Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.eh.273302412003 (1996)ASPEN/PITKIN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT oil APPLICAI N FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL S ""TEM 130 S. Galena St., Aspen Colorado 81611 Phone 970-920-5070/Fax 970-920-5039 _ Z_ X0.3 Permit # .p (J. �� Parcel ID # � i' 7 ,� �� / Permit For: New Installation (✓ Repair ( )Remodel ( )Emergency Use ( ) Name of OWNER J�OAI G Owner's MailingAdddr,+q ess s S / ti C.cJ / Business Phone: %6 f Z 4417 Home Phone: Primary Contact Person _ L,I4 -1 Li �Q/"EI _ Contact Mailing Address A> A - L 5 F/0 L Business Phone .3 /tel. y Cell Phone : Fax : Copy of permit to be sent to: Owner( ) Contact Person Both ( ) Street Address ^,z l.e:gal Description: Lot = 4,Block Size of lot: f /(0 acres Type of proposed structure: Total area/living space (sq. ft): 6,000 r1 ,Subdivision Sizeof bldg. envelope: # of Bedrooms, offices and similar size rooms: ICaretaker Unit : ( )Attachf�d ( )Detached # of Bedrooms, offices and similar size rooms: I Water:( %)Private well( )Spring ( )Stream ( ) Community/Public (Name of System) Is Proof of Adequate Water Attached (required) ? Yes ( ) No Has this project been approved by Pitkin County ? ( 4Yes ( ) No Is a copy of the floor plan attached ( required ) ? M Yes ( ) No Is a copy of the site plan attached (required) ? Qq Yes () No Application for an individual sewage disposal system is hereby submitted. ersigned acknowledges that the above information is true and that false information will invalidate the application and any subsequent permit. Issuance of the s not imply the approval of any other permit required for construction pursuant to Pitkin County codes. No construction may be undertaken until ail approvals an its ve been obtained. The owner assumes all responsibilities in case of failure or inadequacy of this system. Signature of applicant Date For department use below ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PERMIT FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM Design Criteria of s stem to be Instalteo (Hnycnanges musr uC ��� ..�� a Perc Rate © per inch Profile Hole: a�N, �• feet ft. —min Septic tank capacity: 3000 gallons Absorption area: sq. _ j o IsOU Ja-1h» 5e�ly _ -{roe's are rea)aw,7de% 4u /S*- lank -5hoa-ld �ueae ExtCl� . p° 1 L- ImuCIleSS Cwa,r ulh;cit redU.ce-5 44x- S9t&,T- 44 regtife.tU,,& 40 lei �l r�►' iy Chambjr5. -hese Can b� u�-rariFjtd a brd or 4r i hes �e /}l1 �rtd se+haCL 4i54UXel- kU- W01 1 441- 1{ach d • '201),h -teal f of is � rcQuC ;z� An inspection is required prior to backfill of any component of the distribution system. Y/ Design by Engineer Required?( ) Yes (�No All plans and specifications of the engineer must be followed. Any changes must be approved in writing and the engineer must certify the final installation to then Environmental Health Department in writing. Permit approval by: Ai��._ _ 1, Date 1%� /�'� Plans and specifications of the proposedlindividual seN;gge disposal system have been reviewed and are considered satisfactory. Permission is hereby granted to the owner or the agent to perform the work indicated iii 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. Installer: d h this permit before the final approval will be issued. I As -Built drawings must be include fiv� Receipt # Time Info Complete Site Plan 7 ate received Permit issued �— Floor Plan Received by Final Insp Requested f Well Permit or Date Info Complete Final Insp Completed Water System Letter Final Inspection Approval: _ Date: APEHD7� �— i,.� 7 A / y '7 V t. o A GO N 2 N 2 b ro a o N M CN J (V K£ 0 w 2 F O �E a cn A 0. wu'� O u1 O O O O G O N O N O N 6 N O N 1ti �t1 Jf Cl. V) b oo pa1/� on. - b &U) W bo p Q T S W a ] c2 0 A 05/18/98 14:44 FAX i 2002 IZI- V ' I A 05/18/98 14:44 FAX FAX TO: G6 4 - ATTENTION: !I/amct- NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER FROM: STIJTSMAN=GERBAZ, INC - PHONE # (5 70) 923-2734 FAX # (970) 923--0547 RE: L-xp x . -- I Ojo ,�- o 14� GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION WALLACE RESIDENCE LOT 3, HIDDEN MEADOWS PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Prepared For: PAT AND DICK WALLACE c/o T. Michael Manchester & Associates P.O. Box 6537 Snowmass Village, , CO 81615 Job No. GS -1957 September 17, 1996 CTL/THOMPSON, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 234 CENTER DRIVE ■ GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 ■ (970) 945-2809 TABLE OF CONTENT SCOPE 1 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1 SITE CONDITIONS 1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 2 SITE GRADING 3 FOUNDATION 4 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR AND GARAGE AND EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLOOR SLABS 5 BASEMENT ,AND CRAWLSPACE WALLS 5 RETAINING WALL 6 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS 7 SURFACE DRAINAGE 7 LIMITATIONS 8 FIGURE 1 - LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PERCOLATION TEST HOLES FIGURE 2 - LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 - SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURES 4 THROUGH 6 - SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 7 - EXTERIOR FOUNDATION WALL DRAIN FIGURE 8 - TYPICAL EARTH RETAINING WALL DETAIL FIGURE 9 - PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1 - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS PAT AND DICK WALLACE CTLT GS -1957 SCOPE This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the Wallace Residence to be built on Lot 3, Hidden Meadow, Pitkin County, Colorado. We explored subsurface conditions at the site to provide foundation recommendations for the building. This report includes a description of the subsurface conditions found in our exploratory borings, a recommended foundation system and geotechnical criteria for it, construction criteria for details influenced by the subsoils and percolation test results. Our report was prepared from data developed during our field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis and our experience. A summary of our conclusions is presented below. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1. Our exploratory borings penetrated a thin mantle of soft, organic, sandy clays underlain very stiff, sandy clays with thin silty sand lenses and claystone and sandstone fragments. Free groundwater was found in our exploratory borings TH-1 and TH-2, respectively. 2. The building can be founded with footings bearing on the natural sandy clays. Maximum soil bearing and minimum dead load pressures are presented in the "Foundation" section. 3. A ground surface slope away from the building should be maintained at all times to reduce wetting of soils below foundations. SITE CONDITIONS Hidden Meadows is on the south and southeast facing slopes of the mountain side that forms the north side of Brush Creek Valley between the town of Snowmass Village and The Divide in Pitkin County, Colorado. The main base area of Snowmass Ski Area is about two miles to the east via Divide Road and Brush Creek Road. The building site is a moderately sloped open field with grades measured from published topographic mapping of between 15 to 20 percent. Ground surface slopes are from the north down to the south. Steeper grade approaching 40 percent PAT AND DICK WALLACE CTL/T GS -1957 1 with slopes from the west down to the east are near the west boundary of the building envelope. Ground surface slopes from the north down to the south at grades of approximately 30 percent are above the building envelope. Vegetation in the planned building envelope is grasses, sage, weeds and wild flowers. Aspen tree groves are to the north, east and west. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Four (4) exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Figures 1 and 2 to investigate subsurface conditions below the building footprint. Drilling was supervised by our geotechnical engineer who logged the soils and obtained samples for testing in our laboratory. Summary logs of the soils found in our exploratory borings are shown on Figure 3. Our exploratory borings penetrated a thin mantle of soft, organic, sandy clays underlain very stiff, sandy clays with thin silty sand lenses and claystone and sandstone fragments. Free groundwater was found at 30 and 22 feet in our exploratory borings, TH-1 and TH-2, respectively, the day of drilling. Measurement of depth of water were similar 6 days later. Laboratory test results are shown on Figures 4 through 6 and Table 1. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION Development of Lot 3, Hidden Meadows will involve construction of the access drive and the residence. The drive from Ridge of Wildcat Drive to the Wallace Residence will involve a significant amount of earthwork to maintain reasonable grades across the existing steeper slopes near the west building enveloped boundary. It appears cuts and fills of approximately 6 feet deep will be required for the access drive. The Wallace Residence will be a two-story, wood frame home with a walk -out basement. The building footprint will be approximately 6,000 square feet. Living area floors will be structurally supported by the foundation with a crawlspace below. Garage and mechanical room floors will likely be slabs -on -grade. The exterior will PAT AND DICK WALLACE- CTL/T GS -1957 4 F likely be wood and stone. A shake roof is planned. Maximum excavation to construct the foundation will be approximately 11 feet deep. Foundation loads we assumed for our analysis were between 1,500 and 4,000 pounds per lineal foot along bearing walls and maximum interior column loads of 30 kips. We should be informed if the actual building or loads are different than described above to allow re-evaluation of criteria recommended herein. SITE GRADING Fill will not be placed below the building footprint but will be needed below exterior concrete flat work and for achieving access drive subgrade elevations. Fill can consist of on-site soils moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). Areas to receive fill should be grubbed and stripped of vegetation and the resulting surface compacted prior to fill placement. Foundation excavation plans were not available at this writing, however, we understand the site excavation planned will consist of maximum 11 feet tall cut slopes. Excavation sides should be sloped or braced. Excavated slopes will tend to collapse and flatten. We recommend temporary excavation slopes be 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. We believe the sandy clays: are Type B as described in the October, 1989 Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standards published by the Department of Labor governing excavations. The publication indicates a maximum temporary elope of 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) for Type B soils above the water table. We should view the excavation to confirm that soils are as anticipated. Soils removed from tho excavation should not be stockpiled at the edge of the excavation. We recommenduthe excavated soils be placed at a distance from the top of the excavation equal toatleastthe depth of the excavation. OSHA regulations PAT AND DICK WALLACE CTL%f GS -1957 3 require bracing and/or slopes for excavations greater than 20 feet tall be designed by a Registered Professional Engineer. Free groundwater was found at 30 and 22 feet in our borings TH-1 and TH-2, respectively. Depending upon-. cut depths and time of year water may be present. if free groundwater is encountered, we recommend the excavations be sloped to a positive gravity outfall or to sumps where water can be removed by pumping. FOUNDATION We anticipate very stiff, sandy clays at anticipated footing depths. We judge the clays to have a low swellpotential. The foundation system should resist potential swelling of the clays. We• recommend the building be founded with footings bearing on the- clay I dead load. We anticipate s differential movement result in total between footings pads anticipate a maximufM footings. The risk of'i.g by careful attention twill The footings should:h 1. can i 3000 gs should be designed with a minimum is sufficiently flexible to withstand some mended soil bearing pressure would 1 -inch. Maximum differential movement of the actual total movement. We further movement in 10 feet of continuous or localized movement can be reduced discussed under "Surface Drainage". acted with the following criteria: undisturbed natural clays. Materials ;ion or forming process should be Is prior to placing concrete. Footings im allowable soil bearing pressure of load of 800 psf or as high as practical; 2. Where below bearing walls a 4 -inch void should be pl beam between pads to concentrate dead load 09 low space for expansive clays to swell; PAT AND DICK WALukCE 4 CTL/T GS -1957 3. Foundation walls for continuous footings should be reinforced top and bottom, to span loose soil pockets. We recommend reinforcement equivalent to that required for a simple span over an unsupported distance of 15 feet. Reinforcement should be designed by a qualified structural engineer; 4. Soils beneath exterior footings should be protected from freezing. The depth for frost protection assumed in Pitkin County is 42 inches. The local building department should be contacted to check the required depth; and 5. The foundation excavation needs to be checked by a representative of our firm to confirm subsurface conditions are as anticipated from our exploratory borings. LOWER LEVEL FLOOR AND GARAGE AND EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLOOR SLABS Floors in living areas will be structural and supported by the foundation with a crawlspace between the floor and the soils. Garage floors, patios and sidewalks will be slabs -on -grade. Slabs can be constructed on the natural clays free of organics or other deleterious materials. We recommend the following design and construction details for slabs -on -grade: 1. Slabs -on -grade can be placed on the natural clays. Slabs -on -grade should not bear on vegetation or organic material; 2. Slabs -on -grade should be separated from exterior walls and interior bearing members. Vertical movement of the slabs should not be restricted; and 3. Frequent control joints should be provided. The American Concrete Institute (ACI) recommends maximum joint spacing of 15 to 20 feet to control cracking. The above precautions will not prevent movement of the slabs if the soils become wet. They will tend to reduce potential damage if movement occurs. BASEMENif AND CRAWL -SPACE WALLS Foundation walls will be subjected to lateral earth pressures. These walls are restrained and cannot move, therefore, they should be designed for the "at -rest" PAT AND DICK WALL.ACE CTLJT GS -1957 5 lateral earth pressure. Assuming the on-site clays are used as backfill, we recommend using an equivalent fluid density of 50 pcf to calculate lateral earth pressure. The above equivalent fluid density does not include allowances for sloping backfill, hydrostatic pressures, live loads or loads from adjacent structures. Water from surface run-off (precipitation, snow melt, irrigation) frequently flows through backfill placed adjacent to foundation walls and collects on the surface of the comparatively impermeable soils occurring at the bottom of the foundation excavation. This can cause damp or wet conditions in below grade areas of the building. To reduce the accumulation of water, we recommend a foundation drain. The drain should consist of a 4 -inch diameter open joint or slotted PVC pipe encased in free draining gravel. The drain should lead to a positive gravity outfall or a sump to 'be mechanically pumped. A typical foundation drain detail is shown on Figure 7. Crawlspace ventilation should be provided. Backfill placed adjacent to foundation walls should be compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). RETAINING WALL Depending on the driveway alignment chosen a free standing retaining wall up to approximately 6 feettall may be needed. The retaining wall can be founded with footings bearing ort the natural clays designed for a maximum soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf. We: recommend a coefficient of friction between footing concrete and the ground of M35. The retaining wall will be subjected to lateral earth pressure from wall backfill and surchan es. The MOW Ikon, the wall is a function of the wall movement. If the wall can move enough tamobilize the internal strength of the backfill, with movement and the active earth press should be designed ft fluid density pressuree PAT AND DICK WALLACE CTL/T GS -1957 ■ behind the wall, the wall can be designed for Movement and cracking is not permitted the wall earth pressure. We suggest 35 pcf equivalent for the "active case" and 50 pcf equivalent s c� fluid density pressure be used to design for the "at rest" case. An equivalent fluid density of 275 pcf equivalent fluid density pressure can be used for the "passive" case. Backfill behind the retaining wall should be compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density. Lateral earth pressure values do not include allowances for sloping backfill, hydrostatic pressures or surcharge loads. A foundation drain should be placed next to the footing of any retaining wall. As a minimum, the 12 -inches of backfill directly behind the retaining wall should consist of free draining gravel. The gravel should be washed 3/4 inch to No. 4 screen material with less than 3 percent passing the No. 200 sieve and be incorporated into the foundation drain system. A man made drain board product could be used instead of the gravel. Soil backfill placed behind the washed rock or drain board should be compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). The upper two feet of backfill against the wall should be with on-site clays (see Figure 8).. The provision of a foundation drain should reduce hydrostatic pressure which could: develop. PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS Three (3) percolation-.testatshown as P-1, P-2 and P-3 on Figure 1 were performed in the sandy clays.and!dayey sands southeast of the planned building location. Percolation rates= rangedtfrom 7 to 20 minutes per inch. Based on our experience with similar solls:wesuggest a design percolation rate of 20 minutes per inch be used to design the absorption field. Percolation test data and results are shown on Figure 9. SURFACE DRAINAGE a - The performance moisture conditions in th grading the ground SUM Wetting or drying of theC surface surrounding PAT AND DICK WALLACE CTLT GS -1957 tions and concrete flatwork is influenced by the I Wetting of foundation soils can be reduced by aerapid run-off of water away from the building. excavation should be avoided. The ground be sloped to drain away from the building 7 k 0 in all directions. We recommend a slope of at least 12 inches in the first 10 feet. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. Splash blocks or downspout extensions should be provided at all discharge locations. LIMITATIONS Our exploratory borings were spaced to obtain a reasonably accurate picture of the subsurface. Variations in these subsurface conditions not shown by our exploratory borings will occur. We should observe the completed excavation to confirm the soils are as anticipated from our exploratory borings. Our report was based on conditions disclosed by our exploratory borings, results of laboratory testing, engineering analysis and our experience. Criteria presented reflects the propos" building as we understand it. We should be advised if the final design dl ferssffiomour assumptions to permit us to re-evaluate our conclusions. This investigation waSoortducted in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercisedabrr.gWechnical engineers currently practicing under similar conditions in tha implied, is made. If we cam this report, please-carr:- /�JyJ} i3E r• CTLgHO ; INC. J (3 copies sent) PAT AND DICK WALLACE CTL[r GS -1957 his project. No other warranty, express or service or if you have questions regarding J o 0 ♦ -50.0 W A A r+ a O O 0 ,Z .0 O 0 rF Cl) W O 33 m m 0 ' 0 CQ eio 0 Qp — O +� b '01 O ,. aQ- 0 0 N o O rnO a Cl) Z U mwz Ea� oJMM4 0.4 OL4 W W W W W tv N N N � N N � W � W tv N N N m .P � iV O to to N N iV CPO p O Cr CT O 390A nI IIoI.4'0daig Depth In Feet o —�— ❑ 0I V I -TT I -7� R a v a �-• o p ►°�� fob ° �' ►°s A•� a' p p olim oo�a trm o o b+p m ° I cv ro � A ►d oon 96 .a" o�� p� 0� am A ° 0 too 44cc, co to m� mma m Gogo A� a p , c o' c a0 1111lIIII� 400d III tn&(I r 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 2 Z O cn Z Q� CL X W aR i Z 0 2 W GC Cd G 0 !1 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0.1 1.0 10 .iw APPLIED PRESSURE — KSF Sample of _"I AY SANDY ( Ct ) NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 122 PCF From TH-1 AT 9 FEET NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT= 13.4 % JOB NO. GS -1957 f Swell Consolidation Test Results F I G . 4 1.0 0.1 APPLIED PRESSURE — KSF Sample of _ From TH-3 AT 9 FEET —r_c-1957 NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 116—PCF NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT= 13.3010 Swell Consoliclabon Test Results FIG. 5 C 0.1 1.0 lu APPLIED PRESSURE — KSF Sample of _ From - JOB NO. GS -1957 NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT=---!' —7PCF NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT= 9.7 % Swell Consolidation Test Results FIG. 6 SLOPE PER REPORT r r�, ,......... . 52" MINIMUM B" MINIMUM OR BEYOND 1:1 SLOPE FROM BOTTOM OF FOOTING. (WHICHEVER IS GREATER) 4 -INCH DIAMETER PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE. THE PIPE SHOULD BE LAID IN A TRENCH WITH A SLOPE RANGING BETWEEN 1 /B INCH AND 1/4 INCH DROP PER FOOT OF DRAIN. E CL' NOTE: DRAIN SHOULD BE AT LEAST 2 INCHES BELOW BOTTOM OF VOID AND FOOTING AT THE HIGHEST POINT AND SLOPE DOWNWARD TO A POSITIVE GRAVITY OUTLET OR TO A SUMP WHERE WATER CAN BE REMOVED BY PUMPING. PROVIDE PVC SHEETING GLUED TO FOUNDATION WALL TO REDUCE MOISTURE PENETRATION. REINFORCING STEEL PER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS. PROVIDE POSITIVE SLIP JOINT BETWEEN SLAB AND WALL �- FLOOR SLAB ..................................... FOOTING OR PAD EXTER 10 R 1'0 D N DATI O N WALL D RAI N FIG. 7 JOB NO. GS -1957 r 5 t j - BACKFILL i i BELOW GRADE WALL i � ENCASE PIPE IN WASHED SLOPE CONCRETE AGGREGATE (ASTM PER 11 C33, NO. 57 OR NO. 67). OSHA EXTEND GRAVEL TO AT LEAST l 1/2 HEIGHT OF FOOTING. i L r t ii l COVER GRAVEL. WITH FILTER FABRIC OR ROOFING FELT. r�, ,......... . 52" MINIMUM B" MINIMUM OR BEYOND 1:1 SLOPE FROM BOTTOM OF FOOTING. (WHICHEVER IS GREATER) 4 -INCH DIAMETER PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE. THE PIPE SHOULD BE LAID IN A TRENCH WITH A SLOPE RANGING BETWEEN 1 /B INCH AND 1/4 INCH DROP PER FOOT OF DRAIN. E CL' NOTE: DRAIN SHOULD BE AT LEAST 2 INCHES BELOW BOTTOM OF VOID AND FOOTING AT THE HIGHEST POINT AND SLOPE DOWNWARD TO A POSITIVE GRAVITY OUTLET OR TO A SUMP WHERE WATER CAN BE REMOVED BY PUMPING. PROVIDE PVC SHEETING GLUED TO FOUNDATION WALL TO REDUCE MOISTURE PENETRATION. REINFORCING STEEL PER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS. PROVIDE POSITIVE SLIP JOINT BETWEEN SLAB AND WALL �- FLOOR SLAB ..................................... FOOTING OR PAD EXTER 10 R 1'0 D N DATI O N WALL D RAI N FIG. 7 JOB NO. GS -1957 " MI CLAY BACKFILL BACKFILL .. COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 90% O;.•:0! OF ASTM°•Q' D 698 ° �•O..o. e• t 2' PROVIDE GALVANIZED SCREEN WEEP HOLES PROVIDED AT 10' CENTER TO CENTER WASHED 3/4 INCH TO NO. 4 CONCRETE AGGREGATE WITH 4 INCH DIAMETER PERFORATED PLASTIC PIPE BE LAID ON A SLOPE MAXIMUM OF 3 PERCENT PASSING THE DRAIN LINE SHOULD RANGING BETWEEN 1/8 INCH AND 1/4 INCH THE NO. 200 SIEVE. PROP PER FOOT OF DRAIN AND LEAD TO A POSITIVE GRAVITY OUTFALL. TYPICAL EARTH RETAINING WALL DETAIL FIG. 8 JOB NO. GS -1957 ;ATION AND rnt'AHAiwN 9/10/96 AT START OF SATURATION: 2:00pm HOLE P-1 P-2 P-3 PERCOLATION TEST DATE: 9/17/96 WATER IN BORING AFTER 24 HOURS X YES NO PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS DEPTH (INCHES) TIME AT START OF INTERVAL TIME INTERVAL (MINUTES) DEPTH TO WATER GE ER LIN PERCOLA-, TION RATE (MIN/INCH)INTERVAL START OF (INCHES) END OFH INTERVAES) (INCHES 45 2:15 20 4.5 13.5 9.0 2 2:35 20 13.5 18.0 4.5 4 2:55 20 18.0 21.75 3.75 5 3:15 20 21.75 24.75 3.0 7 3:35 40 24.75 29.5 4.75 8 4:15 39.75 2:15 20 6.0 7.25 1.25 16 2:35 20 7.25 8.75 1.5 13 2:55 20 8.75 10.0 1.25 16 3:15 20 10.0 11.0 1.0 20 3:35 40 11.0 13.25 2.25 18 4:15 2:15 20 8.75 10.0 1.25 16 42.75 2:35 20 10.0 L 11.0 - 1.0 20 2:55 20 11.0 12.0 3:15 20 12.0 13.5 1.5 13 3:35 40 13.25 15.25 2.0 20 4:15 Fig. 9 Job No. GS -1957 N H J M Cl) LLIM cc U) w O a 0 m 5 U- 0 a J U J J U U J U J U J U J U J U J U J U a } r>} o 0 0 r 0 0 0 r 0 r 0 0 r 0 z z z z z z z z z z J N N N N N N N N N N O W e g g g> 5 g g g g U U U U U U U U U U �o Z o W NN Cn W oOD < zaz CD 0 Npw azvo a J W m Q o J J °-- v) N W W S Zy(~3 O O W OT O d a N Z 0 N U UX G H 0 v R 01 _J N Z g cs 0_ a uJ a o� W kL�J = N r Q JCD D U T N N N N Cl) M OD n Cl) N Z Q T T T T Q W - Zo J W Q N o T N o N r; T n O r> ch P- O N N o 0 v T T Z 2 ^ W W r v J T N I? 0 S 10-14-1996 7:57PH L FROM NORRIS 9709231964 and ASSOCIAUS inc. GtoerA Contractor Custom Hours . comffier6al To: Environmental Health Attention: Nancy Fax Number-. 9234414 From: Paul Broome, Project ManagOr Date: October 15,1996 Re.- Wallace Residence, Lot 3 Hidden Meadows Job site phone: 970 923 1964 Job site fax: 970 923 1967 Pages: 3 (including cover sheet) Comments: Let me know if you need anythitig else. P. 0. Box 5759 Sn0Wr]3&_S 1VjjjW, Cu, 81615 (970) 9232030 P. I P. 3 10-14-1996 7=58PM FROM MORRIS 9709231964 C3ct-35-9G d5.2�► No. TIME DRAvloowx (feet) ( mf n ) DATA TiC 19 100.0 123.6 ID4.5 20 120.0 124.1 107.9 21 250.0 124.1 112.0 22 190.0 125.8 115.3 23 210.0 128.2 118.2 24 240.0 129.2 1!20.6 25 300.0 130.8 124.7 26 360.0 132.8 128.1 27 420.0 134.0 130.9 28 600.0 139.2 137.5 29 720.,0 1.40.1 140.8 30 900.0 144.1 345.0 31 1140_0 149.6 149_3 32 1440.0 154_2 153.6 33 14140..0 1-54.2 153.6 Fq $TER'RESOLUTl0N MATRIX: "*N INDICATES 7"IXED PARAMETER 5 £7.86 T 4.02 1.00 --- PAGE 2 DIFFERENCE (Percent) 1.19 -4.566 -0.626 0.1.63 0.351 0.351 * AQUXrEC 9 10-14-1996 7:58PM FROM NORRIS 9709231964 P-2 VVW, ",xK Artw Avj- FA,?,. 913- 06'? z -2-D02 -------------------- PAGE I DATA SET.' Z-2-DV2 AQUIFER: MANC05 --r- WATER TABLE: 113.90 feet, RADIUS Or FLOWING WELL: x.voo in RADIUS OF WELL CASING: 2.500 in The f011owing depths :are from tOP of Aquifer: pUmpiNG WELL: SCREENED FROM 100.00 TO 415.00 feet FITTING ZRRGR; 0-63a PMZCENT Theis, DATE: 20 -APR -90 CLIENT: LOCATION: ZIEGLER SNOWXAS-s VTT-LACE WELL No.: FLOW RATE; 2 10.00 gal/min COUNTY: PROJr,r-T: PITKIN WELL TEST EVALUATION NP.T*L DEPTH: 415.00 feet feet 7.100E-02 TRAINSM: 62.Z15 11day BE THICXNESS: 4000.00 AQUIFER: MANC05 --r- WATER TABLE: 113.90 feet, RADIUS Or FLOWING WELL: x.voo in RADIUS OF WELL CASING: 2.500 in The f011owing depths :are from tOP of Aquifer: pUmpiNG WELL: SCREENED FROM 100.00 TO 415.00 feet FITTING ZRRGR; 0-63a PMZCENT Theis, 1935: confined Aquifer MODEL PARAMETERS: STORAGE COEF*. 7.100E-02 TRAINSM: 62.Z15 11day BE FREE FREE: TIME DRAWDOWN (feet) DIFFERENCE NO, (min) DATA ISYHTHI�Tlc (percent) 1 1.00 120.0 23.09 2 2.00 120-1 34.20 3 3100 120.2 41.10 4 4.00 120.5 46.11 s 5.00 120.8 50.05 6 16-00 120.8 53.29 7 7.00 120-8 56-05 8.0a 120.4 53.44 9.00 120.3 60.56 10 10.0* 120.9 62.47 11 15.00 121.1 69-82 12 20,130 122.0 75-045 13 25,00 122.0 79.13 14 30.00 12119 82.47 is 40-00 121.9 87.74 16 50.00 122.4 91.$3 17 60-00 122-0 95.17 113 -S0.00 123-0 100.4 AQUATEC JO -11-1996 2.06AM FROM NORRIS 9709231964 Attention: Fax Number" From: Date, Re: Job site phone: Jab site fax. - Pages: Comments, Water test results M and ASSOCIATES inc, General Contra~ CU=M Homes . commercial Aspen Environmental Health Betsey 9205439 pwA 13toome, Project Manager October 11, 1996 Wallace Residenoe 970 923 1964 9709231967 2 (Including cover s1wet) P-O.Box 5759 Sn0WM&,zVillage, Co. 81615 (970)9232030 P- 1 d� .10-1 1-1 396 2 : 06AM FROM NORR I 3 97092.31964 P.2 G* a�lsul�AR�E []1 FOR TEST 51it31IIY1138 WATER & 8dH oATIOM awrw REGuln � PA. wx Pw MlEIABRA�E t fLTER �' Sj vdjA6E, E0. '81815 } r San* 1.Dcatio PNIs 108 __ — — 1 ��—�--' mw tw 4 SAMPLE 7AKM DATE_i 4+ �= "AEE ""LY Y€'!Lb'lEtf y� p+ L'N�OL1�T��L EGAL ABSENF � � i ICU SAMPLER �— ( } COMiAi1NI" SUPPLY ( i �Qtt n DWTNBUTXgN SYSnm SUPPLY AIUMED (�LIFWVAli4Q 1tL ( } NON(Ut�kJMIrY ( I C#IECK?LE ( } 1414i'E53 Aul7ER LOIIQIt: �A4t1ATd { } SNPAC€ LAURYL SULFATE BROTH 1� ( } pT K%Z ( I RANI 'I -� } I RIYATE I } SPECIAL vrSRPDSE E G X 7E: IF Ali IHFDRW Ma" IS Wr SowUE➢, TAE SAMPLE WU 24 OF p0rARDED, 48 REPAAAKSAll 1 1 nY f i a RtWR TQ. G4L4TQ1 Jto(tuL A0--- —� RES17i13 GNEA7ER 1 NAK OME CULIPMU PER1c7R ML MICATES W a;lfY'$TA7E� a NOWCCMKLA=VmMt11iM)M SEE RL'4ERSE FOA 70F.LIMITATtBtlfa SANPLYNB fli$rRUCT10NS Mo DEFOIT14NS. NlI101S MASER SPAN S LAG-WOO 1,006 ((tNx 3_79) Toe"jq k> -7 f 'R — ;L-7 33—vaY Q r.. MEMORANDUM To: Francis Krizmanich , Planning Office From: Nancy MacKenzie, Environmental Health Officer Through: Lee Cassin, Assistant Environmental Health Director fG Date: December 7,1995 Re: Havapart Major Plat Amendment Parcel ID #2733-024-12-003 The Aspen/ Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the details of the Havapart application under the authority of the Pitkin County Land Use Code and has the following comments. ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS: Sections 2-17 and 3-1104: "It is the policy of the County to insure the availability of a water supply of adequate quality, quantity, pressure and dependability for fire protection and support of a proposed land use prior to approval of the use. The County shall require land uses to hook up to existing public systems if service is available." This Department has adequate information on the quantity of water available. Lots 2, 3 & 4 of the Hidden Meadow Subdivision are served by a well constructed on Lot 4. The engineering analysis by Dean Gordon of Schmueser Gordon Meyer dated September 11, 1990 states that the yield can adequately service the three lots, though it will be necessary to provide individual storage at each of the residences for peak instantaneous demand and for fire protection water storage. The applicant must ensure that the water quality is acceptable by having it tested by a lab such as the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District or Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District.. It is recommended that low water landscaping (xeriscaping) be used and that the timing of any sprinkler systems be decreased for low water plants. The Colorado State University Cooperative Extension office can be contacted for more information on xeriscaping. 1 Printed — Re yded Paper A condition of approval for this application is the receipt of information documenting that the quality of the well water is adequate before the septic permit and building permit can be issued. SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: Sections 2-18 and 3-1105: "It is the policy of the County to ensure that adequate sewage treatment facilities are available to serve existing and new developments. Public and private sewage disposal systems and connections to such systems shall comply with the sewage disposal guidelines of Pitkin County's Individual Sewage Disposal System Regulation." Lots in the area are served by individual septic systems. All such systems installed within Pitkin County require septic permits issued by the Environmental Health Department, and must comply with the County's septic regulations. To receive a septic permit, the applicant will need to submit a septic permit application and appropriate fee with a completed Soil Data Form including percolation test results and profile hole information. It must be possible to design an adequate septic system before a building permit can be issued. The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department will design the system for the applicant as part of the permit fee, if an engineered system is not required. We will do a site visit, advise the applicant about the best location for the system and provide a system design. We will determine if an engineered system is needed based on soil test results. An engineered system is required if any one of the following conditions occurs: a percolation rate faster than 5 mpi or slower than 60 mpi; maximum seasonal level of the groundwater table or bedrock less than four feet below the bottom of the proposed absorption system; or a slope in excess of 30%. Prior to initiating any tests at the site, the applicant should contact this office. Based on percolation test results in the general vicinity, we are confident that a septic system can be installed. Lot 2 and lot 4 had a percolation rates of around 15 mpi. However, site specific soil data will have to be obtained for lot 3. The applicant will need to adhere to minimum horizontal setback requirements for placement of septic system components which should not be difficult on this lot. They will need to locate the leach field site a minimum of 100 feet from their well and from any neighboring wells which should not be a problem.. The proposed building envelope should be a more suitable site for placement of the septic system than the previous envelope. The previous envelope straddled a drainage and limited area available for placing the components of the septic system. Printed — Recycled Paper r s A condition of approval for this application is the receipt and approval of the septic permit by the Environmental Health Department before a building permit can be issued. WATER QUALITY IMPACTS• Sections 2-14 and 3-705 and 3-710_ "It is the policy of the County to preserve and protect its present water resources. To this end it is the policy of the County that no land use be initiated which would adversely affect the quantity, quality, or accessibility of the County's water resources; or which would occur at the expense of established water -dependent agricultural activities; or which would result in increased salinization of water resources, loss of minimum stream flows, further destruction of wildlife habitat, or major expenditures to reacquire or redistribute major water resources. It is also the policy of the County to maintain a natural vegetative buffer along its surface waters such that the surface and groundwaters of the area are not encroached upon by land uses or other human activities which could cause deterioration of water quality or impair the natural treatment processes provided by meadows and wetlands." The Environmental Health Department will be addressing water quality impacts on down stream water quality. This application is not expected to impact down stream water quality if the minimum horizontal distances between components of the system and physical features are in accordance with the Pitkin County Sewage Regulations. A condition of approval for this application is: NONE AIR QUALITY• Sections 2-13 and 3-602: "Only that development is permitted which will not contribute significantly to degradation of air quality in Pitkin County. Developments may not constitute an indirect or direct air pollution source under Federal, State or County regulations." This project is not expected to contribute significantly to degradation of air quality in Pitkin County. plan would need to include, but is not limited to, fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads to remove mud that has been carried out, speed limits, or other measures necessary to prevent windblown dust from crossing the property line or causing a nuisance. The applicant must file a fireplace/woodstove permit with the Environmental Health Department before the building permit will be issued.. The less densely populated parts of the county like Hidden Meadows may have two devices per building: a maximum of one wood burning fireplace and a second device which can be either a gas log fireplace or a certified woodstove. In addition, unlimited numbers of decorative gas appliances are allowed. Coal may not be burned in any device. No wood burning device may be installed in barns or agricultural buildings. Printed on Recycled Paper M- M M A condition of approval for this application is the receipt and approval of the fireplace/woodstove permit by the Environmental Health Department before the building permit can be issued. CONFORMANCE WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAWS: Section 2-7: ,,it is the policy of the County to ensure that no use or development of land is permitted which is in violation of the laws of the County, the State of Colorado, or the United States of America." This Department is not aware of any issues of concern regarding other environmental health laws. 4 Printed nn Recycled Paper .roe Q N RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT FOR LOT 3, HIDDEN MEADOWS SUBDIVISION, TO RELOCATE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE. Resolution No. 96- 13 RECITALS 1. HAVAPART, a California limited partnership, has applied to Pitkin County for approval of a subdivision amendment to relocate the building envelope on Lot 3 of the Hidden Meadows Subdivision. 2. The property is described as Lot 3, Hidden Meadows Subdivision. 3. This application was reviewed by the Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting on January 2, 1996. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application subject to conditions. 4. The Board reviewed this application at their regularly scheduled public hearing on March 27, 1996, at which time evidence and testimony was presented with respect to this application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners that it hereby approves the Hidden Meadows Subdivision Amendment for Lot 3 subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit an amended plat for recording which complies with the standards of the Land Use Code. REC DOC UCC 392197 04/29/96 03..32P P(3 1 OF �� 0.00 SI L197 DAVIS PITN.IN COUNTY CLE RI'. & RECORDERCORDER Resolution No. 96-4.� `,rr Page 2 2. The applicant shall adhere to all representations and commitments made with respect to this application. 3. All previous conditions of approval for the subdivision remain in effect and shall be adhered to by the applicant. 4. Driveway lighting and outdoor ornamental landscape "uplighting" is prohibited to minimize visual impacts. All other lighting shall comply with the County Land Use Code standards. APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 67%7 TH DAY OF 171alt C�,1996 ATTEST: A -AM leaiqette Jones, Deputy Cler Recorder APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Cindy Houben, Community Development Director 392197 04/29/96 03:32P PG 2 OF 2 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO James R. True, Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM: John >mty Attorney