HomeMy WebLinkAbout21750 Hwy 6 - 193924401006INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT
EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION 0
P.O. Box 179 - 500 Broadway • Eagle, Colorado 81631
Telephone: 328-8755
YELLOW COPY OF PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT INSTALLATION SITE. PERMIT NO. 1496
Please call for final inspection before covering any portion of installed system.
OWNER: Edward Iacino PHONE: (303)329-9595
MAILINGADDRESS: 6211 East 42nd Ave. city: Denver Scale: Co. zip: 80216
APPLICANT: Linda Waterhouse PHONE: (303) 756-5916
SYSTEMLOCATION: Canon Woods,Filing#4,Lot#6 TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 1939-224-01-006
LICENSED INSTALLER: K.W. Pipe Fixations/ Ken Williams LICENSENO: 33-95
DESIGN ENGINEER OF SYSTEM: Inter Mountain Engineering
INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING:
1000 GALLON SEPTIC TANK
ABSORPTION AREA REQUIREMENTS:
SQUARE FEET OF SEEPAGE BED_ -`' 701 SQUARE FEET OF TRENCH BOTTOM. via 19 infiltrators
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: Install as per Engineer's design.Rake trench sidewalls. Engineer must perform
final inspection and submit as-builts to County before final C.O. is issued
i
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE: July 21, 1995
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: 720 SQUAREFEET. via 20 infiltrator units.
INSTALLED SEPTIC TANK: 1000 GALLON DEGREES q0 FEET FROM
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:Fnginaar AA—builtR rP(`PIVP(1 12-20-95
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE: IZ i l
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: U DATE:
(RE -INSPECTION IF NECESSARY)
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS
APPLICANT! AGENT:
OWNER:
PERMIT FEE PERCOLATION TEST FEE RECEIPT A CHECK #
a
(Site Plan MUST be attached)
ISDS Permit #
APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICE - EAGLE COUNTY
P. 0. BOX 179
EAGLE, CO 81631
328-8755/927-3823 (El Jebel)
**************************************************************************
* PERMIT APPLICATION FEE $150.00 PERCOLATION TEST FEE $200.00
*
*
* MAKE ALL.REMITTANCE PAYABLE TO: "EAGLE COUNTY TREASURER"
PROPERTY OWNER:
MAILING ADDRESS:
10
PHONE: (.36 3) 3Z9-?. ,13
APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON: L-lmo PHONE: (3n 3) 7$. -S /�
MAILING ADDRESS: 184-1 S_ OL, ✓r_ s-r- r). . jx-" n c,- -7 ,7 A
v
LICENSED ISDS CONTPACTORr: ,
CO PANY / DBA : l� (� ADDRES
PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR: New Install Alteration
( ) n ( ) Repair
LOCATION OF PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM:
Building Permit #
(if known)
Legal Description: Subdivision: tkWOU WDOP5 Filing:lBlock: Lot No. f
Tax Parcel Number: �j �- a- Q �_ Lot Size: 1.6,35 4-c .
Street Address: Z("1 Sb �11--t, Hwky G ��l-4 LE 601.0" 0 0
BUILDING TYPE: (Check applicable category)
Residential/Single Family
Residential/Multi-Family*
( ) Commercial/Industrial*
TYPE OF ATER SUPPLY: (Check applicable category)
Well ( ) Spring ( ) Surface
( ) Public Name of Supplier:
Number
Number
Type _
of Bedrooms_
of Bedrooms
*These systems require desigly a Registered Professional Engineer
SIGNATURE:C_-v -�`'�� S
Date: e7 Ite /,7 ************************************************************* ** **********
TO BE COMPLETED 5Y THE COUNTY
AMOUNT PAID: RECEIPT #: /Qy 3J-7 DATE:2 4
CHECK #: /Y{-o CASHIER:
Community Development Department
(970)328-8730
Fax: (970) 328-7185
TDD: (970) 328-8797
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
December 21, 1995
Eagle County Building
P.O. Box 179
500 Broadway
Eagle, Colorado 8163 1 -0 179
Edward Iacino
6211 East 42nd Ave.
Denver, CO 80216
RE: Final of ISDS Permit No. 1496-95 Parcel #1939-224-01-006.
Property location: 21750 Hwy 6, Edwards, CO.
Dear Mr. Iacino,
This letter is to inform you that the above referenced ISDS.
Permit has been inspected and finalized. Enclosed is a copy to
retain for your records. This permit does not indicate
compliance with any other Eagle County requirements. Also
enclosed is a brochure regarding the care of your septic system.
Be aware that later changes to your building may require
appropriate alterations of your septic system.
If you have any questions regarding this permit, please contact
the Eagle County Environmental Health Division at 328-8755.
Sincerely,
Janet Kohl
Environmental Health Department
Eagle County Community Development
ENCL! Information Brochure
Final ISDS Permit
cc: files
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
(303) 328.8730
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
July 21, 1995
K. W. Pipe Fixations
Environmental Health Division
725 CHAMBERS AVE.
P.O. BOX 179
EAGLE. COLORADO 81631
FAX (303) 328.7207
RE: Issuance of Individual Sewage Disposal System
Permit No. 1496-95 Tax Parcel #1939-224-01-006
Property Location: Canyon Woods, Filing# 4, Lot#6.
Enclosed is your ISDS Permit No. 1501-95 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. Engineer as builts must
be submitted for permit to be finalized and C.O. issued.
Permit specifications are minimum requirements only, and should
be brought to the property owner's attention.
This permit does not indicate conformance with other Eagle County
requirements.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the
Environmental.Health Division at 328-8755.
cc: files
Community Development Department
(970)328-8730
Fax:(970) 328-7185
TDD: (970) 328-8797
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
December 12, 1995
Dear Applicant,
Eagle County Building
P.O. Box 179
500 Broadway
Eagle, Colorado 8163 1 -0179
The Environmental Health Division would like to notify you to
make a formal request to extend your Individual Sewage Disposal
System(ISDS) Permit #igq&-q) into the 1996 construction year. The
Environmental Health Division discontinued percolation tests on
November 15, 1995 and final inspections on December 2, 1995 due
to climatic conditions.
ISDS permits are active for 120 days after the date of issue if
no Building Permit has been issued for the same property. If a
Building Permit has been issued for the same property the ISDS
will expire at the same time as the building permit.
If you still plan to apply for a Building Permit this year or in
the early months of 1996 you will need to have a percolation test
conducted before your Building Permit will be released. You will
have to contact a Registered Professional Engineering(RPE) firm
to conduct your percolation test.
If you have had your permit issued and have not had your final
inspection completed, but plan on constructing the system in the
next few weeks, please give our office a call and we will
evaluate your permit on a case by case situation.
Please give the Environmental Health office a call at 328-8755,
if you have any questions regarding your permit extension
process.
cc: ISDS Permit #/`!R(�-q ) File
. .Huntingdon
Huntingdon Engineering & Environmental, Inc.
(Chen -Northern, Inc.)
5080 Road 154
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
Telephone: (303)-446 745e- ;02,
Fax: (303) 945-2363 7+-+ (0
I�c��lq�zs�
NOV 211994
Durrant Flickinger - --
SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
AND PERCOLATION TESTING
PROPOSED RESIDENCE
>M _
IC
WEAG E "C C DN� H
JOB NO. 4 112 95
NOVEMBER 14, 1994
PREPARED FOR
M NOW
C/O KNI ��iT PLANNING
ATTN: STEVE WUJEK
P. O. BOX 947
EAGLE CO 81631
CJ A mem0er of the H I H 9mo of companies
Huntingdon
November 14, 1994
1.
Mr. Ed Iacino
c/o Knight Planning
Attn: Steve Wujek
P.O. Box 947
Eagle CO 81631
Huntingdon Engineering & Environmental, Inc.
(Chen -Northern. Inc.)
SOSO Road 154
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
Telephone: (303) 945-7458
Fax: (303) 945-2363
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Testing, Proposed
Residence, Lot 6, Canyonwood-Red Mountain Ranch, Filing IV, Eagle County,
Colorado
Job No. 4 112 95
Gentlemen:
As requested, we have conducted a subsoil study at the subject site, located in Eagle County,
Colorado. Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings drilled in the proposed
building area consist of silt and clay overlying sand in Boring 1. We also encountered clayey
gravel at a depth of 17 feet. In Boring 2 and the profile .boring, the silt and clay overlay the
clayey gravel which was encountered at a depth of 11 feet and 4 feet respectively. Groundwater
was not encountered in the borings to the maximum depths explored.
The proposed residence can be founded on spread footings placed on the natural subsoils and
designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 1000 psf. Alternatively, the residence may be
founded on a straight shaft drilled pier foundation system. Design and construction criteria
relating to geotechnical aspects of the proposed residence'are presented in the body of this
report.
The report which follows describes our investigation, summarizes our findings, and presents our
recommendations.. It is important that we provide consultation during design, and field services
during construction to review and monitor the implementation of the geotechnical
recommendations. If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us.
Sincerely,
HUNTINGDON ENGINEERING &. ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
Fred R. Cameron
Project Engineer
Rev. By: JZA
FRC/lr
�� A member of the H I H1 gmw of mmWies
Huntingdon
TABLE OF CONTENTS
t.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF'STUDY
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
SITE CONDITIONS 2
FIELD EXPLORATION
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 3
FOUNDATIONS 3,
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS ....................... 5
FLOOR SLABS ..................... 6
PERCOLATION TESTING ............ 7
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM 7
SURFACE DRAINAGE 8
LIMITATIONS ...................... 8
FIGURE I LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS.
FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURE 4 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 5 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
TABLE II - SUMMARY OF PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES
401 A fforgm of dw FH 1—HI gimp of mffW.ies
Huntingdon
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residence to be located
on Lot 6, Canyonwood-Red Mountain Ranch, Eagle County, Colorado. The project site is
shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the
foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical
engineering services to you, c/o Knight Planning, dated October 17, 1994.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain
information on subsurface conditions. Samples obtained during the field exploration were tested
in the laboratory to determine compressibility or swell and other engineering characteristics of
the on -site soils. 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. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing are presented in
the report.
This report has been prepared to summarize the data obtained during this study and to
present our conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed construction and the subsoil
conditions encountered. Design parameters and a discussion of geotechnical engineering
considerations related to construction of the propbsed�residence are included in the report.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
We assume that the proposed residence will be a two story wood framed structure with
a possible basement. Ground floor or basement floor will likely be slab -on -grade. Grading for
the structure is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 4 to 10 feet. We
assume relatively light foundation loadings, Ltypical of the proposed type of construction.
When building location, grading and loading information have been developed, we should
be notified to reevaluate the recommendations presented in this report.
0
A member of ft FH 1 if group o1 cwvies
Huntingdon
Ira
SITE CONDITIONS
The lot is located just south of Colorado Highway 6. The site is approximately 5 feet
below the highway grade. It is bordered by the river bank on its south side, with the water
being about 5 feet below the building envelope at the time of our investigation. The lot is
relatively .flat, with approximately one foot change in elevation across the site. It is. covered
with grasses, and cottonwood trees line the river bank.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on October 20, 1994. Two
exploratory borings and one profile boring were drilled at the locations shown on Figure 1 to
evaluate the subsurface conditions, The borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous
flight augers powered by a truck -mounted CME-55 drill rig. The borings were logged by a
representative of Huntingdon.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 1 3/8-inch or 2-inch I.D. spoon sampler. The
sampler was driven into the. subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140-pound hammer
falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM
Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or
consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration
resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings; Figure 2. The samples were
returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing.
The three percolation test holes were drilled with 7-inch diameter continuous flight augers
and saturated to be ready for testing on October 21, 1994.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The subsoil conditions encountered at the site are shown graphically on Fig. 2. The
subsoils consist of about one foot of topsoil overlying very stiff silt and clay. Sand and gravel
tJ A MOTMer of the H 1 H 91ouv of companies
Huntingdon
-3-
was encountered at depths of 10 to I 1 feet. Drilling in the dense gravel with auger equipment
was difficult due to the cobbles and boulders and drilling refusal was encountered in the deposit
in Boring 2.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural
moisture content and gradation analyses. Results of consolidation testing performed on relatively
undisturbed drive samples, presented on Figs. 4 and 5, indicate moderate compressibility under
conditions of loading and wetting. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I.
No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were
slightly moist to very moist.
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 granular soils.
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread
footing foundation system. The construction criteria should be considered when preparing
project documents.
1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural fine grained soils should be designed for an
allowable soil bearing pressure of 1000 psf. As an alternative, footings placed on 3 feet
of compacted structural fill may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of
1500 psf. Structural fill for support of footings should extend outside of the footings a
distance equal to the depth of fill and be compacted to at least 98 % of the maximum
standard Proctor values. Based on experience, we expect settlement of footings designed
and constructed as discussed in this section will be on the order of 1 to 1.5 inches.
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 areas should be provided with adequate
W A member of the H 1 H group of tomoan es
Huntingdon
-4-
soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of foundations
at least 42 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this area.
4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span an unsupported
length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be
designed to resist lateral earth pressures as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining
Walls" section of this report.
5) All existing topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing
bearing level extended down to relatively dense natural granular soils. If water seepage
is encountered, the footing areas should be dewatered before concrete placement.
6) A 'representative of the soil engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to
concrete placement. to evaluate bearing conditions.
} The preferred alternative foundation system with regard to mitigating potential settlement
caused by. wetting of the compressible silt and clay soils is a straight -shaft drilled pier
foundation. In addition to their ability to reduce settlement, the piers have moderate load
capacity. The piers can typically be constructed quickly and should experience a relatively small
amount of settlement. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed
for design of a straight -shaft pier foundation system:
1) Piers should be designed for an allowable end -bearing pressure of 6000 psf. The piers
may also be designed for a skin friction of 600 psf for the portions penetrating the
gravel. The piers should be drilled to refusal or at least 5 feet into the gravel soils.
Since groundwater levels will probably be higher during the spring months, the piers
should also be designed to resist appropriate hydrostatic pressures.
2) We assume the piers will have a total embedment length on the order of 14 to 20 feet
based on the information obtained from the drilling. The pier diameter should be at least
18 inches.
3) The pier holes should be properly cleaned prior to placement of concrete. The natural
silt and clay soils are generally stiff which indicates that casing of the holes should not
be required. Some caving and difficult drilling may be experienced in the bearing soils
due to gravels and possible cobbles and boulders. The pier drilling contractor should
CO A member of the H t H group of =o Wim
Huntingdon
-5-
mobilize equipment of sufficient size to achieve the design pier sizes and depths. Piers
which refuse short of bearing soils should be evaluated on an individual basis for
capacity.
4) Free water was not encountered in the borings drilled at the site and it appears that
dewatering of the pier holes will probably not be needed if excavation is performed
before higher spring water levels.
5) A representative of the soil engineer should observe pier drilling operations on a full-time
basis.
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS
Foundation walls and retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be
expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth
pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 55 pcf for backfill.
consisting of the on -site fine grained soils and 45 pcf for backfill consisting of imported granular
materials. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the residence and can be
expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be
designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of
50 pcf for backfill consisting of the on -site fine grained soils and 40 pcf for backfill consisting
of imported granular materials.
All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and
surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and equipment.
The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal
backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will
increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain
should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind walls.
Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum
dry density determined by ASTM D698 at a moisture content near optimum. Backfill in
pavement and walkway areas should be compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard
Proctor density. Care should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment
e j A member of me H I H tyoup of companies
Huntingdon
M
near the wall since this could cause excessive lateral pressure on the wall. Some settlement of
deep foundation wall backfill should be expected even if the material is placed correctly and
could result in distress to facilities constructed on the backfill.
The lateral resistance of foundation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of
the sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure
against the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be
calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.30. Passive pressure against the sides of the
footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 250 pcf. The coefficient of
friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable
factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will occur at the
ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against the sides of
the footings to resist lateral loads should be a nonexpansive material compacted to at least 95 %
of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D698 a moisture content near optimum.
We recommend imported free -draining granular soils for backfilling foundation walls and
retaining structures because their use results in lower Iateral earth pressures and the backfill can
be incorporated into the underdrain system. Subsurface drainage recommendations are discussed
in more detail in the "Underdrain System section of this report. Imported free=draining
granular wall backfill should contain less than 5 % passing the No. 200 sieve. Granular materials
should be placed to within 2 feet of the ground surface and to a minimum distance of one half
the wall height beyond the walls. The upper 2 feet of the wall backfill should be a relatively
impervious on -site soil or a pavement structure should be provided to prevent surface water
infiltration into the backfill.
FLOOR SLABS
The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly to moderately
loaded slab -on -grade construction. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor
slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow
unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due
to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be
�� A member of the H l li ryoup of cumoan es
Huntingdon
-7-
established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4-inch
layer of free -draining gravel should be placed beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage.
This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with less than 50% passing 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 the
maximum dry density determined by ASTM D698. at a moisture content near optimum.
Required fill can consist of the on -site soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock.
PERCOLATION TESTING
Percolation testing was performed in the proposed leach field area southwest of the
building site. One profile boring had been drilled to a depth of 10 feet. The soils encountered
in the profile pit consist of about 1 foot of organic sandy clay topsoil overlying very stiff silt and
clay to a depth of 4 feet. Below the silt and clay we encountered clayey gravel. No free water
was observed in the profile boring. Percolation testing was performed in three holes around the
profile boring which had been soaked the day before our testing. The results of the percolation
testing are presented in Table II. The results indicate the subsoils have a variable percolation
rate but should be acceptable for a conventional infiltration septic disposal system.
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our
experience in mountainous areas that local perched groundwater may develop during times of
heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched
condition. We recommend below grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawl space and
basement areas, be protected from wetting`and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain
system.
The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill
surrounded above the invert level with free -draining granular material. The drain should be
placed at each level of excavation and at least l foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and
sloped at a minimum I % to a suitable gravity outlet. Free -draining granular material used in
0 A member of the H 1 { 1 ytatp of companies
Huntingdon
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 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 dry density determined by ASTM. D698 in pavement and slab areas
and to at least 90% of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D698 in landscape
areas.
3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain
away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of
12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the
first 10 feet in paved areas. Free -draining wall backfill should be capped with about
2 feet of the on -site soils to reduce surface.water infiltration.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill.
5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least 10 feet
from foundation walls.
LIMITATIONS
This report has been prepared in` accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
- n nor;nq_nrinciDles_andpractices in this area at this time. We make no other warranty either
mhl190 62:90-9917 3NIdVVV3 >101d s and recommendations submitted in this report are based
xQ j ZLOZ-99b (OL6)
OWOH 6&6-997 (OL6) iratory borings drilled - at the locations indicated on Fig. 1,
901-0 LOt X L9£1,-9917(OL6)
961 t-9£b09 0C1Vd0100 'N011ld
96t t X09 '0 'd ind our experience in the area. Our findings include
(Ssa'PPV Sdn) 80£# 'IS GIU09016 t t
Zi iin83W0H Wolsno �_� subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings
aad o
1.w.W of the FH 1-1-11 group of companies
Huntingdon
and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is
performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear to be 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.
e are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our exploratory information
which has not been described or documented in this report. 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 of 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.
Sincerely,
HUNTINGDON ENGINEERING
& ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
Fred R. Cameron
Project Engineer
Reviewed By O`�DO.RfG S -
OLPN A04s0
Q' Zti,
29707
Jor y Z. A amson, o `E.
ASS/4NAL ECG`
Cd A member of fne rH I HI WWP of companies
TOPSOIL: Silty clay, loose, moist, brown
SILT AND CLAY (CL—ML); slightly sandy, medium firm, moist, red
SAND (SC); clayey, medium dense, wet, brown
GRAVEL (GP —GC); clayey, sandy in lenses, dense, wet, light brown
Drive Sample, 2—inch I.D. California liner sample.
Drive Sample, Standard Penetration Test, 1 3/8—inch split spoon sample.
Drive sample blow count. Indicates that 49 blows of a 140-
49/12 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the
California sampler 12 inches.
Practical Rig Refusal
NOTES
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on October 20, 1994 with a 4—inch diameter
continuous flight power auger, while a 7—inch auger was used for the
percolation and profile holes.
2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing
from features shown on the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory borings were measured by hand level and
refer to the benchmark on Fig. 1
4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered
accurate only to the degree implied by the method used.
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring Iogs represent
the approximate boundaries between material types and the transitions may
be gradual.
6. Ground water was not encountered in the borings at the time of drilling.
WC=Water Content (%) LL=Liquid Limit (7.)
` DD=Dry Density (pcf) PI=Plasticity Index (%)
—200=Percentage passing No. 200 sieve
4 112 95 1 Hiii'11t"inoti(1n I LEGEND AND NOTES I Fig. 3
2
1
0
c
0 1
N
a)
i
0-
2
E
0
(j
%,j
a�z 0
0
.N 1
N
a)
S
Q
E 2
O
U
3
4
J
Moisture Content = 7 percent
Dry Unit Weight = 122 pcf
Sample of: silty clay
From: Boring 1 at 7 feet
No movement upon wetting
- IV 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
Moisture Content = 9 percent
Dry Unit Weight = 123 pcf
Sample of:
silty clay
From: Boring 1 at 12 feet
No movement upon wetting
iu - 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
4 112 95 Huntingdon I SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fg. 4
4
3
2
�
1
0
o
�
V
tN
N
L
E
O
U
2
'
3
4
5
o.
1.0 10 too
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
4 112
95
Huntingdon
SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 5
Moisture Content = 19 percent
Dry Unit Weight = 10 � pcf
Sample of: silty
HUNTINGDON ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
TABLE II
SUMMARY OF PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
JOB NO. 4 112 95
HOLE
HOLE
.LENGTII OF
WATER DEPTH
::;:::::;:;
WATER DEPTH:<>
;'::;AVERAGE
NQ
pEPTH
INTERVAL
AT START OF
AT END OE
.....................
PERCOLATION
Caches)
(W in.)
INTERVAL:1NTERYAI
RAT>;.:
(IachesX°
»......
1
36
10
17.5
18.5
1.0
10
18.5
19.5
1.0
20
19.5
21.5
1.75
20
21.25
22.25
1.0
20
22.75
23.25
1.0
20
23.25
24.25
1.0
20
24.25
25.0
1.75
20
2
36.50
10
18.5
20.0
IS
10
20.0
21.0
1.0
20
21.0
22.25
1.25
20
22.25
23.5
1.25
20
23.5
24.5
1.0
20
24.5
25.23
0.75
20
25.25
26.0
0.75
27
3
35.5
10
17.5
19.0
1.5
10
19.0
19.75
0.75
20
19.75
21.5
1.75
20
21.5
22.5
1.0
20
22,,5
23.5
1.0
20
23.5
24.25
0.75
20
24.25
25.0
0.75
27
CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES
1�Clh-en-Northern, Inc- a , _ ._ RIR .�..•�, ASTM Designation: D 2487 - 83
(Based on Unified Soil Classification System)
Soil Classification
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tesls' Group
Symbol Name'
Coarse -Grained Soils Gravels Clean Gravels Cu>4 and iSCc:53' GW Well graded gravel'
More than 50% retained on More than 50% coarse Less than 5% lines`
No. 200 sieve fraction retained on Cu<4 and/or 1>Cc>3' GP
No. 4 sieve Poorly graded gravel'
Gravels with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel' ° More than 12% fines`
Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel' ° -
Sands Clean Sands Cu>6 and I:SCc<_3' SW Well -graded sand'
% or more of coarse Less than 5% fines"
fraction passes No.
4 sieve
Cu<6 and/or 1>Cc>3' SP
Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM
More than 12% fines"
Poorly graded sand'
Silty sand' -
Fines classify as CL of CH SC
Clayey sand' -'
Fine -Grained Soils
50% or more passes the
Silts and Clays inorganic
Liquid limit less than 50
PI>7 and plots On or above CL
"A'
Lean clay
No. 200 sieve
line'
PI<4 or plots below -A- ML
Sill'
line'
organic
Liquid limit - oven dried <0 75 OL
Organic clay
Liquid limit -not dried
Organic silt'
Silts and Clays inorganic
Liquid limit 50 or more
PI plots on or above '-A" line CH
Fat clay' • "
PI plots below "A" line MH
Elastic silt'
organic
Liquid limit - oven dried <0 75 OH
Organic clay'
Liquid limit - not dried
Organic silt' ` ` °
Highly organic soils
Primarily organic matter. dark in color. and organic odor PT
Peat
'Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve.
'it Held sample contained cobbles or boulders. or both.
add -with Cobbles or boulders. Of both- to group name
`Gravels with 5 to 12% lines require dual symbols-
GW-GM well -graded gravel with silt
GW-GC well -graded gravel with clay
GP -GM poorly graded gravel with sill
GP -GC poorly graded gravel with clay
'Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols.
SW-SM well -graded sand with silt
SW -SC wea-graded sand with Clay
SP-SM Poorly graded sand with sill
SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay
SIEVE ANALYSIS
SCREEN -IN I SIEVE NO. I
100
so
'Cu = D. /O,° Cc - (D—)r_
0'. ' Oa
'It soil contains Z15% sand. add -with sand- to group
name.
'If lines classify as CL-ML use dual symbol GC -GM. or
SC-SM.
-11 fines are organic. add bath organic fines- to group
name.
'fl soif contains >15% gravel. add --in gravel- to group
-am*
60
So
a
1 X 40
w
O
Z
H 30
U
H
< 20
J
-0075 d
I I 1 1 I I
5o 10 5 1 0 O.5 o 10
PARTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
0.
Cu w 0. = IS " 200 C s (D;;F (2.51• -56
e o.071 C 0••-lo..' 0.075• Is
•If Alteroerg limns plot m hatched area. soil is a CL-ML-
silly Clay
'If Soil COnla.nl 1510 29% plus No. 200. add -with sand- or
with gravel' wmcnevr s 0110ominanl.
'It Soil COnta.n1 ?30% plus N0. 200. pled Olninanfly sand.
add "sandy" 10 group name.
-If Sort COnta.ns 230% OWS No. 200. predominantly gravel.
ado -914-ily-'0 9rouo name
'PI>4 and 0101S on or aoove -A-fine
'PK4 or plots below -A-line.
'Pt Plots On or above -A" line
'Pl dots Oelow -A- I.ne
For daadlkadM of flh � ; akxy A. and
t4ve-graN4d IraeaOrl of
fpaa
ar
eosagralned
/
/
'P
Equation a-A-airK
HOAZOnul at PI = a to
then P1 = 0.73 (LL•201
4
LL = 25.5.
rG�
Equation of-lf•lute
Sf-
VenicAl at LL = 16 to PI = 7 / yr 1
men PI = 0.9 (LL-a) /
.
i MH �
OH
A4,1
C _M
ML OR
OL
10
7
4
0
0 10 1620 30 40 50 60 70 - so 90 100 110
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
Qr> Q) (�D
m
m
Cb
I
1496-95 Tax#1939-224-01-006
JOB NAME,, Canyon Woods IACINO
Filing#4,Lot#6
40p Na. 80- I'al, 6 0
,JOB FOLDER Produgt 278 ® NEW ENGLAND BUSINESS SERVICE, INC„ GROTON, MA 01471 printed in U.S.A.
® JOB FOLDER
ml
I
GRAPHIC SCALE
(IN"M)
I Inch- 20 - it
110
104
102
100..
98
15,M/N—�
96
94
90
86
82
9a
'AWL MA WR CHAMBER
ALL, C AAM RS ROM rO BE
A ve SAw aEVAnm
1D8
104
-�, 102
r�r 100
98
�- --� 94
WNSTRUCnON NOTES•
1. Sewer line ,fro i'► house to septic tank sho# have o moxknum
6• ;, slops of 1/4" per foot. Bends h bu#ding sewer Muff be
�4, ; 1kn1ted to 45 deowa
2. Septic tank shall be hstolled level. Tank to have removable
�''�•.� r- M/N 1.5 count or manholes to withkr B Itches of Ahish grodo for
Jt 'il. P. I
aAYrY GRAWZ
NOW S EE CCWS/Rl 0%W NOIES FW
/NSTALLATIGW REGUBWWNIS►
SECTION A --A
N. T.&
STANDARD INFILTRAMR. CHAMBER ('VXA4','4'x f)
1000 Gal. Two Comp R
Septic.. Tare
PLAN i
SECTION
s s"
21' cleat insert acCess
0 RI•: jy
sill
Ii
�Y•. L4LL lY`M, .� .. f.
access to each comov tmonls, for clemIng and Inspection.
Septic tank to meet all the requ**ments of flag/4 County
/polWdual Sewage Dhposal SAtems. Section 4.07.
Ji»ox
i
£xcov+ate and /srti✓ J het wide trenChos, ?feet deep and 6 feet apart.
F. 4.
Prepare trench bottom and eldes In accordance with the state
e' MM In
and local regu/allona (For the InAltrotor System, rakktg
s1dewal/ and bottom ktfiltrollvie . surfaces is recommended to
redOvice smeorktg.)
S
Assemble and Instal/ the 1040trotor Chambers In the Tranches
according to the monuftlurers recommendations.
6.
BoakfA'I the side wall area with notive sop for proper
support.
7.
Backfili the trenches with a mdnkmum of 12 Itches of tamped -
soN co vier.
Avoid vehicle troffic. over the system.
9.
All Installations Ma# meet the rules and regulations of
Eog/e County En*onmental Health DIWslon as set forth In the
IndivAdua/ Sewage DIsposal System regu/otlons.
Construction of Me::}stern shot! be Inspected by the Englneer,
prior to bockdihhg.
Dimensions
Capedttes
Aa'f8
Approximate Wilghu
W
L
H
Tank
Lid
Dame WO
Total
T-5'
8'•5'
6'-10'
676
326
647011
3000lbs
1260 49
1.72011
NOTE: IF DURING CONSMUC77ON OF ME LEACHf1410 SOLID OR
FRAGM£NTE'D BEDROCK /S ENCOUNTERED 1H£ ViVNEER SHOMD
B£ CONTACTED IMM4 VA TEL Y f W ADOV nONALRECOWENDA nONS
W•�
•
0.06
�► a�l O
1 F •a:::••OP'
pF C016
p
D£S►GN ftow
Design Percolation Rate, rw 27 minute per Inch
Number of bealooms =' J
Moxk»um doA'y flow - Qmox
r,
Q►rrox = J bans x 2,•personsArm x 75 ga11ons1p*r4on1doy**x 150X
Qmox = 675 gallons per day
=nc TANK
V = Omer x 30hrs
V ? 5 x JO = e44 gallons
24
A 1,000 gallon two comportments septic tank is required.
ABA nON AREA
A = vrex 4T' - y
l
A — j76 07 - 701 sq ft. - - - -
5
Check absorbilon area using table 7-2 (EPA Manual Ohsite
Nbstewoler ftotment and Disposal Systems).
Cheek Amax �
Absorption Area ?
475 ay •: .06 4.2
.70 i
Use on abs"11*7 area (Amox) of 701 sq. ft.
In/fltrotor Chamber S}Qterm In a trench conflgurotlon Is
recommended with an allowed 5OX reductian Ih the requk od
obs" tion area.
0.5 Amax = .05(701 sq. ft.) = J51 sq. ft.
Surface area of one In Virator chamber - 18.75 sq. ft.
Use /9 InNtrotor chambers. Three trenches
Che with 6 hlMtrobri
rro wra► 7 #Imbvtwv
ZfflZM sac M277OONS
Sbf Profile (by Huntktgdon Engineering & EnWrotmental, Inc.)
Soil Arorde Location (refer to drowing)
0. 0 — 4. 4' $11ght/y Sandy SW &Cloy
4.5' — 9.0' Clayey grovel, sandy /n lenses cobbles
�L NOW
t
1. Percolation Test Results and Subsurface Solt Conditions obtctrred from
avbsoR study for foundollon Design and Perrcolation testing by
Hun t/ngdon Englnesrktg & En vlronmen t al, Inc
1. /t /s recommended that the trenches be excavated to o maximum
depth of J6 kt h*& A moxknum count of 2' shall be mohtoined
oust the top of the InNtrotor chambers.
J. Topographic Inforrmatlon and lot layout prepared by Undo E. Nbtw*ouse A.I.A.
and Chuck N*h/teman and AssoclateA Meeker, . Colorado; Aly 1994. '
• :I
I
oi - AYntrer-MO nto,*mn atr s of WM
u
.[ .n SEP T7C D S/GN —MOM024s0
E 1 Y
pd11N Itt ACAT a� MM
• I
a� sit
COT 6,
RR RED MOUNTAIN RANCH, RUNG NO. 4
ma aw .Aear EACLE COUNTY, COLOIRADO
. 1 1
GRAPHIC SCALE
20 0 10 20 40
( IN FEET )
1 inch = j
06,
104
102
100-
CLEANG
POR
96
94
9�
86
82
to FRONTAGE ROAD
(ASPHALT)
>
o0
N
.p
6
CONSTRUCTION NOTES.
6
1. Sewer line from house to septic tank shall have a maximum
slope of 1/4 A' per foot. Bends in building sewer shall be
limited to 45 degrees
A
2. Septic tank shall be installed */evel. Tank to have removable -
INFILTRATOR CHAMBER (TYP.) 1
�,
cover or manholes to within 8 inches of Finish grade for
ALL CHAMBERS ROWS TO BE ----- i
access to each compartments, for cleaning and inspection.
AT THE SAME ELEVA770N
Septic tank -to meet all the requirements of Eagle County
4' PVC Nl7N "Ty -----y
individual Sewage Disposal Systems, Section 4.07.
't �
J. Excavate and level J feet wide trenches, 2 feet deep and 6 feet apart.
f4.
Prepare trench bottom and sides in accordance with the state
4• M/U.. To
and local regulations. (For the Inrltrator System, raking
FLA �'�'� BEDROCK
sidewall and bottom infiltrative surfaces is recommended to
reduce smearing.)
5. Assemble and install the Infiltrator Chambers in the Trenches
NOTE • SEE CONSTRUC770N NOTES FOR
according to the manufacturers recommendations.
INSTALLA77ON REQUIREMENTS.
6. Backri/l the side wall area with native soil for proper
SECTION A —A
support.
N. T.S.
7. Backfill the trenches with a minimum of 12 inches of tamped
-
soil co ver.
8. Avoid vehicle traffic over the system.
9. All installations shall meet the rules and regulations of
Eagle County Environmental Health Division as set forth in the
Individual Sewage Disposal System regulations
Construction of the system shall be inspected by the Engineer,
prior to backlrlling.
DESIGN FLOW
Design Percolation Rate, T= 27 minute per inch
Number of bedrooms = J
Maximum daily flow = Qmax
Qmax = J brms x 2 persons/brm x 75 gallons/person/day x 1509
Qmax = 675 gallons per day
SEPTIC TANK
V Qmax x JOhrs
24.hrs _
V = 675 x JO = 844 gallons
24
c./ A 1, 000; gallon two compartments septic tank is required.
ABSORP RON AREA
A -= Orrax -
�
5
A = 675 J = 701 sq. ft.
5
Check absorbtion area using Table 7-2 (EPA Manual Onsite
Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems)
24
Check Qmax <1.2
Absorption Area
i
675 as/Ions/day = ss d.2
701
Use an absorbtion area (Amax) of 701 sq. ft.
infiltrator Chamber System in a trench configuration is
recommended with on allowed 50.Z' reduction in the required
absorb tion area.
102
0.5 Amax = .05(701 sq. ft.) = J51 sq. ft.
Surface area of one infiltrator chamber = 18.75 sq. ft.
�- 100
Use
19 infiltrator chambers, Three trenches
One with 6 Infiltrators
Two with 71nRtrators
CT
SUBSURFACE SOIL COND117ONS �IZC�
Soil Profile (by Huntingdon Engineering & Environmental, Inc.)
98
Soil Prori/e Location (refer to drawing)
94
0.0 — 4.4' Slightly Sandy Silt & Clay
4.5' - 9.0' Clayey gravel, sandy in lenses cobbles
90
GENERAL NOTES
1. Percolation Test Results and Subsurface Soil Conditions obtained from
subsoil study for Foundation Design and Percolation Testing by
Huntingdon Engineering & Environmental, Inc.
2. It is recommended that the trenches be excavated 'to a maximum
depth of J6 inches. A maximum cover of 2' shall be maintained
NOTE.• IF DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE LEACHF/ELD SOLID OR
over the top of the infiitrator chambers
FRAGMENTED BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED THE ENCINEER SHOULD
J. Topogrophic information and lot /aynut prepared by Linda E. Waterhouse AJ.A_
BE CONTACTED /MMED/A 7FL Y FOR ADD/T7ONAL RECOMMENDA 77ONS.
and Chuck Whiteman and Associates, Meeker, Colorado, July 1994.