Loading...
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.