Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
pitkin.eh.264507101003 (1999)
Permit # 99017 As, /Pitkin Environmental Health Depart t Permit for an Individual Sewage Disposal SybLem 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone 970-920-5070 / FAX 970-920-5197 Parcel ID # 2645-071-01-003 Type of permit New( X ) Repair( ) Addition to House( ) Name of Owner William Tobey Street Address 1707 Rose Spur Ln, Snowmass, CO 81654 Property legal description Tract "C", McCabe Ranch Size of lot 31.51 acres Total square footage of the house 6,778 Water source private well # of bedrooms in house 4 # of offices, lofts & similar sized rooms in house one 4 -bed bunkroom 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) 4 BR + 2 for 4 -bed bunkroom = 6 Total Permit information Designed by David Powell, Timberline Engineering Mailing Address PO Box 631, carbondale, CO 81623 Perc rate 36mpi Profile hole depth 11' Depth to groundwater or bedrock Septic tank capacity 3412 minimum Absorption area 3,276 Cnmments +11' The engineer design and specifications dated 4/19/99 of Timberline Engineering must be followed which includes: one 2,500 and one 1,500 septic tanks in series, both single compartment concrete *30% reduction allowed for infiltrator units (150 infiltrator units in a 10 unit X 15 unit bed) Permit approved by: w'� . 4'y Date: v % Plans and specifications of the proposed 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 Installer: Final inspection approval: it before the final approval will be issued. Date: Ili -99 MON 01:22 PM AQUPEN/PITKIN ENV HEALTH FAX,970 920 507 H DEPAR 4T ASPEN/PIT'K I .NVIRONDMAL SEWAGDISPOSAL' :TEM APPLICATION t -OR !NO IV 130 S. Galena St., Aspen Colorado 81611 Phone 970-920-5070/Fax 970-920-5039 Name of OWNER 2 32 (o w 11^ n Owner's Mailing Address ��/ _ o Z Home Phone: a,IQ;nac5 Phone:GQ� N PAGE 3 P(a!I communication regarding this permit will go through this person) Primary Contact erson Name • 1 Company112 Contact Mailing Address 0 • 2 Business Phone 04 I f Fax Parcel ID # (available from assessor's office 2 !2 at 920.5160 or at www.aspen.comlassessarn V Street address of property oL—e—�`—i �t—v Block Filing Subdivision rr0:� L Legal Description: Lot S�D Type of proposed structure: �� Size of bldg. envelope: 141 Size of lot: �j ,s� acres. TYp Tota{ square feet of house # of bedrooms in house # of offices, lofts & similar sized rooms in house Caretaker Unit: Attached ( ) Detached ( ) Total area(sq. ft.) of caretaker unit # of bedrooms in caretaker unit # of offices, lofts and similar size rooms of caretaker unit Permit is for: New Home ( X� Repair due to failure Water: Private well (K Spring ( ) Stream ( ) If community system: Name of system artment to proval takes The fee for a ISDS application is per for wpebelcharyed Thet that takes 6 hmaximum feours or lesses $1000r the . The basic,ee of S??0 isdueat the time longer than 6 hours. a rate 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. tem that the above Application for an individual sewage d true disposal sYs ccurate) nfoermation on locations ofreby submitted. I ball existing and p proposed wells, contour true and contour accurate and that I a p waterlines, springs, suction or irrigation lines, drinking water cisterns, drain h intervals, buildings, property lines, ditches, slopes, tiles, irrigation ditches, lakes, water courses, streams, floodplains, dry gulches, and existing septic systems. I hereby rortify tal Of that any such features not shown on attached site map are not present_ Issuance of the permit does not imply the app any other permit required for construction pursuant to Pitkin County codes. No construction may be undertaken until all approvals and permits have been obtained. es of ese encies ll be The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental disposalth ) sy0epartment, Pitkin stem ail or malfunction. The pe munty and ptotoeconstruhct is slued on information held dn submless itted by should the individual ihi 9 the applicant or his/her representatives. The owner assumes full responsibility in case of failure of the system. ) Remodel/Addition ( ) Emergency use Community/Public Water System ( ) Date 'OG • ��7 Signature of applicant &�s Receipt # Date Received by A STRUCTURAJ,/ccP,qL FNGU\TEERa4G # CONMU=G ♦ MR=MID RI MRGY D ESEGN PRGI�MSSIONA . May 9, 2000 Pitkin County Environmental Health Attn: Nancy MacKenzie 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: ISDS Installation Tobey Residence Tract C, McCabe Ranch Dear Nancy: The installation of the ISDS for the above residence has been completed and has been installed in accordance with applicable county specifications and the approved plan. The additional work of lining the irrigation ditch with an impervious liner has been completed and the installation is in compliance with the approved plan. An as -built drawing of the system is attached. If you have any questions, please call me at 963-9869. Sincerely, David A. Powell, Reg. No. 25851 � � RFC�sIFo e 14\ A. P6 cc: Lipkin Warner Design'& Pla Aaron Hoffinans 23400 Two Rivers Road #44 P.O. Box 2239 Basalt, CO 81621 LLC P.O. BOX 6K CARBONDAILIE, CO. 81623 PHONE 970 963 9869 / FAX 970 963 9003 -41ri -lf f 7 -41 Mwri - F��- ";4-i 1 H a_ ' �ts� t�: a.�,4 ,fir. v ♦ �' ' ��, .�.� ,r r 'r _. a �A w ` ' �.Si a�.:tii.'� -0 Id � }/���• : \ � - w°%�:` z - �- �.�- ��\ - «�� � F J II ! IJ 0 � Lei wr 04/13/99 TUE 09:49 FAX 97092f' '6 LIPKIN WARNER AAA; �/�� 0120 " 4'-O3 To: (unknown),, INTERNET:tomd@c:i.aspen.co.us CC: (unknown), lwdp From: Gabe Preston, INTERNET:gabep@ci.aspen.co.us Date: 4/6/99, 12:00 PM Re: Tobey residence You should receive permit 9-58 for review soon. I have been working with Erin Hoffman and he has proposed a portion of the septic system outside of the approved building envelope. The planning staff has reviewed this proposal and we give it our approval. If you have questions, call Gabe at r: 5092. ---------------•-------- Internet Header -------------------------------- Sender: gabep@co.pitkin.co.us Received: from babel.ci.aspen.co.us (dns.ci.aspen.co.us [205.170.51.2251) by hpamgaab.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.1) with SMTP id OAA27551 for. <lwdp@compuserve.corr:>; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 14:00:06 -0400 (EDT) Received. (qmail 1856 invoked from network); 6 Apr 1999 18:00:01 -0000 Received: from commons.ci.aspen.co.us (205.170.56.1) X001 by babel.ci.aspen.co.us with SMTP; 6 Apr 1999 18:00:01 -0000 Received: from comdev.ci.aspen.co.us (comdev [205.170.53.1]) by commons.ci.aspen.co.us Received: from comdev30 (comdev30.ci.aspen.co.us [205.170.53.80)) by comdev.ci.aspen.c Message-Id:<2.2.32.19990406180320.008f9f38@comdev> X -Sender: gabep@comdev (Unverified) X -Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime -Version: 1.0 Content -Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 13:03:20 -0500 To: tomd@ci.aspen.co.us From: Gabe Preston <gabep@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Tobey .residence Cc: lwdp@compuserve.com f71' M~k "12-99 MON 12:28 PM X40 tU RECUR' - MCCABE RANCH SUBDIVISXIMPROVEMENTS AC�REEk[ENT ON P, 2 day of THIS AGREEMENT, made be and between HARRY thANTHONY CCOLLYNS is OLLINS, 199 , YAND TRUSTEE OF THE HARRY NTTHhezei efts COLLINS referred toHaeL 'Owner")kand REVOCABLE TRUST AGREEMENT LINTY E COMMISSIONERS of the County yOf Colorado THE BOARD OF the governing body of Pitkin Count , Colorado, as (hereafter referred to as County). W I T N E –S—S E T H WHEREAS, Owner has submitted ed aro othe County for McCabe Ranch lowimpact execution and recording a fin P ) subdivision (hereinafter referred to as the "SubdifiveoPM" consisting of 4 residential lots (hereinafter "Lots"), ts) and a non - zoned employee dwelling 8nihereinafterts ftNDE 'Area")PMH ron11certain real. development easement e property in Pitkin County, Colorado, more particularly described a: lands described as Legal Description of Entire Property on sheet J of the final plat of McCabe Ranch.(heteinafter "Plat"), which Plat: appears of record in Plat Book a` at Page � in the real property records of Pitkin County, Colorado; and WHEREAS, the County has fully considered the Plat and is willing to grant approval of and execute the same upon Owner':; agreement to the obligations herein, all as required by the Pitkin County Land Use Code; and WHEREAS, the Owner is willing to accept these obligations ani, to enter into this Agreement with the County to provide for tho same; NOW, THEREFORE, nedthe inconsideration hereto stipulate mutual n and gree a herein contained, follows. 1. EMH Units. Five pre-existing dwelling un;.ts located or, the McCabe Ranch ate drezoned to the PMH restricted 9employee Zone D stridct and welling ocater� ("PMH Units") and and described e on the Plat. l at •arehse Q forth incific rtheo separate uagreement� ,rental of between owner and the Pitkin County Housing Authority recorded of even date herewith d in Relution certain 3 land upon ewh o h obhe Mi1993, granting PMH rezoning of Units are located. The Owner is hereby obligated to ma tohc' improvementsdee dbed repairs on (collectively the Aspen\P kin, I Bu rovemeildingntDepartment. PMH Unites checklist, attached hereto and incorporated herein by the_.; reference at Exhibit A. WWWOMMAR-23- 1999 15 57 FROM ASPEN/PITKIN COM DEV TO 9-9278487 P.01 y #364183 1 y �? r t i'�3 ., 45 Rec . c_�t� BK: 733 F'' $� Via pavis, I,Pitl_rl r•k, Dar .c�Q j_ A RESOA.IITION OF TSE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Y, COLORADO GRANTING DETAILED SUBMISSION APPROVAL 'OF PITRIN COU Fog�THE MCCABE RANCH LOA 2MPACT SUBDIVISION Resolution # 93-_L-�Z RECITALS i f Trustee of the Harry Anthony Collins 1. Mr. Harry A. Collins, and Judith Allen ,Collins Revocable Trust Agreement, "Applicant", has applied to Pitkin County to hereinafter "App request (Detailed Submission approval for a Low Impact I' Subdivision. 2. The ;Applicant's parcel is located within�Township 9, Section 7 and 3 and Range 86 West of the 6th P-Mand is more Specifically described in Exhibit "A"• 3_ The ,proposed development creates a fathering parcel of 95 acres (which.contai.ns six dwelling units), a 177 acre non- development easement and four free-market parcels each containing approximately 30 acres in size. 4. A Co recurrent FM.H rezoning request for fIive existing I dwelling units was approved by the Board on OCtpber 12, 1993 pursuant to ordinance #93-10 I 5. The A plicant's request was considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission, on June 8, 1993, hereinafter "Commission", at which time the Commission recommended dnial of the Applicant's request to the Board of County Commissioners, hereinafter "Board", The Commission's reasons for denial are i MAR -23-1999 15:59 FROM ASPEWPITKIN COM DEV TO 9-9278487 P.06 #351543 12/o?/92 13 tt�c s. vu tsF syw res IPit Cnty Clerk, Doc 00 Davis, _ _r ;Resolution # 9 7 Page 2 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County jCommissionE�rs 'lof Pitkin County, Colorado that it hereby grants :General submission approval for the McCabe RanchLow impact ect to the following conditions: i Subdivision subj g i I� The am site and dome site on Lot D shall be relocated sos to avoid slopes of 30% and greaten, prior to Detailed Submission. Alljutilities shall be placed underground within new or exiting right-of-ways or easements. The recommendations of Nick Lampiris dat4 October 10, 1993 shall be followed by the applicant. A new report shall be submitted for the relocated homesites to be rev�ewed as part of Detailed Submission. i Dogs shall be prohibited on the newly created lots. This requirement shall be included in th4 pr otective covenants. The applicant is allowed to provide caretaker/employee dwelling units pursuant to Section 3-8.13, only if such uniits are attached to the main residence. No free standing caretaker or employee dwelling U:Tits shall be per*itted. Detailed Submission review s�lall include bic hearing publication for detached (attached to a p lueg lly approved accessory structure) caretaker unit app oval on each site, should the applicant wish to obt in such approval. 6. The Pro recommendations of the .Basalt and! Rural 'Fire .eetion District memo dated May 7, 1992 shall be adhdred•to by.the applicant. "' a Wildfire recommendations of the Colorado State Forest :3Y �� seryice letter dated January . 20, 1992 shall be adhered to y . the applicant. recommendations of the Sheriff ' s Of f ice memo - -• wildf lie recomme to. dated January .30 '.1992 shall _ be adhereki by the. ;. ap lica it. - ...... . homesites B,--.. eta landscaping plan for sereening�-- ; .y: D --which -> corpora. n ::. ..: ate Wildfir =ming �r=;:s : :_, � C,�� and= .`..�` , : --In ry.. -= T��_=.a:� ==, tecy .be.'- su►mijqi#s�ted f r..-: _ `:'_ �' _ _ ..Y_'CS,.•' . �� �. _ a:7�.r' •' :%: - �..;.,, }�. �r _+ice � �::: ._ � ... �[cr=e�-__``�_,��a-.•a,-_,,,_ir„��-. '. •iti- .�.�r �.. ..: , x v�-[��'-,t� � -e 5 :=:�': • :••. ''+Yx:_:.: 1:�� .�:ai,?�:�•%.i :�.:•_.-.;;_.� .-.}.F'';..:!.!.;4 y'.. _ '.:moi (Y- - ..wr- V-1t r Nl,.1 ��`�+a'....a..-..�..,_ •aTw..:' ..._.Y _,.._ --.;,.r 7: � :'•'' _ _ .A:Y l •y::.. ._ - - J.� � • '/: ... � . APR -05-99 MON 09:44 AM STRUCTURAL ASSOCIATES 4; ,� 0 HEPWORTH-PA'-vLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC - March 31, 1999 Structural Associates Attn: Shane Evans 4185 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 FAX:9709450482 PAGE 2 0 5020 tioad '154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax 970 94,5-8454 done97(1y4�.795� t',i',(TO. BSRECEIVE_SF JOB OT, 2,R M _ APR 0 11999 Job No. 198 784 STRUCTURAL ASSOCIATES Subject: Percolation Test Results, Proposed Tobey Residence, Tract C, McCabe Ranch, Pitkin County, Colorado Dear ,N4r_ Evans: As requested, percolation tests were conducted to evaluate the feasibility of an infiltration septic disposal system at the subject site. We previously conducted a subsoil study for foundation design of the proposed residence and presented our findings in a report date December 18, 1998, Job No. 197 784. A profile boring 11 feet deep and three shallow borings (P-1 through P-3) were drilled with a truck -mounted drill rig on March 25, 1999 at the locations shown on Fig. 1. The shallow borings (percolation test holes) were soaked with water and covered with rigid foam insulation following drilling. The soils exposed in the test holes was similar to the profile boring, shown on Fig. 2 and consisted of about 1/2 foot of topsoil and 11,/2 feet of - sandy silty clay overlying silty sand and gravel with cobbles and boulders. No free water was encountered in the profile boring and the subsoils were slightly moist to moist. The site was clear of snow and no evidence of frost was observed in the subsoils at the time of drilling and testing. Percolation tests were performed on March 26, 1999 by a representative of Hepworth- Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. The percolation rates were performed in the sand and gravel soils. The percolation test results, as shown on Table I, indicate an infiltration rate between 18 and 45 minutes per inch with an average of 36 minutes per inch. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered and percolation test results, the tested area should be suitable for a conventional infiltration septic disposal system. The system should be based in the sand and gravel. If you have any questions of if we can of further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, HE RTH-PAtiVLAK GFi' C � �- •z;,;� 20707 4: Jordy Z. Ada so , Jr. P. E. ,t ?I << Rev. B DEH '`�`•'' •.l,''�99 • ' ��'�r JZA/k m attachments cc: Timberline Engineers - Attn: Dave Powell ADR -05,99 MON 09:45 AM STRUCTURAL ASSOCIATES FAX:9709450482 PAGE 3 APPROXIMATE SCALE --1 1" = 500' l / � BUIILrNG \ i pA417PE Mowry LAA APPROXIMATE SCALE P 3 PROFILE O BORING P 1 A P 2 0 198 784 HEP WORTH - PAWLAK I LOCATION OF PERCOLATION TEST HOLES I Fig. 1 GEOTECHNICAL. INC. APR -05-J9 MON 09,45 AM STRUCTURAL ASSOCIATES FAX;9709450482 0 PROFILE BORING 15/12 5 29/12 .J m I • V• 4' d Q� � 10 5/1.to/0 a. 15 NOTE: Explanation of symbols is shown on Fig. I PAGE 4 0 5 Q: �.l I L d m Q 10 15 198 784 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK LOG OF PROFILE BORING Fig, Lj GECTECHNICAL, INC. ApR-05--99 MON 09:45 AM STRUCTURAL ASSOCIATES FAX:9709450482 PAGE 5 LEGEND: TOPSOIL; sandy silty clay, organic, moist, dark brown. CLAY (CL); silty, sandy to very sandy, stiff, slightly moist. brown, low to medium plasticity. SAND AND GRAVEL (SM—GM); silty, slightly ciayey, with cobbles and boulders, dense, slightly moist, brown. Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2 -inch I.D. California liner sample. Drive sample: standard penetration test ( SPT ), 1 3/8—inch I.D. split spoon sample. ASTM D — 1586. Drive sample blow count: indicates that 15 blows of a 140—pound hammer falling 30 inches were 15/12 required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12 inches. NOTES: 1, The profile boring was drilled on March 25, 1999 with a 4—inch diameter continuous flight power auger. The percolation test holes were drilled with a 6—inch diameter auger. 2, Location of the profile boring and test holes were measured approximately by pacing from features shown an the site plan provided. levation of the profile boring was not measured and the log of profile boring is drawn to depth. 4. The profile boring location should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the profile boring log represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the boring at the time of drilling or when checked 1 day later. Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. 193 7841 GEOTECHNIGA AWLA LEGEND AND NOTES L ig. 3 � APR -0;-99 MON 09:45 AM STRUCTURAL ASSOCIATES FAX:9709450482 PAGE 6 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE I PFRC_nl ATInN TEST RFSULTS JOB NO. 198 784 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 (MINANCH) P-1 48 15 121/4 11 1/2 3/4 18 11 1/2 10 1/2 1 10 1/2 9 1/2 1 9 1/2 8 1/2 1 8 1/2 7 1/2 1 7 1/2 7 1/2 P-2 49 is 13 1/2 13 1/2 45 13 12 1/2 112 121/2 12114 1/4 121/4 12 1/4 12 11 1/2 1/2 11 1/2 11 1/4 1/4 P-3 45 15 15 112 13 112 2 45 13 112 13 112 13 12 1/2 1/2 12 112 12 114 1/4 12 1/4 11 314 1/2 11 314 11 112 1/4 NOTE: Percolation holes were drilled with 6 inch diameter auger and soaked on March 25, 1999. Percolation tests were perfomed on March 26, 1999 by H -P Geotech, Site was clear of snow and no evidence of frost was observed in the subsoils at the time of drilling and testing. The average percolation rate was based on the last three readings of the each test. i I ` a. HEPWORTH-PAWLA40TECHNICAL, INC. Qoad 154 - Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax 970 945-S454 Phone 970 945-19SS SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED TOBEY RESIDENCE TRACT C, McCABE RANCH _ PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO. 198 784 DECEMBER 18, 1998 PREPARED FOR: STRUCTURA,L, ASSOCIATES ATTN: SH_ N`E EVANS 4185 COUNTY ROAD 154 GLEN, WOOD SPRINGS, COLORA-DO 81601 BEPIC, RTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICO, INC. December 18, 1998 Structural Associates Attn: Shane Evans 4185 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Job No. 198 784 Subject: Report Transmittal, Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Tobey Residence, Tract C, McCabe Ranch, Pitkin County, Colorado Dear Mr. Evans: As requested, we have conducted a subsoil study for the proposed residence at the subject site. Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings drilled in the proposed building area consist of from 2 to 21/2 feet of topsoil and 1'/2 to 2 feet of stiff, sandy silty clay overlying relatively dense sand and gravel with cobbles. Groundwater was not encountered in the borings at the time of drilling -to the drilled depths of 91/2 to 16 feet. The laboratory testing indicates the clay soils posses some settlement/heave potential when loaded and wetted. The proposed residence can be founded with spread footings placed on the natural subsoils, or structural fill, and designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 to 3,000 psf. Slabs -on -grade bearing on the clay soils, or properly placed and compacted structural fill, should be feasible. The report which follows describes our exploration, 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, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. David A. Young, P.E. Rev. By: SLP DAY/ksm a TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ............................... 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION .................................... 1 SITE CONDITIONS .......................................... 2 FIELD EXPLORATION ....................................... SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................... 3 FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS ........................... 3 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ................................. 4 FOUNDATIONS ........................................ 4 FLOORSLABS........................................5 SURFACE DRAINAGE ................................... 6 LIMITATIONS ...........................................`... 6 FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 4 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 5 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS H -P GEOTECH �..�.�w,r...,�,-.-•,».. ._..: _ ,. _. .. ..—.weir.. —,..._ PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for the proposed Tobey residence to be located on Tract C, McCabe Ranch, Rose Spur Road, 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 Structural Associates dated November 16, 1998. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain information on subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or swell and other engineering characteristics. 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. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsoil conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed residence will be a single story structure located on the site as shown on Fig. 1. Ground floors will be slab -on -grade near the existing ground surface. Grading for the structure is assumed to be relatively minor with cut and fill depths between about 2 to 4 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction. 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. H -P GEOTECH -2 - SITE CONDITIONS The tract is vacant and located.in the southwest portion of the McCabe Ranch Development west of Rose Spur Road. The terrain appears natural consisting of relatively flat irrigated pasture. The ground surface slopes generally down to the north at about 3 % to 5 % grade. Elevation difference across the proposed building is about 3 or 4 feet. Vegetation consists of short thick grass with some trees along the edge of a steep down-slope a few hundred feet northwest of the building site. There are several shallow irrigation ditches that cross the site that were dry except for some drifted snow at the time of our field work. There is a recently completed residence on Tract D several hundred feet to the north. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on December 2, 1998. Four exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4 inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a truck -mounted Longyear BK-51HD drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with 13/s 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. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Fig. 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. H -P GEo7ECH 0 -3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface. conditions encountered at the site are shown on Fig. 2. The subsoils consist of about 2 to 21/2 feet of organic topsoil overlying stiff, sandy to very sandy silty clay. Below the clay, at depths from about 31/z to 4 feet, was relatively dense, silty sand and gravel containing cobbles and boulders which extended to the maximum depth drilled, 16 feet. Drilling in the dense sand and gravel with auger equipment was difficult due to the cobbles and boulders and drilling refusal was encountered in the deposit. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content and density, gradation analyses and Atterberg limits. Results of swell -consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples of the sandy clay subsoils, presented on Fig. 4, indicate low to moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. One sample (Boring 3 at 21/2 feet) showed a lowy swell potential when wetted under a constant light surcharge. Results of gradation analyses performed on small diameter drive samples (minus 11/2 inch fraction) of the natural sand and gravel soils are shown on Fig. 5. The liquid and plastic limit testing indicates the clay to have low to medium plasticity. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were slightly moist to moist. FOLIATION BEARING CONDITIONS The sandy clay soils posses relatively low bearing capacity and variable settlement/heave potential. Spread footings bearing on these soils can be used for foundation support with some risk of movement. Due to shallow depth of the clays the risk of movement is probably low. A lower risk of foundation movement would be to bear the footings entirely on the underlying sand and gravel soils and/or compacted structural fill. H -P GEOTECH -4- DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of theproposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural soils or compacted structural fill. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the upper natural soils should be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. Based on experience, we expect movement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be up to about 1 inch. There could be some additional movement if the clay bearing soils become wetted. 2) Footings placed entirely on the underlying sand and gravel soils or on compacted structural fill can be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf. We expect settlements will be less than 1 inch and occur essentially during construction. 3) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. 4) 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. 5) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist lateral earth pressures as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls" section of this report a lateral earth pressure H -P GEOTECH corresponding to an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 50 pcf. All retaining walls should be provided with underdrains to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressure. 6) All topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to firm natural soils. If the footings are designed to bear on the sand and gravel soils the clays should also be removed. Structural fill placed to re-establish design bearing level should be a granular material, such as road base, compacted to at least 100% of standard Proctor density near optimum moisture content. 7) A representative of the geotechnical 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 loaded slab -on -grade construction. Providing at least 2 feet of properly placed and compacted granular fill below the slabs should limit potential movement if clay subgrade soils become wetted. 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 gravel can be placed immediately beneath the slabs to act as a leveling course and provide for subgrade support. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with at least 50% retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 12% passing the No. 200 sieve. All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95 of maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near to slightly above optimum. Required fill can consist of the on-site sand and gravel, or imported granular material, devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. H -P GECTECH c-6- SURFACE 6 SURFACE DRAINAGE Positive surface drainage is an important aspect of the project to limit the potential for wetting of the clay soils below the building. The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed: 1) Excessive wetting or drying of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. Drying could increase the expansion potential of the clays. 2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95 l 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 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in paved areas. Granular wall backfill should be capped with about 2 feet of the on-site clayey soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. LLIIITATIONS 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 borings drilled at the locations indicated on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and ©ir experience in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface H -P GECTECH conditions identified at the exploratory borings 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 so that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. Sincerely, HEPWORTH - PAW OTECHNICAL, INC. ' ja David A. Young, P.E.; -9. 32-216 �' o Reviewed B ��� 2-( 1`v:'• v Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. DAY/ksm cc: Lipkin -Warner Design - Attn: David Warner H -P GEOTECH VICINITY MAP BENCH MARK NUMBER 22 \ / BUILDING ENVELOPE APPROXIMATE SCALE 1" = 300' APPROXIMATE SCALE 1" = 30' 1198 784 I HEPWORTH - PAWLAK I LOCA ONN OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS I Fig. 1 I GEOTECHNICAL, INC. BORING 1 BORING 2 BORING 3 BORING 4 ELEV. = 98.6' ELEV. = 97.3' ELEV. = 99.9' ELEV. = 1 C0.4' 105 105 25/6,30/2 80 80 Note: Exolcnation of symbols is shown on Fig. 3. 198 784 l HEPWORTH - PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGSI Fig. 2 E GOTECHNICAL, INC. 100 ASSUMED GRCUNO FLOCR LEVEL 12/12 19/12 WC=15.2 100 11 D0=103 10/12 Q. WC=15.6 -200=50 95 21/12 ° CD=105 -200=67 33/12 95 D0=980 o y LL=39 ol 30/0 P1=20 0 1 o' 43/12 I C o �: 65 /12 0 � c ° Q. ..J a WC=4.8 , 0 0 ami p: +4=38 d 70/12? 90 w w 90 ,�° -200=18 p: 75/12 ° WC=8.7 +4=27 o° -200=25 o: 75/12 85 i 85 25/6,30/2 80 80 Note: Exolcnation of symbols is shown on Fig. 3. 198 784 l HEPWORTH - PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGSI Fig. 2 E GOTECHNICAL, INC. LEGEND: TOPSOIL; organic silty clay with scattered gravel and small cobbles, highly to moderately organic with depth, moist, black to dark brown. CLAY (CL); silty, sandy to very sandy, scattered gravel and small cobbles, stiff, slightly moist to moist, brown, low to medium plasticity. SAND AND GRAVEL (SM—GM); with cobbles and boulders, silty, occasionally clayey, dense to very ° dense, slightly moist, mixed brown and red—brown, rocks are subangular to subrounded. hRelatively undisturbed drive sample; 2—inch I.D. California liner sample. Drive sample; standard penetration test ( SPT ), 1 3/8—inch I.D. split spoon sample, ASTM D — 1586. Drive sample blow count; indicates that 10 blows of a 140—pound hammer falling 30 inches were 10/12 required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12 inches. TPractical drilling refusal. NOTES: 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on December 2, 1998 with a 4—inch diameter continuous flight power auger.! 2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided. Building layout stakes had been placed. 3. Elevations of exploratory borings were measured by instrument level and refer to the Bench Mcrk shown on Fig. 1. 4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content ( % ) DD = Dry Density ( pcf ) +4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve. —2C0 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve. LL = Liquid Limit ( i ) PI = Plasticity Index ( % ) 1 198 784 I HEPWORTH - PAWLAK LEGEND AND NOTES I Fig. 3 I j GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 0 l 2 3 C: cn0 4 a� a E U 5 6 7 Moisture Content = 12.0 percent Dry Density = 98 pcf Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay From: Boring 1 at 2 Feet Compression upon wetting 8 l I I I I 1 I I i i i I i I i I i i i 0.1 _ 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf c 0 Moisture Content = 15.6 percent Dry Density = 105 pcf Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay From: Boring 3 at 2.5 Feet Expansion upon wetting 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 198 784 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 4 GEC T ECHNICAL, INC. 2 4 100 90 80 C� 70 Z 6 50 Q 0_ 5a 1-- z Z W 40 U tY w 30 0- 20 10 0 ...,... ...�. .,... i �� 127 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS CLAY 70 SILT FINE MEDIIUN COARSE FINE A COARSE CCBEI:S GRAVEL 38 % SAND 44 % SILT AND CLAY 18 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX % SAMPLE OF: Silty Sand and Gravel FROM: Boring 2 at 5 Feet HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME REACNNGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SCUARE OPENINGS 24 HR. 7 HR 10c 90 BO U 70 Z_ 50 [n Q 54 F - Z w 4a U N u x 2G l0 0 ...... i <.n 127 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS AN A CLAY TO 9L7 FINE V@IUM COARSE FINE COARSE COEreL.S GRAVEL 27 % SAND 48 % SILT AND CLAY 25 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTiC:TY INDEX % SAMPLE OF: Silty Sand with Gravel FROM: Boring 4 at 10 Feet I - TWE READINGS I U.S. STANDARD SERIES I CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS I 4 HR- 7 HR 0 10 20 30 0 W Z_ A-0 Q w e0 z 60 w U 70 w 80 90 100 u 198 784 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fi;. 5 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. m co O z c O -T- > a� m > cc U U c U 3 C V%^/ co VJ VJ VI CZ \\0) ❑ W y > F - Z O a. U � F - z O N � U U X O y O N R co r O �n � CO LO N w i O iil 2 a z 0 a c U m N I _ LrJ M _ cc O O z ❑ z z W CD N Lr) LO Q ❑ Q � r� � M W z U o a N Ln N a v 0 W n ? C\ cr G` O a � x ONOWHE1♦ R E CU R C E 111,.111, 111' 1111 f, 1111111 ■1111111 ■I♦EE■ E N G I N E E R I N G I N C Mr. Don Smith August 29, 1994 McCabe Ranch PO Box 79 Snowmass CO 81654 RE: Tract D Well Construction and Pump Test Report Dear Don: The Tract D well was constructed in July 1994 by Collins Drilling. A 24 hour pump test was conducted and water quality testing was conducted. The preliminary conclusion is that the well is capable of providing an adequate quantity of high quality domestic water for the four lots in the McCabe Ranch Low Impact Subdivision. A late winter pump test is recommended to evaluate aquifer characteristics at the seasonal low water table. WELL CONSTRUCTION The well was constructed by cable tool drilling methods to a total depth of 54 feet (see Figure 1) through boulders, sand and gravel and fine sand. Shale was encountered at 52 feet and drilling ceased at 54 feet. Subsequently the lower 2 feet of the hole was grouted. Eight inch plain steel casing extends from 1.6 feet above the ground surface is installed to a depth of 32 feet. The screen assembly consists of 10 feet of 8 inch diameter No. 80 slot (0.08 inch slot width) stainless steel telescoping well screen with a 5 foot riser pipe and a 5 foot tailpipe. The screen is set between 37 feet and 47 feet. The No. 80 slot screen was chosen based on a gi`ain size analysis of the formation conducted by the screen supplier. PUMP TESTING A 24 hour purrip test was conducted by Collins Drilling and Pump Service on July 25th and 26th. The well was pumped at 25 gallons per minute (gpm) for 10 minutes and then increased to 65 gpm. The rate was held at 65 gpm through the end cf the test. The well exhibited minimal drawdown and as shown on Figure 2 indicating efficient well construction and high aquifer transmissivity (ability to transmit water). At the start of the test the static water level was 10.67 feet below the top of the well casing (9 feet below ground surface). In the first minute of pumping the well drewdown 2.75 feet then remained fairly steady through 10 minutes, drawing down only an additional 0.08 feet to 2.83 feet. Based on the minimal drawdown at 25 gpm the pumping rate was increased to 65 gpm at 10 minutes. Increasing the pumping rate increased the drawdown to 4.21 feet at 11 minutes. After 11 minutes drawdown slowly increased and reached a maximum of 5.00 feet at 360 minutes. From 360 minutes to the end of the test at 1440 minutes the drawdown decreased steadily. The decrease is attributed to ground water recharge caused by irrigation of the grass -hay pasture above the well which was started sometime during the pump test. Consulting Engineers and Hydrologists 909 Colorado Avenue ■ Glenwood Springs, CO 61 601 IN (303] 945-6777 ■ Fax (303] 945-1137 Mr. Don Smith August 29, 1994 Page 2 The drawdown data suggests, with adequate recharge to the aquifer, the well is capable of a sustained pumping rate of 65 gpm. The maximum drawdown of 5 feet observed prior to the irrigation induced recharge represents approximately 25% of the available drawdown assuming the well can be drawn down to the top of the riser pipe (drawdown = 22 feet). Extrapolating the conditions that existed between 10 and 360 minutes suggests that drawdown would increase to approximately 5.17 feet after about 70 days of pumping at 65 gpm and to approximately 5.24 feet after about 700 days. Extrapolating the data in this manner should only be used as an indication of the possible safe yield of the well. In the case of the Tract D Well the aquifer recharge characteristics are a very important factor. The safe yield of the well may be less than 65 gpm in the late winter when there is no irrigation and minimal natural recharge. Beyond 360 minutes as shown on Figure 2, the drawdown decreased steadily indicating positive recharge of the well. That is, water was flowing into the cone of depression around the well at a rate greater than it was being pumped. As mentioned above this is attributed to irrigation that was started on the grass -hay pasture above the well sometime during the pump test. The exact time irrigation started is not known but the recharge influence was first detected at approximately 6:00 pm on July 25th, 8 hours into the pump test. This indicates that irrigation recharge has a near instantaneous impact on the water levels in the well and may play a significant role in the long terra safe yield of the well. The data indicates that the well will yield 65 gpm if there is adequate recharge. However, late winter conditions (February or March) may be significantly different. A long period of non -irrigation plus minimal natural recharge in the winter should drop the water table to its seasonal low by February or March. We recommend that the water level in the well be monitored occasionally throughout the fall and winter of 1994/95 and a second pump test conducted in February or March 1995. Based on observations (Don Smith, 1994) that the seepage face in the draw adjacent to the well does not fluctuate significantly summer to winter suggests that the well should safely produce 65 gpm in the winter. A pump test is necessary to confirm this. The potential demand on the well is summarized in the Resource Engineering, Inc. report entitled McCabe Ranch Water Right Plan for Augmentation, Five Residential Lots, dated December 22, 1992. Assuming all four lots of the low impact subdivision are supplied from the Tract D Well the annual demand would average 3 gpm. In the summer when the well is used for irrigation the average demand is expected to be approximately 7 gpm. This supports the opinion that, given adequate recharge, the well is capable of meeting the potential demand placed on it. WATER QUALITY A water quality sample was obtained near the completion of the pump test and submitted to Grand Junction Laboratories for analysis on July 26th. A "Standard State Analysis" was conducted which provides information on most regulated constituents. '''''RESOURCE MOUS■ MOUSE E N G I N E E R I N G I N C Mr. Don Smith August 29, 1994 Page 3 Tests were not conducted for pesticides, herbicides, volatile organic chemical (VOC's), synthetic organic chemical (SOC's) or radioactivity. While we would expect negative results on these tests we recommend that they be conducted when a second pump test is conducted. The water quality results (attached) suggest excellent water quality with the exception of hardness. The water is moderately hard. Although the hardness does not impose a health risk water softening may be desired to minimize mineral buildup and extend the life of plumbing fixtures. Further, reverse osmosis treatment for drinking water would be desirable to eliminate the constituents associated with hardness and the salts that are added during water softening. Turbidity was 1.25 NTU, slightly above the regulated limit for surface water supplies. Turbidity, a measure of the clarity of water, is not regulated for ground water sources. A measurement of 1.25 NTU indicates very clean water for which no additional treatment (filtration) is warranted. Additionally, high turbidity is expected in new wells and typically decreases after a period of production. Since there is immediate recharge from the upgradient irrigated grass -hay pastures, best management practices (BMP) need to be followed to prevent contamination of the ground water. BMP's include developing and implementing guidelines for careful selection and application of pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers. For example, over fertilization could result in elevated nitrate levels. Another example of a BMP would be guidelines for lot owners regarding disposal of household chemicals such as cleaning agents, solvents, oil and gas. One additional water quality issue is potential that the well is a ground water source under the influence of surface water. That is, microscopic surface organisms are migrating through the aquifer to the well screen from the surface. Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, a well less than 100 feet deep is considered a surface source unless proven otherwise by the owner. This is done by conducting a microscopic particulate analysis test which detects the presence of surface microorganisms. A positive test, concluding the influence of surface water, indicates that filtration is recommended. We recommend that a particulate analysis test be conducted during the height of runoff next year or during the irrigation season. These time periods represent the highest probability of positive results. Thus, a negative test is an excellent indicator that there is not surface influence and the well can be considered a true ground water source. A detailed discussion of potential treatment requirements for the McCabe Ranch water systems and the regulatory environment is presented in Dean Gordon's letter to Harry Collins dated September 29, 1992. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS • The well is 52 feet deep and is completed in sands and gravels. • The well is screened from 37 to 47 feet with 8 inch nominal, telescopic, stainless steel, No. 80 slot well screen. ////RESOURCE //. ■//// E N G I N E E g I N G l i. 40 Mr. Don Smith Page 4 August 29, 1994 • The well was pumped at 65 gpm and is capable of sustaining 65 gpm with adequate aquifer recharge conditions. • Irrigation recharge of the aquifer above the well is nearly instantaneous and has a significant impact on water levels in the well. • A second pump test should be conducted in late winter coincident with the seasonal low water table to provide an estimate of well yield under conditions of minimal irrigation and natural recharge. • Water quality is good and is suitable for drinking water although it is moderately hard. • Water softening is recommended to reduce mineral buildup and extend the life of plumbing fixtures. • Reverse osmosis treatment may be desired for drinking water. • Additional tests for volatile organic chemicals, herbicides and pesticides, radioactivity and particulates are recommended at the time a second pump test is conducted. The well appears to be an excellent source of water for all of the residences in the four unit low impact subdivision based on conditions existing at the time the well was constructed and pump tested. A second pump test, in late winter, is needed to confirm the long term safe yield of the well. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, RESOURCE ENGINEERING, INC. 14L /7 ,-- John M. Currier, P.E. Water Resources Engineer JMC/mmm 137-2.1.1 p oport.137 Attachment (pump test results) RES0UR7E ..... Ott■ E NGINE ERIN,. d 2 0' joB Resource Engineering, Inc. SHEET NO. of 802 Grand Avenue Suite 302CALCULATED BY rLC _ DATE —7 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 (303) 945-6777 CHECKED BY DATE SCALE QO0L SP�►�b 9 GP.^YtL i -(-(a TOP �/15�NCj 0 -N 120 VN c> F IC,URE le:; " 4 5'i ee- ( rt r--� >'2' 1z 13` i2 i�tA� C= t v �Z C r.'z V'.� 2 37 ` Tc�1D SGIz1:.G i*: TtLl:SGV�L1{� Wi21 -(— 6e-aeL0 Sy' 13orrorj Hots �.lviC : L,oG �rafl GoN s i r2ucTrorl q�; Pc�c.S ���o�fl� � � ti Goc. L 1116 1�R.11.L lNq 0 140 Drawdown (feet) j n� Cz A cn O� �i c M M N Pumping Rate (gpm) J g� 0 r� 1 ,4 m o n M .a o 1 m M Z z n 0 140 Drawdown (feet) j n� Cz A cn O� �i c M M N Pumping Rate (gpm) J Received from: Customer No. JOHN C. KART & CO.�r�;r.?;S_';�?�� GRAND JUNCTION LABORATURE 435 NORTH AVENUE • PHONE 242-7618 • GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 8)jl Ji ANALYTICAL REPORT r�C�dlX3M�2 ",'VWf'" Resource Engineering; John M. Currier, P.E. Glenwood Springs, CO 0741 water Laboratory No. Sample 7/26/94 Date Received Lab number 0741 Sample ID McCabe Ranch Tract D Well 8/23/94 Date Reported Limits for Drinking Suggested by Colo. Dept. Health Arsenic(As) 0.000 mg/1 0.05 mg/l Barium(Ba) 0.22 mg/l 1.0 mg/l Cadmium(Cd) 0.0000 mg/l 0.01 mg/1 Chromium(Cr) 0.000 mg/1 0.05 mg/1 Fluoride(F) 0.27 mg/l 4 mg/1 Lead(Pb) 0.000 mg/l 0.05 mg/l Mercury(Hg) 0.00000 mg/l 0.002 mg/l Nitrate(N) 0.44 mg/l 10.0 mg/l Selenium(Se) 0.000 mg/l 0.01 mg/1 Silver(Ag) 0.0000 mg/l 0.05 mg/l Color(Co/Pt unit) 0 no official pH 7.40 no official Conductivity@25 deg. C 799 umbos/cm no official Sodium(Na) 3.9 mg/1 20 mg/1 Calcium(Ca) 133 mg/1 no official Magnesium(Mg) 23 mg/l 125 mg/l Potassium(K) 0.9 mg/l no official Chloride(Cl) 4 mg/1 250 mg/l Sulfate(SO4) 165 mg/1 25U mg/l Phenol. Alkalinity(CaCO3) 0 mg/l no official Total Alkalinity(CaCO3) 244 mg/1 no official Bicarbonate(HCO3) 295 mg/l no official Carbonate(CO3) 0 mg/1 no official Dissolved Solids 628 mg/1 500 mg/1 Hardness (CaCO3) 426 mg/l 200 mg/1 Turbidity(NTU) 1.25 1 Boron(B) 0.035 mg/1 no official Copper(Cu) 0.001 mg/l 1.0 mg/l Iron(Fe) 0.01 mg/l 0.3 mg/l Manganese(Mn) 0.018 mg/l 0.05 mg/1 Molybdenum(Mo) 0.000 mg/l no official Ammonia(N) 0.08 mg/1 no official Phosphate(P) 0.00 mg/l no official Zinc(Zn) 0.006 mg/l 5.0 mg/1 limit limit limit limit limit limit limit limit limit limit limit limit limit Lab Dir.: Brian S. Bauer JOHN C. __,iF"'IART & CO. GRAND HNNION LHORA10RE 435 NORTH AVENUE • PHONE (303) 242-7618 ♦ FAX 243-7235 ♦ GRAND .JUNCTION, COLORADO 81501 NOTES on sample # 0741 : Your water tests show levels exceeding drinking water limits for: Dissolved Solids: This exceeds the limit, though not greatly. The other tests reveal that it, is composed of primarily Calcium, Alkalinity and Sulfate in this sample, none of which are present in harmful amounts. Hardness: Can cause mineral buildup and necessitate the use of large amounts of soap for cleaning. Turbidity: Cloudiness of the water; public waters must meet the criteria 1 NTU. Filtration often corrects this. This would be considered a fairly good drinking water source for humans; it may be inconvenient in household use, due to its hardness. FORMNO. STATE OF COLORF') For Office Use rn* GWS -10 OFFICE OF THE S. -NGINEER 2 818 Centennial Bldg., 1313 - -_ anan St, Denver, Colorado 80203 RECEIVED (303) 866.3581 RECEIVED APR 0 9 1997 MR 0 7 '�7 FOR WSTRUCTiONS, SEE REVERSE SIDE STATEMENT OF BENEFICIAL USE WELL PERMIT NUMBER 044789-F 'MA rER REs4A iCEs STATEENGMIEER WATERREsouRcES ca.o. SUTE EEW�IKER 1. WELL OWNER Harry Anthony Collins NAME(S) C/O Scott Balcomb, Esq., Delaney & Balcomb PC Mailing Address PO Box 790 City, SL Zip Glenwood Svring,s CO 81602 Phone ( q7n ) QA9-6sLh 2 WELL LOCATION: COUNTY Pi t-ki n OWNER'S WELL DESIGNATION wpi l n (Address) (City) (fie) (Zp) SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4, Sec. 5 Twp. 9 ❑ N. or ❑ S., Range 86 ❑ E. or ❑ W. 6th P.M. Distances from Section Lines 165 Ft. from ❑ N. or © S. Line, 230 FL from ❑ E. or ® W. Line. 3. The well is being used for the following purpose(s): T,ands ane i rri Bari on Ranr•h 4uhrl i yi -,i nn Trnrt c R- C and n assnci arerl wi rh Mr(cahp 4. Water from the well was first used beneficially under this permit number, for the above described purposes on October 15. 19_. (Do not report a date which is before the issued date of this permit) 5. The pumping rate claimed is 60 gallons per minute. 6. The average annual amount of water diverted is 4.0 acre feet. 7. The land area irrigated (watered) by water from this well is: 30,000 ❑ Acres or ® Square feet, (Number) described as: (Legal Description) oras McCabe Ranch Subdivision Lot(s) A, B, C Block Filing/Unit Well drilled by: Collins Drilling Co. Uc. No: 634 Pump installed by:_.�Lua Tec Systems, Inc. Lic. No: 1106 9. Meter Mfg. by NenrnnP Serial No.: 'jg15n-j1 5 Date Installed: 1 n/Qs�gF, I (we) have read the statements made herein, know the contents thereof, and state that they are true to my (our) knowledge. (Pursuant: to Section 24-4-104 (13)(a) C.R.S., a making of false statements herein constitutes perjury in the second degree and is punishable as a Class 1 mipdemeanorj 10 Name/Title (Please type or print) ignatu �11 W��J Date Scott Balcomb -/- % S7' FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Accepted that those conditions of approval as stated on the permit are complied.with, ; >1: J U L 0 9 1997 State Engineer Date Court Case No. Div. Co. WD n MD Use R ea®.■ C E MENEM E N G I N E E R I N G I N C Mr. Herb Klein, Esq. 201 N. Mill St., Suite 203 Aspen, CO 81611 RE: McCabe Ranch Tract D Well Water Quality Tests Dear Herb: October 25, 1994 Attached are the water quality tests results received today for the McCabe Ranch Tract D well. Tests were run for coliform bacteria, inorganic chemicals and organic chemicals (herbicides and pesticides, VOC's, Colorado regulated organic chemicals and Colorado unregulated organic chemicals). The results indicate the water is of good quality and suitable for human consumption. As expected, and typical of the area, water softening is recommended and home owners may wish to install reverse osmosis treatment for drinking water. As identified by earlier testing the water is slightly hard with slightly elevated levels of total dissolved solids. Turbidity is also above regulated limits for surface water sources (turbidity is riot regulated for ground water). This is normal in new wells and is expected to decrease over time. The current tests indicate that iron concentrations are slightly elevated above the suggested level in contrast to tests in July, 1994 (also attached) which showed very very low iron concentrations. No herbicides, pesticides, regulated VOCs or unregulated VOCs were detected. If you have any questions or need any additional information please call. Sincerely, RESOURCE ENGINEERING, INC. John M. Currier, PE Water Resources Engineer JMC/jmc file 1371v.,nd.w attachments cc: Mr. Don Smith Mr. Harry Collins Consulting Engineers and Hydrologists 909 Colorado Avenue ■ Glenwood Springs, CO 81 601 ■ (303) 945-6777 ■ Fax (303) 945-1137 JOHN C. KEi ,jART & CO. GRAND JUNCTION LARRATORG - 475 NORTH AVENUQ ♦ PHONE 242-7518 • GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 91501 ANALYMCAL REPORT Received EMM: Resource Engineering; David Smith Glenwood Springs, CO Custorxa No L bo'"Cory No. 1626 water Sample 10/12/94 10/25/94 Date Received _ Date Reported . _ _.- Lab ..Lab number 1628 Limits for Drinking Suggested Sample ID New Well, McCabe by Colo. Dept, Health Ranch, Snowmass CO Arsenic(As) 5arium(Ba) ;admium(Cd) hamiumK'r) •'1 .�rid��i ) e Pb E .pry 1 r ) i _ ite P a E nig nl :e) c )r(. of -t unit) c iuct. i-. ty@25 deg. C .;a.gnes i 4;m : Mg) �otassium(K) �,'hloride (C1) 3ulfate(SO4) ?henol. Alkalinity(CaCO3) Total Alkalinity(Ca,CO3) Bicarbonate(HCO3) Carbonate =3) Dissolved Solids Hardness (CaCO3) Turbidity(NTU) Boron(B) Copper(Cu) Iron(Fe) Manganese(Mn) Molybdenum(Mo) k=onia (N) Phosphate(P) Zinc(Zn) Total Coliform Bacteria 0.000 mg/1 0.05 mq/l 0.02 mg/1 1.0 mq/1 0.0002 mg/1 0.01 mg/l 0.000 Mg/1 0.05 mg/ 1 0.17 mg/l 4 mg/l 0.002) mg/l 0.05 mg/l 0.00000 mg/1 0.002 mg/l 0.34 mg/1 10.0 mail 0.002 mg/l 0.01 mq/1 0.0000 Mg/1 0.05 mcg/ I 0 colonies/ 0 no official 6.70 100ml (safe) no official 726 umbos/cm page 1 of no official 4 mg/1 2.0 mcq / 1 120 mg/1 ►zo official 25 mc 1 12b MCT/ 1 1.6 mg/1 no oificlal 7 mg/l 250 mq/1 145 m9/1 250 m9/1 0 MCT/ 1 no official 2:32 mg/l no official 281 mg/l no otiicial 0 mg/l no official 587 mg/ 1 500 mo/1 402 mg/1 200 mq/1 8 1 limit. limit I imi t limit limit I unit limit limit limit 0.075 mg/I nQ official limit 0.005 mg/1 1.0 ma/1 0.40 mg/l 0.3 mg/l 0.017 mg/l 0.05 mq/l 0.001 mg/l no official limit 0.00 mg/l no official limit 0.03 mq/1 no official limit 0.004 mg/l 5.0 mg/l 0 colonies/ 0 colonies/ 100ml (safe) 100ml page 1 of 4 Lab Dir.: Brian S. Bauer JOHN C. K (HAAT & CO. GRAND JUNCTION LHORAIRIS 493 NORTH AVENUE • PHONE 242-7616 • GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 61501 ANALYTICAL REPORT Rtcnivedfrom: Resource Engineering Inc., David Smith Glenwood Springs, CU 1628 water Customs No. __ -_ La6ontory No, Sample r 10/12/94 10/25/94 Ihte Received - Date Repotted --- _- _ Lab No: 1628 Limits for Sample name: New Well, McCabe Public Drinking Ranch, Snowmass, CO Waters Total Phosphorous(P) 0.4 mg/l none Dissolved Phosphorous(P) 0.01 mg/l none Total Suspended Solids 16 mg/1 none Herbic,-des: 2, -1- D < 0 .0 0 01 Mg/ 1 0.07 Mg/1 2, y,5 -TP <0,0001 rng/1 0,05 mg/1 Pests '=des: nlq/1 1,1.2 -Trichloroethane <0.001 Er _-in <0.0005. mg/ i 0.002 mg/1 L' J ane <0.00005 mg/1 0.0002 mcg/1 Mt h..)xychlor <0.0005 mg/1 0.04 mg/1 Tc _a phene <0.001 mg/ 1 U.003 mg/ 1 Colorac:o Regulated Volatile Organic Chemicals cVOCI: 1,1-Dichloroethylene <0.001 mg/1 0,007 mg/l 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane <0.001 mg/l 0.2 nlq/1 1,1.2 -Trichloroethane <0.001 mg/l 0.005 mg/1 1, 2 -Di ch I oroethane <0.001 mg/l 0.005 rng/1 1,2-Dichloropropane <0.001 mcg/1 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4--Trichlorobenzene <0.001 mg/l 0.07 mg/l Benzene <0.001 mg/l 0.005 mg/1 Carbon Tetrachloride <0.001 mg/1 0.005 mcT/1 cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene <0,002 mg/1 0.0% mg/l Dichloromethane <0.002 mg/l 0.005 mg/l Ethylbenzene <0.001 m4/1 0.7 rng/l Monochlorobenzene <0.002 mg/l 0.1 mg/1 o -Dichlorobenzene <0.002 mg/l 0.6 mq/1 para -Dichlorobenzene <0.002 mq/1 0.075 mg/l Styrene <0.005 mg/1 0.1 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene <0.001 mg/l 0.005 mg/1 Toluene <0.001 mg/1 1.0 mg/l trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene <0.002 mq/l 0.1 mg/l Trichloroethylene \/0.001 mg/1 0.005 mq/1 Vinyl chloride <0.002 mg/l 0,002 Ing/l Total Xylenes <0.005 mg/l 10.0 mg/l means "less than" (none detected) Lah.Dir: Brian S...Bauer page 2 of 4 Received f om: Customer No JOHN C. KEPBART & CO. GRAND JUNCTION LHORATORIIS 435 NORTH AVENUE • PHONE 242-76191 • GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 91501 ANALYMAL REPORT Resource Engineering Inc., David Srnic.h Glenwood Springs, CO 10/12/44 Date Received . .. _ .. _ 1626 Lbontory No. D&te Repotted Water Sample 10/25/94 Lab No: 1628 Sample name: New Well, McCabe (no limits set Ranch, Snowmass. CO by Colorado) Colorado Un -Regulated Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOC): Trihalomethanes: Chloroform <0.001 rag/1 Brcrnodichloromethane <0.001 mg/l Ch:�rodibromomethane <0.00 mg/1 B7 . rtof orm <0'00t mg/ 1 1,1 -*,-.chloroethane <0.001 mQ/l 1,1- •hloropropene <0.00.1 mg/l 1,1, .--Tetrachloroethane <0.002 mg/l 1,1,_.. -Tetrachloroethane <0.002 mg/l 1,2,--richlorobenzene <0.02 1mg/1 1,2,.-.'richloropropane <0.00.1 mg/1 1,2,x--rimethylbenzene <0.002 mg/l 1,3-Di-7hloropropane <0.001 mg/1 1,3-Ddzhloropropene <0.001 mg/1 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <0.002 mg/l 2,2-Dichloropropane <0.001 mg/1 Bromobenzane <0.002 mg/l Bromochloromethane <0.001 mg/1 Bromomethane <0.001 mg/1 Chloroethane <0.001 mg/l Chloromethane <0.001 Trig/ I Dibromomethane <0.002 ma/l Dichlorodifluoromethane <0.041 mg/1 Fluorotrichloromethane <0.001 mq/1 Hexachlorobutadiene <0.003 mg/1 Isopropylbenzene <0.002 mg/1 m -Dichlorobenzene <0.002 mg/l Naphthalene <0.005 mg/1 n-Butylbenzene <0.002 mg/l n-Propylbenzene <0.002 mg/l o-Chlorotoluene <0.003 mg/l p-Chlorotoluene <0.001 ma/1 p-Isopropyltoluene <0.002 mg/1 wec--Butylbenzene <0.003 mg/1 tert-Butylbenzene <0.003 mg/l page 3 of 4 Lab Dir: Brian S. Bauer JOHN C. I IIART & C.O.. GRANO JUNCTION LAHRA10RE -435 NORTH AVENUE ♦ PHONE (303) 242.7618 . • FAX 243-7235 • GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 81301 NOTES on sample # 1628 New'Well, McCabe Ranch, Snowmass CO Your water tests show levels exceeding drinking water limits for the following parameters: Iron: Can cause staining on porcelain and in laundry, Not known to be a health hazard. Dissolved Solids: Consisting primarily of Alkalinity, Calcium and Sulfate in this sample - an indicator of the salts actually dissolved in the water, that filtration will not alter. It is not alarmingly above recommended limit for drinking. iardness: Can cause mineral buildup and 'necessitate the use of large .r.,unts )f soap for cleaning. Cloudiness of the water: public waters must meet the r Feria 1 NTU. Filtration often corrects this, n_s wou ,d be considered a fairly good drinkinc7 water source for humans. t may be inconvenient in household ube, due to its hardness. page 4 of 4 . JOHN C. KEF RT & CO. GRAND JUNCTION LABDRATDRE 435 NORTH AVENUE • PHONE 242-7618 • GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 81501 ANALYTICAL REPORT Received from: Resource Engineering; John M. Currier, P.E. Glenwood Springs, CO Customet No 7/26/94 Date Received .ab number Sample ID 0741 water Laboratory No. Sample 8/23/94 Date Reported 0741 Limits for Drinking Suggested McCabe Ranch by Colo. Dept. Health Tract D Well �rsenic(As) 0.000 mg/l 0.05 mg/l arium(Ba) 0.22 mg/l 1.0 mg/l admium(Cd) 0.0000 mg/l 0.01 mg/l �hromium(Cr) 0.000 mg/l 0.05 mg/l ?luoride(F) 0.27 mg/l 4 mg/l ead(Pb) 0.000 mg/l 0.05 mg/l ercury(Hg) 0.00000 mg/ -1 0.002 mg/l itrate(N) 0.44 mg/1 10.0 mg/1 elenium(Se) 0.000 mg/l 0.01 mg/l ilver(Ag) 0.0000 mg/l 0.05 mg/l olor(Co/Pt unit) 0 no official H7.40 Iotassium(K) no officialmonductivity@25 deg. C 799 uhos/cm no official odium(Na) 3.9 mg/l 20 mg/l alcium(Ca) 133 mgrl no official agnesium(Mg) 23 mg/1, 125 mq/1 0.9 mq/l no official „-)loride(C1) 4 mg/l 250 mg/l Sulfate(SO4) 165 mg/l 250 mg/l ?henol. Alkalinity(C:aCO3) 0 mg/l no official Total Alkalinity(CaCO3) 244 mg/l no official 34i.carbonate(HCO3) 295 mg/l no official Carbonate(CO3) 0 mg/l no official Dissolved Solids 626 mg/l 500 mg/l Hardness (CaCO3) 426 mg/l 200 mg/l Turbidity (NTU) 1.25 1 Boron(B) 0.035 mg/l no official 0.001 mg/1 1.0 mg/l Iopper(Cu) ron(Fe) 0.01 mg/l 0.3 mg/l Kanganese(Mn) 0.016 rag/l 0.05 mg/l Molybdenum(Mo) 0.000 mg/l no official Ammonia(N) 0.08 mg/1 no official Phosphate(P) 0.00 mg/l no official Zinc(Zn) 0.006 mg/l 5.0 mg/l limit limit limit limit limit limit limit limit limit limit limit limit limit Lab Dir.: Brian S. Bauer For Ofte use only _ GWS -42 OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGNEEA 818 Centennial Bldg., 13s<. Denver. Coioredo W203 C RECEIVEC P03) 866.3581 jv� PRIOR TO COMPLETING FORM, SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE SIDE 1. APPLICATION FOR WELL LOCATION AMENDMENT WATE""E°UF�CI S STATE E4=E WELL PERMIT NUMBER 044789-F .......................................................:.............................. �1O 2 WELL OWNER McCabe Ranch c/o Edward B. Olszews i NAMES) MailingAddress .........�rawer...790.................................................................................. City, St Zip ................... Gl.enwo.o.d...S.prings,....CD....... 81602............................................ Phone( 970 945-6546 ............ )........................................................................... 3. ACTUAL WELL LOCATION: COUNTY.....pi.t;kG.ixk ............................... OWNER'S WELL DESIGNATION ....McCabe Ranch Well D Snowmass, ��8 i 654 ............P.p.....Box....Z.g....................................................................................................................................... ..... ........... ............... (Addn3s at well lo-..:ation) (City) (State) (GP) NW 1/4otthe ..........NW..1/4, Sec........8....... Twp.....9........... ..... South ...... . Range ........86..-...... ..:...West.... ........6th P.M. ........... ........ ......... (norm or south) (East or west) Distances from Section Lines 5,105 South 4,952 East Ft. from Section Line, Ft from ..............-..._. Section Line. ........................ .............................. or South (East or west) (►corm ) Subdivision Lot Block FilingUnit .................................................................................................. . .......................... A. The location of the existing well needs to be amended for the following reason(s): (Attach appropriate documentation as necessary) Well drilled at a different site. .................................................................................................................................................................................................._:.....-.....................-.-..................................-....-....... .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................._..................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 5. 1 (we), the above listed owner(s) own the well described herein. 1 (we) have read the statements made herein, know the contents thereof, and state that they are true to my (our) knowledge. [Pursuant to Section 24-4104 (13)(a) C.R.S., the making of false statements herein constitutes perjury in the second degree and is punishable as a class 1 misdemeanor.] Name\TIUe (Please type or print) Sign re Edward B. Olszewski, Date Attorney for Applicant i ` 50n O rFiCE US-�',NLY / - =: �;' D -O? •; .G.... =C'!G, - L-0.!,7GN PURSUANT _. 1 TCS POLiC't `ylc +iiG i `��i f! �< -cam JLY 7, 1593 �� f IRRu ............... J-.. •' R^ • u,. h RLS` rer^r� ..:�,....... D J•:�i,C� I?ato to Engineer r _ Court Case No. .................................... Div. J........ Co..��..... W0..........cd. Basin ............... MD ............... ASPEN/PITK 'ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTME,:_ I" ISDS DESIGN REQUIREMENTS -DEPARTMENT USE ONLY Name SAMPLE DRAFT House Size 6,000 (75 gpd, 100 gpd, or 130 gpd) #of Bedrooms, Similar Rooms accessible to baths in Main Residence # of Bedrooms, similar rooms w/ access to bath in ATTACHED caretaker # of Bedrooms & Similar Rooms w/ access to baths in DETTACHED caretaker Average Daily Waste Flow 900 # bedrooms X 2 people/br X 75 State Review Required? no Perc Rate 36 (T) 3 equals # of Perc Holes Required Design Flo w (Q) = # bedrooms X 2 people/bedroom X gpd X 1.75 Q= 2730 Minimum tank capacity 3413 gallons Absorption Area (A== Q/5 X SQRT) A = 3276 sq. ft. of absorption area required 211 infiltrator units without reduction A maximum 30% reduction is allowed for use of deep gravel or gravelless chambered system. 2293 sq.ft. with reduction 148 infiltrator units with reduction AREA NEEDED FOR STANDARD ABSORPTION TRENCHES 1092 3276 Total sq ft /3 =lineal ft of trench needed 130 6 19 1092 lineal ft/assumed trench length of 60ft = # of 60ft trenches needed 18 # trenches minus 1 = rows of 6ft wide undisturbed soil between trenches 57 19 times 3 = total width of of 60" long field needed for just the trenches 108 18 times 6' = total width of 60' long field needed just for undisturbed soil 165 width of trench +width of undisturbed soil = total width needed 165 by 60 ft is the area needed for a standard absorption field in a trench configuration with no reductions taken and ASSUMING AN AVERAGE PERCOLATION RATE OF 36 SLOWER PERCOLATING SOILS WOULD REQUIRE MORE AREA. SETBACK FROM WELL SETBACK FROM POND, STREAM OR IRRIGATION DITCH # of feet = 238.4 # of feet = 188.4 SETBACK FROM DRY GULCH # of feet = 163.4 Remember: 8 feet of additional distance for each 100 gallons/day of design flow over 1,000 gallons/day should be added unless an RPE can verify that it is not necessary to prevent contamination. 1/20/99 Printed on Recycled Paper isoaizso� - �asoro'[ wrusas : "VaNSMAMCNALMOM ONINNv713 WnMG WWRYM MMM d d *L, J -Vg918 03 `SSVWMONS 'NI 21f1d5 35021 LOLL ��N�C115��1 J��901 tawusots6mxoaori *9919 OO `SSVV MONS g curusou = »rmsaannoncso►ca Nl injG 35021 LOLL e ? LL N A:)N3(JIG'Ml /0901 M -I utr(zca(s ttuzoaod t�918 OO `SGVMAONS °C twnrcas • .�raas�vao(►(.00ecc $ N1 NnjG AGoN LOLL s k `j N �mrivusteatau>®a�r>�ut ; z � cl a 3:)N3dIGMl Jk39O-L a g J J ml agis OOlwm csratzsoLs 6EU XO6O'J stasLL6'OL6 : vwcm SX Ml OALLODM OMNKrM V A4M929 ,EDWAL MMM d O M l -V99t8 0O `SSVNWNS 'NI NnjG 3gmi zoa ��N�CIIS��I J��901 i i O' i 7791 / / / / / / 7789 / O O m Ln O J+ a� LT 3 J m co Q T CD O F- a.T a 0 0 III / /D 100'-0" T O PLYLVD SITE = 7793' / / / r CLEANOUT 779 / 778` _ \CLEA U T/ // \\ 779/0 CLEANOUT 7787 — —' 91,5 91 5 / / / WYE __-- / MUD RM 98,_0„ SITE � 7791,5 // // i x- 7791 / / / / / / STONE �4 K -WAY / / P�CXET FENCE / / HITCHING POST 89.75 / / 88,85 / /1= 1,500 CAL SIIXGCE COMPARTMENT .-CONCRETE SEP TIC TANK / / 11 PORT CONCRETE / / DISTRIBUTION BOX / / / W/EQUALIZERS, r � / / / I / / I / GARAGE 9 '- 3 4'�/ /'/ _ - - - - - SITE = 77X,3,_ 7 3 7786 /- I 7789 = 1B.0 7788 1— 00 GALLO I ' 7 S LE COMPA MEN T CON CRETE SEPTIC TAN / / o / / / / / 6 INSPECTION PORTS @ 4 CORNERS / / / / / 7785 / / / / / / 85 -' / / / / / / / gE0 / / / / / / / / / Z d J / / / / / / _ SGL; 1 /N =10 rT ORT CC 9 4 CORNERS___ WTCX]NG POST •_ / GRS )]BS / � SINP,LE CONPAR>kENi ONCRETE SEPRC TANK � 5 / / / 11 PORT CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION Box / W/EOUALIZERS/ 9-)� P 0Eo �• ^` I / / _ / i / i / / ITCH 0 N D L I N CR- / �UMNEE MWE a G6 -LINED / AS SHOWN ' / )JGS MURE 10" / / /D 100'-0" T O PLYLVD SITE = 7793' / / / r CLEANOUT 779 / 778` _ \CLEA U T/ // \\ 779/0 CLEANOUT 7787 — —' 91,5 91 5 / / / WYE __-- / MUD RM 98,_0„ SITE � 7791,5 // // i x- 7791 / / / / / / STONE �4 K -WAY / / P�CXET FENCE / / HITCHING POST 89.75 / / 88,85 / /1= 1,500 CAL SIIXGCE COMPARTMENT .-CONCRETE SEP TIC TANK / / 11 PORT CONCRETE / / DISTRIBUTION BOX / / / W/EQUALIZERS, r � / / / I / / I / GARAGE 9 '- 3 4'�/ /'/ _ - - - - - SITE = 77X,3,_ 7 3 7786 /- I 7789 = 1B.0 7788 1— 00 GALLO I ' 7 S LE COMPA MEN T CON CRETE SEPTIC TAN / / o / / / / / 6 INSPECTION PORTS @ 4 CORNERS / / / / / 7785 / / / / / / 85 -' / / / / / / / gE0 / / / / / / / / / Z d J / / / / / / _ SGL; 1 /N =10 rT ORT CC 9 4 CORNERS___ WTCX]NG POST •_ / GRS )]BS / � SINP,LE CONPAR>kENi ONCRETE SEPRC TANK � 5 / / / / 11 PORT CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION Box / W/EOUALIZERS/ 9-)� P 0Eo �• ^` I / / _ / / / / / / ITCH 0 N D L I N CR- / �UMNEE MWE a G6 -LINED / AS SHOWN ' / )JGS MURE 10" / / / NEO IRRIGATIONDITCH '1ROUGN THIS F EA MPRDX 1981F / — / / / / / / / / / /D 100'-0" T O PLYLVD SITE = 7793' / / / r CLEANOUT 779 / 778` _ \CLEA U T/ // \\ 779/0 CLEANOUT 7787 — —' 91,5 91 5 / / / WYE __-- / MUD RM 98,_0„ SITE � 7791,5 // // i x- 7791 / / / / / / STONE �4 K -WAY / / P�CXET FENCE / / HITCHING POST 89.75 / / 88,85 / /1= 1,500 CAL SIIXGCE COMPARTMENT .-CONCRETE SEP TIC TANK / / 11 PORT CONCRETE / / DISTRIBUTION BOX / / / W/EQUALIZERS, r � / / / I / / I / GARAGE 9 '- 3 4'�/ /'/ _ - - - - - SITE = 77X,3,_ 7 3 7786 /- I 7789 = 1B.0 7788 1— 00 GALLO I ' 7 S LE COMPA MEN T CON CRETE SEPTIC TAN / / o / / / / / 6 INSPECTION PORTS @ 4 CORNERS / / / / / 7785 / / / / / / 85 -' / / / / / / / gE0 / / / / / / / / / Z d J / / / / / / _ SGL; 1 /N =10 rT ORT CC 9 4 CORNERS___ WTCX]NG POST •_ / GRS )]BS / � SINP,LE CONPAR>kENi ONCRETE SEPRC TANK � 5 / / 11 PORT CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION Box / W/EOUALIZERS/ 9-)� P 0Eo �• ^` I / _ / / / / / ITCH 0 N D L I N CR- / �UMNEE MWE a G6 -LINED / AS SHOWN ' / )JGS MURE 10" / / / NEO IRRIGATIONDITCH '1ROUGN THIS F EA MPRDX 1981F — / / / / / /D 100'-0" T O PLYLVD SITE = 7793' / / / r CLEANOUT 779 / 778` _ \CLEA U T/ // \\ 779/0 CLEANOUT 7787 — —' 91,5 91 5 / / / WYE __-- / MUD RM 98,_0„ SITE � 7791,5 // // i x- 7791 / / / / / / STONE �4 K -WAY / / P�CXET FENCE / / HITCHING POST 89.75 / / 88,85 / /1= 1,500 CAL SIIXGCE COMPARTMENT .-CONCRETE SEP TIC TANK / / 11 PORT CONCRETE / / DISTRIBUTION BOX / / / W/EQUALIZERS, r � / / / I / / I / GARAGE 9 '- 3 4'�/ /'/ _ - - - - - SITE = 77X,3,_ 7 3 7786 /- I 7789 = 1B.0 7788 1— 00 GALLO I ' 7 S LE COMPA MEN T CON CRETE SEPTIC TAN / / o / / / / / 6 INSPECTION PORTS @ 4 CORNERS / / / / / 7785 / / / / / / 85 -' / / / / / / / gE0 / / / / / / / / / Z d J / / / / / / _ SGL; 1 /N =10 rT P CKET FENCE ORT CC 9 4 CORNERS___ WTCX]NG POST •_ / GRS )]BS / � SINP,LE CONPAR>kENi ONCRETE SEPRC TANK � 5 / / 11 PORT CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION Box / W/EOUALIZERS/ 9-)� P 0Eo �• ^` I / _ / / / / / ITCH 0 N D L I N CR- / �UMNEE MWE a G6 -LINED / AS SHOWN ' / )JGS MURE 10" / P CKET FENCE ORT CC 9 4 CORNERS___ WTCX]NG POST •_ / GRS )]BS � SINP,LE CONPAR>kENi ONCRETE SEPRC TANK � 5 11 PORT CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION Box / W/EOUALIZERS/ 9-)� P 0Eo �• ^` I _ / ITCH 0 N D L I N CR- �UMNEE MWE a G6 -LINED / AS SHOWN ' / )JGS MURE 10" / / / NEO IRRIGATIONDITCH '1ROUGN THIS F EA MPRDX 1981F i IRRIGATION DITCH t/ ` BARN SITE 7854 SO,fT.'5GAIX IN �1 0Fl- \ 1 � 1 �po ,��°�. .. cos�,'ir COPYRIGHT ®� om a\ v-4 v-4� m® DRAWN BY o a u � U � � o U U DATE 0/09000 REVISIONS 4/h�/99 RNISCDTNJK 5110 SCALE /4-'5 51fi0WV DRAWING 1,54454 /1� SHEET JL � ITHIS DRAWING SHOWS ALL EXISTING WELLS WITHIN SETBACK WELL DISTANCES (INCLUDING ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES), CONTOUR INTERVAL / ALL PROPOSED AND EXISTING BUILDINGS, PROPERTY LINES, DITCHES, SLOPES OF GREATER THAN 15% 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, AND ALL SUCH FEATURES ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES WITHIN SETBACKS. <o INLET -5GAL-E; l IN ' l00 fi / \ 91'5 / GARAGE 97'- 3/4;/ /I SITE = 77)y,3 7791 1 X791/ / / CLEANOUT\\O�QP�� 1 / / STONE YA� WAY / 5 \\� I 1 ' 111 / P}CKET FENCE O 1' 1 , HITCHING POST 1 / 88.25 0 ORS G �b v i 77`V \778 / I I BUILDING / \ / ENVELOPE // \ y / 43560 SU,FT / I \ 7;8v __ \� / a/ \ i GRAVEL DRIVE 7780 / 7758 / � / I 7785 / INSTALL INSPECTION PORTS @ 4 CORNERS JJ / / i / i / / / / / / \ i / Z FUTURE DRIVE / / TU BARN/ \ q��IC' i NOTE: WATERLINE CROSSINGS REQUIRE THAT THE DRINKING WATER OR WASTEWATER PIPE BE ENCASED FOR AT LEAST TEN (10) FEET \ OF EACH SIDE OF THE CROSSING OR PLACE WHERE COMPONENTS \ ARE CLOSER THAN SETBACKS. PIPE OF SCHEDULE 40 RATING OR BETTER MUST BE USED, OF SUFFICIENT DIAMETER TO EASILY \ SLIDE OVER AND COMPLETELY ENCASE THE LINE. RIGID END CAPS OF AT LEAST SCHEDULE 40 RATING MUST BE GLUED OR SECURED IN A WATER -TIGHT FASHION TO THE ENDS OF THE ENCASEEMENT PIPE, THERE MUST BE A HOLE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PIPE IN THE LOWERMOST SECTION OF THE RILED CAP SO THAT THE CONVEYANCE PIPE RESTS ON THE BOTTOM OF THE ENCASEMENT C� PIPE. THE AREA IN WHICH THE PIPE PASSES THROUGH THE ENDCAPS MUST BE SEALED WITH AN APPROVED UNDERGROUND SEALANT COMPATIBLE WITH THE PIPING USED. INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH NATURAL BACKFILL IIIIIIIIIII� — INFILTRATOR UNIT — 11'11111\Illi;,, NATURAL GROUND j �00� 00 °�o A DIA. 20" DIAD �C -, o , , Q ��, c�J ooh \ _ 0� V' INFILTRATORS TO BE SET ON GRAVELS SECTION "A" TYPICAL INFILTRATION BED PLAN ,Q, PLASTIC TEE INSTALLED TO _ ��• BE VISIBLE FROM MANHOLE ?� 6 IN. MAX. BACKFILL OVER oC>� / OPENING COVER OF MANHOLE. i BUI = K \v�. I � r I / � I W / ( �♦ Bw SITE \� DITCH SETBACK ZONE I �DITCH TO BE '_INED W/PIPE \ I ' ----- WHERE IT IS INSI E HATCHED AREA .TELEPHONE IRRIGATION DITCH \ I I 30' WIDE EASEMENTLITY I TRACT C i 31.51 acres 1,372,607. sq. ft. j I J 11454' l S28°49`21°E W 1 1 o w t' zCL t t 1 1 �1 1' t � ITHIS DRAWING SHOWS ALL EXISTING WELLS WITHIN SETBACK WELL DISTANCES (INCLUDING ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES), CONTOUR INTERVAL / ALL PROPOSED AND EXISTING BUILDINGS, PROPERTY LINES, DITCHES, SLOPES OF GREATER THAN 15% 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, AND ALL SUCH FEATURES ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES WITHIN SETBACKS. <o INLET -5GAL-E; l IN ' l00 fi / \ 91'5 / GARAGE 97'- 3/4;/ /I SITE = 77)y,3 7791 1 X791/ / / CLEANOUT\\O�QP�� 1 / / STONE YA� WAY / 5 \\� I 1 ' 111 / P}CKET FENCE O 1' 1 , HITCHING POST 1 / 88.25 0 ORS G �b v i 77`V \778 / I I BUILDING / \ / ENVELOPE // \ y / 43560 SU,FT / I \ 7;8v __ \� / a/ \ i GRAVEL DRIVE 7780 / 7758 / � / I 7785 / INSTALL INSPECTION PORTS @ 4 CORNERS JJ / / i / i / / / / / / \ i / Z FUTURE DRIVE / / TU BARN/ \ q��IC' i NOTE: WATERLINE CROSSINGS REQUIRE THAT THE DRINKING WATER OR WASTEWATER PIPE BE ENCASED FOR AT LEAST TEN (10) FEET \ OF EACH SIDE OF THE CROSSING OR PLACE WHERE COMPONENTS \ ARE CLOSER THAN SETBACKS. PIPE OF SCHEDULE 40 RATING OR BETTER MUST BE USED, OF SUFFICIENT DIAMETER TO EASILY \ SLIDE OVER AND COMPLETELY ENCASE THE LINE. RIGID END CAPS OF AT LEAST SCHEDULE 40 RATING MUST BE GLUED OR SECURED IN A WATER -TIGHT FASHION TO THE ENDS OF THE ENCASEEMENT PIPE, THERE MUST BE A HOLE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PIPE IN THE LOWERMOST SECTION OF THE RILED CAP SO THAT THE CONVEYANCE PIPE RESTS ON THE BOTTOM OF THE ENCASEMENT C� PIPE. THE AREA IN WHICH THE PIPE PASSES THROUGH THE ENDCAPS MUST BE SEALED WITH AN APPROVED UNDERGROUND SEALANT COMPATIBLE WITH THE PIPING USED. INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH NATURAL BACKFILL IIIIIIIIIII� — INFILTRATOR UNIT — 11'11111\Illi;,, NATURAL GROUND j �00� 00 °�o A DIA. 20" DIAD �C -, o , , Q ��, c�J ooh \ _ 0� V' INFILTRATORS TO BE SET ON GRAVELS SECTION "A" TYPICAL INFILTRATION BED 17". SECTION NOTIFY ENGINEER OF HIGH WATER TABLE 0 LINE CONNECTIONSA O TANK TANK SEPTIC TANK DETAIL NOT TO SCALE UPPER EXTENSION OF INLET AND EXIT "TEE'S" SHALL BE WITHIN 1 IN. OF TOP OF TANK TYPICAL NOT LESS THAN 9 INCHES OR MORE THAN 17', INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH / / / PLAN ,Q, PLASTIC TEE INSTALLED TO J BE VISIBLE FROM MANHOLE ?� 6 IN. MAX. BACKFILL OVER oC>� / OPENING COVER OF MANHOLE. 17". SECTION NOTIFY ENGINEER OF HIGH WATER TABLE 0 LINE CONNECTIONSA O TANK TANK SEPTIC TANK DETAIL NOT TO SCALE UPPER EXTENSION OF INLET AND EXIT "TEE'S" SHALL BE WITHIN 1 IN. OF TOP OF TANK TYPICAL NOT LESS THAN 9 INCHES OR MORE THAN 17', INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH / / / LINED IRRIGATION DITCH THROUGH THIS AREA APPROX, 198 LF INFILTRATOR UNIT 'o' 0 4` 99 0 SECTION "B" TYPICAL INFILTRATION BED NTS NTS 34" INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH NATURAL BACKFILL o Z�i� c- zo o,c„ .o> 0 0 0 0�0 ,o a�o0.`0 o o O� rJ'�` oC'o0 00 O' o �'oCo,�O -C� p (� c o,., o°0 0 J c O ���� o`o �:-��o C\o. o �, L o- o �'e,o 00 moo° �oy o'Oo �,C'o�o ar�\00� �OCV�cC.�p° \VO:oaO��cC�O v0Ao�-�o° Co'_0o°o INFILTRATORS TO BE SET ON GRAVELS \' A. CALCULATIONS SCAL.f, 1 /N - 20 FT 1. PERCOLATION RATE = 36 MPI AVG. (H.P. GEOTECH. JOB NO. 198 784) 2. DESIGN FLOW = 6 BEDROOMS X 2 X 130 X 1.75 = 2,730 GALLONS PER DAY 3. REQUIRED SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY = 2,739 X 1.25 = 3,412 GALLONS USE 2- 2,000 GAL., TWO COMPARTMENT, CONCRETE SEPTIC TANKS 4. ABSORPTION BED AREA REQUIRED = A = ( 2 730 / 5 ) * 36-112 = 3,276 SF DEDUCT 30% FOR INFILTRATOR BED = 2,293 SQ. FT. 5. INFILTRATOR BED INSTALLATION: 2,293 SQ. FT./ 15.5 SQ.FT, PER UNIT = 148 UNITS MIN, USE 10 UNIT X 15 UNIT INFILTRATOR ARRAY OF H-10 UNITS 6. WELL SETBACK DISTANCE 100 + 8 * ((2730 - 1000)/100) _ -38 FT 7. DITCH AND POND SETBACK DISTANCES 50 + 8 * ((2730 - 1000)/100) = 1Y5 FT 8. WATER LINE SETBACK DISTANCE 10 FT. TO TANK, 25 FT. TO FIELD 8. GENERAL NOTES 1. THE INFILTRATOR BED SHALL BE LEVE_ (+/- 0.1 INCHES), ON NATURAL GRAVELS (NOT IN FILL) -ND BACK FILLED WITH NATURAL SOILS PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY Fr 3M THE BED. 2. THE SEPTIC TANKS SHALL BE LOCATED AT LEAST FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE RESIDENCE 3. THE PIPE FROM THE RESIDENCE TO THE TANK MUST BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS: THE PIPE MUST BE INSTALLED STRAIGHT IN ALIGNMENT AND GRADE. IF A CHANGE IN ALIGNMENT OR GRADE IS NECESSARY, A CLEANOUT WILL BE REQUIRED AT THE CHANGE. THE MINIMUM GRADE OF THE PIPE MUST BE 1/4" PER FOOT. THE PIPE MUST BE A MINIMUM OF ASTM 3034 PVC PIPE. IF THE LINE CROSSES A VEHICULAR ACCESS, THE PIPE SPECIFICATION SHALL BE -STY 3034 PVC OR BETTER. A MINIMUM OF 1 CLEANOUT SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE LOCATION WHERE THE PIPE LEAVES THE RESIDEN THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4" IN DIAMETER. 4. THE PIPE FROM THE SEPTIC TANK TO HE INFILTRATOR BED SYSTEM MUST BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS: THE MINIMUM SLOPE OF THE LINE MUST BE 1/4" PER FOOT. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF ASTV 3034 PVC PIPE. IF THE LINE CROSSES A VEHICULAR ACCESS, THE PIPE SPECIFICATION SHALL BE CHANGED TO ASTM 3034 PVC OR BETTER. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4" jNI DIAMETER. 5. USE RISERS TO BRING THE SEPTIC TANK ACCESS WITHIN 6" OF FINAL GRADE. 6. ALL MATERIALS, INSTALLATION PRACTIC=S AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS SHALL COMPLY WITH PITKIN COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS. 7. INFILTRATOR COMPONENTS TO BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS. 8. PLACE DISTRIBUTION BOX AND DISTRIBUTION PIPING ON 3/4" SCREENED ROCK. SEAL ALL PIPES ENTERING DISTRIBUTION BOX WITH WATERPROOF MATERIAL 9. INSTALL INSPECTION PORTS AT ALL 4 CORNERS OF INFILTRATOR BED t C,O�'v`�� �i� -off • G� ..rr . COPYRIGHT i o � 4 Cj� DRAWN BY O �1 C Q o DATE 4//9/99 REVISIONS 4/19X7 K'�//5%l.J Ti}NK 5/Z� SCALE % DRAppW�ING �1 �I V Of 7_All� f5 and SHEET (Cl / / i i LINED IRRIGATION DITCH THROUGH THIS AREA APPROX, 198 LF INFILTRATOR UNIT 'o' 0 4` 99 0 SECTION "B" TYPICAL INFILTRATION BED NTS NTS 34" INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH NATURAL BACKFILL o Z�i� c- zo o,c„ .o> 0 0 0 0�0 ,o a�o0.`0 o o O� rJ'�` oC'o0 00 O' o �'oCo,�O -C� p (� c o,., o°0 0 J c O ���� o`o �:-��o C\o. o �, L o- o �'e,o 00 moo° �oy o'Oo �,C'o�o ar�\00� �OCV�cC.�p° \VO:oaO��cC�O v0Ao�-�o° Co'_0o°o INFILTRATORS TO BE SET ON GRAVELS \' A. CALCULATIONS SCAL.f, 1 /N - 20 FT 1. PERCOLATION RATE = 36 MPI AVG. (H.P. GEOTECH. JOB NO. 198 784) 2. DESIGN FLOW = 6 BEDROOMS X 2 X 130 X 1.75 = 2,730 GALLONS PER DAY 3. REQUIRED SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY = 2,739 X 1.25 = 3,412 GALLONS USE 2- 2,000 GAL., TWO COMPARTMENT, CONCRETE SEPTIC TANKS 4. ABSORPTION BED AREA REQUIRED = A = ( 2 730 / 5 ) * 36-112 = 3,276 SF DEDUCT 30% FOR INFILTRATOR BED = 2,293 SQ. FT. 5. INFILTRATOR BED INSTALLATION: 2,293 SQ. FT./ 15.5 SQ.FT, PER UNIT = 148 UNITS MIN, USE 10 UNIT X 15 UNIT INFILTRATOR ARRAY OF H-10 UNITS 6. WELL SETBACK DISTANCE 100 + 8 * ((2730 - 1000)/100) _ -38 FT 7. DITCH AND POND SETBACK DISTANCES 50 + 8 * ((2730 - 1000)/100) = 1Y5 FT 8. WATER LINE SETBACK DISTANCE 10 FT. TO TANK, 25 FT. TO FIELD 8. GENERAL NOTES 1. THE INFILTRATOR BED SHALL BE LEVE_ (+/- 0.1 INCHES), ON NATURAL GRAVELS (NOT IN FILL) -ND BACK FILLED WITH NATURAL SOILS PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY Fr 3M THE BED. 2. THE SEPTIC TANKS SHALL BE LOCATED AT LEAST FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE RESIDENCE 3. THE PIPE FROM THE RESIDENCE TO THE TANK MUST BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS: THE PIPE MUST BE INSTALLED STRAIGHT IN ALIGNMENT AND GRADE. IF A CHANGE IN ALIGNMENT OR GRADE IS NECESSARY, A CLEANOUT WILL BE REQUIRED AT THE CHANGE. THE MINIMUM GRADE OF THE PIPE MUST BE 1/4" PER FOOT. THE PIPE MUST BE A MINIMUM OF ASTM 3034 PVC PIPE. IF THE LINE CROSSES A VEHICULAR ACCESS, THE PIPE SPECIFICATION SHALL BE -STY 3034 PVC OR BETTER. A MINIMUM OF 1 CLEANOUT SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE LOCATION WHERE THE PIPE LEAVES THE RESIDEN THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4" IN DIAMETER. 4. THE PIPE FROM THE SEPTIC TANK TO HE INFILTRATOR BED SYSTEM MUST BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS: THE MINIMUM SLOPE OF THE LINE MUST BE 1/4" PER FOOT. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF ASTV 3034 PVC PIPE. IF THE LINE CROSSES A VEHICULAR ACCESS, THE PIPE SPECIFICATION SHALL BE CHANGED TO ASTM 3034 PVC OR BETTER. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4" jNI DIAMETER. 5. USE RISERS TO BRING THE SEPTIC TANK ACCESS WITHIN 6" OF FINAL GRADE. 6. ALL MATERIALS, INSTALLATION PRACTIC=S AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS SHALL COMPLY WITH PITKIN COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS. 7. INFILTRATOR COMPONENTS TO BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS. 8. PLACE DISTRIBUTION BOX AND DISTRIBUTION PIPING ON 3/4" SCREENED ROCK. SEAL ALL PIPES ENTERING DISTRIBUTION BOX WITH WATERPROOF MATERIAL 9. INSTALL INSPECTION PORTS AT ALL 4 CORNERS OF INFILTRATOR BED t C,O�'v`�� �i� -off • G� ..rr . COPYRIGHT i o � 4 Cj� DRAWN BY O �1 C Q o DATE 4//9/99 REVISIONS 4/19X7 K'�//5%l.J Ti}NK 5/Z� SCALE % DRAppW�ING �1 �I V Of 7_All� f5 and SHEET (Cl m m a� CU 66 0 0 cv L CD - _:r Q 0 crn Cu 0 F- **00 BUI 'A I ' I ♦ � IIS II VI j V II � � I I B*I �TE V % DITCH SETBACK ZONE DITCH TO BE LINED PIPE WHERE WHERE IT IS INSIDE HATCHED ARE .TELEPHONE \ I IRRIGATION DITCH 1 I 30' WIDE I ROAD & UTILITY EASEMENT ' I I TRACT C 1 I 31,51 acres 1,372,607, sq, ft. I ti A r I 1 11454' S28°49'21'E J w w LLLI 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I � ITHIS DRAWING SHOWS ALL EXISTING WELLS WITHIN SETBACK WELL DISTANCES (INCLUDING ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES), CONTOUR INTERVAL / ALL PROPOSED AND EXISTING BUILDINGS, PROPERTY LINES, DITCHES, SLOPES / OF GREATER THAN 15%, 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, AND ALL SUCH FEATURES ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES WITHIN SETBACKS. �o NOTIFY ENGINEER OF HIGH WATER TABLE BEFORE FINAL INSTALLATION OF TANK OR LINE CONNECTIONS TO TANK. SEPTIC TANK DETAIL NOT TO SCALE VK INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH SG7t4_jff; 1 /N -100 r7- NATURAL T SECTION "B" I / / 91.5 / GARAGI SITE _ I / 7791 / IIi 7791Z CLEANOUT \ STONE YALK-WAY / P�CKET FENCE HITCHING POST 8,25 / / ✓ BUILDING / ENVELOPE 43560 SQ.FT, / \ 7788/ --------------- — \ 7787 \ NATURAL GROUND / GRAVEL DRIVE \ 778/ / FUTURE DRI)/E TO BARN/ \Fq / 7786 ��,--------- 7788 / /j � -7- P / / / / 7785 INSTALL INSPECTION PORTS @ 4 CORNERS 0) / / / / / / i i N 0 TE: WATERLINE CROSSINGS REQUIRE THAT THE DRINKING WATER OR WASTEWATER PIPE BE ENCASED FOR AT LEAST TEN (10) FEET OF EACH SIDE OF THE CROSSING OR PLACE WHERE COMPONENTS ARE CLOSER THAN SETBACKS. PIPE OF SCHEDULE 40 RATING OR BETTER MUST BE USED, OF SUFFICIENT DIAMETER TO EASILY SLIDE OVER AND COMPLETELY ENCASE THE LINE. RIGID END CAPS OF AT LEAST SCHEDULE 40 RATING MUST BE GLUED OR SECURED IN A WATER -TIGHT FASHION TO THE ENDS OF THE ENCASEEMENT PIPE. THERE MUST BE A HOLE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PIPE IN THE LOWERMOST SECTION OF THE RIGED CAP SO THAT THE CONVEYANCE PIPE RESTS ON THE BOTTOM OF THE ENCASEMENT PIPE. THE AREA IN WHICH THE PIPE PASSES THROUGH THE ENDCAPS MUST BE SEALED WITH AN APPROVED UNDERGROUND SEALANT COMPATIBLE WITH THE PIPING USED. INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH NATURAL BACKFILL INFILTRATOR UNIT o°� O�o ° (Do, O°oOo°\000 JoC0. oo�oaOaOo0 OoOO Vo 000 CIO - 00 ao°°O 00 - \ / LINED IRRIGATION DITCH THROUGH THIS AREA APPROX. 198 LF INFILTRATORS TO BE SET ON GRAVELS SECTION "A" TYPICAL INFILTRATION BED INFILTRATOR UNIT NTS NIATIIDAI DA('VCII 1 34" INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH TYPICAL INFILTRATION BED N TS INFILTRATORS TO BE SET ON GRAVELS 5GALE; 1 /N - 20 fT m FA A. CALCULATIONS 1. PERCOLATION RATE = 36 MPI AVG. (H. P. GEOTECH. JOB NO. 198 784) 2. DESIGN FLOW = 6 BEDROOMS X 2 X 130 X 1.75 = 2,730 GALLONS PER DAY 3. REQUIRED SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY = 2,730 X 1.25 = 3,412 GALLONS USE 2- 2,000 GAL., TWO COMPARTMENT, CONCRETE SEPTIC TANKS 4. ABSORPTION BED AREA REQUIRED = A = ( 2730 / 5 ) * 361/2 = 3,276 SF DEDUCT 30% FOR INFILTRATOR BED = 2,293 SQ. FT. 5. INFILTRATOR BED INSTALLATION: 2,293 SQ. FT./ 15.5 SQ.FT. PER UNIT = 148 UNITS MIN. USE 10 UNIT X 15 UNIT INFILTRATOR ARRAY OF H-10 UNITS 6. WELL SETBACK DISTANCE 100 + 8 * ((2730 - 1000)/100) = 238 FT 7. DITCH AND POND SETBACK DISTANCES 50 + 8 * ((2730 - 1000)/100) = 188 FT 8. WATER LINE SETBACK DISTANCE 10 FT. TO TANK, 25 FT, TO FIELD B. GENERAL NOTES 1. THE INFILTRATOR BED SHALL BE LEVEL (+/- 0.1 INCHES), ON NATURAL GRAVELS (NOT IN FILL) A^JD BACK FILLED WITH NATURAL SOILS PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM THE BED. 2. THE SEPTIC TANKS SHALL BE LOCATED AT LEAST FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE RESIDENCE 3. THE PIPE FROM THE RESIDENCE TO THE TANK MUST BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS: THE PIPE MUST BE INSTALLED STRAIGHT IN ALIGNMENT AND GRADE. IF A CHANGE IN ALIGNMENT OR GRADE IS NECESSARY, A CLEANOUT WILL BE REQUIRED AT THE CHANGE. THE MINIMUM GRADE OF THE PIPE MUST BE 1/4" PER FOOT. THE PIPE MUST BE A MINIMUM OF ASTM 3034 PVC PIPE. IF THE LINE CROSSES A VEHICULAR ACCESS, THE PIPE SPECIFICATION SHALL BE ASTM 3034 PVC OR BETTER. A MINIMUM OF 1 CLEANOUT SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE LOCATION WHERE THE PIPE LEAVES THE RESIDENCE. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4" IN DIAMETER. 4. THE PIPE FROM THE SEPTIC TANK TO THE INFILTRATOR BED SYSTEM MUST BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS: THE MINIMUM SLOPE OF THE LINE MUST BE 1/4" PER FOOT. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF ASTM 3034 PVC PIPE. IF THE LINE CROSSES A VEHICULAR ACCESS, THE PIPE SPECIFICATION SHALL BE CHANGED TO ASTM 3034 PVC OR BETTER. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4" IN DIAMETER. 5. USE RISERS TO BRING THE SEPTIC TANK ACCESS WITHIN 6" OF FINAL GRADE. 6. ALL MATERIALS, INSTALLATION PRACTICES AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS SHALL COMPLY WITH PITKIN COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS. 7. INFILTRATOR COMPONENTS TO BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS. B. PLACE DISTRIBUTION BOX AND DISTRIBUTION PIPING ON 3/4" SCREENED ROCK. SEAL ALL PIPES ENTERING DISTRIBUTION BOX WITH WATERPROOF MATERIAL 9. INSTALL INSPECTION PORTS AT ALL 4 CORNERS OF INFILTRATOR BED •t<. L COPYRIGHT i e� v==4� o �® Fl DRAWN BY U V � O O U l�j U O V � o DATE 4//9/99 REVISIONS 4/19/99 PfV15FD 7 -/WK 51Zr SCALE tt5 S"OWN DRAWING �i�/CN 0jE A1L-_'5 and NOT5 SHEET / / / N 0 TE: WATERLINE CROSSINGS REQUIRE THAT THE DRINKING WATER OR WASTEWATER PIPE BE ENCASED FOR AT LEAST TEN (10) FEET OF EACH SIDE OF THE CROSSING OR PLACE WHERE COMPONENTS ARE CLOSER THAN SETBACKS. PIPE OF SCHEDULE 40 RATING OR BETTER MUST BE USED, OF SUFFICIENT DIAMETER TO EASILY SLIDE OVER AND COMPLETELY ENCASE THE LINE. RIGID END CAPS OF AT LEAST SCHEDULE 40 RATING MUST BE GLUED OR SECURED IN A WATER -TIGHT FASHION TO THE ENDS OF THE ENCASEEMENT PIPE. THERE MUST BE A HOLE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PIPE IN THE LOWERMOST SECTION OF THE RIGED CAP SO THAT THE CONVEYANCE PIPE RESTS ON THE BOTTOM OF THE ENCASEMENT PIPE. THE AREA IN WHICH THE PIPE PASSES THROUGH THE ENDCAPS MUST BE SEALED WITH AN APPROVED UNDERGROUND SEALANT COMPATIBLE WITH THE PIPING USED. INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH NATURAL BACKFILL INFILTRATOR UNIT o°� O�o ° (Do, O°oOo°\000 JoC0. oo�oaOaOo0 OoOO Vo 000 CIO - 00 ao°°O 00 - \ / LINED IRRIGATION DITCH THROUGH THIS AREA APPROX. 198 LF INFILTRATORS TO BE SET ON GRAVELS SECTION "A" TYPICAL INFILTRATION BED INFILTRATOR UNIT NTS NIATIIDAI DA('VCII 1 34" INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH TYPICAL INFILTRATION BED N TS INFILTRATORS TO BE SET ON GRAVELS 5GALE; 1 /N - 20 fT m FA A. CALCULATIONS 1. PERCOLATION RATE = 36 MPI AVG. (H. P. GEOTECH. JOB NO. 198 784) 2. DESIGN FLOW = 6 BEDROOMS X 2 X 130 X 1.75 = 2,730 GALLONS PER DAY 3. REQUIRED SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY = 2,730 X 1.25 = 3,412 GALLONS USE 2- 2,000 GAL., TWO COMPARTMENT, CONCRETE SEPTIC TANKS 4. ABSORPTION BED AREA REQUIRED = A = ( 2730 / 5 ) * 361/2 = 3,276 SF DEDUCT 30% FOR INFILTRATOR BED = 2,293 SQ. FT. 5. INFILTRATOR BED INSTALLATION: 2,293 SQ. FT./ 15.5 SQ.FT. PER UNIT = 148 UNITS MIN. USE 10 UNIT X 15 UNIT INFILTRATOR ARRAY OF H-10 UNITS 6. WELL SETBACK DISTANCE 100 + 8 * ((2730 - 1000)/100) = 238 FT 7. DITCH AND POND SETBACK DISTANCES 50 + 8 * ((2730 - 1000)/100) = 188 FT 8. WATER LINE SETBACK DISTANCE 10 FT. TO TANK, 25 FT, TO FIELD B. GENERAL NOTES 1. THE INFILTRATOR BED SHALL BE LEVEL (+/- 0.1 INCHES), ON NATURAL GRAVELS (NOT IN FILL) A^JD BACK FILLED WITH NATURAL SOILS PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM THE BED. 2. THE SEPTIC TANKS SHALL BE LOCATED AT LEAST FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE RESIDENCE 3. THE PIPE FROM THE RESIDENCE TO THE TANK MUST BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS: THE PIPE MUST BE INSTALLED STRAIGHT IN ALIGNMENT AND GRADE. IF A CHANGE IN ALIGNMENT OR GRADE IS NECESSARY, A CLEANOUT WILL BE REQUIRED AT THE CHANGE. THE MINIMUM GRADE OF THE PIPE MUST BE 1/4" PER FOOT. THE PIPE MUST BE A MINIMUM OF ASTM 3034 PVC PIPE. IF THE LINE CROSSES A VEHICULAR ACCESS, THE PIPE SPECIFICATION SHALL BE ASTM 3034 PVC OR BETTER. A MINIMUM OF 1 CLEANOUT SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE LOCATION WHERE THE PIPE LEAVES THE RESIDENCE. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4" IN DIAMETER. 4. THE PIPE FROM THE SEPTIC TANK TO THE INFILTRATOR BED SYSTEM MUST BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS: THE MINIMUM SLOPE OF THE LINE MUST BE 1/4" PER FOOT. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF ASTM 3034 PVC PIPE. IF THE LINE CROSSES A VEHICULAR ACCESS, THE PIPE SPECIFICATION SHALL BE CHANGED TO ASTM 3034 PVC OR BETTER. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4" IN DIAMETER. 5. USE RISERS TO BRING THE SEPTIC TANK ACCESS WITHIN 6" OF FINAL GRADE. 6. ALL MATERIALS, INSTALLATION PRACTICES AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS SHALL COMPLY WITH PITKIN COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS. 7. INFILTRATOR COMPONENTS TO BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS. B. PLACE DISTRIBUTION BOX AND DISTRIBUTION PIPING ON 3/4" SCREENED ROCK. SEAL ALL PIPES ENTERING DISTRIBUTION BOX WITH WATERPROOF MATERIAL 9. INSTALL INSPECTION PORTS AT ALL 4 CORNERS OF INFILTRATOR BED •t<. L COPYRIGHT i e� v==4� o �® Fl DRAWN BY U V � O O U l�j U O V � o DATE 4//9/99 REVISIONS 4/19/99 PfV15FD 7 -/WK 51Zr SCALE tt5 S"OWN DRAWING �i�/CN 0jE A1L-_'5 and NOT5 SHEET / N 0 TE: WATERLINE CROSSINGS REQUIRE THAT THE DRINKING WATER OR WASTEWATER PIPE BE ENCASED FOR AT LEAST TEN (10) FEET OF EACH SIDE OF THE CROSSING OR PLACE WHERE COMPONENTS ARE CLOSER THAN SETBACKS. PIPE OF SCHEDULE 40 RATING OR BETTER MUST BE USED, OF SUFFICIENT DIAMETER TO EASILY SLIDE OVER AND COMPLETELY ENCASE THE LINE. RIGID END CAPS OF AT LEAST SCHEDULE 40 RATING MUST BE GLUED OR SECURED IN A WATER -TIGHT FASHION TO THE ENDS OF THE ENCASEEMENT PIPE. THERE MUST BE A HOLE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PIPE IN THE LOWERMOST SECTION OF THE RIGED CAP SO THAT THE CONVEYANCE PIPE RESTS ON THE BOTTOM OF THE ENCASEMENT PIPE. THE AREA IN WHICH THE PIPE PASSES THROUGH THE ENDCAPS MUST BE SEALED WITH AN APPROVED UNDERGROUND SEALANT COMPATIBLE WITH THE PIPING USED. INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH NATURAL BACKFILL INFILTRATOR UNIT o°� O�o ° (Do, O°oOo°\000 JoC0. oo�oaOaOo0 OoOO Vo 000 CIO - 00 ao°°O 00 - \ / LINED IRRIGATION DITCH THROUGH THIS AREA APPROX. 198 LF INFILTRATORS TO BE SET ON GRAVELS SECTION "A" TYPICAL INFILTRATION BED INFILTRATOR UNIT NTS NIATIIDAI DA('VCII 1 34" INTERCEPTOR DRAINAGE DITCH TYPICAL INFILTRATION BED N TS INFILTRATORS TO BE SET ON GRAVELS 5GALE; 1 /N - 20 fT m FA A. CALCULATIONS 1. PERCOLATION RATE = 36 MPI AVG. (H. P. GEOTECH. JOB NO. 198 784) 2. DESIGN FLOW = 6 BEDROOMS X 2 X 130 X 1.75 = 2,730 GALLONS PER DAY 3. REQUIRED SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY = 2,730 X 1.25 = 3,412 GALLONS USE 2- 2,000 GAL., TWO COMPARTMENT, CONCRETE SEPTIC TANKS 4. ABSORPTION BED AREA REQUIRED = A = ( 2730 / 5 ) * 361/2 = 3,276 SF DEDUCT 30% FOR INFILTRATOR BED = 2,293 SQ. FT. 5. INFILTRATOR BED INSTALLATION: 2,293 SQ. FT./ 15.5 SQ.FT. PER UNIT = 148 UNITS MIN. USE 10 UNIT X 15 UNIT INFILTRATOR ARRAY OF H-10 UNITS 6. WELL SETBACK DISTANCE 100 + 8 * ((2730 - 1000)/100) = 238 FT 7. DITCH AND POND SETBACK DISTANCES 50 + 8 * ((2730 - 1000)/100) = 188 FT 8. WATER LINE SETBACK DISTANCE 10 FT. TO TANK, 25 FT, TO FIELD B. GENERAL NOTES 1. THE INFILTRATOR BED SHALL BE LEVEL (+/- 0.1 INCHES), ON NATURAL GRAVELS (NOT IN FILL) A^JD BACK FILLED WITH NATURAL SOILS PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM THE BED. 2. THE SEPTIC TANKS SHALL BE LOCATED AT LEAST FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE RESIDENCE 3. THE PIPE FROM THE RESIDENCE TO THE TANK MUST BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS: THE PIPE MUST BE INSTALLED STRAIGHT IN ALIGNMENT AND GRADE. IF A CHANGE IN ALIGNMENT OR GRADE IS NECESSARY, A CLEANOUT WILL BE REQUIRED AT THE CHANGE. THE MINIMUM GRADE OF THE PIPE MUST BE 1/4" PER FOOT. THE PIPE MUST BE A MINIMUM OF ASTM 3034 PVC PIPE. IF THE LINE CROSSES A VEHICULAR ACCESS, THE PIPE SPECIFICATION SHALL BE ASTM 3034 PVC OR BETTER. A MINIMUM OF 1 CLEANOUT SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE LOCATION WHERE THE PIPE LEAVES THE RESIDENCE. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4" IN DIAMETER. 4. THE PIPE FROM THE SEPTIC TANK TO THE INFILTRATOR BED SYSTEM MUST BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS: THE MINIMUM SLOPE OF THE LINE MUST BE 1/4" PER FOOT. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF ASTM 3034 PVC PIPE. IF THE LINE CROSSES A VEHICULAR ACCESS, THE PIPE SPECIFICATION SHALL BE CHANGED TO ASTM 3034 PVC OR BETTER. THE PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4" IN DIAMETER. 5. USE RISERS TO BRING THE SEPTIC TANK ACCESS WITHIN 6" OF FINAL GRADE. 6. ALL MATERIALS, INSTALLATION PRACTICES AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS SHALL COMPLY WITH PITKIN COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS. 7. INFILTRATOR COMPONENTS TO BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS. B. PLACE DISTRIBUTION BOX AND DISTRIBUTION PIPING ON 3/4" SCREENED ROCK. SEAL ALL PIPES ENTERING DISTRIBUTION BOX WITH WATERPROOF MATERIAL 9. INSTALL INSPECTION PORTS AT ALL 4 CORNERS OF INFILTRATOR BED •t<. L COPYRIGHT i e� v==4� o �® Fl DRAWN BY U V � O O U l�j U O V � o DATE 4//9/99 REVISIONS 4/19/99 PfV15FD 7 -/WK 51Zr SCALE tt5 S"OWN DRAWING �i�/CN 0jE A1L-_'5 and NOT5 SHEET