Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.eh.272929201083 (1994)Parcel 1 ASPEN/PiTKIN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENY APPLICATION FOR AN INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM (ISDS) PERMIT 2 I`. Na;iis of OWNER John Witaschek Bus. Phone # Mailing Address 2505 Upham, Lakewood, CO 80215 Home Phone #(303) 232-2823 Name of AGENT-4a4,,&-Ria€-3attb-,Bus. Phone # CamUti4s3 Mailing Address -T �4 F'-"" u Fish Road-Carh.o.ndal-e�-- 623 [Iome Phone # Copy of Permit to be Sent to: John Witaschek 'ERMIT IS FOR: Xy NEW INSTALLATION, O REPAIR, O ALTERATION NOT DUE TO FAILURE, or O EMERGENCY USE. for permit # STREET ADDRESS of Property: 0002 Chair Mountain Drive, Redstone, CO 81623 _EGAL DESCRIPTION of Property: lot 61 , block _, filing _, and subdiv. size of Lot acres Type of Structure Proposed single family residence r # BEDROOMS 3 , # LOFTSI> # GARBAGE DISPOSALS 1 # DISHWASHERS 1, # CLOTHES WASHERS 1 , Nater Supply: O Private Well, O Spring, O Stream, or N System (Public or Private Name: W d:k'r- rill 5 h -i C=+ S PROOF OF ADEQUATE WATER ATTACI IED? O YES or O NO HAS T1 ]IS PROJECT BEEN APPROVED BY PITKIN COUNTY? O YES or O NO '.pplicatlon for an Individual sewage disposal system permit Is hereby submitted. Tho undersigned acknowledges that the above Information Is hue and that false Information will Invalidate the application and ,ny subsequent permit Issuance of lire permit does not explicitly or implicitly Imply the approval of any other permit required for construction pursuant to Pitkin County codes. No construction may be undertaken mill all approvals and permits have been obtained. The owner assumes all responsibilities In case of failure of Inadequacy of this system. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT_ Date 1 -he application becomes invalid 120 fro dales ned. tils Wrmit is valid only for the design as specified below. ******************************BELOW FOR OFFICE USE ONl_Y••ikiA*tA***kRtk*ttkkttAiAkk** INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT # vl ora ;150 fee paid (/Yes. Date received q Receipt # QQ j2Q 7 Received By _ 'k 'DESIGN CRITERIA OF SYSTEM TO BE INSTALLED: Any changes must be submitted and approved in writing. /1 of Bedrooms: , -, Percolation Rate: A_ mpi, Average Daily Waste Flow: _ �-CJ _ gallons. s an Engineer Designed system needed? ( ) Yes or % No (All plans and specifications of the engineer shall be followed. Any changes must be approved in writing and the engineer hall certify the final Installation to the Environmental Health Department in writing.) A' imum Septic Tank Capacity 1.10 0 gallons Absorption Area (a �/ square feet minimum Absorption Bed, () Absorption Field in Trenches, () Gravel -less system, () Pumping/Dosing Chamber, () Absorption Pit ('ey y l Sf�,L, I/ f ` fj '� ` ®ca� r6vu o C+.1•-^- .� �j '+t 4%L Stages requiring inspection: O Before excavation, O Upon completion and prior to placement of gravel, O Before covering distribution system of absorption field, ( ) Prior to backfill of any component and any situation deemed necessary by Environmental Health Department Staff. Flans and specifications of the proposed Individual sewage disposal system have been reviewed and are considered satisfactory. Permission is hereby granted to the owner or Ills agent to perform the work ,dlcaled above in accordance with the Pilkin County Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations In effect on the date of issue. In addition to general provisions set forth In any attachments, this Permit is subject o the following additional terms and conditions if any: /\PPROVED FOR ISSUE BY: _ DATE- OF ISSUE: — he above individual sewage disposal system Inas been Inspeclebl or use by the Aspen/Pitkin E ionmenlal f lealth Department. The owner assumes all respons' irities case 1 failure or inadequacy of this .ystern. Complete as built drawing and ell specifications of as dl are Included with this porn SINAL INSPECTION B I�'L DATE OF FINAL INSPECTION: YS i3OTH:UDD:JTCPC:WP.PERMIT.B. 1 13 S LITH GALENA STREET ' ASP N, COLORADO 81611 ' PHONE 303.920.5070 FAX 303.920.5197 ;PEHD 1/94 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER M01 � pk� s� • ,. Aspen / Pitkin Environmental Health Department L Contact Log Sheet ti .flame: ' 1 �1 ( Parcel ID#: Address: Date Person Spoken To Comments / Action to be Taken , x- Initials -16 17 -� t. cx 1-4 7w eceS (aAt Foie ASA k) c Y Co vp-\ I a ASPEN/PITKIN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST *Forms must be completed fees paid before building permits can be issued. YES NO o Is the water source for the project private? If yes, YOU will need to provide proof from the Colorado Division of Water Resources that a water supply is available and adequate. DIG o Does this project require the installation of an individual sewage disposal system or modification of the existing system? If yes, contact Environmental Health to obtain a guidelines packet and fill out an application. There is a $150 fee for the septic Per i -t • This procedure can take some time. N�;W CC*05 o Does the project involve a building with an individual sewage disposal system and the addition of anv bedrooms? if yes, Environmental Health needs to determine the adequacy of the existing septic system. CC3�D o Does this project involve any neW fireplaces (either wccdburning, gas or woedsteves)? If yes, you must fill out a fireplace application. There is a $25 fee. o`, Will there be any charges made to existina fireplaces or wccdstcves? If yes, Environmental Health will need to determine if a permit is required. oDces the project involve a restaurant(or any portion of a reestaurant), catering kitchen, or a grocery store? If yes, whether it involves a new establishment or a remodel, Environmental Health is required to complete a plan review of the establishment. A fee of $75 may be required. C Is the property on the superfund site? If yes, an additional form will have to be filled out. It is available from the Building Department. *Contact Environmental Health if you answered "yes" to anything -on the checklist at 920-5070. APPLICANT azk i1�i DATE ADDRESS OF PROj ECTQj2 BUILDING PERMIT fi HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax 303 945-8454 Phone 303 945-7988 SUBSOIL STUDY AND PERCOLATION TEST PROPOSED RESIDENCE _LOT 61, CRYSTAL RIVER PARKS PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO. 194 310 JULY 29, 1994 PREPARED FOR: JOHN WITASCHEK 2505 UPHAM LAKEWOOD, CO 80215 h k HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 July 29, 1994 Fax 303 945-8454 Phone 303 945-7988 John Witaschek 2505 Upham Lakewood, CO 81215 Job No. 194 310 Subject: Subsoil Study And Percolation Test, Proposed Residence, Lot 61, Crystal River Park, Pitkin County, Colorado. Gentlemen: As requested, we have conducted a subsoil study and percolation test for the proposed residence at the subject site. Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory pits excavated in the general building area consist of a shallow topsoil layer above silty sand and gravel with cobbles and boulders. Groundwater was not encountered in the pits at the time of excavation. The proposed residence can be founded on spread footings placed on the natural subsoils and designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. The tested area of the lot appears suitable for a conventional infiltration septic disposal system. The report which follows describes our investigation, summarizes our findings, and presents our recommendations. It is important that we provide consultation during design, and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of the geotechnical recommendations. If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us. Sincerely, HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. SLP/rr cc: B & H General Contractors - Attn: Hans Raaflab TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY .............................. 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION .................................. 1 SITE CONDITIONS ......................................... 2 FIELD EXPLORATION ....................................... 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................... 2 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ 3 FOUNDATIONS ....................................... 3 FLOOR SLABS ........................................ 4 UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM ................................. 5 SURFACE DRAINAGE .................................. 5 PERCOLATION TESTING ................................ 6 LIMITATIONS ............................................. 6 FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURE 3 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 4 - GRADATION ANALYSES TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study and percolation test for a proposed residence to be located on Lot 61, Crystal River Park, Pitkin County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation design and percolation rates for leach field design. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to John Witaschek, dated June 17, 1994. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory pits was conducted to obtain information on subsurface conditions. Samples obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine compressibility and other engineering characteristics of the on-site soils. 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 and for the leach field design. 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 Plans for the residence were conceptual at the time of this study and the subsoil information will be considered in the purchase agreement of the lot. The house will be located in the middle to upper part of the lot between the exploratory pits shown on Fig. 1. In general the house will be 1 1/2 stories of wood frame construction above a walkout basement level. Grading for the structure is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 3 to 6 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of wood frame 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. -2 - SITE CONDITIONS The site consists of undeveloped property along the downhill side of Chair Mountain Drive. Most of the lot is grass covered with small aspen in the lower part. Large conifer trees border the southwest side of the lot, roughly corresponding to a natural ephemeral drainage channel that was dry. The ground surface slope is strong down to the southeast with about 10 feet of elevation difference across the lot. Below the lot to the east the ground is moderate sloping and more irregular. A very high rock cliff is located to the west of the property and forms the west valley side of the Crystal River. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on June 24, 1994. Two exploratory pits were excavated at the locations shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The pits were dug with a rubber -tired backhoe. The pits were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with relatively undisturbed and disturbed sampling methods. Depths at which the samples were taken are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Pits, Fig. 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Fig. 2. The subsoils consist of about 1/2 foot of topsoil overlying silty sand and gravel containing cobbles and boulders to the pit depths of 6 1/2 and 10 feet. The soils consist of debris fan deposits and generally appeared medium dense. Pit 1 was more sandy H -P GEOTECH -3 - than Pit 2 and stratification could be seen in the pits. Most of the rock consists of sandstone. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the pits included natural moisture content, density and gradation analysis. Results of consolidation testing performed on a relatively undisturbed liner sample, presented on Fig. 3, indicate low initial compressibility under light loading and moderate compressibility after wetting. Results of gradation analysis performed on a sample (minus 1 1/2 -inch fraction) of the natural coarse granular soils are shown on Fig. 4. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavation and the subsoils were moist. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory pits and the general type of construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural granular soils. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soils should be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. Based on experience, we expect settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be about 1 inch or less. There could be some additional settlement if the bearing soils were to become wetted. 2) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. 3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement H -P GEOTECH 0 -4- of foundations at least 42 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this area. 4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure corresponding to an equivalent fluid unit weight of 45 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site soils excluding vegetation, topsoil and oversized rods. 5) The topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the natural granular soils. If water seepage is encountered, the footing areas should be dewatered before concrete placement. 6) A representative of the soil engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions. FLOOR SLABS The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable support lightly loaded slab -on -grade construction. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4 -inch layer of free -draining gravel should be placed beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2 -inch aggregate with at least 50% retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve. All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95 % of maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist of the on-site soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. H -P GEOTECH -5- UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in mountainous areas that local perched groundwater may develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below grade construction, such as retaining walls and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free -draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1 % to a suitable gravity outlet. Free -draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2 % passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 1 1/2 feet deep. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed: 1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. 2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. 3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to H -P GEOTECH 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. Free -draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 feet of the on-site finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. PERCOLATION TESTING A profile pit (Pit 2) was excavated and three percolation tests were conducted to evaluate the feasibility of a conventional infiltration septic disposal system on the lot. The subsoil profile is shown on Fig. 2 and the percolation test results are presented in Table 11. Based on our findings, the test soil is suitable for an infiltration septic disposal system. An average percolation rate of about 10 minutes per inch can be assumed for sizing the system. LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no other warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pits dug at the locations indicated on Fig. 1, the assumed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory pits and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified so that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. Potential surface runoff impacts on the property are beyond the scope of our study. 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 H -N GEOTECH -7- 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 soil engineer. Sincerely, HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. - O Steven L. Pawlak, SLP/rr H -P GEOTECH ",a-. ;:. GEST '•0 9 • i 2 '7 `�le�os�flNAL �7%'r •eesee�.nQ�� Approximate Scale 1"=20' Chair Mountain Drive Lot Boundaries Pit Approximate Drainage I Channel 1 Lot E P-2 eachfi Building Area Lot 62 194 310 1 H"WORTH-PAWLAK Location of Exploratory Pits Fig 1 GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. and Percolation Test Holes Pit 1 0 .o 0 o 14C=3.3 DD=98 5 �pO' +4=21 -200=20 +-> a v c 10 LEGEND: ETOPSOIL; organic silty sand, dark brown. 'Dit 2 PM SAND AND GRAVEL (SM -GM); silty, cobbles, small boulders, sandier at Pit 1, medium dense, moist, red -brown. Subangular to rounded rock. 2" diameter hand driven liner sample. Disturbed bulk sample. NOTES: 1 . Exploratory pits were dug on June .2-14, 1994 with a backhoe. 10 2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from the property corner stakes. 3. Elevations of exploratory pits were not measured and logs of exploratory pits are drawn to depth. 4. The exploratory pit locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavation. Fluctuations in water level may occur with time. 6. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content (%) DD = Dry Density (pcf) + 4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve !'r MiOit M-PAWLAK Fig. 2 194 310 �HIIMCAL, Logs of Exploratory Pits g, I ! i I I t! I i i i I I O z n z 2 W U G W d 0 fiTUIILJMC 1 I= t1 ANALT-�IJ SIEVE ANALYSIS TIME fIEAOINGS U.S. SI ANUAIIU SERIES (HEMSUUAiiL• OPENINGS 21 FiR, 7 HR. DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMFTERS SAND GRAVEi CLAY TO Slli I FIND I MEDIUM COARSE I FINE I CDAIIS ,a.Ooattn GRAVEL 21 % SAND 59% SILT AND CLAY 20 % LIQUID LIMIT a a PLASTICITY INDCX % SAMPLE OF Silty Sand with Gravel FROM Pit 1 @ 4-5 Feet HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVF ANALYSIS 21 lift 7 HR. i1ME HEADINGS U.S.::IANUAIIU SfAI1ES ••^ GLEAM SQUAME OPENINGS i ,< z.0 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY TO SILT SAND GRAVEL FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COAnSE COBBLES GRAVEL % SAND % SILT AND CLAY % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX % SAMPLE OF FROM 194 310 GES EC TH- ALWLnAcK I CRADATiON TEST RESULTS Fig. 4 0 M r z m 0 i Z 2 (n U w W O W LLJ0 J Q 00 < Q 2Q ~ m Q CL U- = o O a W 2 U) 75 pW L a � O Y i O O N Q m C m co N N W O Z Lo F` o U 1- 2 O N � U U F- X � � a W Q W O r a a o J J — 0 0 w 2 O W N > 0 U N N oN N a a Z z a N LO Z O H a 0 a C7 J W cc — N a } ~ _ Y 00 o w n CA z W J H Q N z — ri a o o Z U Q U U O J W i Q� � N a HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE II Job No. 194 310 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS 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 (MIN./INCH) P-1 57 10 (Refill) 15(Refill) (Refill) (Refill) 91/8 6 3 1/8 4 11 1/4 7 41/4 103/8 53/4 45/8 103/4 63/8 43/8 11 1/2 7 1/2 4 P-2 56 10 (Refill) 15(Refill) (Refill) (Refill) 7 7/8 5 5/8 21/4 8 9 5/8 67/8 23/4 10 73/4 21/4 93/4 75/8 2 1/8 101/4 81/2 1 3/4 P-3 46 10 15(Refill) (Refill) 9 5/8 73/4 1 7/8 12 73/4 6 5/8 1 1/8 9 7 3/8 1 5/8 9 7/8 83/8 1 1/2 83/8 7 1/8 1 1/4 Note: Holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on June 24 and the tests conducted on June 25, 1994.