HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.eh.246536300009 (2002)Document Layout
(From Most Recent to Oldest Permit)
Permit
Application
Log Sheet/Notes & Photos
Communications
As -built Design
Engineer Design
Soil Information
Water Permit & Information
Second System on property
Third System etc.
Floor Plans
Please See Building and Land Use Approvals Files for additional information.
a
Pitkin County Environmental Health Department
Permit for an Individual Sewage Disposal System
0405 Castle Ck Rd, Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone 970-920-5070 / FAX 970-920-5077
Permit # 01086 Parcel ID # 2465-363-00-009
Type of permit New( X ) Repair( ) Addition to
Name of Owner David & Dawn Storm
Street Address 4001
Property legal description Lot 6, Section 36
Size of lot 49.9 acres Total square footage of the house
Water source Private well
# of bedrooms in house 3 # of offices, lofts & similar sized rooms in house 1
Caretaker unit Total square footage of the caretaker unit
# of bedrooms in caretaker unit # of offices, lofts & similar sized rooms in caretaker unit
Designed for what # rooms (list) FOUR (4) : 3 bedrooms, + 1 basement with full bath
Permit information
Designed by High Country Engineeri
Mailing Address 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101
Perc rate 20 Profile hole depth 8 ft Depth to groundwater or bedrock + 8 ft
Septic tank capacity 1750 gallons Absorption area 1253 sq ft; 50% infiltrator trench = 627 sq ft
Comments
Septic permit approved per compliance with the engineer design and specifications stamped 11-2-01. Any
changes must be approved by this department and the design engineerrp for to them being made.
Minimum horizontal distances between components of the system and physical features shall conform to the Pitkin
County ISDS regulations.
Design is for a 1750 two-compartment concrete tank with an effluent filter. Engineer has taken a 50% reduction in
the absorption field for infiltrator in a trench configuration: 3 trenches, 14 units long = 42 units total.
This department does not endorse any brand of products. The engineer must do a final inspection of the
installation and submit an as -built letter to this department. This department must also be called for an inspection
with a minimum of 48 hours advanced notice.
Permit approved by: :',ftrJ Date:
Plans and specifications of the pr osed individual sewage disposal system have been reviewed and are considered
satisfactory. Permission is hereby granted to the owner or the agent to perform the work indicated in accordance with the Pitkin
County ISDS Regulation in effect at the time of issue. This permit becomes invalid 6 months from the date that the permit was
issued unless system construction has commenced or an extension has been approved in writing by the Department.
As -built drawings must be included with this permit before the final approval will be issued.
Installer: C)W r\R /l 1 ncqa l ➢ d
Final Insllfe d0 P0&0 al:
Date: Z3 j 0
� 6AKf . C Kk,
PITKIN CCISTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DE' TMENT
APPLICATI OR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOMSYSTEM
0405 Castle Creek Road, Suite 10, Aspen Colorado 81611
Phone 970-920-5070/Fax 970-920-5077
Name of OWNER C)Iau 'I Qrl(i ciuw) `-)�r crn
Owners Mailing Address P, 0. Sax 9-2 ',)n01 afT'rl-as _ Q AI In Sri
Business Phone: 920-3-72-21 9 7 Home Phone: q 7 n- q2,7- Q? q
Primary Contact Person (all communication regarding this permit will go through this person)
Name Lit, -D{-OC n an
Contact Mailing Address
i)co�e.
Beswess Phone : I Cell Phone: Fax : 012,
varcei iua lavauame Trom assessors ortice
at 920-5160 or at www.aspen.com/assessor/)
Street address of property y Op F q L j,
3La
Legal Description: Lot (o ,Block Filing
Size of lot: acres. Type of proposed structure:
,Subdivision
hj j Size of bldg. envelope:
Total square feet of house L j ' ,� # of bedrooms in house
# of offices, lofts 8 similar sized rooms in house I
Caretaker Unit: Attached ( ) Detached (
Total area(sq. ft.) of caretaker unit
# of bedrooms in caretaker unit # of offices
size rooms of caretaker unit
Permit is for: New Home ( ,, ) Repair due to failure ( ) Remodel/Addition ( ) Emergency use ( )
Water: Private well (< ) Spring ( ) Stream ( ) Community/Public Water System ( )
If community system: Name of system
The fee for a ISDS application is $330 for a permit that lakes 6 hours or less for the department to approve. If approval takes
longer than 6 hours, a rate of $65 per hour will be charged. The maximum fee is $1000. The basic fee of $330 is due at the time
of application. The remainder, if any, will be due in two stages: first, at the time of issuance of the ISDS permit; second, before
final approval of the ISDS permit.
Application for an individual sewage disposal system is hereby submitted. I hereby certify that the above information is true and
accurate and that I have provided true and accurate information on locations of all existing and proposed wells, contour
intervals, buildings, property lines, ditches, slopes, waterlines, springs, suction or irrigation lines, drinking water cisterns, drain
tiles, irrigation ditches, lakes, water courses, streams, floodplains, dry gulches, and existing septic systems. I hereby certify
that any such features not shown on attached site map are not present. Issuance of the permit does not imply the approval of
any other permit required for construction pursuant to Pitkin County codes. No construction may be undertaken until all
approvals and permits have been obtained.
The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department, Pitkin County and employees of these agencies will be held harmless
should the individual sewage disposal system fail or malfunction. The permit to construct is issued on information submitted by
the applicant or his/her representatives. The owner assumes full responsibility in case of failure of the system.
Signature of applicant ( JQr 7�/ ��/�,y,1 ; Date / z/ 0
Received by Receipt # Y `3 Date 2 /°
G:\eh\isdsVsdsapp\isdsapp. doc
PITKIN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
SSIC SYSTEM APPLICATION CHECK*T
NOTE: SEPTIC PERMIT APPLICATIONS CANNOT BE ACCEPTED UNTIL ALL OF THE
INFORMATION BELOW IS INCLUDED.
The soils test and system design must be done by a Registered Professional Engineer. You should plan
to meet with the RPE at your site to discuss where the soils tests should be done to meet all of the
County regulations and where you want to put your house. The RPE will be your contact for issues you
want to discuss about your system's size and location. Each box should be checked to indicate the
following have been submitted before the application can be accepted.
El Environmental Health has been called to look at profile hole
El Completed application form
0 Engineer design stamped by a RPE registered in the State of Colorado. (One set).
Design must be based on the Pitkin County ISDS Regulation, Revised 2001.
0 Site map must include locations of all existing and proposed wells within setback distances
(including on surrounding properties), contour intervals, all proposed and existing buildings,
property lines, ditches, slopes of greater than 15% in the area of the drain field, water lines,
sprinkler systems, springs, suction (irrigation) lines, drinking water cisterns, drain tiles, irrigation
ditches, lakes, ponds, water courses, streams, floodplains, floodways, dry gulches, or existing
septic systems. This must include all such features on neighboring properties within setbacks.
Complete building floor plans. Floor plans should be 11x17. (One set)
Proof of adequate water supply: (Well must be drilled before septic permit can be issued.):
For private wells, recent well driller's pump test showing gpm actually produced, well permit
showing legal supply. The minimum yield from the well or water storage shall be .07
gallons/minute/person which is 100 gallons/person/day. There must be storage or yield capable
of a 24-hour supply for domestic purposes only (not including fire protection or irrigation)
For community systems, proof there is adequate water for all houses served by the system.
❑ Proof of adequate water quality with bacteriology test: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
and Snowmass Water & Sanitation District perform this test locally.
11 Percolation tests
El All ISDS Permit fees are $330 to cover first six hours of processing. Hourly rate of $65 will be
charged beyond first six hours, up to $1,000. Tank only fee $110. Please make check payable
to: Pitkin County Environmental Health Department.
El Copy of county approval (1041 approval, subdivision approval, etc.)
You must obtain written approval from Community Development before submitting this
application if your septic system is outside the building envelope and any part of the
system is more than 30" above grade.
A WAIVER IS AVAILABLE FOR SUBMITTING A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION PRIOR TO
OBTAINING AN INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT.
Please ask the Community Development Dept. or Environmental Health Dept. for further information.
g 1eNsds�sdsappli6sdschck.doc
30't
(MIN.)
0
♦ \y
2000-CALLON
SEPTIC TANK (MIN.)
Lath
(TYP.)
m
HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. DAWN STORM
PIIKIN COUNN, co SCALE:1"=40' AS -BUILT
y�
SUITE AVEM:E. 14 SUITE NESS DRIVE EAST. PARCEL 0. EAST 80Hi8 CK
GLENWOOD SPRFM 00 8W ENG EWOOD, 00 80tl2 ISDB DES. DJW CK: FILE N0. SHEET
/ F)C(970) 945-25558 FX(303) 925'0547 AS -BUILT DR. DJW DATE: 5/15/021201073. 1
0 •
Pitkin County Environmental Health Department
Contact Log Sheet
May 15, 2002
Nancy MacKenzie
Pitkin County Environmental Health
0405 Castle Creek Road, Ste. 10
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Parcel 6, East Sopris Creek, Pitkin County, Colorado
HCE File Number 2011073.59
Dear Nancy:
0
On May 14, 2002, High Country Engineering personnel observed the construction of the ISDS for
Parcel 6, East Sopris Creek within Pitkin County, Colorado. One 2000 -gallon septic tank and
forty-two (42) Bio -diffuser units had been installed in a trench configuration, but no backfilling
had taken place. The contractor was advised to fasten the units together, install the inspection
wells per the construction detail and to extend the effluent pipe into the access. Otherwise, the
installation of the system was in conformance with the intent of the design. I have enclosed an as -
built drawing with this letter. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please
contact us.
Sincerely,
HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC.
Roger D. Neal, P.E.
Project Manager
RDN/djw
xc: Dawn Storm -
2GG75
�%
1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 14 Inverness Drive East Suite 0.136
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Englewood, CO 80112
Telephone (970) 945-8676 - Fez (970) 945.2555 Telephone (303) 925-0544 - Fax (303) 925-0547
0 0
Pitkin County Environmental Health Department 0405 Castle Creek Rd. Suite 10. Asnen. CO 81611
FAX/MEMO
TO:1XL�
Phone:
Fax Phone: G�
CC:
I REMARKS:
(�A&
❑ Urgent
❑ For your review
/S2 S
Date: 016 /0
Number of pages including cover sheet:
FROM: Nancy MacKenzie
Phone: 970-920-5076
Fax Phone: 970-920-5077
E-mail: nancymAci.aspen.co.us
❑ Reply ASAP ❑ Please Comment
cv
FROM :STORM
v
Paved E Dawn S+orm
of 7.7 -029 3 Nm
379-7187 cz„
309-2793 cell
FAX NO.
pv,s 5,0
pGo
01-I4je IrhrKS
S+or� a+ RS ex.+� n4 oF� 82
odd coN�S�
C'.. • amn, as
6 04 2002 02:36PM P2
gspel grove
Q00 5.4 in; les
►09 home
14.6 M-leS
0
�
o� Ooxcs
' �I
K, to Per
oq" PlIpew
;t4
m
11r� =
"F of o�tY► Perms4it
be perr+, clea. ��'Zool
trim,'+ sSy . Lool
I is
..-•
rn 1� rv►eaSu«. � a;-
l" w/in W1d,oc�'dt �
w1 Plc mi
'n..
oink}- 'r cts"Wst.
4%r Ah 1:4 w/ R I+V
;rt. IJ�e( moor OJf Iff
)II
t� C'�tech
October 12, 2001
Dave and Dawn Storm
P. 0. Box 97
Hepwor*awlak Geotechnical, Inc.
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone: 970-945-7988
Fax: 970-945-8454
hpgeo@hpgeotech.com
Snowmass, Colorado 81654 Job No. 101 500
Subject: Supplemental Percolation Testing, Proposed Residence, Lot 6, Section
36, Range 87 West, Township 8 South, Pitkin County, Colorado
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Storm:
As requested, Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc., performed supplemental
percolation testing at the subject site on October 8, 2001. We previously performed a
preliminary subsoil study and percolation testing, and a supplemental subsurface study,
for foundation and septic system design of the proposed residence at the site under our
Job No. 101500. The work was as verbally authorized by Dawn Storm on October 4,
2001.
Profile Pit 2 and three percolation test holes (P-4, P-5 and P-6) were excavated at the
locations shown on Fig. 1 prior to our October 8 site visit. A graphic log of the
subsoils encountered in the pit is provided on Fig. 2. The subsoils exposed in Profile
Pit 2 consisted of about 1 foot of topsoil overlying clayey to very clayey sand with
gravel and scattered cobbles to the bottom pit depth of 8 feet. Results of a gradation
analysis performed on a disturbed bulk sample of the subsoils combined from the
bottoms of the P-4 and P-6 holes (minus 11h inch fraction) are provided on Fig. 3. No
free water was observed in the pits and the soils were generally moist. The percolation
test holes had been hand dug in the bottom of shallow backhoe pits and soaked with
water on October 7, 2001.
Boring 1, located in the proposed building area, encountered sandy to very sandy clay
soils to a depth of 30 feet underlain by claystone shale bedrock. No free water was
encountered in the boring to the drilled depth of 41 feet when drilled in August of 2001.
Percolation testing was conducted on October 8, 2001 by a representative of Hepworth-
Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. The percolation test results are summarized in Table I and
indicate average percolation rates from about 7 to 20 minutes per inch. Based on the
subsurface conditions encountered and the percolation test results, the tested area should
be suitable for a conventional infiltration septic disposal system. We recommend the
/5
Dave and Dawn Storm
October 12, 2001
Page 2
system be oversized due to the variable percolation rates. A professional civil engineer
should design the septic disposal system.
If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call our office.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
G2
Davi7t 3.216
Rev. By:
DAY/rso
attachments
cc: High Country Engineering - Attn: Deric Walter
H -P GEOTECH
I
LOT 3
LC
BUILUINU
/ENVELOPE /
/ \
PROFILE
� PIT 1 �
'LOT' 6 ❑ P2
SEC N 6 P(3 AP1 �A
/ P�5- PROFILE
1 0 PIT 2 /
JC\PPROXIMATtI P6 1 RING
\\BUILDING
\ FOOTPRINT
o �o
abco
cN fiN
OXIMATE SCALE
1" = 300'
8150
—8200
8250
8300 8300
LEGEND
■ EXPLORATORY PIT FOR
CURRENT STUDY
A PERCOLATION TEST HOLE
FOR CURRENT STUDY
❑ EXPLORATORY PIT FOR
PREVIOUS STUDY DATED
JULY 26, 2001
0 PERCOLATION TEST HOLE
FOR PREVIOUS STUDY
DATED JULY 26, 2001
O BORING FROM PREVIOUS
STUDY DATED
SEPTEMBER 20, 2001
LOT 13
HEPWORTH—PAWLAK LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING, PITSI Fi 1
101 500 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. AND PERCOLATION TEST HOLES 9
/�
PROFILE PIT 2
0 0
V y
d
I 5 5
L L
a. a -
N m
10 10
LEGEND:
TOPSOIL; organic silty clay, firm, slightly moist, dark brown.
SAND (SC—CL); Clayey to very clayey, gravelly, scattered cobbles, very stiff, moist, brown to
red—brown.
NOTES:
1. The exploratory pit was excavated with a trackhoe prior to our observation on October 8, 2001.
2. Location of the exploratory pit was measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the
site plan provided.
3. Elevation of the exploratory pit was not measured and log of exploratory pit is drawn to depth.
4. The exploratory pit location should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the
method used.
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit log represent the approximate boundaries
between material types and transitions may be gradual.
6. No free water was observed in the pit. Fluctuations in water level may occur with time.
101 500 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK LOG OF EXPLORATORY PIT Fig. 2
GEOTECHNICAL, INC_
/C�
HEOORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICONC.
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 101 500
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES)
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
(MIN)
WATER
DEPTH AT
START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER
DEPTH AT
END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
DROP IN
WATER
LEVEL
(INCHES)
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MINJINCH)
P-4
42
5
water added
61/2
5
11/2
7
5
4 114
314
4114
3
11/4
3
13/4
11/4
53/4
5
3/4
5
4 114
3/4
4 114
3 112
314
3 112
23/4
314
P-5
42
15
6
5
1
20
5
4
1
4
31/4
314
3114
2 112
314
21/2
13/4
314
13/4
1
3/4
1
1/4
314
P-6
44
5
water added
6
41/2
11/2
10
41/2
21/2
2
6
51/2
1/2
51/2
5
1/2
5
4 112
1/2
4 112
4
1/2
4
31/2
1/2
3 112
3
1/2
Note: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on October 7,
2001. Percolation tests were conducted on October 8, 2001 by H -P Geotech. The average
percolation rates were based on the last three readings of each test.
07 0
p
C/HSI
\tech
July 26, 2001
Hepwoeawlak Geotechnical, Inc.
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone: 970.945.7988
Fax: 970-945-8454
hpgeo@hpgeotech.com
Dave Storm
P. O. Box 97
Snowmass, Colorado 81654 Job No. 101 500
Subject: Preliminary Subsoil Study and Percolation Testing, Proposed Residence,
Lot 6, Section 36, Range 87 West, Township 8 South, Pitkin County,
Colorado
Dear Mr. Storm:
As requested, Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. performed a preliminary subsoil
study and percolation testing 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 July 9, 2001. The data obtained and our
recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions
encountered are presented in this report. Evaluation of potential geologic hazard
impacts on the site are beyond the scope of this study.
Proposed Construction: The proposed residence will be a 2 story wood -frame
structure over a walk -out basement level located in the building envelope as shown on
Fig. 1. Ground floors are proposed to be slab -on -grade. Cut depths are assumed to
range between about 3 to 6 feet. Foundation loadings for this type of construction are
assumed to be relatively light and typical of the proposed type of construction. The
septic disposal system is proposed to be located to the north of the residence.
Once building and foundation plans have be developed, we should be contacted to
review the plans and perform additional geotechnical analysis as needed.
Site Conditions: The lot is about 40 acres in size and located about 1 mile south of
East Sopris Creek to the southwest of the Town of Basalt. The building site is located
on a relatively flat topographic bench of a northwesterly facing hillside. The ground
surface in the building area appears natural and slopes strongly down to the northwest
with about 3 to 4 feet of elevation difference across the assumed building area. The site
is vegetated with grass, weeds, sage brush and thick scrub oak brush.
Subsurface Conditions: The general subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated
by observing one exploratory pit (Profile Pit) in the proposed septic disposal site about
50 feet north of the proposed residence located as shown on Fig. 1. The log of the pit
is presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 1/2 foot of topsoil,
consist of very stiff sandy clay extending to the pit depth of 51/2 feet. Results of swell -
consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed samples of the clay, presented
on Fig. 3, indicate low compressibility under existing moisture conditions and light
loading and a moderate to moderately high expansion potential when wetted. The
0� /
Dave Storm
July 26, 2001
Page 2
samples showed a swell pressures in the range of 8,000 to 10,000 psf. Liquid and
plastic limit testing indicate the clay has high plasticity. No free water was observed in
the pit and the soils were slightly moist to moist.
Foundation Recommendations: Spread footings placed on the natural clay soils
encountered at the site will have a risk of heave, possibly resulting in building distress
if wetting were to occur below the foundation. Subexcavating the clay soils to provide
several feet of structural fill below the building or a deep foundation are possible
foundation types to reduce the risk of foundation movement and building distress.
Provided below are preliminary recommendations for spread footings. Additional
subsurface exploration should be done at the building site for final foundation design.
Recommendations for alternate foundation types can be provided as part of the
additional subsurface exploration.
Spread footings placed on at least 4 feet of compacted structural fill and sized for a
maximum soil bearing pressure of 2,500 psf can be assumed for building support. The
natural clay soils tend to swell when wetted and there could be some post -construction
foundation heave on the order of 1 inch depend on the depth and extent of the wetting.
Footings should be a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for
columns. 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
heavily reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies and better withstand the
effects of some differential movement such as by assuming an unsupported length of at
least 15 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to
resist a lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 60 pcf
for the on-site soil as backfill.
The structural fill below footings should be a relatively well graded aggregate material
such as CDOT Class 2, base course compacted to at least 98% of the maximum
standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. The structural fill should
extend laterally beyond the footings a distance equal to at least the depth of fill below
the footing . The structural fill placement should be observed and evaluated for
compaction on a regular basis by a representative of the geotechnical engineer.
Floor Slabs: The on-site soils possess an expansion potential and slab heave could
occur if the subgrade soils were to become wet. Slab -on -grade construction may be
used provided precautions are taken to limit potential movement and the risk of distress
to the building is accepted by the owner. A positive way to reduce the risk of slab
movement, which is commonly used in the area, is to construct structurally supported
floors over crawlspace.
H -P GEOTECH
as
0 0
Dave Storm
July 26, 2001
Page 3
To reduce the effects of some differential movement, nonstructural floor slabs should be
separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow
unrestrained vertical movement. Interior non-bearing partitions resting on floor slabs
should be provided with a slip joint at the bottom of the wall so that, if the slab moves,
the movement cannot be transmitted to the upper structure. This detail is also important
for wallboards, stairways and door frames. Slip joints which will allow at least
2 inches of vertical movement are recommended. Floor slab control joints should be
used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. Slab reinforcement and control joints
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 immediately beneath
basement level slabs -on -grade. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate
with less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve.
The free -draining gravel will aid in drainage below the slabs and should be connected to
the perimeter underdrain system.
Required fill beneath slabs should consist of suitable imported granular material,
excluding topsoil and oversized rocks. The fill should be spread in thin horizontal lifts,
adjusted to at or above optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95% of the
maximum standard Proctor density. All vegetation, topsoil and loose or disturbed soil
should be removed prior to fill placement.
The above recommendations will not prevent slab heave if the expansive soils
underlying slabs -on -grade become wet. However, the recommendations will reduce the
effects if slab heave occurs. All plumbing lines should be pressure tested before
backfilling to help reduce the potential for wetting.
Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration,
it has been our experience in mountainous areas and where clay soils are present that
local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal
runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can also create a perched condition. We
recommend below -grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawlspace and basement
areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain
system.
The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill
surrounded above the invert level with free -draining granular material. The drain
should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent
finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1 % 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
H -P GEOTECH
a3
ay
0 0
Dave Storm
July 26, 2001
Page 4
2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 11/2 feet deep.
Surface Drainage: The following drainage precautions should be observed during
construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed:
1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be
avoided during construction. Drying could increase the expansion
potential of the soils.
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, finer graded 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) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of
all backfill.
5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation, such as sod, should
be located at least 10 feet from the building. Consideration should be
given to the use of xeriscape to limit potential wetting due to irrigation.
Percolation Testing: Percolation tests were conducted on July 12, 2001 to evaluate the
feasibility of an infiltration septic disposal system at the site. One profile pit and three
percolation holes were dug at the locations shown on Fig. 1. The test holes (nominal 12
inch diameter by 12 inch deep) were hand dug at the bottom of shallow backhoe pits
and were soaked with water one day prior to testing. The soils exposed in the
percolation holes are similar to those exposed in the Profile Pit shown on Fig. 2 and
consist of very stiff sandy clay. The percolation test results are presented in Table II
and indicate percolation rates of 240 and 360 minutes per inch and one test with no
percolation. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered and the percolation test
results, the tested area will need to have an engineered septic disposal system. We
recommend a civil engineer design the infiltration septic disposal system.
Limitations: This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted
geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no
warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted
in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pit excavated at the
location indicated on Fig. 1 and to the depth shown on Fig.2, the proposed type of
H -P GEOTECH
9 0
Dave Storm
July 26, 2001
Page 5
construction and our experience in the area. Our findings include extrapolation of the
subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory pit 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.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for preliminary design
purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our
information. As the project evolves, we should provide additional subsurface
exploration, 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 let us know.
Sincerely,
INC.
David A. Young P Off. 32-21
Reviewed by:
4
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
DAY/ksw
attachments
cc: S. K. Peightal Engineers - Attn: Jack Albright
H -P GEOTECH
a5
1 1'
APPROXIMATE SCALE
i" — qnn'
OO
LOT 7
`b
8150
o
_o
\
\ ■
/8200
'
o
o
BUILDING
ENVELOPE / —� 8250
/
/
0
i
8300
80(%
\
1
f
PROFILE
IJ
I PIT
I ■
W
W� CON
TT��
SEC, N 6
HEPWORTH—PAWLAK
LOCATION
OF EXPLORATORY
P3 P2 /
Flg 1
101 500
GEOTECHNICAL,
I BUILDING
PERCOLATION TEST HOLES
/\
RE 1 LOT 13
L �
CIS
LEGEND
\
\
\
\ ■
EXPLORATORY PIT
PERCOLATION TEST HOLE
LOT 3
1
o f_
W
W� CON
HEPWORTH—PAWLAK
LOCATION
OF EXPLORATORY
PIT AND
Flg 1
101 500
GEOTECHNICAL,
INC_
PERCOLATION TEST HOLES
0
E
PROFILE
PIT
L_ 10
LEGEND:
HTOPSOIL; organic, silty sandy clay, moist, brown.
wc==15.0
DD=108
-200=58
LL=58
PI=77
WC-- 14.8
DD=114
WC --15.6
DD=112
CLAY (CL—CH); very sandy, very stiff, slightly moist, brown, medium to high plasticity.
k2° Diameter hand driven liner sample.
W.
Me
NOTES:
1. The profile pit was observed on July 12, 2001 with a backhoe.
2. Location of the exploratory pit was measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the
site plan provided.
3. Elevation of the exploratory pit was not measured and log of exploratory pit is drawn to depth.
4. The exploratory pit location and elevation should be considered accurate only to the degree implied
by the method used.
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit log represent the approximate boundaries
between material types and transitions may be gradual.
6. No free water was observed in the profile pit. Fluctuations in water level may
occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Water Content ( % )
DO = Dry Density ( pct )
—200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
LL = Liquid Limit ( % )
PI = Plasticity Index ( % )
1
101 500 I GEOWORTH—ALW AK I LOG OF PROFILE PIT I Fig. 2 I
Moisture Content = 14.8 percent
Dry Density = 114 pcf
From: Profile Pit at 3 Feet
3
Sample of: Very Sandy Clay
Expansion
upon
2
�
c
0
N
1
0
0
X
L
0
wetting
c
0
.q
N
O
1
n
E
0
U
2
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
Moisture Content = 15.6 percent
Dry Density = 112 pcf
Sample of: Very Sandy Clay
From: Profile Pit at 4 Feet
--TM
2
Sd
c
O
N
C 1
C1
C
Expansion
X
W
upon
wettin
I 0
C
O
m 1
0
E
0
U
2
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
EPWORTH-PAWLAK
SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 3
101 500TGEOTECHNICAL,
INC.
Moisture Content = 14.8 percent
Dry Density = 114 pcf
From: Profile Pit at 3 Feet
Expansion
upon
d
«
2
<
0
z
_
Q
LLJF-
0
$
$
\
<
+
I
e
0
¥
CL
LLI
_
/
y
m
[
e
f
Adlk
IMF
j
j
2
G
2
\
/
/
))>
/
LO
^
/
Z
=zzt
R
=
j
( 00
}
2
§|\
{
m
«
HE*RTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICALOC.
TABLE 11
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 101 500
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES)
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
(MIN)
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
DROP IN
WATER
LEVEL
(INCHES)
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MINJINCH)
P-1
40
30
6
5'/<
Y.
240
5%
55/e
'/a
55/8
5%
0
P-2
45
30
7
67/8
Ya
360
67/8
6'%
'/e
6'/e
6'/0
0
P-3
44
30
6
6
0
Did Not Pero
6
6
0
6
6
0
Note: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on July
11, 2001 by the client. Percolation tests were conducted on July 12, 2001 by H. P.
Geotech. The average percolation rates were based on the entire time interval of each
test.
3�;
n
It
ATTENTION
Al .aa.wuw to w..e «
� q c.w ae
ooeu«w. cavo -«tar to w. eNw�w t .talo as eor ta• elven
a r w�. rar a�� oauq �awuo.. r pop. 11w....1a wwi m1a1q aew..
rrwp. to Pte. �^oy ua ..wr.P q wni rLnang wee.. a.wr u+e cma«w. to w
.epwrow ow rwie w.ey uat ens.s Pw�.. esral. ero .00vwu ew.c nu.� ..gonwba.
Ia areo of cwt�c[M
I ebkJ.. aue pi.«. rwi r.p w contact NemsLtyl...eom O.s1gn bsv'.e.. ane we
ulu cv gim b bip I-bbb-]bb-9s^J.
W-110 Vb' • bon
•
nI
mojwr NUatlm I
0 0
MEMORANDUM
To: Tamara Pregl, Community Development Department
From: Nancy MacKenzie, Pitkin County Environmental Health Department
Date: October 15, 2001
Re: Storm Minor Amendment to a Development Permit
Parcel ID # 2465-363-00-009
The Pitkin County Environmental Health Department has reviewed details of the application to
locate the well outside of the approved building envelope under the authority of the Pitkin
County Land Use Code and has the following comments.
ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS: Sections 2-170 and 3-70-100: •it is the policy of the
County to insure the availability of a water supply of adequate quality, quantity, pressure and dependability for fire protection and support of
a proposed land use prior to approval of the use. The County shall require land uses to hook up to existing public systems if service is
available." (Prior code 2-77)
I have been at this property. The new site they are proposing seems like an area that will likely
produce water. It is appropriate to allow the Storms' the right to drill at any other locations
where they hopefully can find water.
A site with suitable soils has been identified within the building envelope for the sewage
disposal system. This location will meet required setback distance from any future well
location. However, we will not be able to issue a septic permit, nor be able to sign -off on their
building permit, until a producing well has been drilled.
&,S R m P,,h Piper
0
Shelton Drilling Corp
P.O. Box 1059
Basalt, Co. 81621
(970)927-4182
Lic. # 1095
Name : David Storm`_
c/o --- — —
Address : P.O. Box 97
City, St, Zip : SnopCo._81654
Phone # _
Hole &M pogo Typo Cam ID ca by OD
70
6.5 U PVC 0
Recommended Pump Set Depth 210 Ft.
p� u–,�P r
Invoice # : —C-1W—
Date
-1865Date 11/162001
Permit #: 234746
Location : Sec 36
From, To
Perforated Ft :
40 ft
Estimated :
3-4 gpm'
0
_
Static Level:
102 R
23-223
Total Drilled :
223 It
Pumping__! GPM
For Pump Installation We Recommend : Samuelson Pump 945-6309 (Raun Samuelson)
i 8c M Pump Co 945-6159 (Rick Holub)
Aqua Tec Pump 984-0311 (Tom Platzer)
Instructions:
Price Per Foot 200 Feet C S 25.00 Per Foot = S 5000.00
Feet (a� S Per Foot = S 0.00
Total Footage Charge $ 5000.00
Minimum Well Charge (if applicable) ........... .................. S
Conditions Of Payment
I�
pay S 5000.00 _
1. • WE STRONGLY RECOMMEND A VALID PUMP 7 EST BE CONDUCTED BY A LICENSED PUMP INSTALLER
TO DETERMINE THE ACTUAL WELL PRODUCTION AND WATER QUALITY. THIS SHOULD ESTABLISH THE
ACTUAL WELL PRODUCTION PARAMETERS WHICH CANNOT BE DETERMINED WHILE DRILLING
3, The Isadowner is attimalely resposaibk for the Plugging asd abssdounwel of dry boles or replaced wells.
according to State Rules sad RnWatioas. Mae" costact us for details ssd/or prices.
4. ALL INV01CFr S DUE A -ND PAYABI-L WITHIN IQ DAYS OF INVOICE DATE UNLESS PRIOR -ARRAN L---
MENTS ARE MADE w 1 sx HAND .IN . CHAR - .p$$MONTH MAY BE ADDED 15 DAYS FROM_FWT
RILLING,
Please call us if you have any questions.
FROM : SNOWMRSS W S 0 PHONE NO. : 9709235,271
STANDARD BACTERIOLOGICAL WATER TEST
SNOWMASS WAM 6 SANITATION DISTRICT
P.O. BOX 5700 - SNOWNASS VILLAGE, 00 51616
0 Nov. 30 2021 07:03AM P1
ANkYShSTART_ �Q -- L'N5URASLE
AWkY$TA:YIISH,�L� FOR:isT
BN FI `
� YEYBRAMIIE FILTER
PWS:OA_ —�S/1:•�•�• • • OFC T
SMIPLc TAKEN DATE %A?N6
SUPPLY I
ABSENT PPEEEYT l -I
KCAL A93ENT PP.ESENt
cc
COUNTVyyy�y.rA1PEq+d1�11n'�i/=0 I
I ) CO11Ag1N!TY SDFPLY I! ROUTINE OISTAIMiT:JN SYSTEM SUPPLY ,ADJUSTED COU;C_RM1V MLI $ �j• Q (��`
I )NONCOMMUNITY ! ICHECK SAIAPL! IPROCESSWATER WJiNL ULFATEB:�74 i N\ C
OTHER PUBLIC 1 !RAW 1 )gFICUND ( ISURFACE V�
Z
(1k) PRIVATE t 1 SPECIAL PURPOSE SAI I 2M
S'
,*ME: IF ALL WOPUAADON IS NOT SUPPUE2 THE SAMPLE W::L BE DISCARDED.
O
ADORESS_.� w/+X —1. I bIGW-.LPC%4•rn f�.L� q
7 N
Q/ 'E:.%L 6.7EArP THAN 0.'YE
CITYSTATE _ �S.n1-O7'LU-'nap
^7e4 --S-S. 7} pwO;M PER:a w!, IND.CCes
..9-•IE�+OE'AE\'.2�w'i1194.N ♦F :MI.IDII!iG v,6TW^CM:lO AFP NnpN.
STANDARD BACTERIOLOGICAL WATER TEST -
SNOWMASS WATER 3 SANITATION DISTRICT
P.O. BOX 5760 - SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615
I
[S IDF Sample Location =
���,��//��,, NAME OF
SAMPLE TAKEN GATE TI������iL SUPPLY
1 (CHLORINE
COUNTY{'! }'y I!(1 �PLER___ RESIDUAL MGJL
( ) COMMMUNUTY SUPPLY ( I ROUONE DISTRIBUTKKJ SYSTEM SUPPLY
( ) NON COMMUNITY 1 I CHECK SAMPLE 1 ) PROCESS WATER
( ) OTHERPUBLIC RAW ( )GROUND ( ) SURFACE
( )PRIVATE ( ) SPECIAL PURPOSE SAMPLE
-NOTE: IF ALL INFORMATION IS SUPPLIED, THE SAMPLE WILL BE DISCARDED.
REMARKS: r
RETURN TO �� �• 1
ADDRESS t
1 r:
SEE REVERSE FOR TIME UMRATIONS SAMPLING INamJCTIONS AND DEFINmONG
LABMICRO 106 (REV. 2-0) WIN
ANALYST/START--M---V If" 17
UNSUITABLE
❑
S
FOR
TEST
ANALYST/FINISH�')
`I 1
RESU
MEMBRANE FILTER
m
>
M
Q
W
W
S
DIRECT i T
COLIFORM ABSENT PRESENT
FECAL ABSENT PRESENTADJUSTED
COUNT:
COLIFORM/100 ML
F ('Q
!{,�
`j
U
LAURYL SULFATE BROTH
z
3 F
F
O
Z
O
QO
Z
"PE
COLIFORWIDD MLOER
THAN ONE100
ML INDICATES
WITH MINIMUM
ICE
w
R STANDARDS,
o
��;c ll M�eMl�F�1F
MEMORANDUM
TO: Cindy Houben, Community Development Director
FROM: Tamara Pregl, Planner O q
RE: Stone Minor Amendment to a Development Pennit
DATE: October 23, 2001
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting an amendment to Condition 9 of Resolution
No. 99-21 to allow for a well to be located outside of the approved building envelope upon review and
approval of the Community Development Department and the Environmental Health Department.
APPLICANT: David and Dawn Storm
LOCATION: The subject property is referred to as Lot 6 of Section 36. The property is located
approximately 3 miles from East Sopris Creek Road on Tract 36 Road. The property is addressed as 4001
East Sopris Creek Road.
ZONING/SIZE: The property is zoned RS -30. The property contains approximately 49.9 acres and is
conforming in size.
BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Resolution No. 99-21, the Board of County Commissioners granted a
1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission approval to establish a building envelope for the
construction of a single-family residence. The site plan for the property is in the process of being
recorded.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: Referral agency comments are incorporated throughout this memorandum,
and are attached for reference.
STAFF COMMENTS:
D MINOR AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT:
A minor amendment to any development permit is intended to change an element or condition of a
development permit subject to compliance with the standards in Section 3-200-080 of the Land Use Code.
These standards require that:
A. The amendment must not change the use of the proposed development between residential,
commercial, and tourist accommodation uses.
Response: The amendment will not change the use of the proposed development. The applicant is not
requesting a change in use.
B. The amendment must be consistent with action taken during the review of the original
development and does not constitute a new land development activity.
3�
0 0
Storm Minor Amendment
October 23, 2001
Response: The amendment is consistent with action taking during the review of the original
development and does not constitute a new land development activity. The Applicant is requesting that a
well be located outside of the approved building envelope. The Applicant drilled an 800 -foot well on
September 24-26, 2001, within the approved building envelope without hitting water. The location of the
proposed well is in an area adjacent to the road along the northwest boundary of the property. However,
this may not be the final location of the well. The Applicant and Shelton Drilling assume that water will be
located in this area.
C. The proposed activity does not:
L Change the basic character of the approved use of land on which the activity occurs
including basic visual appearance and method of operation;
2. Increase off-site impacts in the surrounding neighborhood;
3. Endanger the public health, safety or welfare;
4. Violate any Land Use Code Standard;
S. Substantially increase the need for on-site parking or utilities, or affect affordable housing
generation; and
6. Increase theJloor area ofthe use by more than two (2) percent or decrease the open space
on the site by more than three (3) percent.
Response: It does not appear that what the Applicant is proposing will increase off-site visual impacts
from what was initially approved, nor does it change the character of the use of the land. The Applicant
will be required to revegetate the area of disturbance created by the installation of the well with native
vegetation.
The request does not have negative impacts to public health, safety or welfare, nor does it appear that the
request violates any Land Use Code standards. The Applicant shall note that disturbance of slopes 30%
and greater is prohibited pursuant to section 3-80-050(C)(2) of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. This
may affect the area of disturbance between the well and the building envelope.
The amendment does not increase the need for parking, utilities or affordable housing generation, nor
does it increase floor area.
➢ ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
Environmental Health Department: Comments from the Environmental Health Department are attached
to this memorandum for reference. Nancy MacKenzie has visited the site and has noted that be proposed
location for the well would likely produce water. Ms. MacKenzie has noted that suitable soil has been
located within the approved building envelope for a septic system.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Community Development Director approve
the Storm Minor Amendment to a Development Permit, subject to the conditions in the attached
Administrative Determination.
2_�
0
ATTACHMENT:
1. Administrative Determination
2. Environmental Health Department
3. Zoning
0
Storm Minor Amendment
October 23, 2001
•Ma. RSI M a U.. m Urban Plorming f rlm Uni.enirya/Wi,rwuimMihwWc ll4. Pregllw dmi wrbne »•rh Pirtiri County CwnmuniqDndgmon Depwrmmr as a Plam�aJw JJmrz.
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMERDIRECTOR OF PITKIN
COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING APPROVAL TO DAIVD AND DAWN STORM FOR A MINOR
AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
Administrative Decision No. - 2001
RECITALS
1. David and Dawn Storm (Applicant) have applied to the Community Development Director of Pitkin
County, Colorado, (Director) to amend Condition 9 of Resolution No. 99-211 to allow for a well to be located
outside of the approved building envelope upon review and approval of the Community Development Department
and the Environmental Health Department.
2. The subject property is referred to as Lot 6 of Section 36. The property is located approximately 3 miles
from East Sopris Creek Road on Tract 36 Road. The property is addressed as 4001 East Sopris Creek Road.
The property is more specifically described in the attached Exhibit "A."
3. The Board of County Commissioners granted a 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission
approval to establish a building envelope for the construction of a single-family residence, pursuant to
Resolution No. 99-21. The site plan for the property is in the process of being recorded.
4. The Director finds the request is consistent with the requirements of Section 3-200-080 of the Land Use
Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DETERMINED by the Pitkin County Community Development Director
that approval is hereby granted to the Storm Minor Amendment to a Development Permit, subject to the following
conditions which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest:
1. The Applicant shall comply with the provisions of Resolution No. 99-21, unless otherwise replaced or
amended by the conditions of this approval.
2. Condition No. 9 of Resolution No. 99-21, shall be amended to allow for the location of a well outside of the
approved building envelope upon review and approval of the Community Development Department and the
Environmental Health Department.
3. The Applicant shall submit a Revegetation Plan for the area of disturbance created by the installation of the
well and associated trenching for piping. This plan shall be submitted at the time of building permit application and
shall be reviewed and approved by Land Management.
4. Disturbance of slopes 30% and greater is prohibited, pursuant to section 3-80-050(C)(2) of the Pitkin
County Land Use Code. Any disturbance of slopes 30% and greater may require further land use review.
5. All material representations made by the Applicant in the application shall be adhered to and considered
conditions of approval unless amended by other conditions.
APPROVED ON THE' 0.,OF OCTOBER 2001. �7
Gann_- cls
00����`-'/ lF If
CindyHouben,
Community Development Director
Case # P161-01
246536300009
3y
0
rMEMORANDUM
• ATTACHMENT Z
To: Tamara Pregl, Community Development Department
From: Nancy MacKenzie, Pitkin County Environmental Health Department
-
Date: October 15, 2001
Re: Storm Minor Amendment to a Development Permit
Parcel ID # 2465-363-00-009
The Pitkin County Environmental Health Department has reviewed details of the application to
locate the well outside of the approved building envelope under the authority of the Pitkin
County Land Use Code and has the following comments.
ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS: Sections 2-170 and 3-70-100: 'it is the policy of the
County to insure the availability of a water supply of adequate quality, quantity, pressure and dependability for fire protection and support of
a proposed land use prior to approval of the use. The County shall require land uses to hook up to existing public systems if service is
available.' (Prior code 2-17)
I have been at this property. The new site they are proposing seems like an area that will likely
produce water. It is appropriate to allow the Storms' the right to drill at any other locations
where they hopefully can find water.
A site with suitable soils has been identified within the building envelope for the sewage
disposal system. This location will meet required setback distance from any future well
location. However, we will not be able to issue a septic permit, nor be able to sign -off on their
building permit, until a producing well has been drilled.
m asyd�e no.
• • ATTACHMENT3
Joanna Schaffner, 09:07 AM 10/18/01 -0600, Storm Minor Amendment to a Development Permit
X -Sender: joannas@comdev
X -Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 09:07:45 -0600
To: Tamarap@co.pitkin.co.us
From: Joanna Schaffner <joannas@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject: Storm Minor Amendment to a Development Permit
I have reviewed this application and have no zoning concerns at this time.
Printed for Tamara Pregl <tamarap@co.pitkin.co.us>
I/
08/21/2001 06:30
---------------
........
wag"
R
17
........ ...... . .....
...
........
8250
gpvv�
.......
ff-_': n j,
I/(p/(yj�{�yl,/fjVlf�jw'. \
-ki
o S q,�
"`f. V+.. s. 4
........
. ... .
;lKi 9. i
Alfliffl-
Z.
..... ...
U..........
......
A"
...... I. .....
qp
g "I'M
......
......sn
0
inu
5;
LIJ
Z
Ld
. . ......
As -
Ld
V)
A
GRAPHIC SCALE
2
"T
V)
+
...... ...
82 70
30 0 30 60 120
4 MKI,
R
E
N,
11 o4X
W,
0
0
0
%
IN FEET
1 inch 30 ft.
1 Z -Al
L vw�,
ke
Ld
U)
>
v
...... Lath
(TYP.)
......
...... . ..
REMOVABLE CAP
wm
un,
Ld
....... ...
T"
4h
J
<
C)
INSTALL INSPECTION
WELL (TYP.)
wf
4" 0 CUT HOLE IN TOP OF
SOLID PIPE INFILTRATOR UNIT FOR
71M
al'u,
INSTALLATION OF INSPECTION
WELL PIPE
zl�
0 CHEN
Co I
4"0 PVC SEWER
00
�-
04
0
4
(TYP.)
I
N
-z
VICINrrY MAP
z
0 (if
IQ
A�2
✓
.
N
0
SCALE: 1"=2000'
0� 0
0
-INSTALL 1750- ALLr»wu
......
121. 0
- Cf)
ro
SEPTIC TANK (MIN.)
4" 0 PERFORA7ED PIPE
0
1 ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PITKIN COUNTY
REGULATIONS OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, EVEN THOUGH
I- Lu
<
%ALL
f
CLEANOUT
INSTALL CLE
//l
SUCH REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS,
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SUCH SPECIFIC DETAILS AS
ARE REFERRED TO IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED REGULATIONS.
o L) 0
Ic
36'..
2. FLOW FOR BED:,
4 BEDROOMS 2
10,
..........
je,
ll� �j
* PERSONS/BEDROOM * 100 GALLONS/PERSON/DAYIS:
800 GPD = AVERAGE DAILY FLOW.
It
(MIN.)
- I
-,
INSPECTION WELL DETAIL
DESIGN FLOW = 1.75 * AVERAGE 1400 GPD (Q)
. ......
N.T.S.
SEPTIC TANK:
MINIMUM TOTAL TANK SIZE:
Q * I DAY/24 HRS * 30 HRS 1760 GPD
04
Sp
d
INSTALL ONE 1750 -GALLON TANK WITH BAFFLE
***INSTALL EFFLUENT FILTER IN SEPTIC TANK OUTLET***
ft 0
20
STANDARD ABSORPTION AREA:
WCO 0
(M 11
A Q ji Q=MAXIMUM FLOW
t=PERCOLATION RATE 20 min./in.
Lq
5 R z >4
LL
66
ll�A
Z
NATURAL BACKFILL
1400,12-0 . 1253 SF
5_
4< Lo
00
03 U4
rn -.
'Za
1
12: MIN. COVER
30 MAX.MANL;UVtK
USE OF STANDARD INFILTRATOR UNITS IN TRENCH CONFIGURATION:
50% REDUCTION - (1253 SIF *0.50) 0 15.5 SF/UNIT, 41 UNITS
REQUIRED. INSTALL 42 UNITS IN 3 x 14 UNIT TRENCH CONFIGURATION.
8
V2
LA
003
3. CLEAN OUTS ARE REQUIRED AT ALL BENDS AND AT LEAST EVERY 100
FEET ALONG THE HOUSE SEWER.
V� 03
Y y
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLING ALL
WATER TIGHT COMPONENTS, PRIOR TO THE ABSORPTION AREA,
TO PREVENT INFILTRATION.
12"
5. TOPSOIL COVER MAY BE VARIED (WITH I FOOT MINIMUM) TO ALLOW
LANDSCAPING.
'000/1
X
TRENCH BOTTOM LEVEL
INSTALL RISERS AS NECESSARY TO BRING ALL ACCESS POINTS TO
WITHIN ONE-HALF FOOT OF FINAL GRADE.
7. LOCATIONS OF ALL COMPONENTS MAY BE VARIED AS NECESSARY AS LONG
1
r . /
10
NATURAL GROUND AND ROUGHENED INFILTRATOR UNIT
36" -
AS ALL MINIMUM DISTANCES AND SLOPES MEET THOSE REQUIRED.
8. PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE OF SURFACE WATER AWAY FROM ABSORPTION
M-00-Irm
I.e
f
TRENCH CROSS SECTION (TYP.)
FIELD AREA USING DRAINAGE SWALES AS NECESSARY.
9. SOILS AND PERCOLATION INFORMATION FROM l"FORMA TION PROVIDED BY
H.P GEOTE CH, INC., JOB NO. 101 500, DATED OCTOBER 12, 2001,
N.T.S.
10. THIS DRAWING DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ISDS PERMIT. PERMIT MUST BE
a
OBTAINED FROM APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY OFFICIALS.
ENGINEER MUST OBSERVE CONSTRUCTED SYSTEM BEFORE BACKFILL
AND PROVIDE REPORT TO COUNTY.
11, THIS SYSTEM IS SIZED FOR TYPICAL DOMESTIC WASTES
.1
ONLY. BACKWASH
OR FLUSHING FLOWS FOR REVERSE OSMOSIS UNITS OR WATER SOFTENERS
OR FILTERS SHOULD NOT BE INTRODUCED INTO THIS SYSTEM.
kk
REMOVABLE PVC CAP
L%
AI•
INSTALL MARKER IF
IS TO BE BURIED
12. INSTALL BLUEBOARD INSULATION OVER SEWER PIPE WHEREVER DEPTH IS
LESS THAN 5.0 FEET.
1�
I 1 1.
I
FINISH GRADE
13. THE ENGINEER SHALL BE CONTACTED FOR SITE INSPECTION PRIOR TO
BACKFILLING
(j) �z
W
OF SYSTEM COMPONENTS.
14. DESIGN OF ABSORPTION TRENCHES BASED ON SOIL PROFILE INDICATING
1 -FOOT TOPSOIL OVERLYING CLAYEY TO VERY CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL
AND SCATTERED COBBLES TO A PROFILE DEPTH OF 8 -FEET.
0) Ill
_j
0
Cf)
$NDO Real
5. SITE PLAN INFORMATION FROM TUTTLE SURVEYING SERVICES-ZkN%
1 If
OWNER.
0
0
CO 2 a:
In
tt
IL
Cj . 0.
09
GENERAL ASSOFETION TRENCH NOTED 39
>:
0
U) D
0) 0
Co
w
F/
i If
1
lid,Lo
Oak
4" COUPLING 4" RISER
4" 45' SWEEP BEND
1. ABSORPTION LATERALS SHALL NOT EXCEED 100 FEET IN LE46/$
V 710
2. THE BOTTOM OF EACH ABSORPTION TRENCH SHALL BE LEVEL. 111 NAL
>
<
Y
t
a_
a: ell
0
LU
rj)
W (D
4" SEWER LINE
3. DRAINAGE SWALES ARE TO BE PROVIDED ABOVE AND AROUND TRENCHES, AS
NECESSARY, TO PREVENT SURFACE RUNOFF FROM ENTERING ABSORPTION AREA.
_j
_j W
0
C2
4. TRENCH LATERALS SHALL FOLLOW CONTOURS.
D
311
FLOW
5. INSTALL INFILTRATOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
6. TRENCH BOTTOM AND SIDEWALLS MUST BE RAKED TO REMOVE SOIL SMEARS
INCURRED DURING EXCAVATION.
a-
z
4 x 4" x 4"---/
PVC WYE
7. NO EXCAVATION OF ABSORPTION FIELD IS TO BE DONE DURING WET WEATHER
CLEAN OUT
AND USE OF RUBBER TIRE VEHICLES OVER ABSORPTION AREA IS PROHIBITED
8. BOULDERS EXISTING WITHIN THE TRENCH SHALL BE EXCAVATED AND
PROJECT
NO.
ASSEMBLY
BACKFILL SHALL CONSIST OF ONSITE SELECT OR PIT -RUN MATERIAL.
2011073.59
8260
SEWER CLEAN 0
OUT DETAIL
N.T.S.
9. IN ALL TRENCH CONFIGURATIONS, SERIAL DISTRIBUTION SHALL BE USED
INSTEAD OF EQUILATERAL DISTRIBUTION TO INCREASE SETTLING TIME AND
PROTECT THE BACTERIAL BIO -MAT.
SHEET
1
:48 73STORM2.dwg
IVONVO
According to Colorado law, you must commence
any legal action based upon any deject in
this survey u uAzn three years alter you
first da'scover such defect An no event may
any legal action based upon any defecl in
this survey be commenced more than ten years
from the date of the cerAlwahon shown
hereon
v
If
-¢ores f /-
88:0
110Iney� Storm 10z/> Review SZ& Plan
See tion 36, Township 8 South
Range 87 I�'esl of the 6'th P.�1.
Pitkin County, Colorado
GRAPHIC SCALE
20 40 80
Rye
_ _ ( IN FEET )
r 1 inch = 40 ft.
0 \
Legend and Notes:
— This survey does not represent a title search by this
easements
determine ownership or to discover
s or other encumbrances of record.
— This map does not represent on improvement survey or
improvement location certificate.
— This property is subject to apparent easements for
existing utilities and irrigation ditches.
a
— Bearings ore bosed upon 2 1/2" U.S.G.L.O. Brass Cops found at
the southeast corner and east 1/4 corner of Section 36
using a bearing of N0000'56"W between the two described monuments.
OO Wood Lath
Surveyor's Certificcte:
4 JEFFREY ALLEN TUTTLE, being o Registered Land Surveyor in
the State of Colorado, do hereby certify that this map of
existing conditions was prepared by me and under my
supervision from a survey made by me and under my
supervisio Xbter 26 2001 and that both the survey and map
are tru �the best of my knowledge and belief.
✓E �F�FO L. S. 33638 DATE "
Note: opa rop'h' op complies with National Map
Accurc YrdoY topographic mops. Where checked
90% of abe within 1/2 the contour interval
and well dei points should be plotted within 1/50" of
their true position. Critical design should be based upon
spot elevations, please contact Tuttle Surveying Services
for this spot elevation information.