HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.eh.264309300016 (1993)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.
ASPEN*PITKIN
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PERMIT 140.
TYPE OF PERMIT:
041nitial Construction ( )Emerganey, Use ( )Repair Work,(Piavious Permit 1 .) ( )Alteration of an existing system,
or installation (Previous Permit / .)
( )Use Permit as a result of Sale ( )Othori
ISSUED T0: DATE OF ISSUE. �t
Owner l iyM6ertarolF :EVAt Home. Phone Business PhoneLJfo) 491 -r3S4
Mailing ulvo sp„ra vn.nrr� C3!✓A• 5 ,:}e. 511D
Address�/nx2YiLsk� 1 �«+wwtwt+ r Sze✓tCO��IS Spic Los h,nr6fws LA faeu-
Agent Colorltdo CwMs . CO pv er„f TSTA /4sperl cc) 6-/ 1.l2 Phone jZZ- L1L
Mailing
Address
Sewage Disposal System Work to be performed
This permit valid only for premises location by the -following legal descriptions 1,)f5 /4 P f,y- See
LOT SITE 2.04 acres1-
WATER SUPPLY .lc . AVERACE(� PERCOLATION RATF (n ob{.rtGi_ ltiyb�Y'
This Individual Sewage Disposal remit is granted with regard to the following uses Rib• aevtr e/ 6oxnr-iA leer
Musbcr oft Dadicoms 1_ Lofts_ Carbage Disposals_L Dishwashers_ Clothes Washers
CALCULATED AVERAGE DATLY WASTE LOAD 4 b o GALLONS.
THE NATURE OF THE SYSTEM INCLUDED UNDER THIS PERMIT:
ypc of Tank or Treatment Units Sep fa- jZA/( Tank Capacity /SOU _Callon Minimum
c shod of ESnal Disposals £r MoKy� Syg(-trsr� Abwrptiog .Ares £riff Square felt minimum
ascription (including brand name, If any) of other equipment or appurtnancea,
) 2.5014 ) do I All t4rl k
Ir44 FPT ar,trtC bgse4rtt+ zssv6t'
:[her Conditions or Speeif lcationas
systewl ue.s crI✓tled be{tf!¢ r,✓1/u! rasp. .IV, eu COfft✓ gt{w�l� atfaf;.I
15y6l-C4'1 4V4s V&i/*A 4ceofdl +Y, jo eA.3
STAGES REQUIRING INSPECTION BY THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT:
( )Before Excavation ( )Upon completion of excavation and prior to p'seement of gravel ( )Before system co eringAbsorcionrftn
ald
( )Prior to backfill of any component ( )Ocher, Specifys
Plans and specifications of the proposed sewage disposal system have been reviewed and are eonsidcred satisfactory. Permission
is hereby granted to t),e owner or his agent to Perform the voik indicated above in accordance with the Pitkin County Individual
Seva,,e Diepesal Regulations in cffcct on the date of issue. In addition to general proVlaleaa act forth on the reverse her^_of,
this Permit is subject to the following additional terns and conditions ..
APPROVED FOR ISSUE BY ac', P C t`.te/C (title) k Q
:6o ah.svc individual sevajo disposal syatc.� Installed by
has b, -en 11:Pectcd lar use by a representative of the Aspen 11 1 n Lnviron, La I,,a t.. O,p.,,meat. Theuvnnr-- -n'-- +rl
rv:;ponsibillly, in cdse of failure or inad yuacy of in%, �s,w�atJO�disposal system. Complete as -built dravinq attached.
TIATr n17 97\•AT IVQPCr`TTf)N -4c-' '�/-T'1 - s7- /q-1�?
BY: C�(f� IY Chte� TITLE���f
�a 9
130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 131611 303/920-6070
• ASPEN40PITKIN •
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
• APPLICATION FOR AN INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL•PERMIT
Name of OWNER PHONE '31e
/imi ) N raj✓a5 wr6a� �-7J7��iz�5i rNC-
1 / / co S.,f-.vT•f srr o.vrt-r 6�- ✓ i4 iU
Address of OWNER <O i%v� oma
C0b01Qfi/90 JNST CO.
Name of APPLICANT /'� +3 ox iso
-Ss�rZw .ca _
PHONE —/`I/y
'ERMfT TO BE, 0O Picked Up ( )Mailed tot TYPE OF PERMITS Q4new Installation ( )Repair
l )Owner ( )Applicant _ { )Emergency use ( )Alteration NOT due to failure
ACATION OF PROPOSED SYSTEMS
q -
'.egal Description �lJ�J /'y
bt Block Fillnq subdivision jW/'41V'N6 C"4 --*size of Lot 2-6`r acres
TYPE OF STRUCIVRE: o4si F ly Dwelling ( )Other&
ao, of bedrooms No. of Lofts 0 No. of Garbage Disposals
so. of Automat:' Clothes Washers 1
Do you plan any further additions to the
residence? ( )YES 00NO
No. of Automatic Dishwashers
LATER SUPPLY: GOPrivate Wall, Depth 7 �%C� or ( )Public, Name of System
( )Spring
( )Stream or Creek
TYPES OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED,
Septi' Tank/Absorption Field ( )Aeration Plant/Absorption Field ( )Composting Toilet ( )Incineration Toilet ( )!bund
( )Recycling, potable use ( )Recycling, other use ( )Vault Privy ( )Other,
:tial site Inspection must be arranged with the Aspen/Pitkin-Environmental Health Department (925-2020, 8:10-900 a.m.)
a permit can be issued. The individual sewage disposal permit must be Issued before a building permit Can be obtained.
FINAL INSPECTION APPROVAL MUST BE GIVEN BY THE ASPEN/PITKIN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO BACKFILLING ANY PORTION
OF THE SYSTEM.
Application for an individual sewage disposal permit is hereby submitted. The undersigned acknowledges that the above information
is true and that false info(rmm" nn�wi�l(}�1 _ to the plication and any subsequent permit.
Signature of Applicant M �9.�sr't<- - DATE CZZ2 fz
(This application becomes. invalid/12 months from the above date.)
NOTE: PLOT PLAN must be filed with this application.
Please locate the following items by measured distances:
1. Property lines and dimensions.
2. Proposed and existing water wells on subject property and
adjacent property. .
3. Domestic water service lines.
{. Proposed and existing buildings, driveways, and other
Structures.
S. Streams, lakes, ponds, irrigation ditches, and other water
courses.
6. Proposed and existing individual sewage systems on subject
property.
SUBMIT A REVISED PLOT PLAN PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION IF INSTALLATION IS TO
BE CHANGED FROM ORIGINAL PLAN.
The undersigned hereby acknowledges receipt of this �i.(n�fdividual sewage disposal I. app on and a pe ee in the amour.
Of SL)Receipt Number �� �lll . Dace Fee Received �.by
• TT
Administrative officer
130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 303/920-5070
LI
Tom Dunlop
Pitkin County Environmental Health Department
130 S. Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: 770 Twining Flats Road, ISDS
HCE File # 92004.20
Dear Mr. Dunlop:
EL
AUG 1 9 1993
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
ASPEWPITKIN
On May 5, 1993, HCE personnel observed the visible construction of the individual sewage
disposal system located at 770 Twining Flats Road, in Pitkin County, Colorado. The tops of
the septic tank and the dosing tank, which were both of plastic construction, were visible. The
absorption field was constructed, but not covered with soil, and the top of the gravel layer was
covered with filter • fabric. The gravel base area appeared
drawing. to be in conformance with the design
•
According to the former Pitkin County Environmental Health Officer, Bob Nelson, the
contractor had placed a four foot depth of sand fill under the gravel distribution layer, but, the
fill, apparently did not match the design drawings. However, according
basal area of the sand
to the subcontractor, Steve Stepp, and the General Contractor, Dave Reams, a large quantity of
pit run gravel material was placed between the absorption area and the house. The pit run
material was placed adjacent to the absorption area. Therefore, the sand layer should be
hydraulically connected to the pit run material, and thus give the sand layer a larger effective
area to dissipate its effluent. Thus, it appears that the design intent of a larger sand base area,
was effectively provided.
Later, on May 28, 1993, HCE personnel met you and Dave Reams on the site and discussed the
ISDS in general, and the backfill that had been placed over the absorption field area, in
Particular. It was basically agreed that the condition of the pipes in the field was dependant on
the care of the contractor during back -filling. Steve with Stepp Construction indicated that he
thought they had been very careful while covering the field and no wheeled vehicles were
allowed on the field until it had a couple of feet of cover.
923 Cooper Avenue • Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Telephone: 303.945-8676 • FAX: 303.945-2555
0
In summary, even though some concerns have been raised, it appears that the construction
• conforms with the intent of the design.
If you have any further questions please contact us.
Sincerely,
HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC.
T
y P. Beck, P.E.
al Engineer
TPB: mkc
cc: Dave Reams
•
I
r,
•
9
►;I FEB - 8 1993 L
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
ASPEN/PITKM
770 FLATS 20? -o .
lgmc� 4, _ ;16 //
�Px 9Zs- /2 0 8
oM �3
i -p
Chen@Northern, Inc.
A --m , n11M1 N1NInrn..n ni rmm�anic<
0
SUBSOIL STUDY
FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED RESIDENCE
770 TWINING FLATS ROAD
NEAR ASPEN
PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
JOB NO.4 530 92
SEPTEMBER 28, 1992
PREPARED FOR:
COLORADO CONSTRUCTION CO.
ATIN: LEE FINNELL
P.O. BOX 350
ASPEN CO 81612-0530
Consuntng Engineersan Scenvsis
5080 Roan 154
Gienw Spings. CdaaCo 81601
303 945-7456
303 9452363 Facsimile
0
• 'Chen@Northern, Inc.
September 28, 1992
Colorado Construction Co.
Attn: Lee Finnell
P.O. Box 350
Aspen CO 81612-0350
Cm fting Engte is am Scemists
5080 Road 154
GLenwod Spings. Cd ado a160t
303945-7458
303 94 5-2363 Fa[ mie
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Residence, 770 Twining Flats
Road near Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado.
Job No. 4 530 92
Gentlemen:
As requested, we have conducted a subsurface study at the subject site, located between
Twining Flats Road and the Roaring Fork River, northwest of Aspen.
Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings drilled in the proposed
building area consist of about 1/2 to 1 foot of organic topsoil overlying relatively dense
clayey sandy gravels with cobbles. Claystone shale bedrock was encountered below the
coarse gravels in the proposed building area. Groundwater was encountered in one of the
borings (Boring 2) at 5 1/2 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater was not
encountered in the other borings at the time of drilling or when checked one day later.
The proposed residence can be founded on spread footings placed on the natural subsoils
and designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 3000 psf. The borings should bear on the
gravels at least 3 feet above the shale due to the potential for swelling of the claystone.
The report which follows describes our investigation, summarizes our findings, and presents
our recommendations. It is important that we provide consultation during design, and field
services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of the geotechnical
recommendations.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us.
Sincerely,
CHE,WNPRTHERN, INC.
David A. Young
DAY/ec
i Rev. By: SLP
r-:)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ................................... 1
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ....................................... 2
SITE CONDITIONS ................................................ 2
FIELD EXPLORATION ............................................. 3
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........... 4
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................... 5
FOUNDATIONS .............................................. 5
FLOOR SLABS .............................................. 6
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM ...................................... 7
SEPTIC DISPOSAL SYSTEM .................................... 7
SURFACE DRAINAGE ............................................. 8
LIMITATIONS.................................................... 9
FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND
PERCOLATION TEST HOLES
FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PROFILE BORING
FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURE 4 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
TABLE II - PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
- CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES
Chmiialloohern fnr
a
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residence to be
located at 770 Twining Flats Road, near Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. The project site
is shown on Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the
foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for
geotechnical engineering services to Colorado Construction, dated September 18, 1992.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain
information on subsurface conditions. Samples obtained during the field exploration were
tested in the laboratory to determine engineering characteristics of the on-site soils and
bedrock. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to
develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the
proposed building foundation. Profile boring and percolation testing was also performed
at the septic disposal site to evaluate subsurface conditions and infiltration characteristics
of the subsoils. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing are presented in
the report.
This report has been prepared to summarize the data obtained during this study and
to present our conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed construction and
the subsoil conditions encountered. Design parameters and a discussion of geotechnical
engineering considerations related to construction of the proposed residence are included
in the report.
(�hanr NnrthPrn Inc,
I ()
-2 -
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The proposed residence will be a 1 1/2 story log structure with a detached garage
located on the site as shown on Fig. 1. Ground floor will be structurally supported over
crawl space in the residence and slab -on -grade in the garage at an elevation near the
existing ground surface. Grading for the structure is assumed to be relatively minor with
cut depths between about 2 to 4 feet. We assume relatively light to moderate foundation
loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction. An individual septic disposal system
is proposed northwest of the residence.
If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those
described above, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations contained in this
report.
SITE CONDITIONS
The site is vacant property between Twining Flats Road and the Roaring Fork River
near Highway 82, about seven miles northwest of Aspen in Pitkin County. The ground
surface slopes gently down to the northeast towards the river at about 5% grade. Above
Twining Flats Road, the ground surface slopes up steeply and exposes a gravel terrace
deposit about 25 to 35 feet in height. Below the site, the riverbank is about 10 to 15 feet
high and exposes coarse river gravels with Mancos Shale bedrock a few feet above the river
elevation. The shale appears to dip moderately down to the northeast. Vegetation on the
hA„r' T�tnrthPrn fill-
-3 -
property consists of grass and weeds with deciduous and occasional pines in the northwest.
There are existing residences to the south and north of the site.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on September 18, 1992. Three
exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsurface
conditions in the building area (Borings 1 and 2) and at the septic disposal site (Profile
Boring). The borings were advanced with 4 -inch diameter continuous flight auger powered
by a truck -mounted CME -55 drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of
Chen -Northern, Inc.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with 1 3/8 -inch and 2 -inch I.D. spoon samplers.
The samplers were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140 -pound
hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by
ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative
density or consistency of the subsoils and hardness of the bedrock. Depths at which the
samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of
Exploratory Borings, Fig. 2. 'Be samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the
project engineer and testing.
Percolation testing was performed in three approximately 4 -feet deep, 4 -inch
diameter auger holes (P-1, P-2 and P-3) at the locations shown on Fig. 1. The percolation
holes were soaked after drilling and cleaned the following day prior to the testing. Results
of the measured infiltration rates are provided in Table II.
Chen€allorthpm Inr
IQ
-4 -
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The subsoil conditions encountered at the site are shown graphically on Fig. 2. The
subsoils in the borings consist of about 1/2 to 1 foot of organic topsoil overlying relatively
dense, clayey sandy gravel containing cobbles and boulders. At the percolation holes, the
overburden depth of the topsoil and silty sands ranged from 1 to 3 feet before the coarse
gravels were encountered. Drilling in the dense gravel with auger equipment was difficult
due to the cobbles and boulders and drilling refusal was encountered in the deposit as
shown on Fig. 2. At Boring 2, the drilling penetrated the gravels and encountered claystone
shale bedrock of the Mancos Shale Formation at a depth of 5 1/2 feet extending to the
boring depth of 15 feet. The upper 1 1/2 feet of the shale was weathered.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural
moisture content, gradation analyses and liquid and plastic limits. Undisturbed samples for
swell -consolidation testing could not be obtained.. The Atterberg limits indicate the shale
is low plasticity claystone. Results of gradation analyses performed on a small diameter
drive sample (minus 1 1/2 -inch fraction) of the natural coarse granular soils are shown on
Fig. 4. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I.
Free water was encountered in the Boring 2 at a depth of about 9 feet at the time
of drilling and was at a depth of 5 1/2 feet when checked one day later. No water was
encountered in Boring 1 and the Profile Boring to the depths drilled, 6 1/2 to 7 1/2 feet.
The subsoils were slightly moist to moist becoming highly moist to wet with depth.
ChenONnrthern Inc
9
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the
nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread
footings bearing on the natural granular soils. The shale is low plasticity claystone and may
possess a swell potential. A minimum dead load pressure on the footings should not be
needed to mitigate the swell potential provided the bearing level is in the granular soils.
We suggest the bearing level be at least 3 feet above the shale bedrock in footing areas.
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread
footing foundation system. The construction criteria should be considered when preparing
project documents.
1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soils should be designed for an
allowable soil bearing pressure of 3000 psf. Based on experience, we expect
settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be
about 1 inch or less.
2) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and
2 feet for isolated pads.
3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with
adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of
foundations at least 42 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this area.
4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local
anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 10 feet. Foundation
/v
(hPn€aNc)r fern inr
V
0
I Me
walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist a lateral earth
pressure corresponding to an equivalent fluid unit weight of 45 pcf for backfill
consisting of the on-site gravel soils excluding topsoil and plus 6 -inch size rock.
5) All existing fill, topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the
footing bearing level extended down to relatively dense natural granular soils. The
footings should be kept as shallow as possible to maintain at least 3 feet of coarse
gravels over the shale. If water seepage is encountered, the footing areas should be
dewatered before concrete placement.
6) A representative of the soil engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to
concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions.
FLOOR SLABS
The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly to
moderately loaded slab -on -grade construction. To reduce the effects of some differential
movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with
expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints
should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint
spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience
and the intended slab use. A 4 -inch layer of fine -graded gravel can be placed beneath slabs
to facilitate drainage and act as a leveling course. This material should consist of minus
2 -inch aggregate with less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 12% passing the
No. 200 sieve.
ChrnvaNnrthern Inr
0
-7-
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 gravels devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock.
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although free water was encountered below probable excavation depth during our
exploration, it has been our experience in mountainous areas that local the groundwater
level can rise and perched groundwater may 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 and crawl space 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 (above the 100 -year flood level)
or a sump where water can be removed by pumping. 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 2 feet deep.
SEPTIC DISPOSAL SYSTEM
Percolation test results performed in the borings drilled at the site are presented in
Table II. Our exploratory profile boring in the septic disposal site was limited to 6 1/2 feet
i J Cli�,is�%_\Inrtliorn lnr
�p
depth due to refusal in the coarse gravels. Boring 2 encountered shale bedrock and
groundwater at about 5 1/2 feet depth. The shallow bedrock and water level may impact
the septic disposal design.
Average percolation rates measured at the site were 56 to 70 minutes/inch. Based
on the test results and subsurface profile information, a conventional infiltration septic
disposal system appears feasible at the site with some limitations. Due to the shallow
bedrock and groundwater level, the leach field may need to be mounded. We recommend
additional subsurface investigation with a backhoe to determine bedrock and/or
groundwater depths in the selected disposal area. Additional percolation testing should also
be performed at that time. The system should be designed by a qualified civil engineer
familiar with engineer designed disposal systems.
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.
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 6 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in
('ham„ �l�fnrf barn h,�
0
0
the first 10 feet in paved areas. Free -draining wall backfill should be capped with
about 2 feet of the on-site, finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill.
LIMITATIONS
This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and
foundation engineering practices in this area for use by the client for design purposes. The
conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained
from the exploratory borings drilled at the locations indicated on Fig. 1 and the proposed
type of construction. The nature and extent of subsurface variations across the site may not
become evident until excavation is performed. If. during construction, fill, soil, rock or water
conditions appear to be different from those described herein, this office should be advised
at once so reevaluation of the recommendations may be made. We recommend on-site
observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a
representative of the soil engineer.
Sincerely,
=CNOR RN, INC.
David A. Young
Reviewed By
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
('hPntalNlnrthPrn (no
Ire
•
_ APPROXIMATE SCALE
_ 1 " = 30'
TWINING FLATS_ ROAD
BENCH MARK: TOP OF WELL CASING;
ELEV. = 100.0', ASSUMED.
pROpOSEp BORING I
GARAGE
PROPOSED RESIDENCE
BORING 2
OAR/NG FORK RIVER
o1P I
I
P 2
0
PROFILE •
BORING
P3
PROPERTY
BOUNDARIES
LEGEND:
• EXPLORATORY BORING
PERCOLATION TEST
HOLE
LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
4 530 92 1 ChenONorthern,InG I AND PERCOLATION TEST HOLES Fig. 1
Boring 1
Elev. = 97.9'
Profile
Boring 2 Boring
Elev. = 95.4' Elev. = 94.7'
Assumed Ground Floor Level
95 28/6 P-1 (3')*
A 20/6,50/3 P-2 (2')
a P-3 (1,)
•: 15/6,50/5
90 = T
15/6,40/6
0
M-1
EE
50/6 1/2
50/2
Note: Explanation of symbols presented on Fig. 3.
100
95
MI
[-R
a
*Overburden topsoil/silty sand depth above coarse gravels at percolation holes.
4 530 92 Chen�Northern,InC Logs of Exploratory Borings Fig. 2
and Profile Boring
LEGEND:
eTopsoil; organic silty sand with gravel and scattered cobbles, firm to soft,
moist, dark brown.
PM Gravel and Cobbles (GC -GM); with boulders, sandy, clayey, becoming silty with
depth in Boring 1, dense to very dense, slightly moist to moist with depth, brown.
Weathered Shale; claystone, low plasticity, fractured, medium hard, moist, gray.
Shale Bedrock (Mancos Formation); claystone, low plasticity, hard, moist to
slightly moist'wiht depth, gray.
Drive sample; Standard Penetration Test (SPT), 1 3/8 -inch I.D. split spoon
sample, ASTM D-1586.
Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2 -inch I.D. California liner sample.
20/6 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 20 blows of a 140 -pound hammer falling
30 inches were required to drive the SPT or California sampler 6 inches.
0,1 Free water level in boring and number of days after drilling measurement was
made.
T Practical rig refusal. Where shown above bottom of log, indicates multiple
attempts were made to advance the boring.
NOTES:
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on September 18, 1992 with 4 -inch diameter
continuous flight power auger.
2. Locations of exploratory borings were provided by client. Proposed building
and leach field locations were staked in field.
3. Elevations of exploratory borings were measured by instrument level survey and
refer to the Bench Mark on Fig. 1.
4. The exploratory boring elevations should be considered accurate only to the
degree implied by the method used.
5. The lines between materials shown cn the exploratory boring logs represent the
approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual.
6. Water level readings shown on the logs were made at the time and under the
conditions indicated. Flucutations in water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Water Content (%)
DO = Dry Density (pcf)
+4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve
-200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
LL = Liquid Limit (%)
PI = Plasticity Index (%)
4 530 92 1 ChenONorthern,Inc.
Legend and Notes
Fig. 3
Chen -Northern, Inc.
T A B L E I
SUMM ARY OF LA B ORATO R Y TEST R ESULTS
4 530 92
SAMPLE LOCATION
NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENT
(%)
NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
Ifr<11
GRADATION
PERCENT
PASSING
NO 2`L
SIEVE
ATTERUERG LIMITS
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
Ipell
SOIL OR
BEDROCK TYPE
BORING
DEPTH
peed
GRAVEL
I%1
SAND
1%1
LIOU10
LIMIT
PLASTICI Tv
INDEX
2
4.5
1
54
35
11
clayey sandy gravel
6
10
33
10
cla stone shale
J
TABLE II
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
WATER WATER
September 19, 1992
Job No. 4 530 92
LENGTH DEPTH AT
DEPTH AT
DROP IN
AVERAGE
HOLE OF START OF
END OF
WATER
PERCOLATION
HOLE DEPTH INTERVAL INTERVAL
INTERVAL
LEVEL
RATE
NO. (In.) (Min.) (Inches)
(Inches)
(Inches)
(Min./Inch)
P-1 48 20
121/4
113/4
1/2
25
113/4
11
3/4
35
11
10
1
35
10
9 1/4
3/4
35
9 1/4
83/4
1/2 56
P-2 50 25
13
12 1/4
3/4
30
121/4
113/4
1/2
35
113/4
111/4
1/2
35
111/4
103/4
1/2 70
P-3 46 25
131/2
123/4
3/4
25
123/4
12 1/4
1/2
30
121/4
111/2
3/4
35
111/2
103/4
3/4
35
103/4
10 1/4
1/2 56
('hantaNnrtharn Ino
CLAOIFICATION OF SOILS FOR *INEERING PURPOSES
Chen -Northern, Inc.
0
tads
ASTM Designation: D 2 7 - 83
'
(Based on Unified Soil Classification System)
r
,p•
Soil
Classification
Equation of A-4me, .?r4.,
hbrttontal at Pl=410 LL=255 <1/
then PI = 073 (LL -20) N
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests' Group
11,1■"'
Symbol
Name -
Coarse -Grained Soils
Gravels
Clean Gravels Cu2t4 and 1<_Cc<_3' GW
Well graded gravel'
More than 50% retained on
More than 50% coarse
Less than 5% fines'
No. 200 sieve
fraction retained on
Cu<4 and/or 1>Cc>3' GP
Poorly graded gravel'
No. 4 sieve
1
Gravels with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH GM
Silty gravel'
qP
G�'
More than 12% fines'
MH
OH
Fines classify as CL or CH GC
Clayey gravel'-
ravel'°Sands
Sands
Clean Sands Cu>_6 and 15Cc<_3' SW
Well -graded sand'
50% or more of coarse
Less than 5% fines"
fraction passes No.
Cu<6 and/or 1>Cc>3' SP
Poorly graded sand'
MLa+OL
4 sieve
Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM
Silty send -
More than 12% fines -
Fines classify as CL or CH SC
Clayey sand -
Fine -Grained Soils
Silts and Clays
inorganic. PI>7 and plots on or above CL
Lean clay
50% or more passes the
Liquid limit less than 50
"A" line' -
No. 200 sieve
PI<4 or plots below "A" ML
Silt, "
line'
organic Liquid limit- oven dried <0.75 OL
Organic clay'""
Liquid limit - not dried
Organic silt'.'"O
Silts and Clays
inorganic PI plots on or above "A•' line CH
Fat clay' "
Liquid limit 50 or more
PI plots below "A" line MH
Elastic silt' • "
organic Liquid limit - oven dried <0.75 OH
Organic clay'
'
Liquid limit - not dried
Organic silt `
Highly organic soils
Primarily organic matter, dark in color• and organic odor PT
Peat
'Stated on me material passing me 34n. (75 -mm) sieve.
°If fele sample contained cobbles or boulders. or both,
sdd'Whh cobbles or boudea. or both` to group name.
`Gavels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbol-
GW -GM well -graded gravel with silt
GW -GC wellyrarled gravel with clay
GP -GM poorly graded gravel with silt
GP -GC poorly graded gavel with clay
°Sandi with 5 to 12%lines require dual symbols:
SW -SM wellyraded sand with sib
SW -SC we"raded sand with clay
SP -SM poorly graded Send with Sid
SP -SC poorly graded sad with day
SIEVE ANALYSIS
SCREEN -IN I , SIEVE NO. I
021%l % % 4 10 A b NI 140200
I I 1 1 I
50 ,a s to os 010
PARTICLE SIIE IN MILLIMETERS
Cu__ D. ,5 _ _ (25)• =56
D.°= (1d_
0075- 200 Cc`D-,•10., 00)5.15
�J
'Cu = D. yD,e Cc = D;7D
'If wit contains >_15%sand. add "with sard'to group
M IN.
'lf fines classify as CL -ML. use dual symbol GC -GM. w
sc-slk
-II fines are organic, add -with organic fines- to group
nswe
'If soil contains >-16% gravel. add -with gravel- to group
name.
I
50
i
X 40
III
C)
2
F 30
U
F
< 20
a
10
7
4
0
0
'It Atlerberg limns plot in hatched area, soil is a CL -ML.
silly cley.
'If soil contains 15 to 2g% plus No. 200. add'v°th sand- or
`with gravel'. whichever is predominant.
'If soil contains >_W% plus No. 200, piedominw0y sand.
add "sandy to group name.
-11 wit contains >_30ee plus No. M. predominantly gravel.
add -gravelly" to group name.
-PI>4 and plots on or above W IIM.
VK4 Or plots below -A' line.
'PI plots on w above W line.
•PI plots "low W line.
Por CluYantlm of arra9raa,ad orb and
ar,eyra%wd lnetlgn lel caane-g'alr,ed
/�
tads
/
r
,p•
Equation of A-4me, .?r4.,
hbrttontal at Pl=410 LL=255 <1/
then PI = 073 (LL -20) N
11,1■"'
Equation of %r4mi,
VIrl"ItLL=1610M 7
// G
then PI = 0.9 (LL81
I I 1 1 I
50 ,a s to os 010
PARTICLE SIIE IN MILLIMETERS
Cu__ D. ,5 _ _ (25)• =56
D.°= (1d_
0075- 200 Cc`D-,•10., 00)5.15
�J
'Cu = D. yD,e Cc = D;7D
'If wit contains >_15%sand. add "with sard'to group
M IN.
'lf fines classify as CL -ML. use dual symbol GC -GM. w
sc-slk
-II fines are organic, add -with organic fines- to group
nswe
'If soil contains >-16% gravel. add -with gravel- to group
name.
I
50
i
X 40
III
C)
2
F 30
U
F
< 20
a
10
7
4
0
0
'It Atlerberg limns plot in hatched area, soil is a CL -ML.
silly cley.
'If soil contains 15 to 2g% plus No. 200. add'v°th sand- or
`with gravel'. whichever is predominant.
'If soil contains >_W% plus No. 200, piedominw0y sand.
add "sandy to group name.
-11 wit contains >_30ee plus No. M. predominantly gravel.
add -gravelly" to group name.
-PI>4 and plots on or above W IIM.
VK4 Or plots below -A' line.
'PI plots on w above W line.
•PI plots "low W line.
Por CluYantlm of arra9raa,ad orb and
ar,eyra%wd lnetlgn lel caane-g'alr,ed
/�
tads
/
r
,p•
Equation of A-4me, .?r4.,
hbrttontal at Pl=410 LL=255 <1/
then PI = 073 (LL -20) N
Equation of %r4mi,
VIrl"ItLL=1610M 7
// G
then PI = 0.9 (LL81
1
i
qP
G�'
MH
OH
MLa+OL
10 1620 30 40 50 60 70 90 90 100 110
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
ASPEN*PITKIN
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
h
130 South Galena Street • Aspen, Colorado 81611 • (303) 9255070
.. . 1 s . . V i
Printed on Recycled
Paper
ASPEN/PITKIN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
POMIT FOR FIREPLACE OR S1#E
Name of owner of property
Owner's Mailing Address
Street Address of Property
Legal Description of Property
Parcel ID# of Property
Tax Schedule # of Property
Structure type: Single Family F-1 Duplex 0 Condo 0 AptO
Commercial/Office El 0 Other
Check one: New Construction Remodel 0
NUMBER & TYPES OF DEVICES YOU PLAN
TO INSTALL:
# OF CERTIFIED WOODSTOVES
MAKE, MODEL #
ROOM
CATALYST?
# OF FIREPLACES W/ GAS LOGS
ROOM(S)
# OF DECORATIVE NATURAL GAS FIRE
PLACE APPLIANCES W / 4" OR 5" CLASS
B VENT
MAKE, MODEL #
ROOM(S)
# OF WOODBURNING FIREPLACES
DOES THE FIREPLACE HAVE AN INSERT?
(yes/no) TYPE
# OTHER DEVICES _ TYPE
ROOM(S)
NUMBER & TYPES OF DEVICES YOU AL-
READY HAVE
# OF CERTIFIED WOODSTOVES
MAKE, MODEL #
ROOM
CATALYST?
# OF FIREPLACES W/GAS LOGS
# OF DECORATIVE NATURAL GAS FIRE-
PLACE APPLIANCES (WITH 4" OR 5"
CLASS B VENT)
MAKE, MODEL #
ROOMS)
# OF WOODBURNING FIREPLACES
ROOM(S)
DOES THE FIREPLACE CONTAIN AN
INSERT? TYPE
# OF OTHER DEVICES TYPE
ROOMS)
If gas logs or a gas appliance are being installed in a bedroom, the Building Department re-
quires proof that the gas log or appliance is approved for installation in a bedroom by UL or
AGA and the manufacturer.
S59 Signature of applicant Date
Environmental Health Department approval Date
L
UND PROPERTY MONUMENT
EEL ROD 6 PLASTIC CLP
X
0
0
a
IND 112" PIPE
WIRE ENCE ALONG PROPERTY
LINE O REPAIR
REDEEM IS
not I&* NMI
°T ON=
1111
11{;
I►�1� _ _ /1 � � �\iii � t
'I/■�
MCI'
-� ri ; _ /�■■■■■■■■11`11,1
■■■■■
WIRE ENCE ALONG PROPERTY
LINE O REPAIR
REDEEM IS
not I&* NMI
°T ON=
1111
11{;
I►�1� _ _ /1 � � �\iii � t
'I/■�
MCI'
-� ri ; _ /�■■■■■■■■11`11,1
TM/M MUST BE SUBMITTED
WITHIN EO DAYS OF COMhETION
OF THe WORK DISCRISEDHERE'
ON. TYPE OR PRINT IN BACK
INK. If
SU=ANN RESNICK
CO*AO0 DIVISION OF WATER NESOU*S
1717 Silarmwal Street • R)'11" S1a
Ovnver. Colora•10 8020
.WELL COMPLETION AND PUMP INS
T
A
L
LATION REPORT
PERMIT NUMBER
WELL OWNER Marion—A" a Getz
ADORESS 0 Box i7�
47pAII .
P —8,L61 -L.
j.! i I ? r !:1�•3
SiR't sgardzi
TJ?,
of a•C —.�_.�
P.M.
x2fi S 1Q/17, 19 $.Z HOLE DIAMETER
DATE COMPLETED
—..i— in. trop D to It.
uwe, I I rr
t s
,_ .n. from — i0 to ft.
in. from --- to
IRILLING METHOD='xci=T---
:ASING RECORD: Flab. hhIN
iize.2
& kim —
nd _$'itpT. `r,-� IC -• 1 f!
iize --3Z & k:rd _Vim_—.rc'. ?C — tt ...t�f� t:
iize —.— &kind —. ---('o•--1 -
to --- I
Parior37:It Sasint
Size _13 & kind �•L�._.—_ frO,rl �2: cs E' '
Size Pi kind —_--
II•:rr ---- to _ _ t
(r,�m !•�
Size Tu kind i
—. --
GROUTING RECORD
Material Cetaent—__— _ ---• ---
lntervais10- ------_--_----
l=v-
P!acernent Mecho4 _—.•---C„rr.v_—.__
GRAVEL PACK: Size —
Interval
TEST DATA
Date Tested
.' 19 F
Static Water Level Prior to Tast —
Type of Test Pun'Ip g' ��^k�'3n
Length of Test —._ =-!1K—L----
Sustained Yield (Mverzd; _ -=-•5^1-----
Final Pumping%Vater L:vel
;Y) q
9
p
74't -
A
99!\0. F
50.0'
C T \
1.5'
-
47.0' 1.5' n
OPERTY
BLDG SETBACK
337
TOE OF MOUND -�
/ /
\ \\\
°•
0/•
�_
-
SLOPE t
/ HOUSE
\ \
i
24.0'
o
o
04
/
III
GRAPHIC SCALE
�•� x isGAL SEPTIC TANK
oo
\ \
/
•��
40 o so +o eo
iaa
\ ` \ \� / Igo GAt. DOSING TANK
\
( IN FEET
\y/
100' MM.
Q
I
I inch = 40 It.
\)
REBAR &CAP
INFILTRATION GALLERY\
\
1 1
EDGE CF GRAVEL
In
k
m
I � \ � Z II
�
�•
• \
BED
�/
>>p \ `� \ �
/ EXISTING WFL L i0
BE
II ,�
/
SEALED & ABANDONED
\
A
\ \
\
VICINITY MAP
2" SOLD PVC FROM
-/� `- 7-1/2" PERFORATED PVC
DISTRIBUTION LATERAL
o°
10
DOSING TANK
SCALE: 1" = 1000'
-
TOE OF MOUND
--
60'
ROAD EASEMENT \ \
PLAN VIEW OF MOUND
\ J
GRAVEL BED AREA
N.TS.
DRIVEWAY
TWINING FLATS ROAD
/
FILTER FABRIC
�.
Al
h
TOPSOIL
12" MIN.
ROPE
BED OF 1 1/2- SCREENED
ROCK, 12" THICK - SEE NOTES
GENERAL NOTES
IX
n
/
TO
Ate_
FOR MIN. BASE AREA
3 1.
ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PITKIN COUNTY
�y•
y
11
REGULATIONS OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, EVEN THOUGH
\
p
EXISTING GROUND
3
0 0 O 0
O
ALL SUCH REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY NOTED ON THE
DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SUCH
90
SPECIFIC DETAILS AS ARE REFERRED TO IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED
�
6"
REGULATIONS.
>
>,
2.
5 BEDROOMS
750 GALLONS/DAY AVERAGE
O�
DISTRIBUTION _ATERALS
(TYP.)
24" MIN. SAND
THICKNESS
1125 GALLONS/DAY MAXIMUM
SITE PLAN
SAND Flu -SEE NOTES
- -
1500 GALLON SEPTIC TANK
\ /
1" = 40'
FOR MINIMUM BASE AREA
SCARIFY EXISTING
GROUND
1184 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM GRAVEL BASE AREA
2250 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM SAND BASE AREA
V
SECTION A- A
1250 GALLON DOSING TANK.
PUMP:
25-35 GPM ®25 FT. HEAD
NJ.&
3.
SAND FILL SHALL MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:
100% SHALL PASS THE #4 SIEVE (6.4 MM).
<10% SHALL PASS THE #200 SIEVE (0.13 MM) AND SHALL HAVE A
UNIFORMITY COEFFICIENT LESS THAN 5 (D60/D10<5).
ELEC. JCT. BOX
CONCRETE SAND AND MASONRY SAND WILL BOTH GENERALLY MEET THESE
MOUNT CIN POST OR
CRITERIA.
SIDE OF GARAGE
4.
CLEANOUTS ARE REQUIRED AT ALL BENDS AND AT LEAST EVERY 100
FEET ALONG THE HOUSE SEWER.
4' x 4• TREATED
POST
5.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLING ALL
RISERS) TO
1-1/2'0 AIR VENT
COMPONENTS OF THIS SYSTEM PRIOR TO THE ABSORPTION AREA WATER
GROUND SURFACE
TIGHT TO PREVENT INFILTRATION.
CAULK/SEAL WELL
s0pE
6.
TOPSOIL COVER MAY BE VARIED (WITH 1 FOOT MINIMUM) TO ALLOW
LANDSCAPING.
Sip £
7.
INSTALL RISERS AS NECESSARY TO BRING ALL ACCESS POINTS TO
INLET 9
DRILL 1/4"4HOLES 30"-
WITHIN ONE -HALF -FOOT OF FINAL GRADE
ON CENTER 1OR ENTIRE
LENGTH OF .LL LATERALS 1-1/2"
PvC LATERALS
8.
LOCATIONS OF ALL COMPONENTS MAY BE VARIED AS NECESSARY AS LONG
AS ALL MINIMUM DISTANCES AND SLOPES MEET THOSE REQUIRED.
z
f 13
d
2' FEEDER LINE TO
MOUND, SLOPED AT
1`
�5
9.
�
PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE OF SURFACE WATER AWAY FROM MOUND
N 'ALARM'
1/8' PER FT. MIN.
2" PVC MANIFOLD
s>.pPE
3' T�
FILL AREA USING DRAINAGE SWALES AS NECESSARY.
ya• PIPE (SOLID)
10.
BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHY FROM A SURVEY BY LOUIS BUETTNER,
,a
QUICK DISCONNECT
OR UNION
y0
\\
LS NUMBER 13166, DATED 8/27/91.
HOLES ON BOTTOM
TCOIL
S<oleF
OF LATERAL
11.
AQUIFER FOR WELL IS IN EXCESS OF 300 FEET DEEP, PER
AND TIE AN
ADDITIONAL. 10' OF3
SSE
3.5�
WELL COMPLETION REPORT FOR WELL PERMIT NUMBER 149954.
Cu /
WIRE PUMP
REMOVALVAL REM
12.
EXISTING WELL SHALL BE PLUGGED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE OF
WEIGHT J
(TYP.)
\
COLORADO REGULATIONS AND SHALL BE CERTIFIED PRIOR TO START
OF MOUND CONSTRUCTION.
4 m 'OFF'
\\,,
\
PUMP
s.5
a
SET PUMP APPROX,
8' OFF FLOOR
NOTE
2" SOLID PVC FROM
NOTES:
ALL PIPING MUST DRAIN
DOSING TANK
1. SWITCHES TO BE MERCURY TYPE.
BACK TO DOSING TANK
2 4/7/93 REVISED LOCATION OF FIELD TPB
2. FLOAT SNATCH DIMENSIONS ARE BASED
ON A
COPELAND
1250 GAL. TANK.
W/O INTERIOR BAFFLE.
1 2/24/93 REVISED SIZE & LOCATION OF FIELD TPB
3. DOSING TANK SHALL BE OF WATERTIGHT
CONSTRUCTION.
N0. DATE REVISION BY
THE TWINING FLATS PROJECT
PIPE LATERAL LAYOUT
ASPEN, COLORADO
DOSING TANK ARRANGEMENT
MWMAL SEWAGE DISMAL SYSTEM
N T. S
770 TWINING FLATS ROAD
HIw CCwnw e4mamo NC.
= COOPER AVBkAJE
q„�ppD Co SM DES. TPB CK. FILE N0. SHEET 1
\2000COCO 4/22/93
(303)945 -SM DR HMS DATEIC/20/92 92004.20 OF 1
;Y) q