Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.eh.273303300005 (1983)X733 -03.5-6v-005 +ASPENOPITKIN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT m�InT`JIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL PER"TIT f70. 93 0 /3 OF PE'l-MIT: -,.PE (�►toLtia: tonatrnction : )E.,ncr7ency Use ( )Repair Nork,(PieVioua Pe -mit i oC ar, cxint:ng system, (Previous PCX. or instailatlon ( )Use Permit as a reqult of Sala ( )Othori IS SU TO: DATE OF ISSUE / ��� p Business P:.ore 920 L--ner % O�E�2% .0 /� Rome !,hone /2�87�3 Address _.69 A-pe�j�� Agent MailLn S Address Phone Sewa?e Disposal System Work to be performed by OLt)A16jP- �y %� -//,) This permit valid only for premises location by tho following legal descrip_icns"_�3 ��Zi Flo bzt Lilt 512E , C-4ES• 1JATl:A SUPPLY ' �Ec.�— a'JERJIC:E P::RCOLR?IO`I 1tATF.�6 T`is Individual Sewage Di•,posal Permit is granted with regard to the following use: SiN� �� I-AMIL�,SID EA IE Nv+abcz ofd Dodreoms _LoftsCarbage Disposals I Dishwashcca C:othca tashors CrLCULATED AVERAGE DAILY WASTE LOAD 5 0 GALLONS. THE NATJRE OF 'r'.lE SYSTE"! iNCLL`DED UNDER. T1;TS 11 11T: — :ype of Tank oc Treatment knits Tank Capacitywn J Callon riinimun P•etT:od of Fin--illDispo3AIS&/vdlFAJ17,94A(.ABSo,'et(; Al46GD 1lbsorptiop Area �Zv [J Square F^.et HLn(^uin _ De:er.p:ion (irc:•sding brand name,lif any) of other equipment or appurtnancess other Condition! or Spccificaticnas PEN w� N r STAGES REQUIRING INSPECTION BY THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT: ( )Dcfcre ExcavationL'pon completion of excavation anprior to pjaCement of gravel effore covering distrl`,ucion system of aL•sorptio,: oil -1d x?riot to backfill of any component ( )Other. Specifys _IVOWG -- Pians ar.'t !0^eeificattons of the proposed sewage disoo.,el system have bee: r.evlewed and Pre_ eonsi•:cra,i a[isfactery. Porn!—',on grant^,1 to tt,! nwrer or hre avert to ncrform the work indicated above in az , mance with [�, ?._kin C�uc.ty Indi'++'.•ia. Sewa;e Disposal Re•ruiations in cffc,-t on the dac^ of issue. In addition to general provisions set fort, on the ruvcrgc her_c , :• this Permit is su)ect to them following additional Lera and condition33�p�f� i APPROVED FOR ISSUE BY lV, (title) The ahnve inr:ividunl sat+aye '.ispcsal oystcm installed by �-i+A) _ _—.----- ��• hos been for use oy a rcurescntative e.f the .^.seen ,nt 'l:.c .rwnur +u•'<ea 311 re::{wns:billty in c.:sc of Iallura or rnad ,quacv of this scwa.)o 1is;osal system. Cor„picto a+-.ullc dravinq wtta=aud. DATE OF FINNL INSP •CT UN_�� E -Y: / ' _ TITLE 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado B1611 303/925-2020 0 Lil r�iiiTTTT T A parcel of land located in Tract 52, Sections 3 and 10, Township 10 South, Range 86 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, said parcel is more fully described as follows: Beqinninq at Angle Point 5 of said Tract 52; thence N000511911W, 1530.38 feet to Angle Point 4 of said Tract 52; thence S89°59'16"E, 1000.0C ft; thence S00°05'19"E, 1195.11 ft; thence S24°16'14"E, 366.16 ft to a point on line 5-6 of said Tract 52; thence S89°56'14"W, 1150.00 ft. to the point of beginninq. Subject to a County Road right of way as described in Book 166 at paqe 242 in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. PITKIN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Field Test Data Sheet on Percolation Test PROPERTY OWNER —Aoe" PHONE MAILING ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY LOCATION OF TEST HOLES Three (3) test holes required per system Test Hole Depths (24" minimum) Diameter of Test Holes Water remaining after 8 hour soak 3joy • • �.. Drop 40 Timew • LE No. 37 D.. Time 1411111=1 I Percolation Rate Each Hole Average Rate l (� Comments on soil or site: Signature -� 10 ( Adxr,.,- Date w... ,�u.axi..otP..Sltid....ua d:e_.iww...id3 • .... .; a_._- +" �-a'. s Gc E Am,!-\ s% is alx��rt SN° `- b ower V1,DUS,�--- M Section TIT_ - Ydrolc,ZZ armed Geolo�.y I 1)?eport of Wright Water Engineers, Ince regarding the availability of ;nater for domestic purposes. Pgs. 32--35 Dote: in speaking with Bob Nelson, Pitkin County Sanitarian, he suggested that when this process j.s co ,)Jetpd and we begin the design development of the Helm project Envirodesign will mo of with Bob to design an appropriate sewage waste dis- posal. system. The Helms have voiced a desire to use a grey water subsurface irrigation systerl s iri.lai• t0 the design of t,�o previous client systems worked out with o :, :..son. 2) Lincoln / Devore Soils Report pgs. 36--54 Ji ,,dnigri Ttaa:; a, -,�,nvirodesign U D. Paul. Rubin and John Katzenberger +k+ tan } lPre in -Ce e StT'iiC 'Ural engineer eer ut,._ s b. JR . Rots: the team will construct a state of the art passive solar, earth integrated shelter. All.'design criteria specifically mentioned and formulated as a. result of Uncoln/D, yore's soil report will be more than met by the above ;:sntiored design team. (letter from Jades R. bran IAere pg. 55) ASPEN OFFICE D241 VENL NOR AVENUE ASPEN, COLGRADD 61611 CHEYENNE OFFICE 5226 LOCUST DRIVE CHEYENNE. WYOMING 82001 GLENWOOD SPRINGS OFFICE \ P.O. BOX 1266 / GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 51601 SAN LUIS VALLEY OFFICE P.O. BOX 200 ALAMOSA, COLORADO 61101 STEAMBOAT OFFICE P.O. BOX 5220 STEAMBOAT VILLAGE, COLORADO 60499 Paul Rubin P.O. Box 238 Snowmass, CO WRIGHT WATER ENIGINEERS, It ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 2420 ALCOTT STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80211 (303)458-6201 Glenwood Springs, Tel. 445-7755 81654 Dear Mr. Rubin: September 10, 1980 32 K!NNETH R. WnIOHT WILLIAM L. LOR:.11 RICHARD D. JOHNSON FRANX J. T RELEASE EMILY KROKOSZ JOHN H. GERSTLE H. RAY IN MYER CATHERINE KRAEGER ROVEY EDWARD W. ROVEY MARILYN M. STOKES DAN E. VERWOEP.T RE: Robert Helm Property Section 5.25.024 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code At your request, Wri-ght Water Engineers has prepared this letter report for Mr. Robert L. Helm, addressing the ground water supply con- cerns of Pitkin County as outlined in Section 5.25.02d of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. This section of the code is applicable for parcels that will be served by individual wells. The Helm property is a 36 acre parcel located on Snowmass Creek in the southwest quarter of Section 3, Township 10 South, Range 86 West in Pitkin County about 2 miles west of Snowmass, Colorado. We understand the parcel will be developed withone single family residence and an auxiliary residence. It is expected that one well will serve both dwellings. This report contains an evaluation of the surficial geology and ground water availability appurtenant to the Helm property. The evaluation was restricted to an office study utilizing the following resources: 1) U. S. Geologic Survey mapping of the Highland Park Quadrangle, 2) Pitkin County Ground Water Geology map, prepared by Wright Water Engineers in 1977, and, 31 envircnmental.and engineering geology mapping of the Roaring Fork and Crystal Valleys, prepared for the Colorado Geological Survey in 1974, and other materials. That portion of the Helm property which lies on the Snowmass Creek Valley floor is covered with recept alluvial deposits. The varying nature of the depositional forces acting on these deposits is responsible for an internal division among the deposits. The zone of deposition alona the 33 -2- Paul Rubin September 10, 1980 stream channel is stream alluvium while the fringes of the valley bottom are overlain with alluvial fan deposits. The toe of the range flanking the north portion of the property is covered with older glacial morainal deposits. The younger alluvial deposits are characterized by unconsolidated rock fragments which may be moderately to well sorted by size. This material commonly ranges in size from gravel to clay particles. We expect a well penetrating several feet of the saturated unconsolidated material will generally yield low to moderate supplies of acceptable quality ground water. However, it should be noted that variations in the permeability, saturated thickness, recharge properties, pattern of use, and seasonal recharge may result in a wide range of well yields in a given area. A review of the Pitkin County Ground Water maps shaves the Helm property is located in a major recharge area which is associated with the glaciofluvial deposition of the Sno:^mass Creek channel. The maps indicate an absence of any major regional alluvial aquifer units. On the basis of our i ntrepreati on of the above material and the experience of this office related to ground water availability in the Snowmass Creek drainage, a;e feel an acceptable site for a well of low to moderate yield can be selected on the Helm property. The principle aquifer unit covering the valley floor, the unconsolidated alluvial deposits, should exhibit permeability and recharge properties that are capable of sustaining viable, long-term supplies of acceptable quality ground water. It s.bould be recognized that if the 4rell is to be successful, it must penetrate the local water table and several feet of saturated material. The following comments address the ground water supply concerns of Pitkin County as outlined in Section 5.25.02d of the Land Use Code. Wl 34 Paul Rubin September 10, 1980 1. Based on our evaluation and general knowledge of the area, we anticipate that a low or moderate yield well of proper con- struction and location can be drilled on the Helm property that is reasonably capable of low to moderate withdrawals on a long -tern basis. The depth of the well should not exceed 100 feet. Ground water drawn from the well is directly tributary to Snowmass Creek and subsequently tributary to the Roaring Fork River and should be of satisfactory quality. The recharge area is believed to be the extensive glaciofluvial deposits which occur along the Snowmass Creek valley floor. 2. No problems are anticipated with regard to long-term supply, pollution or long-term maintenance. 3. An individual well should be capable of serving the needs of the two proposed dwellings. A well yield of 5 to 10 gpm is generally sufficient to serve 2 dwellings with limited irrigation and adequate storage. 4. The portion of the 1111el m property lying on the Snowmass Creek valley floor appears to be in the geologic flood plain of Snovapass Creek, however, we do not feel this situation will have an adverse impact on the operation of the well. Hence, we do not expect the flood plain occurance to place any restriction on the well location. Geologic hazards are generally not associated with the geologic feature appurtenant to the Helm property. Pollutant sources can be disregarded because there are no discharge sites in :the immediate area. Determination of any local contamination due to leach fields would require a review of soils test data. It appears there are no irrigation ditches associated with the - property; therefore, the well would not create any restriction conflicts. We believe a suitable well site can be located without violating any easement restrictions. Paul Rubin September 10, 1980 35 -4- 5. As previously stated, the proposed well is expected to be capable of serving the 2 dwellings. The pressure of the distribution system is dependent upon the engineering design of the system. 6„ The proposed well should not require any action by the Water Court. On the basis of conversations with the State Engineer's Office, we feel the proposed well will be granted an exempt domestic status. An exempt domestic well can yield up to 15 gpm, serve up to 3 units, and irrigate up to l acre, and is not subject to administration under the State Engineer's priority water right system. If you have any questions, please contact us. Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, IMC. B y�i�-- b;al ter F. Bricker WFB:ep 801-27.25 I r. Lincoln DeVore 1000 West Fillmore St. Colorado Springs. Colorado 80907 (303) 632-3593 Horne Office 1'nvioro Design Box 238 Old Snowmtass, CO 81654 Attn: Paul Rubin Re: GENERAL & ENGINEERING GEOLOGY & SUBSURFACE SOILS HELM RESIDENCE OLD SNOWMASS, COLORADO Gentlemen: 36 Transmitted herewith is a report concerning the general and engineering geology and subsurface soils of the proposed Helm Residence located in Old Snovrmass, Colorado. Respectfully submitted, LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY, INC. By: Duane W. Garrabrant Engineering Geologist Reviewed by Joseph R. Infa•celli Professional Geologist Job No. GS -1530 CC: LD -Glenwood Springs 602 East 8th Street P.O. ©ox 1427 86 Rosemont Plaza Pueblo, Coto 81001 Glenwood Surings. Colo 81601 Montrose. Colo 81401 (303) 5-46-1150 (303) 945-6u20 (303) 249-7838 By: Robin R. Kidder Civ' Engineer; Re Si wee P. E. 1 P.U. Box 1882 P.O. got; 1613 Grano Junct:on.. Co!o 8i Sol Rock SPrinn� 82307 (303) 242-8963 (307)382-2649• INTRODUCTION: 37 This report is a preliminary reconnaissance geology and soil report For a proposed home - site near Snowmass Creek Campground in Pitkin County, Colorado. Authorization was by Paul Reuben on August 28, 1980. The object of this report is to address pertinent geologic and soil engineering conditions which may have an effect on the proposed development and to discuss mitigation of any adverse conditions. The site can be described generally as the southwest .:,uarter of the southwest quarter of Section 3, Township 10 South, Range 86 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian. The proposed development is a single family residence with an adjoining guest house, to be par- tially underground and earth -sheltered. it is our under- standing that the sewage disposal system will be designed based on recommendations of the county sanitarian of Pitkin County. 11ater supply is to be from an individual- well, located and developed under the guidance.of Wright Water Engineers. Lincoln-DeVore has not received any specifica- tions on typw and design of the proposed structures. Paul Reuben located the general building site in the field and provided Lincoln-•DeVore with a sketch plan and legal description of the 36.27 acre lot. This report is based on (1) geologic reconnaissance of the site, (2) two test pits in the building area to determine subsurface soil conditions, j (3)'results of laboratory soil testing of samples obtained from the test pits and, (4) review and analysis of existing -1- 3 geologic literature. For the purposes of this report, attention was focused on the area of the proposed homesite. Geologic reconnaissance and excavation of test pits were conducted on September 2, 1980. GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTIO;: This site lies in the northeast - trending valley of Snowmass Creek, just northeast of the • confluence with East Snowmass Creek. The Snowmass Creek Campground (White River National Forest) lies immediately south of the property. Elevations across the site range from 8260 feet along Snowmass Creek to about 8600 feet at the northwest corner of the lot. The proposed building site is at an elevation of approximately 8290 feet, and is located south of the creek on a relatively flat, bench -like deposit of debris fan material.. Steep slopes, (25-30 degrees) rise from the valley to the northwest and southeast. Vegetation on the site consists of sparse to thick, small to large aspen, scatte.red fir and spruce, and numerous low herbals and grasses. The vicinity of the homesite is characterized by large, open grassy areas. All drainage in the area of the homesite is to the north and east and is tributary to Snowmass Creek. Various springs and seeps emit (or are emitted) from the toe of the slope southeast of the property. The site appears to be essen- tially in its natural state, with no indication of improve- ments or significant previous use. -2- 39 - ENGINEERING GEOLOGY: Surficial deposits in the Snowmass Creek Valley consist of glacial outwash and related deposits, as well as more recent alluvial and colluvial depos- its such as alluvial terrace gravels along streams, talus (broker. -rock) accumulations on the steeper slopes, colluvial wedges at the toe of slopes, and debris/alluvial fans where tributary steams join the main valley. Lardsliding has taken place at many locations on the sideslopes of the valley. Bedrock in the vicinity of the proposed homesite consists of Mancos Shale, including the hard and resistant Fort Hays Limestone member. As indicated by material exposed by the excavation of test pits and previous mappine by the United States Geological Survey, the proposed home - site is underlain by elevated debris/alluvial fan material. Generally, this material cons sts of angular fragments of Mancos Shale and Fort Hays Limestone up to one foot in dia- meter in a matrix of silty clay. Lesser amounts of rounded material derived from the Mzroon Formation is included, indi- cating that this deposit is a complex assemblage of debris flow, colluvial, alluvial, and possibly landslide material. Deposition of this material was probably related to the retreat of glaciers from the area, and no evidence was found for recent deposition in the area of the proposed homesite. Although the East Snowmass Creek drainage to the west of the site has experienced numerous recent debris flows, this area is at a sufficient distance to have no effect on the homesite. -3- 40 Bedrock was not encountered in the test pit excavations, and it is estimated to be at a depth of greater than 25 feet and, therefore, should not be a concern affecting the proposed development. Bearing capa- city for the materials encountered in the test pits should be good, in the range of 2500-3500 pcf. Soil materials derived from the Mancos Shale are known to he potentially expansive, and this may affect foundation design. Debris fan material is charac- terized by variable percolation rates and an investigation will be required to evaluate suitability for a conventional septic system. If a suitable leachfield cannot be found, an alternate engineered design, such as evapotranspiration, may be required. Soils in this area may be potentially corro- sive on foundation materials. A detailed discussi_il of soil materials and their properties will be presented in a later section of this report. The United States Geoloical Survey has mapped the Sno„mass Creek Fault Zone as underlying this site. This fault zcne is probably related to emplace - merit of Tertiary intrusive granite -type rocks and is not considered to be potentially active, therefore, recent or future movement is doubtful. All of western Colorado is subject to varying degrees of seismic risk, and it is recom- mended that all struzctures be designed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code for Seismic Risk Zone 2. Some small landslides have taken place on the steep slopes to the south of the site. Due to their .size and distance from the proposed homesite, they are not expecte to be a concern, however. -4- C 0 Some creep Has been noted on the. slope where the debris fan material descends to the floodplain of Snowmass Creek. This is a normal geologic process and is not severe or widespread enough to be a con- cern affecting the proposed development. No evidence for avalanche hazard was found on the site. To the southeast of the site, some lower ski runs of the Snowmass Ski Area descend the slope to a lift located approximately 1/2 mile northeast of the site. Some potential for avalanching undoubtedly exists on these cleared areas, however, potential avalanche paths :could be well to the east of this site. To our knowledge, no floodplain study exists on this portion of Snowmass Creek. The pro- posed homesite sits 20 to 30 feet above the apparent flood- plain of Snowmass Creek and potentia]. for flood damage at the hoTLsite appears minimal. No free water was encountered in the test pits, however, it is possible that groundwater may be found as shallow as 15 feet, and, depending on depth of foundation, may have an affect on design,. In any case, it is recommended that a perimeter drain be installed below the foundation level. No sources of radioactivity or potentially extractable mineral deposits are expected in the vicinity of this site. No effects of accelerated ero- 41 cion were noted on this site, however, if development is carelessly undertaken, erosion problems could rapidly develop. -5- 42 Disturbed areas should be kept to a minimum and revegetated as soon as possible. The Soil Conservation Service in Glenwood Springs can provide information to assist revegeta- tion programs. Particular attention should be given to final grading plans and considerations of surface.crainage. Structures should not block natural drainage paths unless adequate rechanneling is provided. Water should not be allowed to pond anywhere on the site, particularly near structures where foundation damage may result. MM C 0 43 TEST PIT, LABORATORY TESTS AND RESULTS: Two test pits were excavated across the site, and are located approximately as shoran on the attached Test Pit Log and Location Diagram. The two test pits were placed in such a manner as to obtain a reasonably good profile of the subsurface soils in this area. All test pits were excavated with a backhoe and samples were taken by bulk methods. As shown on the attached Test Pit Log and Soil Summary Sheet, basically two different soil materials were encountered during our subsurface exploration program. The silts of Soil Type No. 1, within the upper 8 feet of Test Pit No. 1, were encountered in a low to medium density/moist condition. This soil type corresponds to the debris/alluvial fan material deposited .cross the site. In this low to medium density/moist state, these soils will have only a slight tendency to expand upon the addition of moisture. For the most part the clayey sands of Soil Type No. 2, encountered at a depth of approxi- mately 10 feet, were noted to be of medium to high density. These clayey sands were noted to be slightly expansive in nature, and therefore, foundations in this area must be de- signed with this characteristic of tr!e soil in mind. Soil Type No. 2 also corresponds to the debris/alluvial sand material deposited across this site. The precise gradational and plasticity characteristics associated with the soils ercoun- tered during the excavation, can be found on the attached -7- • 44 Summary Sheets. The representative number for each soil group is indicated in a small circle immediately beside the sampling point of the Drill Logs. The following discussion of the soil groups will be general in nature. Soil Type.No. 1 classified as a low plasticity silt (ML) of fine grain size. These materials are of low permeability and low to medium density. Soil Type No. 1 is somewhat sensitive to changes in moisture. In a low moisture/medium density condition these silts are capable of producing swells on the order of 850 psf. This magnitude of expansion is generally judged sufficient to affect the lighter structural portions of buildings, as well as floor slabs on grade, and other flatwork. If these soils are encountered in this condition below footings, foundations in this region should be designed to counteract the expansive nater: of the soil. The maximum allowable bearing capacity associated with Soil Type No. 1 can be expected to be on the order of 2500 psf. This soil type was also found to contain sulfates in detrimental quantities. Soil Tyne No..2 classified as a clayey sand (SC) of medium grain size. Soil Type No. 2 is Of low .plasticity/medium permeability, and medium to high density. These soils will have a slight tendency to expand Upon the addition of moisture. At the water content encoun- tered on this site, swell pressures on the order of 1000 psf can be anticipated. This soil will have a very slight tendency to long term consolidate under applied foundational stresses, as well as a tendency to settle rapidly under the initial 45 C application of static foundation pressures. However, these settlements are characteristically very rapid in nature, -and should be virtually complete by the end of construction. In any event, if the allowable bearing values given in this re- port are not exceeded, and if recommendations pertaining to inspection, reinforcing, balancing and drainage are followed, it is felt that differential movement can be held to a toler- able magnitude. As an overall site average, Soil Type No. 2 was found to have an allowable bearing capacity on the order of 3500 psf. At the time of the excavation free water was not encountered in either test pit, which were extended to depths of approximately 12 feet. Further recom- mendations pertaining to drainage and grading will be provided in the next section of this report. CONCLUSIONS _ANDi RLCMIENDATION' : Since the exact magnitude and nature of the proposed foundation loads are not precisely known to Lincoln-DeVore at this time, the recommendations contained herein, must be somewhat general in nature. Any special loads or unusual design conditions should be report- ed to Lincoln-DeVore so that changes in recommendations can be made if necessary. However, based upon our analysis of soil conditions and ;project characteristics previously Out- lined, the following recommendations are made. 46 It is recommended that a shallow foundation system consisting of continuous foundations beneath bearing walls and isolated spread footings beneath columns and other points of concentrated load, be used to carry the weight of the proposed structure. Foundations -which rest on the underlying clayey sands of Soil Type No. 2, may be pro- portioned on the basis of a maximum allowable bearing capa- city of 3500 psf, with a minimum dead load pressure of 1000 psf being required. The bottoms of all foundations should ' be located a minimum of 4 feet below finished grade or great- er, if dictated by local building codes for frost protection. It is recommended that the pro- posed foundation system be well balanced. Structures are often more heavily loaded on some walls and columns than cn others, and the amount o variation in load can be quite high. Balancinq can be accomplished by placing Larger footings be- neath heavier loads, and smaller footings beneath lighter loads. The J-udicious use of voids will probably be necessary c_�sary in attaining the desired, balanced condition, as well as in maintaining the recommended dead 'Load nressur.e, The criteria for -balancing will depend somewhat upon the nature of the structure. Single story slab on grade structures may be balanced on the basis of dead load on'Ly. Multi -story struc- tures, or structures with basements should be balanced on the basis of dead load plus approxinate?y 1/2 the live load. Using whichever criteria is applicable, the contact stresses beneath the exterior foundation walls, should be balanced to -'§0- o 4( within +500 psf at all points. Isolated interior footings should be designed for unit loads.of about 200 psf less than the average of those selected for the exterior walls. It should be noted that any covering earth loads become part of the dead loads of the structure and must be accounted for. All stem walls for continuous foundations should be designed as grade beams capable of carrying their loads over a clear span of at least 12 feet. Horizontal reinforcement should be placed continuously around the structure with no gaps or breaks in the rein- forcing steel unless specially designed. Foundation wails should be reinforced at both top and bottom, with the rein- forcement being approximately balanced between these two locations. Where foundation walls are retaining soil in excess of about c feet in height, vertical reinforcing may be necessary, .and should be designed. For use in designing this reinforcing, the equivalent fluid pressure of the soil may be taken as .about 60 pcf in the active state. Where floor slabs are used, they may be constructed directly on grade or over a compacted gravel blanket of 4 to 6 inches in thickness. If the gravel blanket is chosen, however, it must be provided with a free drainage outlet to the ground surface, so as not to act as a water trap beneath the floor slab. Floor slabs should be constructed in such a manner that they act independently of columns and bearing walls. Additionally, these floor slabs should be placed in sections no greater than 25 feet on a side. Deep construction or contraction joints should be placed at these lines to facilitate even breakage. This -li- 48 will keep to a minimum any unsightly cracking which would be caused by differential movement. Adequate drainage must be main- tained across this site, both during and after construction, to prevent the ponding of water. The ground surface around the structure must be graded such that surface water will be carried quickly a.•7ay. Minimum grading within 10 feet of the structure will depend upon surface landscaping,. Dare or paved areas should have a minimum grading of. 2%, while land- scaped areas should have a minimum grading of 70. Where roof drains are used, they should be carried across all bac„- filler areas, and discharged well away from the structure. Covered roof areas, if any, must be drained very rapidly. It is recommended that a sub- surface peripheral drain be placed around the structure, at foundation level. The drain should consist of an adequate 'discharge pipe, gravel. water collector, and sand or fabric fi.l.ter. The discharge pine should be provid;,d with ? free gravity outf_ail to the ground surface, if at all possible. If gravity outfall is not possible, then a lined, sump and pump should be used. Backfill around the proposed structure and in utility trenches leading to the structure, should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor dry density, (ASTM D-698). The native soils on this site may be used for backfilling purposes, with the excep- tion of the organic topsoil materials. Backfill should be placed in lifts not to exceed 6 inches compacted thickness, -17.- 49 and at the Proctor optimum moisture content of the soil +206. Backfill must be compacted to the required density by mecha- nical means, and no waterflooding techniques of any type should be used in the placement of fill on this site. Any topsoil or debris should be removed from the construction area prior to the beginning construction of foundations. Additionally, should any pockets of debris, organic material, or otherwise unsuitable material be encountered during excavation for footings, this material should be removed and replaced with suitable backfill compacted to 95% of the maximum standard Proctor dry density, using the procedures previously outlined. The open foundation excavation should be inspected prior to the const -ruction of forms or placem-ent of concrete to establish that proper desiegn bearing material has been reac;;ed, and that no debris, soft spots or other ensu table mareria.ls are located in the foundation region. The soils on this site were fount] to contain sulfates in detrimental quancites. For this reason a sulfate resistant cement, such as Type II Cement is recommended for use in all concrete which will be in contact with the foundation soils. Under no circumstan- ces should calcium chloride ever be added to a Type II Cement. In the event that Type II Cement is difficult to obtain, a Type I Cement may be used, providing the concrete is separated from the soils by water resistent membranes. -13- 4 • >0 It is believed that all per- tinent points concerning the subsurface soils on this site have been covered in this report. Should soil types and conditions other than those outlined herein be noted during construction on this site, these should be reported to Lincoln--DeVore so that chances in recommendations can be glade, if necessary. Should questions arise, or further information is needed, please feel free to contact our office. --1 GENERAL SITE LOCATION DIAGFA,H fiOELIJI RES., OLD SNOWPUSS, CO 0 I IN C. 0 N 'ENG I N E E R S GEOLOGISTS r,-,LCFjADC: COLO'RADC, SPRINGS PUEBLO, GLENVoCOD SPRINGS GWA14D ,)UNCTION , mCNT-ROSE WYOMING: ROGK SPRINGS 52 TEST HOLE NO- r TOP ELEVATION f m I- .�, O sc, mcxxr,, FR.� 6. 5 ' � � 1 .l1MEsTc�✓.g s/1. Tf; � � — WX. SXR cF. � I , !/i��y Q s 7-, /W04/1 - S oz 1A —15 20 1 ^i —25 -- T, R,' 2 no T. P.'r/ w TEyT PIT LOG AND LOCA TlO;!CIAGRA.DeVORE '�' !C0L N HELM RES., 01_D S;v0'i-.',''LASS CO � �`��`� r -N ;INE ERs• GEOLOGISTS c -U COLORADO: COLORADO SPRINGS' PUEBLO , GLLNWOOD SPRINGS, GRAND JUNCTION , MCNTROSE , ;YON4iNG_ROCK S?P,I'GS �K SUMMARY SHEET Soil Sample M_� Loring ^;o. / Uepth rd` (TY�'. sample e N10 . 1 --------- 53 Test No. Date S- $ - a (, Test by Natural 'Vater Content (w) 7-1-0/o Specific Gravity (Gs) In Place Density (-Fo) ______ Pcf SIEVE ANALYSIS: Sieve i\h - % Passing HY[--,;I METER ANALYSIS: Gra'^ size (t ;rn) % SOIL ANALYSIS LUV•09 Plastic Limit P.L._ - --2-1-2 r-__._% Liquid Limit L. L. � opo Plasticity lnccx P.I Shrinkage Limit -- -- :ego Floe✓ Index — - Shrinkage Ratio Volumetric Lineal Shrinkage MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTI M METHOD Optimum Moisture Content - w2 °/o Mriximum Dry Density -7d ocf California Bearing Ratio (av�_-__ % Swell - rgys -•'_ °�o Swell psf Ado BE:RING: Hous --1 Penetrometer (av 2 __ _Psf Unconfined Compression (cu)_ psf Plate Bearing: - Psf Inches Set; lement --- Consolidation % under Psf PERMEABILITY: K (at 200C) Voicl Ratio- Sul,ates 2000+ PPM• LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COL OR,Ai�'.) SPRINGS, COLOR:ADO k 0 54 Soil Sa-n-.,ple--- ;� Pi:oject_�!�-7 -QVMY�3- Sample L-ocation-LEIZ-Q-15-L�(P.� Test No. _I57QC,"I - J' ,LKL�_ D a t e — — --13- -()— Test by._,IL, RAVEL SANDST ---I LT TO CLAY --�J-Co.--J-Med.um Fi - n c- Noas C 0 a r se :r_� I nPltic to plastic loor- go 70- L4- 60' 1 ZLO t 3 0 20 LLL .A. e 100 2',% 0 1 1 1 -L" qanve�er- (ITJUI�'- I 3V4 --R10 :020 WI -0 -UCO -42('13 - sic-ve Sample Specific GravJ.t- .A 1-10istu-,,e content— 9 5Z Effective size Cc Fineness Modulus L . L -'QEARIITG-- 3500 GRAIN SIZE AINALI'SIS .0-01 o8";,z % Passing j- 1 Sulfates 2QQ I PPm LTNC(-jL!,!-DeVOR-P TESTING lAbORATORY COLORADO SPRTNCS- MT.nPAnn 3�47. 4-- 1/2 87.1 4 10 73.5 20 6 G 40—, loo 200 .0200 52 7 46.0 0 -005 - Sulfates 2QQ I PPm LTNC(-jL!,!-DeVOR-P TESTING lAbORATORY COLORADO SPRTNCS- MT.nPAnn Jamas R. Van Liore , Inc. STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS IOA03 W CO:EA% AVE SUITE 560 LANEWOCD, CCLC5ADO 80215 OFFICE '(301)278-1411 RES 232-23�O Mr. maul_ Rubin Envirodesign, Ltd. BOX 21�8 Sr_o�ar'ass, Colorado 31654 Dear Paul: Re,: Helm Residence Soils Report Review JRVL No. 2.0039 September 24, 1980 As requested, we have reviewed Soils Report No. GS --1.530 as prepared by Lincoln LeVore of Colorado Springs, Colorado, for the proposed Helvi reg=idence -to be located in Old Snownans, Colorado. Based on our review and education, knowledge and experience in struci:ural and foundation design, It is our opinion that - it hami4 is possible to design and construct, a foundation .system adequate to support the residential structure which you envision. it is our uride rsLanding th zt you intend to have approximately three fourth r, of the structure to be undor- grouI)(1, an aspect of the structural design which we do not foresee as presenting any undue difficulty. Of course, our design will be compatible with the constraints, limitations and precautions delineated in the soils report, such as minimum and maximura bearing pressures, perimeter drains) sulfate resis-tent, concrete, etc. In summary, it is our opinion that the soils on the proposed site are satisfactory material on which to support the structure you are proposing to design and construct. 4 Pis . Paul Rubin • September L4, 1980; pane 2 We trust this letter report satisfies your needs for the present so that you may proceed into the design phase of your work. After you have prepared your plans to a greater degree of completion., we will start the final structural and foundation design and drawings. I_f you have any questions or comments, please feel free to call. Yours truly, James R. Van Liere, Inc. Structural -Engineers �Ta1110s T:. Van ie -e.1 e, P.E. President JRVL:mm