Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAbout179 Lynns Ct - 239122204013 - 158196ISINDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT
EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
P.O. Box 179 - 500 Broadway • Eagle, Colorado 81631
Telephone:328-8755
YELLOW COPY OF PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT INSTALLATION SITE.
Please call for final inspection before covering any portion of installed system.
PERMIT NO.
/6 0
1581
OWNER: Mark & Elizabeth Furlong PHONE: (970) 927-1006
MAILING ADDRESS: P_0_ Box 884 City: Racalt State: CO Zip: 81621
APPLICANT: same PHONE:
SYSTEMLOCATION: 0179 Lynn's Court, Carbondale TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 2391-222-04-013
LICENSED INSTALLER: Dreager EXcayatign, Glenn Meehan LICENSENO: 24-96
DESIGN ENGINEER OF SYSTEM: E.Q. Church, Tnc . , Ed Church R - P . F .
INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING:
1250 GALLON SEPTIC TANK
ABSORPTION AREA REQUIREMENTS:
SQUARE FEET OF SEEPAGE BED 936 SQUARE FEET OF TRENCH BOTTOM. via 37 infiltrators as per design
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: Install_ as per engineer's design dated May 2 , 1996,;n trenches. Fng;neer is
responsible for final inspection T 0 wil not be issued until our office receives h;
certification.
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL- DATE: May 22, 1996
CONDITIONS:
1. ALL INSTALLATIONS MUST COM Y WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE EAG 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: 936 SQUARE FEET. via 37 infiltrator Units as per design
INSTALLED SEPTIC TANK: 1250 GALLON DEGREES FEET FROM _ see site D 1 an
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: Engineer final approval received 3-10-97.
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL DATE: MArch 10, 1 997
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: DATE:
(RE -INSPECTION IF NECESSARY)
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS
APPLICANT / AGENT:
PERMIT FEE PERCOLATION TEST
OWNER:
RECEIPT #
CHECK #
(Site Plan MUST be attached)
—C'°-S� �� �• ISDS Permit #S' r �o
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:
APPLICANT/CONTACT .PERSON;
MAILING ADDRESS:
LICENSED ISDS CONTRACTOR:
COMPANY/DBA:
ADDRESS:
PHONE: O(D_j '" (A
PHONE:
a?q 5
PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR: New Installation ( ) Alteration ( ) Repair
LOCATION OF PROPOSEDfINDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM:
i0qc�.� \}`n.J
Building Permit #C �✓�� ( if known) Ul��
Legal Description: Subdivision: �U1\1Y11��._ ? 0�� Fiing•Block• Lot No.
Tax Parcel Number: -� - 04 - I Lot Size: _ C(O S
Street Address: q\-5 L(�)v1, (0— oQb AJ , Co 1�1 (a 3 _
�F**ic*�c*�F�Y�F*�c�F4c*9c*4c9c�c�t9cic�c�c�c9c***9c**�t�t**�t9c�c9cic�k*�c�c�F�c9c**�F*�t9c�c�F�t�t*ic�c**�F*9F*9r**�c*dr�k
BUILDING TYPE: (Check applicable category)
( Residential/Single Family
( ) Residential/Multi-Family*
( ) Commercial/Industrial*
Number
Number
Type _
of Bedrooms
of Bedrooms
TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: (Check applicable category)
( ) Well ( ) Spring ( ) Surface
(i-t Public Name of Supplier: On G2,,il_AQ,�\)��It� JW�
*These systems require design by a Registered Professional Engineer
SIGNATURE:
TO BE COMPLETED, �BY� THE COUNTY
AMOUNT PAID: �SC
Date:
***************************************
RECEIPT DATE: _Y
CHECK #: CASHIER`
Community Development Department
(970) 328-8730
Fax: (970) 328-7185
TDD: (970) 328-8797
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
March 10, 1997
Mark & Elizabeth Furlong
P.O. Box 884
Basalt, CO 81621
RE: Final of ISDS Permit No. 1581-96, Tax Parcel #2391-222-04-013.
Property location: 0179 Lynn's Court, Carbondale, CO.
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Furlong:
Eagle County Building
P.O. Box 179
500 Broadway
Eagle, Colorado 81631-0179
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 (970) 328-8755.
Sincerely,
,4,.." /001-
e04L----
Janet Kohl
Environmental Health Department
Eagle County Community Development
ENCL:Information Brochure
Final ISDS Permit
cc: files
Community Development Department
(970)328-8730
Fax: (970) 328-7185
TDD: (970) 328-8797
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
Date: May 22, 1996
TO: Dreager Excavating
Eagle County Building
P.O. Box 179
500 Broadway
Eagle, Colorado 81631-0179
FROM: Environmental Health Division
RE: Issuance of Individual Sewage Disposal System Permit No. 1581-96.
Property Location: 0179 Lynn's Court, Carbondale, CO, Furlong
residence.
Enclosed is your ISDS Permit No. 1581-96. It 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.
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. Your TCO will not be issued until our office
receives this certification.
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
E.O. Church, R.P.E.
EOC
E.O. CHURCH, INC.
ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
March 6, 1997
Mark and Elizabeth Furlong
P.O. BOX 84
Basalt, CO 81621
Subject: Installation Observation - OWS, Drainage Swale
Lot 13, Aspen Mountain View
0179 Lynn's Court
Eagle County, Colorado
Job No. 7321
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Furlong,
We observed the installed drainage swale above the drain fields on
March 5, 1997. The OWS was designed by our office in a letter of May
17, 1996.
The drainage swale from the culvert which will carry water around the
north end of the. trenches had been installed. The drainage swale
fulfills all requirements of the OWS design.
If there are any questions, or if we can be of further service, please
call-
E. O. CHURCH, INC
Edward O. Chu
1 copies sent
xc: Eagle County Envirnmental Health
P.O. BOX 179
Eagle, CO 81631-7185
xc: Robert Nelson
P.O. BOX 6961
Snow -mass Village, CO 81615
925 East 17th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80218-1407 P.O. Box 2869 • Evergreen, Colorado 80437-2869
(303) 832-9692 FAX (303) 832-3517 (303) 674-0660 FAX (303) 674-0813
EOC
E.O. CHURCH, INC.
" ENGINEERS &-GEOLOGISTS
July 22, 1996
Mark and Elizabeth Furlong
P.O. BOX 84
Basalt, CO 81621
Subiect: Installation Observation - OWS
Lot 13, Aspen Mountain View
0179 Lynn's Court
Eagle County, Colorado
Job No. 7321
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Furlong,
We observed the installation of the OWS at the lot. The OWS was
designed by our office in a letter of May 17, 1996.
The installation was observed and the OWS was installed in general
conformance with our plans and specifications. The septic tank is a
1250 gallon two compartment tank and 37 chambers were installed in a
serial distribution pattern in three trenches. The system was in-
stalled as indicated on the attached Fig. 1.
One item need improvement, which is a drainage swale from the culvert
which will carry water around the north end of the trenches. At the
time of our observations, the swale had not been installed. Water
from the culvert will flow over the trenches if the swale is not
constructed.
If there are any questinlicS, or if we can be of further service, please
call. p0 RE0. coo
Cj
off..,.•..... STD
E. O. CHURCH, I U®ems � .�
•
Edward 0. Churc jJ'P. E
'/0NM_E�
3 copies sent
xc: Eagle County Envirn. Health, P.O. BOX 179, Eagle, CO 81631-7185
xc: Robert Nelson, P.O. BOX 6961, Snowmass Village, CO 81615
925 East 17th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80218-1407 P.O. Box 2869 • Evergreen, Colorado 80437-2869
(303) 832-9692 FAX (303) 832-3517 (303) 674-0660 FAX (303) 674-0813
0 179 LYNN ' S COURT
/ LOT 13, ASPEN MOUNTAIN VIED
' EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
DRAINAGE SWALE FROM CILVERT
MUST BE CREATED . C lL 'E RT
/
j THREE CHAMBER
TRENCHES -•-WITH
I If OBSE RVA T I-flN PORT. S .
/ TRENCHES HAVE 1 3-
12 AND 12 LHAMBE S
" WITH SERIAL
DISTRIBDTLON
/
/
89
22
�50 GALLON TANK
1:
LOCATION OF INSTA LED OWS
JOB NO. 7321
CLEANOU' \
4'
PROPOSED
4 BEDROOM
RESIDENCE
FIG_ 1
-- cc . I- .i. - --ml 1 1 1\U1-I G. U. l,F1UfCl.f1-1"1F-MM I 1 1 rlUUJC 1 U 17 (1n3etj i1bt,. W1
�Qb
E.O. CHURCH, INC.
ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
TO:
COMPANY:
FAX NO.: J" �74 ' 3d7/�S
FROM •--
�d
DATE: /fiCL&4�. TIKE
TOTAL PAGES INCLUDING TRANSMITTAL SHEET
If you have not received all pages or if pages are unclear, contact
us at (303)832-9692.
825 East 17th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80218-1407
(303) $32•m FAX (3(13) 832.3517
r��- cc i»o lYJ• C1Cni i rRul'I C. U. 1 1 1 nuunt 1 U
EQ
E.O. CHURCH, INC.
ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
May 17, 1996
Mark and Elizabeth Furlong
P.O. BOX 84
Basalt, CO 81621
Subject. Subsurface Evaluation & OWS Design
Lot 1.3, Aspen Mountain View
0179 Lynn's Court
Eagle County, Colorado
Job No. 7321
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Furlong,
As requested, we have reviewed subsurface conditions by Hepworth--
Pawlak Gect8chnical, Inc. (H-P) and prepared an onsite Wastewater
System (OWS) design for the subject site. The purpose of our project
was to design an OWS. for the property. The H-P study is reported in
a letter for .lob No. 196 205 of May 3, 1996.
SITE CONDITIONS - The investigated site is an approximate 1.5 acre: lot
as indicated on Fig. 1 and 2. The subject site is located in a rural
mountain area where onsite wastewater systems are required. Water is
provided by a public water district. The proposed location for the
drain field is indicated can Fig. 2.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION - A. 4 bedroom residence is proposed as indicated
on Fig. 2. The sewage load for a four bedroom dwelling is 600 gallons
per day (GPD), 900 GPO with peaking factor. A garbage grinder and
clothes washer az re included in the design calculations. The drain
field is proposed in the northern portion of the lot.
The ground surface slopes gently to moderately to the south-southwest.
The slope in the drain field area is 4 to 16% to the southeast. The
surface vegetation consists of a good corer of native grasses_ There
is oak brush surrounding the proposed drain field area.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS - Subsurface conditions encountered by H-P con-
sisted of 3 feet of clay topsail underlain by stiff silty, slightly
sandy clay to the maximum depth explored of 8 feet. The percolation
test results by H-P indicate percolation rates ranging from 20 to 40
minutes per inch (MPI) with an average percolation rate of 27 MPI. No
ground water was observed in the test pit..
The proposed location of the drain field is approximately 30 to 40
feet east of the percolation tests. we observed subsurface. conditions
at the profile pit and foundation excavation, and we believe subsur-
face conditions at the proposed field afea are similar to conditions
investigated by H-P, although there may be less topsoil at the pro-
posed field_ We recommend the field be installed to the east to get
the field out of a drainage swale and out from beneath a culvert to
the east. The culvert is new since the H-P study.
925 Egat 17th Avenue • Denver, Colorado $0210-1407 P.Q_ Box 2869 • Evsrgreen, Colorado 80437-2869
(303) 832-9692 FAX (303) 832-3617 (303) 674.0660 FAX (303) 674-0813
__ ..... 1_ . .1u 1 —_. �1 eui wr 1—:-IL-F\F%I i I fluuOC I i7-ru,)e film h'.0j
K
RECON DATIONS - The results of our investigation indicates an OWS
can be installed at the location presented on Fig. 2. The CAWS design
is based on a sewage load of 60o GPD, and a percolation rate of 27
MPI. A minimum 1250 gallon 2 compartment septic tank is required.
There are two alternatives for a drain field which are. I. trenches
with a 6 foot separation between trenches which would require 935
square feet (SF), or 2. beds which would require 1226 SF of field. We
have proposed a field configuration of two 60o SF W X1001) beds con-
nected in series as indicated on Figs. 2 and 3. We do not believe the
difference of 16 SF between the design and proposed fieldareas is
significant to the operation of the OWS. The recommendation is based
on: a. the home is proposed for full time occupancy, and b. the. ground
.surface and vegetation. A viable alternative is installation of 936
SF of trenches in four 31X78' trenches as indicated on Fig. 4 and 5.
-,.Tf the installer proposes to use chamber technology, we will allow a (
40% reductionin area for a minimum of 3 trenches with 13 chambers in 3�
4
the first Gier and 12 chambers each of the lower serial trenches.
The chamber trenches should be connected in series out of the end
chamber of the upper two trenches. Chambers must be installed so the
outlet serial pipes are set on undisturbed ground so effluent will not
.flow along the trench excavation. Our preference for the two beds is
to not Overload the upper trench of an OWS.
If additional bedrooms are anticipated, we recommend installing a
larger septic tank and field. The tank size should be increase by 250
gallon per anticipated bedroom. Additional bedrooms will require an
additional 300 SF of bed or 235 SF of gravel trench per bedroom.
The owner must realize an oSDS is different from a public sewer sys-
tem. The owner must be aware of and assume responsibility for mainte-
nance of the system. we recommend the septic tank be pumped at least
every 2 gears. There are daily 'considerat.ions such as not putting
plastic or other nonbiodegradable materials into the OSDS. water use
must be carefully monitored so toilets are not allowed to run when
seals malfunction. To illustrate the point, it should be noted a
running toilet will consume in excess of 1,000 GPD if allowed to run.
As the system is designed for 600 GPD, a 1000 gallon loading will
flood and harm the system.
LIMITA.'Y'IONS - Our evaluation, layout, design and recommendations are
based on data submitted. If subsurface conditions different from those
described in this report are encountered, we should be called to ob-
serve the subsurface conditions. If proposed construction is changed,
we should be notified to evaluate the effect of the changes on the
proposed OWS.
If there are: any questions r if we can be of further service, please
call.
OR,
E . 0. CHURCH, INC. '"0•�1�1� ��`7c���'�
'113172
0
Edward 0. Church, P. ; &-_Z7,
3 copies sent NAL�`
XC: Eagle County 'Envirn_ , P.O. BOX 179, Eagle, CO 81631-7185
xc: Robert Nelson, P.Q. BOX 6961, Snowmass Village, CO 81615
-- ---�---•�--� �_� `+ .. .. � ��...�. � �,..,_ • a.l IV. �'.el .—I ILI \IAi I I I IVVJL I lJ
17 I l -311-0 r 101> i. VJ,i
SUBSOIL STUDY BY
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICALw.INC_
0 179 LYNN 'S COURT
LOT 13, ASPEN MOUNTAIN VIEW
EAGLE COUNTY. COLORADO
t
r �? 1�
,1
*M i
1 'y
N07E: LE.
BY PUBLIC EP
SITE PLAN AND LOCATION OF
PROFILE PIT AND PERCOLATION TEST
c L- E
a
JOB NO, 7321 FIG- 1
-- ._— I--- -- --- u i 1 11—1 ---- '�.I YVI�L.1.1_I-IGfSFCl I 1 flUU.7C lu
SUBSOIL STUDY BY
HEPWRTH--PAWL.AK CEEOTECHNICAL.ING.
0 l 79 LYNN -S COURT
Ili—ro3eti rib"D F. M
SCALE
I'=C0'
LOT 13. ASPEN MOUNTAIN VIEW
i EAGLE COUNTY. COLORADO
,
a
•
•
P-2 TWO FIE! 0
a b x 100 - 600 SF
P-ia TOTAL AREA
1200 SF SERIAL
DISTRIO ION FIELD
r
PROFILE•
a a
r ♦
•�_ 3 CSL0 0r4.L1� "hl T�IV�:• \\
PROPOSED
Zi OEE•F?OO,M 11
RESIDENCrEE
,
♦
1 `
a\
\
ti L
,
� � L
e
V
,SOB NO. 7321
LOCATION OF
PROPOSED BED OWS
FIG. 2
A. PLAN SECTION - TWO FIELD WITH RRIAL CONNECTION
4' SEWER PIPE PROM
DRAINAGE SWELL � � � SEPTIC TAW
A] �3' OR 4' PERFORATED PIPE, 2
lE �
inn• .�
B. CROSS-SECTION
NA i URAL-- \
GR, ,CE \ EXCAVATE
E
\, OF. -LOW PLL
C _ SPECIFICATIONS
DESIGN CRITERIA:
NO. OF BEDROOMS - 4
LOAD Q - 650 GPD
PERCOLATION RATE, T
27 MPT
AXTTX_1.5X143/5
A 1216 S.F.
'v EL
FIELD SPECIFICATIONS:
INSTALL TWO FIELDS
LENGTH - 100 FEET
WIDTH - 6 FEET
AREA - 1200 S.F.
GRAVEL - 1 1/2 INCH
TREATMENT UNIT SPECIFICATIONS:
ONE 1250 GALLON SINGLE COMPARTMENT SEPTIC TANK. IF
ADDITIONAL, BEDROOM ME ANTICIPATED, 250 GALLONS OF
SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY AND 300 SQUARE FEET OF DTSPO.SAL
FIELD SHOULD BE ADDED PER BEDROOM.
DRAIN FIELD DETAILS
LM33 NO. 7321 FIG. 3
-- -- i _ -- iai - -- o I nui I G. u. ldlulCLdl_nc-mm 1 I I r1UUJC I u
iy rasa r2� P. 07
SU 6UIL 5 TUDY 8Y
HEPWOR H-PAWL.AK GEOTECHNICAL.INC-
0179 LYNN ' S COURT
LOT la ASPEN MOUNTAIN VIEW
EAGLE COUNTY. COL ADO
f�
r
4 TRENCHES
=_2 o 3 x 76 = 234 SF
p_ Q TOTAL AREA. = 936- SF
SERIAL DISTRIBt-1TTON FIELD
p e
JPRC2E IL E �►
,
r G P-3 e
9 \
Z-0 SALI ON TANK
;\ PROPOSED
.4 DEDRDDm
RESLENCE `
r
ti
tie \
a eti`
JOB NO. 7321
LOCATION OF TRENCH
OWS ALTERNA T EVE
SCALE
I-=60'
FIG_ 4
�--- -- • ---I I . flul I c. v. i i i nuu.Dc i u 1'7 ru,31:�d (1t7J I1. lid
MINIMUM 18. OF COVER OVER TRENCH
i;�EXISTIfNS GROUND SURFACE �
4 TRENCHES
3 x 78 TRENCH WITH
4' PVC PERFORATE[) PIPE
12' OF ! I/2 INCH GRAVEL
ScRIAL DISTRIBUTION
C. SPECIFICATIONS
DESIC-N CRITERIA:
NO. OF BEDROOMS - 4
LOAD - 600 GPD
PERCOLATION RATES, T -
2 7 MPI
A= Q X T X 1.5/5
A = 936 S.F.
— SURGE TANK
MINIMUM OF 6 FEET
BETWEEN TRENCHES
FIELD SPECIFICATIONS:
4 TRENCITES
LENGTH - 78 FEET
WIDTH - 3 FEET
AREA - 935 S.F.
GRAVEL - 1 1/2 INCH
TREATMENT UNIT SPECIFICATIONS:
ONE 1250 GALLON TWO COMPARTMENT SEPTIC TANK. IF'
ADDITIONAL BEDROOMS ARE ANTICIPATED, 250 GALLONS OF
SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY AND 23.5 SQUARE FEET OF DISPOSAL
FIELD SHOULD BE ADDED PER BEDROOM_
DISPOSAL FIELD DETAILS
JOB NO. 7321
FIG. 5
TOTAL P.08
i•iay .VC-) y(-) Ij-o4 iqu-uui r.ui
HEPW RTH-PAWL,AK GUOTECHNICAL, INC.
May 3, 1996
9020 xoad 154
Glenwood Spring%, CC) 01601
Fax 970 945-8454
Phone 970 945-7988
Mark furlong
P.C. Box 84
Basalt, Colorado 81621 Job No. 196 205
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, proposed
Residence, Lot 13, Aspen Mountain View, 0179 Lynn's Court, Eagle
County, Colorado
Dear Mr. Furlong:
As requested, Hepworth-Pawlak Ceotechnical, Inc. performed a subsoil study and
percolation test for foundation and septic disposal designs at the subject site. The study
was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services
to you. dated April 23, 1996. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the
proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this
report.
Proposed Construction: The proposed residence will be a two story wood frame
structure with a partial full basement located on the site as shown on Fig. 1. The
remaining portion of the residence, garage and basement floors will be slab -on -grade.
Cut depths are expected to range between about 4 to 10 feet. Foundation loadings for
this type of construction are assumed to.be relatively light.
If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those
described above, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations presented in
this report.
Site Conditions: The site was vacant at the time of our field work. The lot is.located
to the soutb of Lynn's Court on a gently sloping hillside that slopes down to the west.
Lynn's Court is elevated about 7 feet above the lot. approximately 10 to 12 feet of
elevation difference exists across the lot. Vegetation across the site consists of
sagebrush, grasses and weeds. Several groves of scrub oak are present to the northwest
of the proposed residence.
Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by
excavating three exploratory pits in the building site and one profile pit M" the septic
disposal area at the approximate locations shown on Fig. 1. The logs of the pits are
presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, blow about 'h to 21h feet of topsoil,
consist of moist stiff s� illy alai becoming slightly moist and calcareous at depths
between about 3 and 41h feet. Results of swell -consolidation testing performed on
relatively undisturbed samples of the clay subsoils, presented on Figs. 4 and 5, indicate
low to moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. No free
water was observed in the pits at the time of excavation and the soils were moist to
slightly moist with depth.
rid.y VO Jo J:,_, NO.UU1 r.U1
Mark Furlong
May 3, 1996
Page 2
Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the
exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend spread
footings placed on the undisturbed natural sail designed for an allowable soil bearing
pressure of 1,500 psf for support of the proposed residence. Footings should be a
minimum width of lb inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. Loose and
disturbed soils encountered at the foundation bearing level within the excavation should
be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the undisturbed natural
soils. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate cover above their bearing
elevations for frost protection, Placement of footings at least 42 inches below the
exterior grade is typically used in this area. Continuous foundation walls should be
reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported
length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should be
designed to resist a lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at
least 50 pcf for the on -site soil as backfill.
Floor Slabs: The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil,,are suitable to support
lightly loaded slab -on --grade, construction. To reduce the effects of some differential
movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with
expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints
should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking, The requirements for joint
spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on
experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4 inch layer of free -draining gravel
should be placed beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. This material
should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with less than 50 % passing the No. 4 sieve
and less than 21 passing the No. 200 sieve.
All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95 % of
maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum, required fill
can consist of the on -site soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock.
Underdraiia 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 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 backfll
surrounded above the invert level with free -draining granular material. The drain
should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent
H-P GEOTECH
.F- ".. uw,- U 41.411 I LL •.!V•J J4J--94J4
11Cy ua yb 'J;��) NO.UU1 r.U6
Mark Furlong
May 3, 1996
Page 3
finish grade and sloped at a minimum l % to a suitable gravity outlet, Free -draining
granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2 % passing the
No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of
2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 11/; feet deep.
Surface Drainage: The following drainage precautions should be observed during
construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed:
1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be
avoided during construction.
2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and
compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density in
pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard
Proctor density in landscape areas. Free -draining wall backfill should be
capped with about 2 feet of the on -site soils to reduce surface water
infiltration.
3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be
sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We
recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved
areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in pavement
and walkway areas.
4) hoof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of
all backfill,
Percolation Testing: The results of percolation tests conducted at the site are
presented in Table I. The test locations are shown on Fig. 1 and the log of the profile
pat is shown oat Fig. 2. The ercolation.rates varied from 20 to 40 minutes,per inch
With, an average + f about 30 111huftufrhhidings, the tested Sites
suitable for a conventional infiltration septic systeRAj
Limitations: This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted
geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no
other warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations
submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pits
excavated at the locations indicated on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction, and
our experience in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the
subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory pits and variations in the subsurface
conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions
encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report,
we should be notified at once so re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made.
l Za VV - J •.JV 14U . U1J1 1 . U4
Mark Furlong
May 3, 1996
Page 4
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes.
We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As
the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during
construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to
verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant
design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the
recommendations presented herein. We recommend on -site observation of excavations
and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the
geotechnical engineer.
If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please call our office.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH •- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Jordy Z. Adamson, Jr., P.E.
Reviewed By:
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
JZA/kmk
attachments
cc: Eagle County Community Development Attn; Tricia Higgins (fax only)
H-P GF-o'reC:H
,V W U I 1, I I I U W 1 Lln U O U L. G L, 1! 1 LL - l.IQ 1) 714J-O'-FJ �F
iliau 11aa 'Jo i-Jo r4u.uui r.v�
/ LYNN'S COURT
PROPERTY
BOUNDARY
EASEMENT
r P.2 `
`
l°° • P-1 r
LEACH
FIELD
1
r -- ♦ P-5
EASEMENT
r
APPHU7( MATE SCALE
I `l ;s 40'
iFILE
21T
PIT to PROPOSED
RESIDENCE
r
PIT 2
196 205 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK LOCATIQN OF EXPLORATORY PITS I
Fig. I
i CEOTECHNICAL, Inc.
I IUrLUUI i.III QkU I Ctr% 'JGU I..G1,11 _I CL • 0U-J-h4J-04J4 Mdy U0 •jU `J NO UUl V . Ub
PIT 1 PIT 2 PIT 3 PROFILE FIT
ELEV. = 103' ELEV. = 107' ELEV. = 104' ELEV. = 981
110
105
to
LL.
100
d
WdC — 25.6
UP - 84
w
95
WC - 1a.5
DDa88
It - 47
FI-28
85
WC r+ 12.1
DD a 100
WC = 19.5
DD - 109
oe
&70
955
90
85
Note: Explanation of symbols is presented on Fig. 3.
196 205 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 2
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
er
Ir+wui ',III UAW 1 ar, SJUU L•Gl.!I I CL • JV-J V4J 040q
riay Vn ya 'J..5( N 0 . U U 1 I'.07
LEGEND:
TOPSOIL; silty clay, slightly sandy, orgenics,'medium stiff to stiff, slightly moist to moist, dark lrrrtwn.
CLAY (CL); silty, slightly sandy, stiff to very stiff, moist to slightly rrnoist, upper 2 to 3 feet orange brown,
light brown to white below, calcareous
2 inch diameter hand driven liner sample.
NOTES;
1. Exploratory pits were excavated on April23, 19M with a backhos.
2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on
the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory pits were obtained by interpolatton between contours on the site.plan provided.
4. The exploratory pit locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree
implied by the method used.
a. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit Lags represent the approximate
boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual,
6. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavating.
Fluctuations in water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory resting Results:
WC = Waw Ctit#Amt i%)
DD = Dry Density (pcf)
-20D = Percent passing No. 200 sieve.
LL = Liquid L10*4%)
PI = Plasticity Index M)
1 196205 1 GEOTIECl-IMICA , C:. I LEGEND AND NOTES I Fig. 3 I
�Ic..rvsul �111 uwi up, vcU -L,-II ILL-.1VJ--�4J-04J4
1T1d9 Un 'Jb y sf N0.UU1 V.Ue
M
I... I ..
0.1
1.0 10
APPLIED PRESSURE - kaf
Moisture Content — 12.2 percent
Dry Unit Weight -- 108 pnf
�— - Semple of: silty Clay
i
j From: Pit 2 at 4 Feet
wot
No movement
o = — upon
wetti i
Q
E
2
s
A
i
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf
196 205 EHEPPWORTH -- PAWLAK SWELL - CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. d
DTECHNICAL., INC.
i•iay VU yU J • 1)o Nu . UU1 r . U`j
1
2
c
b
a 3
E
C3 4
0.1 1.0 10
APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf
100
1 196 205 1 H EPWOR H - A WLAKNC. I SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS I Fig. 5
nr,RuurtHrdWldK UEUTecn ILL;OUa-9q2-U#&q may OB gb . 9:38 No.001 P.10
U)
O
C14
(D
cr)
d
z
?
�
U
z
U)
�
W .
cc
�
Z
(n
L)
W
LU
0ui
�
j
�
m �
2
U_
cc
�
�
litn
§
�
.
-
k
§ �
.
!
§ @
k
§
�
§
E
9 § $
�
�
% § 2 •
�
■
�
� @
9
q
0
¢
ui
c6
§
§ 74
OD
q
n
\
e
�
§
■
�
�
M
�
.
I ICN IUUI LIIr aLUI CIN Qr,U LCI-II II-L-JVJ"_74Z34041 rIay Utj yb 'J:5�3 No ,U01 P, 11
HEPWOIRTH-PAWLAK GEO TECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
JOB NO. 196 205
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
(WOH ES1
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
(MINI
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
DROP IN
WATER
LEVEL
(INCHESI
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MINJINCH)
P-1
466
20
water added
7 3/4
7 1/4
1/2
40
7 1 /4
8 3/4
112
10 112
10
112
10
9 112
1/2
9 1/2
9
1/2
9
8 1 /2
112
P-2
50 3/4
20
water added
8 112
7
1 112
20
7
8
1
9 3/4
B 314
1
8 314
7314.
1
7 3/4
6 3/4
1
6 314
531
1
P-3
48
20
water added
water added
8 114
4 314
1 112
9
7 1/2
1 112
7 1/2
8 1/2
1
6 112
5 112
1
8 112
7 114
1 1/4
Note: The percolation holes were hand dug at the bottom of shallow backhoe pits and soaked with water on April 23,.1996,
The percolation tests were performed on April 24, 1996,
E EOC
E.O. CHURCH, INC.
ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
May 17, 1996
Mark and Elizabeth Furlong
P.O. BOX 84
Basalt, CO 81621
Subject: Subsurface Evaluation &
Lot 134, Aspen Mountain
0179 Lynn's Court
Eagle County, Colorado
Job No. 7321
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Furlong,
OWS Design
View
As requested, we have reviewed subsurface conditions by Hepworth-
Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. (H-P) and prepared an Onsite Wastewater
System (OWS) design for the subject site. The purpose of our project
was to design an OWS for the property. The H-P study is reported in
a letter for Job No. 196 205 of May 3, 1996.
SITE CONDITIONS - The investigated site is an approximate 1.5 acre lot
as indicated on Fig. 1 and 2. The subject site is located in a rural
mountain area where onsite wastewater systems are required. Water is
provided by a public water district. The proposed location for the
drain field is indicated on Fig. 2.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION - A 4 bedroom residence is proposed a cated
on Fig. 2. The sewage load for a four bedroom dwelling is 600 gallon%
per day (GPD). A garbage grinder and clothes washer are inched -fin
the design calculations. The drain field is propos d in the northern
portion of the lot. q00 P d-
The ground surface slopes gently to moderately to the south-southwest.
The slopein the drain field area is 4 to 16% to the southeast. The
surface vegetation consists of a good cover of native grasses. There
is oak brush surrounding the proposed drain field area.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS - Subsurface conditions encountered by H-P con-
sisted of 3 feet of clay topsoil underlain by stiff silty, slightly
sandy clay to the maximum depth explored of 8 feet. The percolation
test results by H-P indicate percolation rates ranging frt27:MPI
to 40
minutes per inch (MPI) with an average percolation rate of No
ground water was observed in the test pit.
The proposed location of the drain field is approximately '-",To to 40
feet east of= the percolation tests. We observed subsurface conditions
at the profile pit and foundation excavation, and we believe subsur-
face conditions at the proposed field area are similar to conditions
investigated by H-P, although there may be less topsoil at the pro-
posed field. We recommend the field be installed to the east to get
the field out of a drainage swale and out from beneath a culvert to
the east. The culvert is new since the H-P study.
925 East 17th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80218-1407 P.U. boxxt3lia • tvergreen, %IUiUrauu oU1+o1-couu
(303) 832-9692 FAX (303) 832-3517 (303) 674-0660 FAX (303) 674-0813
2 1�
RECOMMENDATIONS - The results of our investigation indicates an OWS
can be installed at the locati=450GP
need on Fig. 2. The OWS design
is based on a sewage load of and a percolation rate of 27
MPI. A minimum 1250 gallonrtment septic tank is required.
There are two alternatives for a drain field which are: 1. trenches
with a 6 foot separation between trenches which would require 935
_square feet (SF), or 2. beds which would require 1216 SF of field. We
have proposed a field configuration of two 600 SF (61X100') beds con-
nected in series as indicated on Figs. 2 and 3. We do not believe the
difference of 16 SF between the design and proposed field areas is
significant to the operation of the OWS. The recommendation is based
on: a. the home is proposed for full time occupancy, and b. the
ground surface and vegetation. A viable alternative is installation
of 935 SF of trenches in four 31X78' trenches as indicated on Fig. 4
and 5. Our preference for the two beds is to not overload the upper
trench of an OWS.
If additional bedrooms are anticipated, we recommend installing a
larger septic tank and field. The tank size should be increase by 250
gallon per anticipated bedroom. Additional bedrooms will require an
additional 300 SF of bed or 235 SF of trench per bedroom.
The owner must realize an OSDS is different from a public sewer sys-
tem. The owner must be aware of and assume responsibility for mainte-
nance of the system. We recommend the septic tank be pumped at least
every 2 years. There are daily considerations such as not putting
plastic or other nonbiodegradable materials into the OSDS. Water use
must be carefully monitored so toilets are not allowed to run when
seals malfunction. To illustrate the point, it should be noted a
running toilet will consume in excess of 1,000 GPD if allowed to run.
As the system is designed for 600 GPD, a 1000 gallon loading will
flood and harm the system.
LIMITATIONS - Our evaluation, layout, design and recommendations are
based on data submitted. If subsurface conditions different from those
described in this report are encountered, we should be called to ob-
serve the subsurface conditions. If proposed construction is changed,
we should be notified to evaluate the effect of the changes on the
proposed OWS.
If there are any questions, for if we can be of further service, please
call.' -'
Very truly yours,
E. O. CHURCH,_INC.
Edward O. Church, P.
3 copies sent
xc: Eagle County Envirn. Health, P.O. BOX 179, Eagle, CO 81631-7185
xc: Robert Nelson, P.O. BOX 6961, Snowmass Village, CO 81615
SUBSOIL STUDY BY SCALE
- -- - - - -- HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL.INC.
0 179 LYNN ' S COURT
LOT 13. ASPEN MOUNTAIN VIEW
EAGLE COUNTY.COLORAOO
A
:J \
/
\ FDPOPOSED
RESIDENCE
\
t
NOTE: Lu- i 3 IS SERVICED \
BY PUBS C. wnTER `\
\
SITE PLAN AND LOCATION OF
PROFILE PIT AND PERCOLATION TEST
JOB NO. 7321 FIG. 1
SUBSOIL STUDY BY SCALE
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL.INC. 1 " = 6 0 '
01 79 LYNN ' S COURT
LOT 13, ASPEN MOUNTAIN VIEW
EAGLE COUNTY,COLORADO
t
j
l `
TWO FIELD
Pot 6 X 100 = 600 SF
P- ! o%1200
TOTAL AREA =
SF SERIAL
DISTRIBUTION FIELD
PROFILE•
/ o P-3
1250 GALLON TANK
PROPOSED \
\ 4 BEDROOM
RESIDENCE
5
t \
` ` V
LOCATION OF
PROPOSED BED OWS
JOB NO. 7321 FIG_ 2
A. PLAN SECTION - TWO FIELD WITH ERIAL CONNECTION
4" SEWER PIPE FROM
DRAINAGE SWELL^ SEPTIC TANK
° 3" OR 4' PERFORATED PIPE W
100
B. CROSS-SECTION
NATURAL
GRADE EXCAVATE
BELOW FILL
6.
V_'-
VEL
X boo
35 3
© U0 j 1 .q Z
C. SPECIFICATIONS
DESIGN CRITERIA:
FIELD SPECIFICATIONS:
INSTALL TWO FIELDS
NO. OF BEDROOMS - 4
LENGTH - 100 FEET
LOAD Q - 650 GPD
WIDTH - 6 FEET
PERCOLATION RATE, T -
AREA - 1200 S.F.
27 MPI
A = Q XTT X _ 1.5 X 1.3/5
GRAVEL - 1 1/2 INCH
A = 1216 S.F.
_
13it] .,0z k
TREATMENT UNIT SPECIFICATIONS:
ONE 1250 GALLON SINGLE COMPARTMENT SEPTIC TANK. IF
ADDITIONAL BEDROOMS
ARE ANTICIPATED, 250 GALLONS OF
SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY AND 300 SQUARE FEET OF DISPOSAL
FIELD SHOULD BE ADDED PER
BEDROOM.
DRAIN FIELD DETAILS
JOB NO. 7321 FIG. 3
SUBSOIL STUDY BY SCALE
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL.INC. I'"
= 6 0
01 79 LYNN ' S COURT
- - - - - - LOT 13, ASPEN MOUNTAIN VIEW
EAGLE COUNTY.COLORADO
f
1 `
1 4 TRENCHES
r P-2 o S X t 6= 234 SF
'f P_ ; c TOTAL AREA = 936 SF
/ SERIAL DISTRIBUTION FIELD
PROFILE •
o P-3 L
-ALL- TANK
LL
PROPOSED L
4 BEDROOM
RESIDENCE
L
s L
L
s L
s` L
L
L L
\ L
\ L
\ L
\ L
LOCATION OF TRENCH
OWS ALTERNATIVE
JOB NO_ 7321 FIG_ 4
MINIMUM 18" OF COVER OVER TRENCHES
EXISTING GROUND SURFACE -� ❑ SURGE TANK
� 6
MINIMUM OF 6 FEET
BETWEEN TRENCHES
� U
4 TRENCHES
3 x 78 TRENCH WITH
4" PVC PERFORATED PIPE
12- OF 1 1/2 INCH GRAVEL
SERIAL DISTRIBUTION
C. SPECIFICATIONS
DESIGN CRITERIA:
NO. OF BEDROOMS 4
LOAD Q - 600 GPD
PERCOLATION RATE, T -
27 MPI
A = Q XTT X 1.5/5
A = 936 S.F.
FIELD SPECIFICATIONS:
4 TRENCHES
LENGTH - 78 FEET
WIDTH - 3 FEET
AREA - 936 S.F.
GRAVEL - 1 1/2 INCH
TREATMENT UNIT SPECIFICATIONS:
ONE 1250 GALLON SINGLE COMPARTMENT SEPTIC TANK. IF
ADDITIONAL BEDROOMS ARE ANTICIPATED, 250 GALLONS OF
SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY AND 235 SQUARE FEET OF DISPOSAL
FIELD SHOULD BE ADDED PER BEDROOM.
DISPOSAL FIELD DETAILS
JOB NO. 7321 FIG. 5
t �
EOC
E.O. CHURCH, INC.
ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
May 17, 1996
Mark and Elizabeth Furlong
P.O. BOX 84
Basalt, CO 81621
Subject: Subsurface Evaluation
Lot 13, Aspen Mountain
0179 Lynn's Court
Eagle County, Colorado
Job No. 7321
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Furlong,
& OWS Design
View
As requested, we have reviewed subsurface conditions by Hepworth-
Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. (H-P) and prepared an Onsite Wastewater
System (OWS) design for the subject site. The purpose of our project
was to design an OWS for the property. The H-P study is reported in
a letter for Job No. 196 205 of May 3, 1996.
SITE CONDITIONS - The investigated site is an approximate 1.5 acre lot
as indicated on Fig. 1 and 2. The subject site is located in a rural
mountain area where onsite wastewater systems are required. Water is
provided by a public water district. The proposed location for the
drain field is indicated on Fig. 2.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION - A 4 bedroom residence is proposed as indicated
on Fig. 2. The sewage load for a four bedroom dwelling is 600 gallons
per day (GPD), 900 GPD with peaking factor. A garbage grinder and
clothes washer are included in the design calculations. The drain
field is proposed in the northern portion of the lot.
The ground surface slopes gently to moderately to the south-southwest.
The slope in the drain field area is 4 to 16% to the southeast. The
surface vegetation consists of a good cover of native grasses. There
is oak brush surrounding the proposed drain field area.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS - Subsurface conditions encountered by H-P con-
sisted of 3 feet of clay topsoil underlain by stiff silty, slightly
sandy clay to the maximum depth explored of 8 feet. The percolation
test results by H-P indicate percolation rates ranging from 20 to 40
minutes per inch (MPI) with an average percolation rate of 27 MPI. No
ground water was observed in the test pit.
The proposed location of the drain field is approximately 30 to 40
feet east of the percolation tests. We observed subsurface conditions
at the profile pit and foundation excavation, and we believe subsur-
face conditions at the proposed field area are similar to conditions
investigated by H-P, although there may be less topsoil at the pro-
posed field. We recommend the field be installed to the east to get
the field out of a drainage swale and out from beneath a culvert to
the east. The culvert is new since the H-P study.
925 East 17th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80218-1407 P.O. Box 2869 • Evergreen, Colorado 80437-2869
(303) 832-9692 FAX (303) 832-3517 (303) 674-0660 FAX (303) 674-0813
2
-RECOMMENDATIONS - The results of our investigation indicates an OWS
can be installed at the location presented on Fig. 2. The OWS design
is based on a sewage load of 600 GPD, and a percolation rate of 27
MPI. A minimum 1250 gallon 2 compartment septic tank is required.
There are two alternatives for a drain field which are: 1. trenches
with a 6 foot separation between trenches which would require 935
square feet (SF), or 2. beds which would require 1216 SF of field. We
have proposed a field configuration of two 600 SF (61X1001) beds con-
nected in series as indicated on Figs. 2 and 3. We do not believe the
difference of 16 SF between the design and proposed field areas is
significant to the operation of the OWS. The recommendation is based
on: a. the home is proposed for full time occupancy, and b. the ground
surface and vegetation. A viable alternative is installation of 936
SF of trenches in four 3'X78' trenches as indicated on Fig. 4 and 5.
If the installer proposes to use chamber technology, we will allow a
40% reduction in area for a minimum of 3 trenches with 13 chambers in
the first chamber and 12 chambers each of the lower serial trenches.
The chamber trenches should be connected in series out of the end
chamber of the upper two trenches. Chambers must be installed so the
outlet serial pipes are set on undisturbed ground so effluent will not
flow along the trench excavation. Our preference for the two beds is
to not overload the upper trench of an OWS.
If additional bedrooms are anticipated, we recommend installing a
larger septic tank and field. The tank size should be increase by 250
gallon per anticipated bedroom. Additional bedrooms will require an
additional 300 SF of bed or 235 SF of gravel trench per bedroom.
The owner must realize an OSDS is different from a public sewer sys-
tem. The owner must be aware of and assume responsibility for mainte-
nance of the system. We recommend the septic tank be pumped at least
every 2 years. There are daily considerations such•as not putting
plastic or other nonbiodegradable materials into the OSDS. Water use
must be carefully monitored so toilets are not allowed to run when
seals malfunction. To illustrate the point, it should be noted a
running toilet will consume in excess of 1,000 GPD if allowed to run.
As the system is designed for 600 GPD, a 1000 gallon loading will
flood and harm the system.
LIMITATIONS - Our evaluation, layout, design and recommendations are
based on data submitted. If subsurface conditions different from those
described in this report are encountered, we should be called to ob-
serve the subsurface conditions. If proposed construction is changed,
we should be notified to evaluate the effect of the changes on the
proposed OWS.
If there are any questiojj-g_—o.r if we
call.
E . 0. CHURCH, INC
r
x F r-_ �
Edward O. Church, �, E'i 22
„�
c +'
3 copies sent`r�' +a''
can be of further service, please
xc: Eagle County Envirn."Health, P.O. BOX 179, Eagle, CO 81631-7185
xc: Robert Nelson, P.O. BOX 6961, Snowmass Village, CO 81615
SUBSOIL STUDY BY
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL.INC.
SCALE
,i
0179 LYNN ' S COURT
�j LOT 13. ASPEN MOUNTAIN VIEW
/I EAGLE COUNTY. COLORADO
A
P 0 2 \,
0 1
1ED
\-��POSEC
ELSIDE1 C E
' NOTE: LOT 13 IS SERVICED '� \
BY PUBLIC WATER
SITE PLAN AND LOCATION OF
PROFILE PIT AND PERCOLATION TEST
JOB NO. 7321 FIG. I
SUBSOIL STUDY BY SCALE
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL.INC. 1 _ = 6 0
01 79 LYNN ' S COURT
LOT 13. ASPEN MOUNTAIN VIEW -- - - --
EAGLE COUNTY.COLORADO
/ If
TWO FIELD
02 6 X 100 = 600 SF
r P-lo TOTAL AREA =
/ 1200 SF SERIAL
DISTRIBUTION FIELD
PROFILE•
,
/ o P-3 \.
GALLCN TANK `
\ PROPOSED
4 BEDROOM
RESIDENCE
ti
ti \
i
V
LOCATION OF
PROPOSED BED OWS
JOB NO. 7321 FIG_ 2
A. PLAN SECTION - TWO FIELD WITH
DRAINAGE SWELL
-
CAL CONNECTION
-4" SEWER PIPE FROM
SEPTIC TANK
2'
6 3" OR 4" PERFORATED PIPE 2
100'
B. CROSS-SECTION
NATURAL
GRADE
C. SPECIFICATIONS
DESIGN CRITERIA:
NO. OF BEDROOMS - 4
LOAD Q - 650 GPD.
PERCOLATION RATE, T -
27 MPI
A = Q XTT X _ 1.5 X 1.3/5
A = 1216 S.F.
EXCAVATE
BELOW FiLL
GRAVEL
FIELD SPECIFICATIONS:
INSTALL TWO FIELDS
LENGTH - 100 FEET
WIDTH - 6 FEET
AREA - 1200 S.F.
GRAVEL - 1 1/2 INCH
TREATMENT UNIT SPECIFICATIONS:
ONE 1250 GALLON SINGLE COMPARTMENT SEPTIC TANK. IF
ADDITIONAL BEDROOMS ARE ANTICIPATED, 250 GALLONS OF
SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY AND 300 SQUARE FEET OF DISPOSAL
FIELD SHOULD BE ADDED PER BEDROOM.
DRAIN FIELD DETAILS
JOB NO. 7321 FIG. 3
SUBSOIL STUDY BY SCALE
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL.INC. I" = 6 0 '
B 179 LYNN ' S COURT
ALOT 13. ASPEN MOUNTAIN VIEW
EAGLE COUNTY.COLORADO
t
/If .
j,
/ I/
4 TRENCHES
= P-2 O 3 x r B= 234 SF
/= P-1 o TOTAL AREA = 935 SF
SERIAL DISTRIBUTION FIELD
/ PROFILE • \
1250 GALLON TANK
\
PROPOSED 4 SEDR00M ,
RESIDENCE
t ,
t
t
LOCATION OF TRENCH
OWS ALTERNATIVE
JOB NO. 7321 FIG. 4
MINIMUM 18" OF COVER OVER
EXISTING GROUND SURFACE
4 TRENCHES
3 x 78 TRENCH WITH
4" PVC PERFORATED PIPE
12" OF 1 1/2 INCH GRAVEL
SERIAL DISTRIBUTION
C. SPECIFICATIONS
DESIGN CRITERIA:
NO. OF BEDROOMS - 4
LOAD Q - 600 GPD
PERCOLATION RATE, T -
27 MPI
A = Q XT X 1.5/5
A = 936 S.F.
TREATMENT UNIT SPECIFICATIONS:
SURGE TANK
MINIMUM OF 6 FEET
BETWEEN TRENCHES
FIELD SPECIFICATIONS:
4 TRENCHES
LENGTH - 78 FEET
WIDTH - 3 FEET
AREA - 936 S.F.
GRAVEL - 1 1/2 INCH
ONE 1250 GALLON TWO COMPARTMENT SEPTIC TANK. IF
ADDITIONAL BEDROOMS ARE ANTICIPATED, 250 GALLONS OF
SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY AND 235 SQUARE FEET OF DISPOSAL
FIELD SHOULD BE ADDED PER BEDROOM.
DISPOSAL FIELD DETAILS
JOB NO. 7321 FIG. 5
1581-96 Tax# 2391-222-04-013
JOB NAME Lot#13, Filing 3 FURLONG
Aspen Mountain -= v«w
0' 79--v_nn-_sCourt_. _C_ar_bondale
JOB NO.6f A�'
OB LOCATION
I
•
DATE STARTED
7u/f
J�'
DATE COMPLETED
DATE BILLED
7
r l
�� tr .i/ �Il .� / .',
i 1 _.'/1. /
:lei _ / .•
/ �i_ ! &/.�.�W-1-mAl
FF
W96
`�■�
�,VAM
//L r/[ _ .' L
L . �, i.: �' /L..� _ :ALL_
i�.I� �4 / _i//r..1
/' �/ N/
/L;' L
`.� / �•/ %�d�._' :rt�L�'ILi.ti�
f. Lam:.,1i.i. !
/._ a� L / .'�
JOB COST SUMMARY
FOY,
nim,",
v001
/ /
TOTAL SELLING PRICE
_■
N I, Namm
•TA . L MATERIALMISC.
ig
TOTAL LABOR
I mm
Nw. awn W. m-
COSTS
—m
ENGINE
�E�E�EME
JOB COST
GROSSTOTAL
"m■
OVERHEADLESS ._ % OF SELLING P
ENE
JOB FOLDER Product 278 nos ® NEW ENGLAND BUSINESS SERVICE, INC., GROTON, MA 01471 JOB FOLDER Printed in U.SA
F
i
•
i
FT
-
ir_
-
� a
a_
- T r
r '
- I
s " ram.