Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication - Permit.. ll Z>CJ0 tS JI> ~8#3::t txifu ·-s-~-+ Garfield County Building & Sanitation Department 108 81' Street, Suite #401 Glenwood Springs, Co. 81601 Office-945-8212 lllspection Line-384-5003 Cl'..{;f ., Job Addressc:ct9 eJ·I ftU Ct Fa mc hu1e g lb3S Nature ofWork Buildin g Pennit ,1/-.fliJ IE IOLfQ ~ 10372 Use of ,Buildin g u[hOVVle LJ ple-6 B o n\~ enclQ wJqar CJt,e &fO liO Owner OO.elft LLC contractor GvCtCe l!~VYlD Amount of Permit $ Lfl.{f6-j± 1tJ tflfOC+QEEQ-/ ~g.{)-0 -TqWiG -:> l..J(;6S -S~ Date 3 -~-:}- OARFlELD COUNTY DUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION · 108 r •.atnct, 81dt.e 201, ~ Spriap. ca &1601 .Pt&oiUil 9?o.9415-1ZI2/ hie: 970-311-'10 /tAqoecu-. Llael P70-384-5CIO:I oo1u COlt 0()1~ Pwcel(SchcduleNo:Jt l '10 713 10'1'0 1.3 I Jab Address: jf 00 1(} / (.,/ ;-( 1/,•t -& ~o,;.l 1-P~ • La ~ / b 3 S Permit No: 8 CJau of Work: 0 0 SIDsJc 0 Double 10 0 Drivewa,y Permit 0 Oa·8fte sewase Dlaposal 0 3itc Plan _\ Jl Ve.II.Wlon of Worlc $ 12 Spectal Conditiou: NOllCE A SEl'ARAT£ IU.ECTRICAL I'I!RMIT IS I'IEQUliUm AND MUBI'BII ISSUED BY'111E SU.TE OP OOLORADO. 1BIS PDMlT JID:QID:IS JIVU. AND VOID IP'WORltOR c:G.IIStJUJCt10 AU7BORIZED 18 HOT COMMI!lfCED Wl11IIJf 180 DAYS, OR.IP · CONS'PIUCRON OR WORK IS SUSPEHDED OR ABANOCINBO FORA PBiuOD OP 180 O.USAT Am' 'l1MS AfTER WORK: 13 COMMSHC£0. PI; ~:ck;:4 2 Permit Fee: /71-r z. .q6 Total Fc:o: Daad. Permit bsued: ~4l(u. "'t>'J "t I 'A~.([) -tffob5.5 7 - 'occ-T~G · Conat. Type: Zoa.ing: Setback&: ...... Mas,. W•Me"! " ISDS No. & Fee: 'f h-co. 1 -· , "~~ ·~ ----, ........ 47. ~~~ /8?.~ I 'I I ! I .! I i I I , ~~ I PERMJSSIOllliS tmRii:BY oRANrSD TO THB IIPPIJCAN1' liS OWNER. CONmACTOR .AND/OR me: AOENr Ol"nE ooNTRAcroR oR aWli£R TO ooNS't'R\Icr· I . Sl'aUct'URSAB DEI'J\ILED ON I'U\NB AND SP.ECit:'ICATJONS SUBMITTED TO AND REVDtW£0 BY THE B~INO DEP&tTMI!:NI'. , i II : I I ' II i J I Ill CONSIDER.\'nOH OF nte: ISSSUANCS OP' THlS PERMJl', 111.8 SIGNER. HSI!EBY AORE:ES TO COMPLY wrtH ALL BUILDING CODES AND IJINO I il REOO&AnOlfS ADOPt'ED 8't OARFJELD CO UNIT PURSUAm' TO AtmfORnY <HVBN LN 30..23.20l CJts. AS AND'fDEO. tHS SOHE:R FUJmiER AOUI!:S 71IA J ~ABOVE &\10 ORDINAHCES ·AR£ NOI' P'Ui.LY .COMJ'JLEO WitH lN TKB U:OAllON, ERI!C110N, CONS1'1WCnoN,l!M> USS OF'·"ftB.NIOVB DESCRII • 1 , STRUC1\Itu:, '111£ PltRIUT MAY BE R£VC_KED BY' NOnCE FROM '1H1!: COUNTY' AND 11L\T TH1RC AND TKitRI!: rr SJfAU. BECOME truLt AND VOlD. I ntE JSSUANce 01' A PERM!' BASED UPCH ~. &PI!Cli'JCA110NS AND oltmR DATA SHA1.L NOT PREVEl'rr 1H£ BUUDINO 01'1'1CW. FROM 11{ltREAf' j Rl!lQUIRIMO TJUt CORRECTlCM OP' ERRORS IIC SAID PLANS. SI'.EaJ:JCA1tONS AND onuat DATA OR FROM PR8VliHTRf0 Buu..n!NO OPE:RA'ttOK BE ; CARRIED OM THl!ai!:UHDER WHSN IN VIOU.TJON 0., TtiS COD& OR ANY OTHER OlUIJlfANCS OR KI!XJUtA110N OP TtUS .JURZSDtCTIOil . ---------~--· ------. ---·-------···· -- •. ·The following items are required by Garfield County for a final inspection: 1. A final Electrical Inspection from the Colorado State Electrical Inspector; 2. Permanent address assigned by Garfield County Building Department posted where readily visible from access road; 3. A finished root: a lockable house, complete exterior siding. ex.b:lrior doors and windows installed. a complete kitchen with cabinets. a sink with hot & cold nmniDg water, non-absorbent kitchen floor coverings, coUDter tops and finished walls. ready for stove and refiigcrator. all uecessary plumbing; 4. All bathrooms must be complete, with washbowl, tub or shower. toilet stool, hot and cold IWllling water, non-absorbent floors and walls finished and a privacy door; 5. All steps outside or inside ovec three (3) steps must have handJails, guard rails on balconies or dcclc:s over 30" high oonstmcted to all me and IRC xequiremeuts; 6 . Outside grading done to where water will detour away :from tbe building; 7. Exceptions to the outside steps, decks and gmding may be made upon tbe demonstration of extenuating circumstances, i.e. weather, but a Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until all the required items are completed and a final inspection made; 8. A final inspection sign off by the Garfield County Road & Bridge Department for driveway inslallatiou, where applicable; as well as any final sign off by the Fire District, anchor State Agencies where applicable. A CERTIFICATE OFOCCUPANCY WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL MJ::: THE .ABOVE ITEMS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. •u•cANNOT OCCUPY OR USE DWELLING t.JNTfi..A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY (C.O.) IS ISSUED. OCCUPANCY OR USE OF D"WELLINO WITHOUT A C.O. WILL BE CON~IDERED AN ILLEGAL OCCUPANCY AND MAY BE GROUNDS FOR VACATING PREMISES UNTIL ABOVE CONDmONS ARE MET. I understand and agree to abide by the above conditions. for occupan~ ana the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the dwelling under building petmit # M.Z~ {0 3/ )....._ X ~ . -. --4jt·l )(_• ~~!j'/6-1 -- signature Date Bpcont0ct2004 I i ! ! II I i . I I I I I I ; t I I II r. I ! ' I l I • I . I I I ----·-------~---·· --~---~· -·------··-------- - VALUATION/FEE DETERMINATION Applicant~ L Lf- Addreie?@, rr lb? Ctt.. Date Z-Co-97 1 . Finished (Livable Area): Pr'BcD Main )(.p )2.. ~ Upper JJ?'B Lower Other Subdivision v M.~ ul~ Ulu.AG.l. Lot/Block 23 Contractor<; tel ce ~ vvtes --_,_ .... , •• .....J T al .l 'y 3 dO, 12} LO ot Square Feet 5090 v 7'1 ° :::-o Valuation Basement: Unfinished Conversion of Unfinished to Finished Plan Check Fee for Conversion Valuation Garage: AD De Crawl Space: Decks/Patios: Valuation Valuation Covered z QQ \-2..). Valuation Open Valuation lr..r..o ~ (L Total Valuation L9t.o COUNTY OF GARFIELD· BUILDING DEPARTMENT CORRECTION NOT IC E 1 08 8th St., Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Colorado Phone(970)945-8212 Job located at ti::J7 2-/ -tJ(!:J 7 Y I Permit No. / o3 ?o / /t:J 3 71- I have this day inspected this structure and these premises and found the following corrections needed: Re.. do /;,:.e s/r;,Pf?l/;f ;,;su/e:zh~ l~>r j?--b~ --1~/&s U/1/er ~l.t}:s You are hereby notified that the above correction must be inspected before covering. When correction(s) have been made, call for i nspection at 970-384-5003. Date ~ .. /7 2o6? Building Inspector _---L,A-'-~z.!i::::~.=!q, ~~:..........;..___;:;.:Joo:::~~----­ Phone(970)945-8212 BUILDING PERMIT CARD Job Address (b tLf ( } I fUJ r + ftv £() rVIO\A -oi~ js= Owner ~)f(. L~C Address~ t:n\1~1 r-1-<:,>r;; \ Phone # ..,-,..J vY'e Y ContractoG:eore H.O~'V1f5 Address 31) \JV\e I Phone # SN S"S3J Se~backs: Front t-Rear (I~ LH _____ Zoning ----- tJJn()Vvr.5 L!ple;\ \3on~ tacit, wJ f~g~~~bl.~P:tut:> Soils Test------------ Footing------------- Weatherproofing _____________ _ Mechanicai _________ __,,....---- Foundation ___________ _ Electrical Rough (State) 8 ~ 3 ~o? rjlaa. Electrical Finai.(State) 11-ttf-o? ~ Finai//-2../-0r{ /Checklist Com~leted? Dh1 Certificate Occupancy# _S~S0==-'='3=...-.=----- Grout __________ ~~~~~~- Underground Plumbing s-zt~o 7 lf1m Aoug.h Plumbin~ Y.-\ ~ ~o ") ~AA 1 Frammg _ ~ t 0-b_ l'"~ Insulation -Z!J .-7 Date 1~suB1 \ \-arro:t Septic System *-:;::==-------- Roofing Drywall -~8n---d"~f'---f)--::::1:::---7/QVi&n---:-------- Gas Piping r'l-~ \ -CY"\ $-.,1 Date ----'--------------Final_.===:..._ ______ _ ;..!fo~ P< f,-/,-o-;7~ •xT.RIOR Address No. Drainage ------------- Decrc..upport & clearlllce to wood Decfca.staln~ & llllls ------ EJCierlor locks Fluhlng aroun~d -:-do_ors_&_w-ln-do_wa ______ _ tneect screens ----------- INT.RIOR GARAGE Fire wall separation Service doors-1~" m-:ln-.--------- Ooor (20 min .) w/auto cloaer·1~" min . Mach. equip. 18" above floor ------ No opening Into sleeping area BASEMENT·CRAWL AREA------- Acc~~a lnsulallon:-------------- Headroom/':St:al:=,.----------- Ventilation ------- Other ________________ _ NOTES FINAL CH.CKL18T MECHANICAL ROOM Soller ~lwa~t.----------------- F.A. gM/oll ________ _ Floor drain Cleer111ce --------- Air con .ayatem _______ _ ~I watw heater Combustion air ---------- Gas piping, valves LPG Drain --------:.___ FIREPLACE/STOVE Clell'ance to combusllblll ------Termination ol chimney ______ _ Combustion air ________ _ Hearth (f2" or 20" on aides)----- Glue doors Certified by : _________ _ REMARKS (continue on back) STAIRWAYS . Heactroo m (8 '6") RaiNng & gu•dra-lls _________ _ Width Rise &-:-ru-n--'----------- KITCHEN Clearance abow grtll EJChaust fan --------- Broiler axhauat (1 hr. chua)------ BEDROOMS Egress Smoka:d,-:-te-c:-lo-r --------- BATHROOMS EJChauat fan ____ -.....: _____ _ Shatterproof glaa _______ _ OTHER OIL - INSPECTION WILL NOT BE MADE UNLESS THIS CARD IS POSTED ON THE JOB 14 HOURS NOTICE REQUIRED FOR INSPECfiONS BUILDING PERMIT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Date lssued.J.~~.'J:.:z.oned Area ............................... Permit No/.0.3.1..2?. ... AGREEMENT In consideration of the issuance of this permi~ the applicant hereby agrees to comply with all laws and regulations related to the mning, location; construction and erection of the proposed structure for which this permit is granted, and further agrees that if the above said regulations are not fully complied with in the mning, location, erection and construction of the above described structure, the permit may then be revoked by notice from the County Building Inspector and 1M MEDIATELY BECOME NULL AND VOID • • Setbacks Fmgt Side Sjde Rear This Card Must Be Posted So It is Plainly Visible From Tbe Street Until Final Inspection. INSPECTION RECORD Footing &4_ t:A.JJ..: •ft• Driveway Foundation f'ul.... Underground Plumbing S-2.:Z.-o7 Je-w\ Insulation cg' · Zo-011hv\_ Rough Plumbing ~ _ \ ..,6 1\ c .t, ll. Drywall 8-d if-DI J. 0-ttv\ Chimney & Vent It • lfl -e:.l\ J," Electric Final (by State Inspeelorl'm.H· ... C · Gas Piping '). ) \ ·D" M.l{ Final II · J..t-o? Electric Rough (By State Inspector) lSf/i[fJ/ Septic Final -?tAL- Framing G .,. 10 .-<.Y\. 9-~ L Notes: (To include Roof in place and Windows and Doon iostaUed). ALL LISTED ITEMS MUST BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BEFORE COVERING- WHETHER INTERIOR OR EXTERIOR, UNDERGROUND OR ABOVE GROUND. THIS PERMIT IS NOT TRANSFERABLE For Inspections Call384-5003 108 8th Street Glenwood Springs, Colorado A~VEDDO NOT DESTROY THIS CARD Oat ~ By FJOIWitrJ NtJ-b IF PLACED OUTSIDE -cov""t/ WITH CLEAR PLAS.TIC -, 4Jdre&!>: (}270-0076 · ·. Cl,· (ftr; ~(), GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING 970-945-8212 l'vflN1MUM APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF COMMERCIALORMULTI-F.Al\fiLYRESIDENTIALBUILDINGS Including NEW CONSTRUCTION ADDITIONS ALTERATIONS And MOVED BUILDINGS In order to understand th,e scope .ofthe work intended Wlder a permit application and expedite · the issuance of a permit it is important that complete information be provided. When reviewing a plan aod i.t's discov~d that required information has not been provided by the applicant, this will result in the delay of the permit issuance and in _proceeding with building construction. The owner or contractor shall be required to provide this infonnation before the plan review can proceed Other plans that are in line for review may be given attention before the new in:.!Drmation may be reViewed after it has been provided to the Building Department. Please review this document to determine if yoa have enough information to design your project and provide adequate information to facWtate a plan review. Also, please Consider using a deslen professional for assistance in you.r design and a construction professional for construction of your project. Any project witb more than ten (10) o~apants requires the . plans to be sealed by a Colorado Registered Design ProfessionaL To provide for a more understandable plan and in order to determine compliance V~tith the building, plumbing and mechanical codes, applicants are requested to review the following checklist prior to and during design. Plans to be included for a Btrllding Permit must be on draft paper at least 18''x 24'"' and draWD. to scale. Plans must include a floor plan, a concrete footing and foundation plan, elevations al1 sides with decks, balcony steps; hand rails and guard rails, windows and doors, including the finish gr.adc and original gxa.de line. A section showing in detail, from the bottom of the footing to the top of the root: including re-bar, anchor bolts, pressure treated 'plates, floor joists, wall studs and .spacing, iosulation, sheeting, house·rap, (which is required), siding or any approved building material. Engineered foundations may be required. Check _with the Building Department. A window schedule. A door schedule. A floor fi:aming p~ a rooting framing plan, roof must be designed to withstand a 40 pound per square foot up to 7,000 feet in elevation, a 90 M.P.H. windspeed, wind exposure B or C, and a 36 inch frost depth. All sheets need to be identified by number and indexed. All of the above requirements must be met or your plans will be returned. All plans submitted must be incompliance with the 2003 me, IPC, IMC and IFOC. AppliCBDts are required to indicate appropriately and to submit cttmpleted cheddist at time of application for a permit: 1. Is a site plan included that identifies the location of the proposed structure. additions or other buildings, setback easements, and utility easements showing distances to the property lines from each comer of the proposed structure prepared by a licensed surveyor and has the surveyors signature and professional stamp on the drawing? Slope!l of30% or more on properties must be show on sito plan. (NOTE: Section 106.2) Any 3itc plan for the placement of any portion of a structure within 50 ft. of a property Une and not within a previousJy surveyed building envelope on a subdivision final plat shall be · prepared by a licensed surveyor and have the surveyors signature and professional stamp on the drawing. Any structure to be built within a building envelope of a lot shoVIJl ol'l a recorded subdivision plat, shall include a copy of the building env~lopc as it is shown on the fin*'lat with the proposed structure located within the envelope. Yes . 2. Docs the site plan when applicable include the location of the I .S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) and distances to the property lines, wells (on subject property and adjacent properties), streams or water courses? This information must be certified by a licensed surveyor with their signature and professional stamp on the design. Yes f No Not ne~acy for this project __ _ 3. Are the plans submitted for application review construction drawfngs and not drawings that are stamped or maxked identifying them as "Not for construction, for permit issuance only",_"Approval drawings only", "For pmnit issuance only" or similar language? Yes Y No__ Notnccessaryforthisproject~-- .2 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Is the I.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) designed, stamped and signed by a Colorado Registered Engineer? Yes+ No__ Not nc::cessiU}' for this project. __ Does the site pl_an indicate the location and direction of the State, County or private road accessing the property? Yes-'t-- Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all ' reinforcing steel in accordance with the uniform building code or per stamped engineered design? Yes~ No_· _ Not necessary for this project_ If the building is a pre-engineered structure, is there a stamped, signed engineered fo~dation plan far this building? Yes-+-No_ Not necessary for this project_ Do the plans indicate the location and size of ventilation openings for under floor crawl spaces and the clearances required between wood and earth? Yes__ No__ Not necessary for project1._ Do the plans indicate the size and location of the ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces and soffits? Yes-* No__ Not necessary for this project_ Do the plans include design loads as required under the me or IRC for roof snow loads, (a minimum of 40 pounds per square foot itt Garfield County)? Ye$+-. No_ Not necessary for this project __ Do th\ll&ns include design loads as required for floor loads under the IBC or IRC7 Yes No_ Not necessary tbrthis project_ · _ Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor, and roof construction? Yes+.-No__ Not necessary for this project~ Is the wind speed and exposure design included in the plan? Yes-+--No_ Notnecessaryfarthispmject __ Does the building section drawing include size and spacing of floor joists: wall studs, ceiling joists. roof rafters or joists or trusses? Yes~ No_ Notnecessaryforthisproject __ 3 'IS. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method of positive coDDeetion of all columns and beams? Yes_:{_ No_ Not necessary for this project_ 16. Does the elevation plan iodicate the height oflbe building or propo!ed addition from the undisturbed grade to the midpoint between the ridge and eave of a gable or shed roof or the to-p of a flat root'l (Check app&able zone district tor building height maximum) Yes No__ Not nc:ccssaiY for this project_ 17. · Does the plan incbxk any stove or zero clearance fireplace plann~ for installation including make and model and Colorado.Phase II certifications or Phase II EPA c:ertification? Yes_ No_ Not ~cessary fur this project..J:_ 18. Does the plan include a. masomy fireplace including a fireplaoe section indicating design to comply with the IBC or IRC? Yes__ No_ Not necessary fur tbis project..l_ 19. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that egress/rescue windows from sleeping rooms and/or basements comply with the reqUirements of the IBC or IRC7 Yes----2:_ No__ Not necessaey for this project_ 20. Docs the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural light and ventilation for all habitable rooms? Yes+ No__ Not :necessary for this project_ 21. Do ~e pJans indic:ate the location of glazing subject to ~uman impact such as glass doors, glazing immediately adjacent to such dotm; glazing adjacent to any surface nonnally used as a waDdng surfac.e; sliding glass doors; fixed glass panels; shower doors and tab · enclosures and speci:fY safety g1azjng fur these areas? Yes_:f__ No_-_ Not~fortbisproject_ 22 Do the p1sos ~lode a complete design. fur all mecbanical systems pbmncd. for instaJiation in thJs buildin&? Yes_ No J? Not necessary for this project. __ 23. Have al1 areas m tbe builcUDg been accurately identified for the intended ose? (Qccupancy as identified in the me Chapter 3) Yes1._ No_ Notnecessaryf'Drthisproject __ _ 24. Does the plan indicate the quantity, to~ use and storage of any baDrdous materials that may be in use in this building? Yes_ No_ Notnccessaryforthfsprojec(_!,_ 4 25. Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas furnaces, boilers and water heaters indicated on the plan? · Yes--/'-. No~ Not necessary fur this project_ ~6. Do the plans indicate the location and dimension of restroOm. facilities and if more than · four employees and both sexes are employed, facilities for both sexes? Yes_ No__ Not necessary for this project~ 27. Do the plans indicate thatrestrooms and access to the building are handicapped accessible? Yes~ No Not necessary for this project_ . 28. Have two (2) complete sets of construction drawings been submitted with the application? Yes_,f-No __ 29. Have you designed or had this plan designed while considering building and other construction code requirements? Yes_L. No__ Not necessalj' for this project. __ 30. Docs the plan aCCU«ltely indicate what you intend to construct and what will receive a final inspection by the Garfield County Building Department? Yes~ No_ 31. Do your plans comply with aU ~onicg rules and regulations in the County related to your ~one district? For comer lots see supplemental section 5.05.03 in the Garfield County Zoning Resolution for setbacks. Yes T No. __ _ 32. Do you understand that approval for design and/or construction changes are required lUi2r to the implem=rtation of these changes? Yes_!_ No_ 33. Do you understand that the Building Department will collect a "Plan Review" fee from you at the time of application and that you will be required to pay the "Penntt" fee as well as any "Septic System'' or "Road Impact'' fees required, at the time you pick up your building pennit? Yes~ No_ 34. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections required under the IBC including approval on a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and occupancy of the building? Yes.;e.--No __ 5 35. Are you aware that the Permit Application must be signed by the Owner or a written authority be given for an Agent and that the party responsible for the project .must comply with tby?niform Codes? Yes No __ 36. Are you aware that you must call in for an inspection by 3:30 the business day before the requested inspection in order to receive it the following business day? Inspections will be made between 7:30a.m.. aud 3:30p.m. Moiway thrOU&:h Friday. Inspections are to be called in to 384-5003. 37. Are you aware that r.equesting inspections on work that is not ready or not ·accessible wiD result in a $50.00 rc-inspection fee? Ycs--YL No. __ _ 38. Are you aware that prior to issuance of a bullclj.ng permit you are required to show proof of a driveway access permit OI:,obtai.n a statement from the Garfield County Road & Bridge Department stating one is not necessary? You can contact the Road & Bridge Department at 625-8601. Yes y No. ___ _ ' 39. Do you uqderstand that you will be required to hire a State of Colorado Licensed Electrician and Plumber to perform installations and hookups? The license number will be required at time of inspection. Yes f No. ___ _ 40. Are you aware. that on the front of the building pon::nit application you will .need to fill in the ParceJI Schedule Number for tbe Jot you axe applying for this permit oo. prior to submittal of the building penoit application? Your attention ill this is appreciated. Yes)' No __ _ 41. Do you know tPa,t the local fire district may require you to ·submit plans for their review of fire safety issues? Yes Y No (Please check with the building department about this requirement) 42. Do you understand that if you arc planning on doing any excavating or grading to the . property prior to issuance of a building permit that you wj]J be required to obtain a grading ~nn.it? Yes \.( 43. Did an Architect seal the plans for your commercial project? S.tate Law requires any commercial project with occupancy of more than 10 persons as per Sec~ on 1004 of the IBC to prepare the plans and specifications for the project. Yes '( No Not Necessary for this project-----: 6 I hereb acknowledge that I have read, understand, and ~wered these questions to t of my ability. SigDature Phone: 2'f~-<[S'21-(days); ________ (evenings) Project Name: lb fl, (/,""' lt, /t~ Project Adcb:ess: 007 0-007 6 Note: Date I · If you answered "No" on any of these questions you may be required to provide this information at the request of the Building Official prior to beginning the plan review process. Delays in issuing the permit are to be ~pcctecl. Work may not proceed witbout the issuance of the permit. *If you have answered "Not necessary for this project" 90 any of the questions and it is determined by the Building Official' that the information is necessary to review the application and plans to determine minimum compliance with the adopted codes, please ex~ the following: · . · · A The application may be pJaccd behind more recent applications for building permits in rhe review process aod not reviewed until required information has been provided and the appijcation rotates again to first positLon for revjew. B. Delay in issuance of the permiL C Delay 'in proceeding wi.th construction. *If you answered ''No'' to this question the circumstances descn"bed in the question could result in a "Stop Work Order" being issued or a "Certificate of Occupancy" not being issued. · Bpcomm Apri12006 7 PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST Applicani:Jac.fec {j_C. Building A ngineered Foundation JJ..il.Driveway Permit _0tl{'l,ce!recl Site Plan '/.). [S' ttvwu .fbi_ septic Permit and Setbacks ~adeffopography 30% ~ach Residential Plan Review List ~mum Application Questionnaire ~divis i on Plat Notes ___l/:AFiie Department Review ~tion Determination/Fees ~ine Plans/Stamps/Sticker ~ach Conditions ~A u · s· d __ pp cation 1gne ~Reviewer To Sign Application __ Parcel/Schedule No. ~now!~ Letter-Manf. Hms . ('.)lL.~ GENERAL NOTES: DateJ7--d7 _ _,_.HOA/DRC Approval Subdivision Plat Notes -- PAGE 82 B8/B4/28B3 . 21:36 S7B24384B7 , -~ ·. ' .· ~ .. . ')_._ BATILEMENTMESASERVICEASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL CO:MMITr.EE.APPLICA'IION SUBM:riTAL FORM (For New Home CoJISI;nlcUos) INSTRUCTIONS: This AppJicatio.n &: Checklist Is to be used for aD project submittals to the Battlement Mesa SeJvice Association Arobftectural CoDDDittee (BMSA/AC). This form is intended to B3Sist in ensurixlg that the appHartion submittsl · is complete. This wiD heJ;p provide.a quicker, more thorough review process. · . . . . It Is teeommellded that each Applicant thoroughly review tho r~ of the c::tttrCDf Architedurt) Sty .... thc;Amgdcd:andRC!biteti DtsJaratfoD. o(Qv.ewnts ligdadiugRq!o)lrtfcms) and thereco.r:ded FinaiPJat .tor th~ir respective ~rllDod prior to prcpariDs a submittaL . . . Applicants p.teparing a submittal sbouJd compare the ir:dDrmation they are about to submit wjEh the requimmeals ·ofthismrm and "check olf" each required item on the tb:rm. lf8IV'itcmis not check~ 1he Application submittal is not complete and sbotdd not be submitted. Jncom,pleteAppHcationswDI not be processed and will be~ ,tO the AppDcm;xt. In addition to the checklist, AppUcants should 1iii in all of the pJaces on the ApplkaticmFonn where hdbrmaiion is requested. ~ AtcbitectlJral COmmittee will usetbis mmrmationinevafuatingyour .Application. If'JD!orm.ation ~requested ~is not appJicable to your specific p.rojeet ~ wrlie tWA.,. iD tbf: spaee ptoVid..;d If some requited iafommtion is yet to be det~ed (sudl as ext«dor paJDt colors you.mq mthave yet selec;ted) write "l'BD" in the appropriated space provj<Jed You w:i11 then be required to mako a foJlow-up submittal with these ' ~at. a. later date but bdt~ imtaiJation m the home • . DO NOT 1iJl in any io1b.tmation m the "Conditions fur .Apj,rovar section oftbis 1inlD. 'Ibis portion of the :Conn is fur Arc:hitectDtal Committ" use «dy. . . . Wlu=o. .B:Q AJ:wlic:ation is compleb; please mail or doliv.c:r it to the .fullowiog, address: Batt:lemt:at Mesa. Service ~n Axchitcetural Committee .A.pp&:ation 73-G Sf~ Drive l ' P.O. Box 6006 I Battle.awlt ~ ColoradO 81636 ~ ! ... The.ArddtcdJuaJCoJDJDltteeaeeta--~ontlaJyoD:Uiol"'aruJ3"'Wednes4&Y·andA:ppUea~a .. sn-e .clite ·_; 1: · · ouo. w~ prior-to t~o SChedulat ~.Data for J.rlor xorinr byC~J:ImdU~m-.J;en. Pl~-~ . Jane Chapman at {970) 285-9740 to confinn the $!sxt .sclJed~ meeting date ort.).llhluest ~ ~txoarlcm. : j Page 1 of 6 i I . I ________________ ! i ·. QS/04/2883 21:3& 9782438487 PAGE 93 • ~ 1111 • ... . . .• . , .. . BA'l'l'LEMENT MESA SERVICE ASSOaAnoN· ARc-:•w ........ l""'EcroRAL COMMI'ITEE APPLICATION &.CBEC'IO.JST (for New HoJne Coutrac:don projects) · Submit1aiDate:. ____ EstimatedStartDate! _____ ~edComplctionDate: ___ _ SUB:M:r:ITAL.REQUIREMENTS: Two Copi~ a.e1l of Items 1, 2 & 4 need to b"e tubmitted. -{Cb.cck-o1fitc:ms attached·to the AppHcation. Fill m apac;es a -indicated.) _--~o:;.V'"_ . . l.· ~itC Plan DrawiDg (1" ... 1 0'' or 1" -20' scale) ~ tb8 ronowiog information shoWn!. Lot, Blook !i: Subctivisicm li8DJe. · Stleet Address o!Project. . Building Set'bad( Lines (also .fill-io. the s4CJxtest dlstam:e ~en pr9perty line to the exteriot wall closest to that property line}. Please b~ aware dlat all Bu,ildiJitr-Setl>ac:k LU.CS are taken ftom .your Property Line Y.UUU Your Property Line fa 'NOT tlle Curb Line!! · · · - From Sctbadc: Left Side Setback: R.igbt. Side Setback: . Rear Setback: .. ' 1 -1 ·· .. Page2 of 6. -. ·--·-·-· --· ---- . .. 88/84/2983 21:36 9782438487 PAGE 84 . . ' .· . ____/' 2. Architectural Drawings (114" -1' or 1/8" = 1' scale) with thD fo~owing inibrmation. sho'Wll. ~Floor Plan(s) with overall dimensions (:fill-in the :tbno\:.nng square foot ar=). ; . . F'n Floor Fioishcd LiviD& Area: Second Floor Fmisbed LiviDg .Area; Lower Floor Fmisbed Livmg Area: Total Fin1sbed LMog Axea: Total Unfinfsbc:d Living Atea! t .. ~ square~ .. ~----~k ..--~___..;Rllare feet 115).08 ~~. ---~~feet x=---~square teet ;L Buil~ .Elewtions ~laDS incfiMrins ~ windows. exterior materials, bailcUIJg height, roof pitch, roof. mounted evaP,orativc:= coo las, etc. (:fill,;in maximum height below). Maximum bWidiug height to ~ ridge line or ba:Ddiag stnictural projection ----f.cct above top of street· cw:b at :fro.nt-ccnter of your lot. · · . ./ ~(~Fou:ndationP1an. · ·. . . . ~Outbuildings iDdicatiog dime~ons. e~ns 8l1d ovemD.haigbt to ridge Jme. . . Color! ~-~\1~ Color: ~, .. ,. . . M-utt Color: O?lor: ~:it. ColOr.. Ak"t"'l Color: ">fA ColOr: \M;h . Si-M.I CoJor: W'h;~ . . • COLOR SAMPLE-COLOR SAMPLE COLOR SAMPLB .. , G:QLQR SAMPLE COLOR SAMPLE COL()RS~LE .. P~3of6 ' .. . . 88/B4,2083 21:36 9782438487 PAGE 85 ' . . . .• . . _ __..::;~-. 4. ~ationP.hms with the following infbrmation: . __/, PJantmg Plan (indicate areas of irrigated Ia~ tree ;P~ .shrub beds, ground covert -_/' etc.). . . . . V Plant Material JistiDg by spec;Jos of trees, shrubs and grasses. . . . iZ . Oroundcowa-Matcrjal with weed control barrier. ~.Fauces. ~ Other l.AtJdscspe Improvements (decks, s.ite lighting, ilag po~ etc.) • . ~ 5. V~ Req~est {"lfapplicable) Give details· below: 'r · YWe he.nby admotrkdcc and IUldcn~d that o~rfailw-etocompleteBomeCo~diODtlmproVenl~t . . ~~ads or Laadscaf.Jillg Coustrudion witldn the time «!ODdrauats noted in C~ttitlons ~ & 3. Oa P~~ .'6 of this AppJicmOD1riD ~ult in a Notice and Oppartlmity for a Hearing b~~··the' ~l\fSA Bo.ud. of ,fJirecto:n. IfJ/Weanf011Dd hl "VfalatiOJl ofthc5e Conditio~ :itttbeReumg itlriJlresqlfm afilie tl'.ifte . .. Omaer of .not Jess-than ssoo~oo · per month for each full month m excess o!thc a~ ~mpletioJ&·tlme 'lhuoe. . •. . . .= • J/We ~e~ aelmowl~e thsatBo•e Co~sfnlctio,a or Improvement Projects or Landscape Construction. · · fea~ W:hich . .re . bunt in uon-cqDroi$Ulllce with· thia full appJicatfqa, in~diu,~o· *"e Coaditlona ~f ~nvaln9ted ou Pago 6 'of 6 -h~ IIW~Mn· be cited by tlte..DMS.A/AC iinvr~U~~i-~oJJ form-.-"~#ic · -~~ o{ discoveey. ~ extenuat~g; ch'enmstaacea a V.~ee #Jay be requested.-~ the BMSALA~,. ! provided; sndl Vl¢aQce ~quest itC!UI·II ~ th8 purview ~d appr.ovai'J.,.n&di~:tt·of1be BMSA/~C. l · ·I,fa· Variance b ·ncr.t·pat" byt~-~AIA:Calid ·ifdle Noii.J::ionlor.mJng,It&UlStaro•o~ @aected·"frit~ . 1 . ~(hfays ·dler~e datie ~flfritten citatto~TJWewiD be seno«NO.tjt-e ~f all~g Jt~~ t~c ~ft;$'$A: :Q~.d· 1 .. · ;flf.Dinc:fons,. ~d .ifJ/We an f~IUl~ -in ~~1#4~~~-of thes~ Nbn-Co.rfoimhl.c It~. at tJ~:•,JJ•riDg1JW-t;lY:tJ.t; l : ·l• · ~~4· ~ .mbdmum or· $500.00· per ··~~~oafonniag it•.. ·}'fobriths.t-.ruU~e-•e ·fo~9iD&t: 'Jtjit:.. ' ·: ·\ · .aclqlc;W~edgt~ftic BMsA Boatd·:oi1J>bc:ioD.andlor ~tecturalCo~e·max, ~e 211ly~~ ·· .. ·. rebl~ avalblb~ bi ·tJie~ent of a noii~~plianc~ · I • ... Page4of 6 . . .. ------------·------ ea/84/2893 21:3~ ~ '· . . . . . . , .. • . .. 9?92438487 .. . . . ·.... ... . .... . . .. . . .. . .. . .. • • • • + ·. . . . ,. . . AS PER TDEARCBI1:ECTURAL STANDARDS,PLEASE miDXCATE 1'BE . . · F~LLO~G ~~~·oN~ ~LOT PLAN AND BELOW:. -: .· • • • + ~ ~-.. : · ·ELEYAnONS AT BAcH coRNim OF-THE LOT.· . • r • • . ·LO(;AUON. •1. 2 . . . . . . . . ' 3. . .. . .. 4. .· .. - . . . . · ... ·. s. . .. 6.-T.BE HIGHPOINT OF 1BB LOT • . . 7 • ..:...nm LOWPO.INT OF Tim LOT. ·. 8.-HBIGBT OF GARAGE F.LOoR. .. 9.--HBIGHI' OF HQUSE MAJN'FLPQ.R.. .-- '10 .. -HEiGll.l' O.F ROOF Al30VE :F'oUNPAllON. - (MAXIMUM-35 FBBT) I 1.-:aEiGHT OF ROOF ABOVE' CENTER. OF T.BE~ CURB. . . . · ·c~-~F.BBT> . . . · 12;.-DR.AiNAGB FLOWLINES ON 11m PLOT PIAN. ... . . . .. .. . . . .. 13.-ROOF -PITCHBS~:-:--1.--- .. 2 •. ---- 3 •. --.......... 4 .. --~ . . · ...... .. .. . . P~GE 96 . ... .. ' . . . .. . .. . I . . ·· . 08/84/2893 21:36 9782438487 PM£ 87 '.. .. .. .. . FaiiiU"C to pay Jines leried .. detOJ'Diined at the -Bearing may aJso rt&alt m a Lien beiDg placea Oil YG :PJ"(tpedy or lit.lgadon·l'ro~ bililated by the BMSA B4ard of])irector.s to-seeure conformaneewlth f fa:ll AppUcaticm and ifs nspeetive Condi~ODB Of ApprovaL • . . . 1/Wt;Ddentandthat~Committeeappro;valdoe:snotcobat:itutoapp~~ofthc:loea:lbufidi dq)utm.eat, dJ;ahutge design-or Jttrucrtural soandaea, nor does it co:u.atitcd:e aaUl-;II,Dco ~ the pia coJDp'JY with· all applicable eodes, regulatioDS, ordin1Ulca and ~ 1/We fiuther admowledgc: that aay iiueguent field changes wbieh: _IIWe ~Y d.sie "to: the BoJ €uustrudion or Improvemeat Pro.Jeets afthfs o~Applfcatlon· S~JJmlftal':~dfhe .origiQal~tmcH1io . of App!'OValissu~· by tile BMBA/AC WiRteq~ au addftiOU:al ~ed AppJCidon~·SRbmittaJ on o behalf;. and tfJ:at -l/Wc. w.iU Dot ~ceed wftlt aDT suiJseqnc:ut fidd dian&es ml1il a~ Coadldcms A.pprovalllave been Issued tu 1lJ by the BMS.A/AC. · · ~·,....,....~or' -~ ,. ., ' --- . • • • .,. i~ \ ;~~~~!~:,)~~'\: i':~; .· '~' \' :~ ... , •... . . --_, :.:!/:. ------·--------------- es/e4/28B3 21:36 9782438407 PAGE as • f '\ ... ' W I .. ' . . . '\.. . • r • 'l1d:l portion of the Application Form b to be completed by the · ARhiteetunl Committee (not -the Appllesmt). CONDmQNS OF APPRQV AL or DISA.PfROV AL .. 1. No sitework or building construction may proceed on my Lot (mcludlog oo ,preJiuliaaly site c~ .. grubhin& gradealteratio~ storing of material. muodation ex~ extension ofundergrouad utilibet, etc.) until the Ptojeot h8s received a Project 8ppl'O\'Blito.m tbe Alehitcctural Committee BD.d has been issued a Building PeiiDit (as required by Oarlield Cou:aty for new holD' ar Renovation project3). 2. .Allg=cral buildiug and site impronmtm' comttu~:lbr auy~ sbaii be completed imd shaJlhave issued a~ ofOcwpqoy ftom the Gar&Jd County Buildiug Dc;.pcutmcnt ao Jatar t&an gp fll . Dar after the issu8liCe date ofthb ~ Co''''''itts; A;Qpnm:l. · · ·3. The complete Jandscapiog and.revegeta.tionofthcdmproved Lot, to spcoificany in,cludcthe Bm. Jkk&aml mu: yard ~ shaJ1 be completed no later than m (6) rno.atbs fiom the date of the Cerdiiaste of Oc:ctJpmcy4 . 4. . If the ~on of col~ IDd /or landscaping plans ate mt inc~~ tD ~they nm.st ~ ·, submitted far approval beJbiC any ·action is-tabu to~ the miising items. : 'l s. (i. . t ~ I : . ~pplblio\/{pi.'I1Yd(JDIIIJ!1s of~ CoJIJDJittee Mcm~): ·~ -~ ~ . . . •/'-'A---.-- · ... ·.BAp~~~: Jbr~.· . ... cCiDIU . ·t4tfr.eaboveeelfdfti0Ji8:. r:e;).S'_tJ~ .. . .vwuaDDJIID: . ~--. ·--------. ~--' 7 . .~-. . ~ . . .. .. .. . Ap~ou Demed {li1iti~ o;f.Axchit~Comadfteo Mcttlbers): .s.r----~- ;Appi •. Demed fOr reuoo(t)-stated ab~e:­ ·B..,~·-. ,J . ---~--~----------------------~---. .. . . Psgr:6of 6 ~:--~----~----- f I -01/llfllll -, •• 20' SITE LAYOUT & GRADING PLAN -Clrto ~to~e Units 0070, 0072, 0074, & 0076 -~ GRACE HOMES -Valley VIew VIllage -- ffi ~ .g <b ..., ~ ,..... rn s· lb ffi ill -CIIVIM/111 -, •• ¥1 SITE LAYOUT & GRADING PLAN -Clwlo 11o1o Units 0070, 0072, 0074, & 0076 -naa cosn....., GRACE HOMES -Valley VIew VIllage ... !lGI-OCI3 GRAl\iD JUNCTION LINCOLN-DeVORE, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS -GEOLOGISTS 1441 Motor St. Gnmd .Junction, CO 111505 Grace Homes 786 Valley Court Grand Junction, CO 81505 June 22, 2006 Re: Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Job #92355-GJ VaJiey View Village, Jlbases C and D, Battlement Mesa, CO Gentlemen: TEL: (970) 2 42 ·89~ FAX: (970) 24H56I As requested. Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore personnel completed a limited geotechnical exploratory program at the above-referenced site. Ten shallow exploration pits were excavated in the vicinity of the proposed buildings, as shown on the attached sketch. These exploration pits were excavated to a total depth of3 feet to 10 feet. These exploration pits were logged and sampled by personnel of Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore on May 10, 2006 . The purpose of these pits was to dctennine the types and character of the in·place overlot grading fill placed on the s ite to the date of our exploration and the types and character of the underlying subgrade soils, particularly the potential expansive characteristics, and to relate these characteristics to the proposed fowufation system. The slope stability of the embankment fill overlooking the storm water detention pond was modeled to conftrm that the building setbacks are adequate. This particular site was the subject of two previous geotechnical studies conducted prior to initial subdivision development The principal report is a preliminlll}' geotechnical study, "Proposed Roan Cliff Village Development, Parcels 2-5 and 2-6, Battlement Mesa, Garfield County, CO," prepared by Hepworth · Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc., Job #102 526, dated September 16, 2002. A second geotechnical report was prepared by Yeh & Associates, '*Test Pit Observations, Lots J-7, 38 and 39, Battlement Mesa, Phose II, Garfield County, CO," Project #24-1 16, dated June 1, 2005. The Hepworth· Pawlak report provided the principal geotechnical parameters for the design and construction of this subdivision. The Hepworth-Pawlak report identified some areas of low expansive clays and one moderately expansive clay. These expansive clays, combined with the proposed structural fill on the site, presented some limitations on the construction and ultimate performance of individual residential construction. The Yeh & Associates report was a very limited study. It appears that five exploration pits were excavated to a total depth of approximately 6 feet. Bulk samples were obtained, and basic soils classification and moisture detenninations were made. This report did not detennine in-place dry density of the soils, nor were relatively undisturbed samples taken for swell/consolidation testing. so very little additional infonnation is provided that can be utilized for predicting residential foundation performance. Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C and D June 22, 2006 Page 2 The following laboratory tests were perfonned on representative soil samples to determine their relative engineering properties. ASTM 0-2487 Soil Classification ASTM D-3080 Direct Shear Strength, Cd ASTM D-2937 In-Place Soil Density ASTM D-2216 Moisture Content of Soil FHA Swell by PVC Meter(ShelbyTube Samples) Tests were performed in accordance with test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials or other accepted standards. The results of our laboratory tests are included in this report. The in-place soil density, moisture content, and the standard penetration test values are presented on the attached exploration pit logs . This letter contains general recommendations for construction of a residential foundations within this subdivision but it is not a foundation design and cannot be used as such. An additional study was conducted on the slope located at the north end of the development overlooking the stormwater detention pond. The purpose of this additional study is to provide a factor of safety for the llSSumed developed conditions regarding slope stability and placement of the building foundations at the top of the slope. Our conclusions and recommendations for this site are presented below. Excavation Observation: Grand Junction Lincoln De Yore personnel should be contacted to observe the foWldation soils after the excavation has been completed and prior to placing forms or concrete. The purpose of this is to observe the type and condition of the foundation soils throughout the excavation. If the soils are found to differ from those encountered in our exploration pits, or if they appear to be unstable, additional recommendations may be required prior to construction of the foundations. Soil Classification: During our field exploration of the existing man-made fills and uppcr2 to 3 feet of the native soil, three soil types were identified. These soils arc all quite similar. being fmc-grained, ofJow to very low plasticity, and derived from the same geologic source. These in-place materials have been naturally reworked due to alluvial activity and wind activity. Soil Type No. I is a slightly sandy lean clay. Soil Type No. II is a somewhat sandier lean clay with some strata being a sandy silty clay. Soil Type No. ill is a low plastic, slightly sandy sill The actual characteristics ofd1ese soils are described on the attached soil analysis and SUJ1UII8Iy sheets. The principal concern of Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore was the presence of low expansive strata. A nwnber of tests were made on relatively undisturbed samples obtained using thin-walled shelby tubes and tested in an FHA PVC meter. This method allows a rather quick test to be perfonned and can be reasonably correlated back to the test methods utilizing the consolidation test apparatus. Based upon our testing of these soils, the possibility of minor amounts of soil expansion being encountered is relatively low; however, the potential appears to exist in both the native and man-made fill soils. Based upon our testing. it would be reasonable to expect between 0.7% and 2.1% swell under conditions of relatively low surcharge presswe. The corresponding swell presswes range from 286 psfto 645 psf. These particular values may only slightly oft'ect a properly designed and proportioned footing and I I ' I i I i I I ! I i l I r-- 1 ' \ l I f . . . ·-Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C and D June 22, 2006 Page 3 stemwall foundation bul would affect more noticeable distortion or movement of a thickened edge slab (monolithic-type) foundation system . Man-made Fill: Portions of this site contain newly placed man-made fill, ranging from only a few inches to as much as 1 2 J 12 feet measured in test pit # J at the northeast corner of the site at the top of the bank overlooking the storm water retention pond. It is our understanding that more fiJI has been placed over portions of this site since our exploration pits. The site grading map plan, which Lincoln DeVore utilized during some of our soil density testing of utility trench backfill, indicates that up to 13 feet of fill can be expected . It is not known if this man-made fill bas been placed under controlled moisture and compactive effort conditions during this subdivision grading. This office does not hove any records regarding the placement of the fill and is not able to verify the overall condition of fill. Based upon our exploration pits, the majority of the fill appears to have been placed in manner that would produce percent compaction results in the range of90 to 100% of the standard proctor (ASTM D-698). The native soils typically contain strata with percent compaction significantly less than 90%, with many of these native strata exhibiting slight to moderately severe collapsible properties. Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore has not been provided with any geotechnical reports or specifications for site improvement, which provide guidelines and requirements for structural fill. It is not known what actual requirements are in effect for this fill which is expected to support buildings, slabs and subdivision improvements. Based upon our experience in this area, it is common to have slructuml fill placed during site grading at a minimum of 95% of the soiJ•s maximum standard proctor density· (ASTM 0..698). It is normally required that the fill be placed at a moisture content ranging from -2% to +2% of the optimum moisture content (ASTM D-698}. Some modification of these specifications are possible, particularly when dealing with potentially expansive soils. Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore typically recommends that the soils be compacted ton minimum of90% of the soWs modified proctor dry density (ASTM D-1 SS1). The requirements for the moisture content ure usually± 2% of the optimum moisture, but in the case of slightly expansive soils, the preferred moisture range would probably increase. Soil Moisture Conditions: No free water was encountered during excavation on this site. In general, the man·made fiJJs and the very upper portion of the native soils were in a slightly damp condition, with the native soils usually being somewhat drier. There exists a distinct possibility of perched water tables developing in the native alluvial/debris fan soils which are present across this entire site. There is also the possibility of a perched water table developing in the compacted man-made fills. This perched water would probably be the result of increased irrigation due to the presence of lawns, landscaping and roof runoff. I ! 1- j I I I I J r I i f I l GrnceHomes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, VaUey View Village, Phases C and D June 22, 2006 Page 4 While it is believed that under tlte existing conditions at the time of our exploration the actual construction progress would not be affected by any free flowing waters, it is very possible that after development is initiated and for several years later, a troublesome perched water condition may develop on individual lots that will provide some problems for existing or future foundations on this tract Therefore, it is recommended that the future presence of perched water tables be considered in the design and construction of all proposed residential structures. Prevention of perched water tables, and minimizing the effects of any developed perched waters around residential buildings, is usually accomplished by prudent site grading, good control of roof runoff, and very good compaction practices regarding backfill against structures, backfill of utility trenches, and extra compaction effort in the areas between structures, particularly in narrow side yards that tend to have slow to very slow surface drainage. In the experience of Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore, good attention to site grading. drainage, and particularly compaction of all backfills is more effective than the installation of shallow perimeter drains around foundations. In some instances, particularly in the side yards between two structures, a shallow drain may be required. Foundation T;me Recommended: The foundation recommendations contained in the Hepworth- Pawlak geotechnical report provide general design information for a standard continuous spread footing and stemwaJf.type foundation system. The preliminary allowable bearing pressure for this foundation system was given as 1,500 psfto 3,000 psf. Further note was made that if expaosive clays ore encountered in the building areas, removal or redesign may be required. The recommendations are general in nature as is typical with a preliminary geotechnical study. Grand Junction Lincoln De Yore has significant experience in the Battlement Mesa area, and on a preliminary basis, provides the following recommendations for lightweight single and attached residential fowulation systems. Grnnd Junction Lincoln Devore Foundation Recommendations: Assuming that some amount of differential movement can be tolerated, then a conventional shallow foundation system, possibly underlain by up to t 8 inches of structural fill (may be native, reworked soils) and placed in accordance with the recommendations contained within this report, may be utilized. The foundation would consist of continuous spread footings beneath all bearing walls and isolated spread footings beneath all columns and other points of concentrated load. Such a shallow foundation system, resting on the properly constructed structural fill, may be designed on the basis of an allowable bearing capacity o£1,500 psf maximum and 500 psf minimum . Recommendations pertaining to balancing, reinforcing, drainage, and inspection are considered extremely important and must be followed. Contact stresses beneath all continuous walls should be balanced to within ± 200 psf at all points. Isolated interior column footings should be designed for contact stresses of about 150 psf less than tho average used to balance the continuous walls. The criteria for balancing wiJI depend somewhat on the nature of the structure. Single story, slab on grade structures may be balanced on the basis of dead load only. Multi story structures may be balanced on the basis of dead load plus one-half live load for up to three stories. i f ! l ! I l ! I ! I I I l I ·. Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C and D June 22,2006 Page 5 If the potential effects of frost heaving are either mitigated or discounted, and if the design of the upper structure is such that loads can be balanced reasonably well, and if minor amounts of differential settlement can be tolerated, a floating structural slab or raft type of foundation could be used on this site. If the slab is to be a floating structural slab (similar in appearance to the "monolithic" slab), the slab should be underlain by a minimum of 2 feet of non-expansive and non frost-susceptible fill, placed in accordance with recommendations contained in this report. Such a slab would require beavy reinforcing to resist differential bending. This structural slab, using the granular structural fill as part of the foundation system, could be designed assuming the top of the structural fill has a modulus of subgrade reaction ofk = 220 pci. If large concentrated loads are located in the interior of tbis fill, or if minor construction problems are encountered in the placement of the fill, the use of geosynthetic fabric or geogrid as part of the fill construction would significantly improve the perfonnancc of tbe fill and foundation system. It is possible to design either the floating structural slab or the raft type of slab either as a solid or ribbed slab, but in eitlter case a rimwaJl must be used for confinement Any such slab must be specifically designed for the anticipated loading. Such a foundation system will senlo to some degree as the softer, underlying soils consolidate, but differential movement is held to a minimum. Because the soils may settle in varying amounts, some minor cracking and heave are possible unless the slabs are specifically designed with the movement in mind. Structural Fill/Soil Improvement: For use in conjunction with a shallow foundation system, a structural fiJI may be required to replace any upper metastable soils, low expansive soils, or to provide a non frost heave-susceptible subgrade. This structural fill may be placed in conjunction with structural fiJI beneath concrete slabs on grade. Any existing metastable soil, expansive soil, or frost susceptible soil beneath slabs should be removed to a minimwn depth up to 1-1/2 feet below the proposed bottom footing elevation and at least 2 feet below the bottom slab elevation for a thickened edge structural slab. The excavation/fill width is to extend at /east16 inches from the interior and exterior of the proposed foundation wall or hearing pad in colltactwirh the fill. Once it is felt that adequate soil removal has been achieved, it is recommended that the excavation be closely examined by a representative of Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore to ensure that an adequate overexcavation depth has indeed occurred and that the exposed soils are suitable to support the proposed structural man-made fiJI . At the specific direction of the geotechnical engineer, water soak the overexcavated portion of the site for at least 1 day prior to the installation of any required perimeter drain and the structural fill. The purpose of this wetting or soaking is to provide initial settlement/collapse of the subgrade soils and to allow proper subgrade. This wetting or soaking must be controlled and must not be aJlowed to adversely affect nearby structures. After any required soaking has been accomplished, the subgrade soils arc to be mechanicaJJy compacted to a minimum of 86% of the soil's maximum modified proctor dry density (ASTM D-1 557) for a depth of at least 6 inches. Once this examination has been completed, it is recommended that a coarse-grained, non-expansive, non free-draining, man-made structural fill be imported to the site and placed on the properly prepared subgrade soils. Non-expansive, native soils may be utilized as structural fill if specifically approved by the geotechnical engineer. The upper 6 to 12 inches (minimum) of the fill is to be a sandy gravel (-3/4 inch and GM/GW) or a gravelly sand (-3/4 inch and SMISW). The structural fill should be placed in the I i I i I I I I J I I t I l j ! I ! I ' I I l I I i l L I I I I l i • I j i ·. Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View ViUagc, Phases C and D June 22,2006 Page 6 overexcavated portion of this site in lifts not to exceed 6 inches after compaction. A minimum of90% of the soil's maximum modified proctor dry density (ASTM D-1557) must be maintained during the soil placement. These soils should be placed at a moisture content conducive to the required compaction (usually proctor optimum moisture content± 2%). Very low expWlsive to non-expansive, native soils may be utilized as structural fill if specifically approved by the geotechnical engineer. If these native soils have a slight expansive potential, the soils should be placed as structural fill in lifts not to exceed 6 inches after compaction. These soils must not be over- compacted but compacted wet of the soil's "optimum" moisture content These soils should be placed at a minimum of 86% and a maximum of 92% of the soil's maximum modified proctor dry density (ASTM D- 1551). These soils must be placed at a moisture content conducive to the required compaction while being wet of the optimum moisture content. These soils must be placed at oplimwn moisture content or up to 4% over optimwn moisture content. The granular material must be brought to tlte required density by mechanical means. No soaking. jetting. or puddling techniques of any type should be used in placement of fill on this site. To con finn the quality of tho compacted fi]J product, it is recommended that surface density tests be taken at maximum 2-foot vertical intervals. It is recommended tbat any required perimeter drain be placed in the exterior portion of the structural fill, at the base of the fill, in order to prevent or at least minimize the collection of water in the soils and fill beneath the structure. Reinforcjpg: All foundationstemwalls should be designed as "grade beams" capable of spanning at least 1 0 feet. Where the foundation stem walls are relatively shallow in height, vertical reinforcing will not be necessary. However, in the walls retaining soil in excess of 4 feet in height, vertical reinforcing may be necessary to resist the lateral pressures (restrained case) of the soils along the wall exterior. To aid in designing such vertical reinforcing. an equivalent fluid pressure (E.F.P) on the order of 55 pcf would be appropriate for the native and the man-made fill soils. Floor Slabs: Non-structural floor slabs on grade, if any. should be positively separated from ali structuraJ portions of this building and allowed to float fteely. Frequent scoring (control joints) of the slabs should be provided to allow for possible shrinkage cracking of the slab. These control joints should be placed to provide maximwn slab areas of approximately 200 to 360 square feet. Any man-made fill placed below floor slabs on grade should be compacted to a minimum of90% of its maximum modified proctor dry density (ASTM D-1557). These soils should be placed at a moisture content conducive to the required compaction (usually proctor optimwn moisture content± 2%). Drainage and Grading: Adequale site drainage should be provided in the foundation area both during and after construction to prevent the pending of water and the wetting or saturation of the subsurface soils. We recommend that the ground surface around the structure be graded so that surface water will be carried quickly away from tbe building. The minimwn gradient within 10 feet of the building will depend I j I I i I I I I I I f ! ! I t I f l j I ·. Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C and D June 22, 2006 Page 7 on surface landscaping. We recommend that paved areas maintain a minimum gradient of 2% and that landscaped areas maintain a minimum gradient of8%. It is further recommended that roof drain downspouts be carried at least 5 feet beyond all backfilled areas and discharge a minimum of 10 feet away from the structure. Proper discharge of roof drain downspouts may require the use of subsurface piping in some areas. Under no circumstances should a "dry welt discharge" be used on this site unless specifically sited by a geotechnical engineer. Planters, if any, should be constructed so that moisture is not allowed to seep into foundation areas or beneath slabs or pavements. The existing drainage on the site must either be maintained carefully or improved. We recommend that water be drained away from structures as rapidly as possible and not be allowed to stand or pond within 15 feet of the building or foundation. We recommend that water removed from one building not be directed onto the backfill areas of adjacent buildings. Should an automatic lawn irrigation system be used on this site, we recommend that the sprinkler heads, irrigation piping. and valves be installed no less than 5 feet from the building. In addition, these heads should be adjusted so that spray from the system does not fall onto the walls of the building and that such water docs not excessively wet the backfill soils. It is recommended that lawn and landscaping irrigation be reasonably limited so as to prevent WJdesirable saturation of subsurface soils or backfilled areas. Several methods of irrigation water control are possible, to include, but not be limited to: Metering the irrigation water. • Sizing the irrigation distribution service piping to limit onsite water usage. • Encourage efficient landscaping practices. • Enforcing reasonable limits on the size ofhigh water usage landscaping within 5 feet of the building or foundation. • Incorporating "xeriscaping,. landscaping J!!!,l irrigation techniques. A plastic membrane placed on any crawlspace ground surfaces may retain/trap excessive amounts of water beneath the membrane. If future moisture problems develop or are anticipated, the foWJdation design engineer or the geotechnical engineer may require that the membrane be partially or completely removed from the crawlspace area. Provided that aU recommendations found herein pertaining to site surface drainage, grading. and soil compaction are closely followed, a perimeter foundation drain would not be required. For fully finished basements, however, the usc of a perimeter foWJdation drain would significantly reduce potential moisture related problems which can arise from subsequent area development Bgckfill: To reduce settlement and aid in keeping water from reaching beneath this building. all backfill around this building should be mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90% of its maximum modified proctor d!y density (ASTM D-1557). The only exception to this would be the components of the perimeter foundation drain, if any. All backfiiJ should be composed of the native soils and should not be placed by soaking, jetting or puddling. All backfill placed in utility trenches around this structure or below 1 t I i I l I I I l I I I I I l I I I i I l I f 1 I r I 1 f 1 ! i I I l t I I •. Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View VilJage, Phases C and D June 22, 2006 Page 8 foundation walls should be mec:baoically compacted to a minimum of90o/a of its maximum modified proctor dty density (ASTM D-1557). These soils should be placed at a moisture content conducive to the required compaction (usually proctor optimum content ± 2% ). Cement Type: Type n. Type 1-ll, or Type ll-V cement is recommended for aJI concrete in contact with the soils on this site. Calcium chloride should not be added to a Type ll, Type I-ll, or Type ll-V cement under any circumstances. Remarks: We recommend that the bottoms of all foundation components rest a minimum of 3 feet below fin ished grade or as required by the local building codes. Foundation components must not be placed on frozen soils. Slooe Stability Analysis: Slope stability calculations were performed on the existing embankments overlooking the stormwater detention pond. The stability onalysis addresses the individual slope and the "global" condition of the entire embankment The soils were subjected to wetting due to lawn irrigation and frequent use of the stonnwater detention pond. Saturation of the lawn areas and the slope toe at the detention pond were modeled using the SEEP/W module. Tbe analysis was performed using the PC software SLOPEIW module within GeoStudio 2004, Version 6 .19, Geo-Siope International LTD, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. The analysis utilized the Limit Equilibrium Theozy for the factor of safety, incorporating the following four methods. Fellenius or OrdiniU}' Method = Bishop Simplified Method = Janbu Simplified Method = Morgenstern-Price Method = Moment Equilibrium Moment Equilibrium Force Equilibrium Moment and Force Equil ibrium The Morgenslem-Price Method, incorporating both Moment and Force Equilibrium Tbeozy is generally considered to be the more "accw-ate" of the four methods. 'The FeiJenius or OrdiniU}', Bishop Simplified, and the Janbu Simplified Methods arc commonly utilized in older slope stability software and are included for comparative purposes. No seismic coefficient wus assumed in these calculations. Several models were assumed for the existing embankments. The critical model assumed that lawn irrigation would be excessive, causing seepage on the upper slope and complete saturation of the slope toe area. Based on slope stability calculations, the constructed fill slope is reasonably stable. The analysis indicated that the embankments have a sufficient factor of safety, equal to or greater than 1.5. The majority of low factors of safety indicate that the steeper slopes arc "sloughing" under the conditions of nearly saturated embankment fill. I I I J I I I I f I I I l ! ! I I I I I I L I ! i l f i I I r 1 Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C and D June 22,2006 Page 9 Limitations: This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or his representative to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and are incorporated into the plans . In addition, it is his responsibility that the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and his subcontractors cany out these recommendations during construction. The fmdings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in acceptable or appropriate standards may occur or may result from legislation or the broadening of engineering knowledge. Accordingly, the fmdings of this report may be invalid, wholly or partially, by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of3 years. The recommendations of this report pertain only to the site investigated and arc based on the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those described in this report. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that planned on the day of this report, Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be provided. if appropriate. · Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore makes no warranty, either expressed or implied, as to the findings, reconuncndations, specifications or professional advice, except that they were prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practices in the field of geotechnical engineering. Respectfully submitted, GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN DeVORE, INC. GJLD Job# 92355-GJ i l i f I I i ! i I I. ( I I I r 1 I I i j CRI11CAL DRAINAGE ZONE nlfCf" 1HE IIIDJH OF JH£ ORNIINAI. OCAVA'!IOH LAliT CVARI£5 -NINUIIN OF a JU:r IROII lltiUIINII) ROOI" DOIINSPDI/T~ DRAINAGE I LANDSCAPING CONCEPT 'NO WATER ZONE' BY FOUNDATION ClllliCAt. DRAJNAGE ZONE TMC£ 'IH£ IIIDIH QF IH£ OlllaNAL ll'CAV-41711H UI<IIT ( VARG -J/IHJUIAI QF S FU:7 FlfQII IIUIIDINC ) • DRAINAGE I LANDSCAPING CONCEPT 'NO WATER ZONE' BY FOUNDATION GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN-DeVORE. Inc. EXTERIOR DRAINAGE / LANDSCAPING CONCEPT 9-16-2005 C20TP.CDNte.AL ENCINEI!RS-GEOLOOlSTS NONE IDI D-DRAIN2 i I I i I ! l i i I I i I ! I I i PLAN Adapted From HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING Drawing GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. NO SCALE SITE LOCATION DIAGRAM VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Date Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction, Colorado Job No. Drawn 92355-GJ EMM l I I r i ! 1 i ' f I I l i I I f i I 1 j i .. ~ PLAN Adapted From HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING Drawing SKETCH From G.J.L.D . Field Personnel Notes ·: . GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction, Colorado VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Date Grand Jundion, Colorado 6-17-2006 Job No. Drawn 92355~GJ EMM ' I f I I I ! I I L j t ! l I i l l 1 l i· ' l I ' OI'EHS?ACE PLAN Adapted From HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING Drawing SKETCH From G.J.L.D. Field Personnel Notes GRAND JUNCTION LINCOlN -DeVORE, Inc. £. TP·I J.IHCIPWol p~~~~ 76sr p,.,.-S-IP·It. l I S · HP-1 I 1 Hi!PKMttrlt • PAwlAI( ~ TB$r ,,~No:.-1-111-n ·. 1 NO SCALE PIT LOCATION DIAGRAM I VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Date Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 j j I i I ' ! 1 f j Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction, Colorado Job No. Drawn 92355-GJ EMM EXPLORATION PIT NO. 1 SHEAR DEPTH SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: NORTHEAST CORNER of SITE, LOT 24 WATER (FT.) 5 10 15 TH .} DEP (FT -- - .-5 -- -- -10 -- - --15 SOIL LOG ~~ 1 I~ I I a ~ ~ -- DESCRIPTION % CL LEAN CLAY Sl. SANDY I SJ. COMPRESSIBLE SI.MOIST MAN-MADE FILL MEDIUM DENSITY 107.2 15.0% STRATIFIED Strata of LOW DENSITY 96.6 15.4% CL LEAN CLAY Sl. SANDY Sl. MOIST 103.7 10.7% I Sl. COMPRESSIBLE MEDIUM DENSITY Sl. MOIST 15.0% MAN-MADE FILL CL LEAN CLAY St . SANDY MEDIUM DENSITY I Sl. COMPRESSIBLE Sl. MOIST 13.3% ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE 15 Pit Total O.pth: 12-1/2' NO Free Water During Observation: 5-10-2008 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J . EXPLORATION PIT NO . 2 SHEAR SOil PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: SOUTH PORTION, LOT 24 Torvane DENSITY WATER DESCRIPTION psf J)cf % CL MAN-MADE FILL MEDIUM DENSITY SI.MOIST ~ 100.5 13.2% Sl. COMPRESSIBLE .§I_ 105.3 10.4% ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf 104.8 10.2% MEDIUM DENSITY Sl. DAMP NiJ ML SANDY SILT Ill COLLAPSIBLE STRATA LOW DENSITY 5 97.1 13.6% .!!....._ 86 .8 16.5% STRATIFIED -- 10 --ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE------:rs Pit Total Depth: 4' NO Free Water During Ob.ervatJon: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. LOG OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Pbnse C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. GRACE HOMES Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado Date ·6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction, Colorado Job No. Drawn 92355-GJ EMM i I I l I I I I I I I I I t I ! [ I I I ! I I l I I i I J l l I I l 1 ~ j l TH DEP (FT .) -- -- • SOIL LOG r ' I EXPLORA110N PIT NO. 3 PIT LOCA110N & ELEV.: Property_ Line LOT 2.5 & 28 DESCRIPTION CUT AREA for SITE GRADING AlLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf ML SANDY SILT LOW DENSITY Ill COLLAPSIBLE STRATA SHEAR SOIL Torvane DENSITY WATER psf ocf % DRY "NO 88.3 10.1% DRY sr-6.~k 5 -· • I! STRATIFIED MEDIUM DENSITY 5 100.4 9.6% - - --10 -----15 TH DEP (FT .) - - I -· -5 ---- -10 -- - --15 NO - ----:ro --ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE ND NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE==: 15 Pit Total Depth: 5' NO Free Water During Observation: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. EXPLORA110N PIT NO. 4 SHEAR SOIL SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: Property Line LOT X1 & 21 Torvane DENSITY WATl!R LOG DESCRIPTION lpsf pcf % I I CUT AREA for SITE GRADING 51 . DAMP ML SANDY SILT I '! COLLAPSIBLE STRATA Slrala of LOW DENSITY MOIST "'N[)'" 19.5% Ill 89.1 ALLUVIAUOEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS , Qa/Qdf DRY s:r-84.1 9 .0% STRATIFIED ___§. -MOISTURE ACCUMULATION ABOVE 3' _1Q --ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE ND NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE 15 Pit Total Depth: 3' NO Free Water During Observation: 5·10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN • DeVORE, Inc. Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction, Colorado LOG OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado Job No. Drawn 92355-GJ EMM Date 6-17-2006 2 3 EXPLORATION PJT NO. 5 SHEAR SOIL DEPTH SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: Propl!_rtyllne LOT 14 & 15 Torvarnr DENSITY WATER (FT.) LOG DESCRIPTION IQSf pcf % fi ~ CL MAN-MADE FILL MEDIUM OENSilY l!Q_ 110.3 11.2% --DRY ST 106.8 6.9% ML SANOY SILT LOW DENSITY -Ill COLlAPSIBLE STRATA N[) 5- 89.1 12.7% STRATIFIED -"-5 ·--------- 10---:w ---ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE -NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSilYJMOISTURE--;-::-l 15-15 I I Pit Total Depth: 3' NO Free Water During Observation: 5-10-2006 ! Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. i I I l I I EXPLORAnON PIT NO. 6 SHEAR SOIL DEPTH SOIL PIT LOCAnON & EL£V.: NORTH PORTION, LOT 23 Torvane DENSITY WATER i (FT.) OG DESCRIPTION i.I'Sf _pc! % I ! -1\ I -_, ML SANDY SILT LOW DENSITY i , Ill COLLAPSIBLE STRATA 51. DAMP NO 89.8 18.1% ! ' -t ! ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf ST 15.6% i 5-I I MEDIUM DENSITY-5 I -l -' STRATIFIED I _, Strata of LOW DENSITY DRY~ t k~ ML SANDY SILT 92.2 8 .1% -Ill COLLAPSIBLE STRATA MEDIUM DENSITY ~ 4.6% i 96.6 10-_.1Q I -I -I l -1 ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE ' -NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE---=" l I 15-I 15 i Pit Total Depth: 8' NO Free Water During Observation: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. l LOG OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D a Battlement Mesa. Colorado GRAND JUNCTION GRACE HOMES Inc. Date LINCOLN ~ DeVORE, Inc. Graod Junction, Colgrado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Job No. I Drawn Grand Junction, Colorado 92355-GJ EMM 4 I EXPLORATION PIT NO. 7 SHEAR SOIL l DEPTH SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEV.; Pro party Line LOT 22 & 23 Torvana DENSITY WATER (FT.) LOG DESCRIPTION ll!sf pcf % I _I I CUT AREA for SITE GRADING l -I ML SANDY SILT I t COLLAPSIBLE STRATA -Ill l!Q_ 92.2 9.4% I t I~ ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf ST 81.1 13.4% I 5-Sl. EXPANSIVE STRATA@ 4' 645 psf@ 2.1% Swell 5 93.2 6.0% -I 107.5 6.9% ----- 10-·-10. ! -I -ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE I -NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE i 15-15 I I Pit Total Depth: 4' NO Free Water During Observation: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. ~ ; I I ' ' I l!XPLORATION PIT NO. 8 SHEAR SOIL ! DEPTH SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEV.; Property Une LOT 20 & 21 Torvana DENSITY WATER (FT.) LOG DESCRIPTION [Qsf pcf % ~: MAN-MADE FILL i -. -CL LEAN CLAY SI.SANDY MEDIUM DENSITY Sf. DAMP NO 95.8 15.2% l II Sl. EXPANSIVE STRATA@ 2' 286 psf@ 0.7% Swell ST 106.3 13.2% I -Strata of LOW DENSITY ND 89.3 11 .5% 5-ML SANDY SILT MEDIUM DENSITY DRY 5 99.2 4.7% ! ·-Ill COLLAPSIBLE STRATA ST i -ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS , Qa/Qdf j -t l -~ 10-·-10 I f -l -:~ ~~~~:~~~~~~~~~s:~S~;/MOISTURE-l -I l 15-15 I ! Pit Total Depth: 4' NO Free Water During Observation: 5·10-2006 ·' Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. ~ 1 i f LOG OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D a Battlement Mesa, Colorado GRAND JUNCTION GRACE HOMES Inc. Date LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Job No . J Drawn Grand Junction, Colorado 92355·GJ EMM TH .) DEP (FT SOIL LOG -l!' ~ - - .-5 -- - --10 --- - -15 DEPTH (FT .) - f\ "~·~' ,·~~ /'/ SOIL LOG ~ -. EXPLORATION PJT NO. 9 SHEAR SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: Property Line LOT 18 & 19 Tor~ene DENSITY WATER DESCRIPTION psf pet % MAN-MADE FILL ML SANDY SILT LOW DENSITY St. DAMP II COLLAPSIBLE STRATA BQ_ 87 .6 14.9% ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qd( DRY~ 90.7 11 .0% CL-Ml SILTY CLAY LOW DENSITY 5 II a Sl . EXPANSIVE STRATA@ 5' 62 psf@ 0.3% Swell DRY NO 94.5 10.1% MEDIUM DENSITY .E.._ 89.6 4.1% Strata of LOW DENSITY 97.0 6 .1% --w ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE 15 Pit Total Depth: . 5' NO Free Water Durrng Observation: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. EXPLORATION PJT NO. 10 SHEAR SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: Property Line LOT 18 & 17 Torvant DENSITY WATER DESCRIPTION lpsf pcf % MAN·MADE FILL NO 110.3 14.4% CL LEAN CLAY MEDIUM DENSITY SI .DAMP ~ -~ I COMPRESSIBLE Strala of LOW DENSITY NO 87.5 19.6% --5 -- ---10 --- - -15 ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf ST 109.0 7 .8% ML SANDY SILT MEDIUM DENSITY DRY-s -II COLLAPSIBLE STRATA 10 ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE 15 Pit Total Depth: 3-112' NO Free Water During Observation: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN .. DeVORE, Inc. Geotechn ical Consultants Grand JuncUon, Colorado LOG OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado Job No . Drawn 92355-GJ EMM Date 6-17-2006 5 i i l I I t l ' J 1 Soil Sample: LEAN CLAY (CL) Sl. Sandy Sample No.: I (Typical) Geoloalc Orlfiin: ALLUVJAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf Test b~: LRS Natural Water Content {w): 10.-r'k Pit No.: 1 Depth: 5' In-Place Density (pcf): 103.7 Soil Specific Gravity iG~ Estimated COBBLE to GRAVEL I SAND SILTioCLAY 100 ~ Effective size mm 90 Cu Cc 80 .. .. Plastic Limit (PL) 18 70 - Uquid Limit {LL) ~ cnBO Plasticity Index (PI) :1a c .. Skempton's Activity 0.3 ·~50 Shrinkage Limit (SL) Q. Shrinkage Ratio ~ 40 .. f:? \ en Q. 30 20 -DIRECT SHEAR: co Peak Res. 10 Shear Angle: deg . Tan Shear: 0 :J& 12.5 9.5 -4-« 2 0.85 0.~25 0.15 D.pj£ 0.02 0 .005 Cohesion : psf 125 75 50 37.5 25 Particle Grain ize {mm} Sieve (mm) %Passing MOISTURE I DENSITY RELATIONSHIP: 5" 125 ASTM Method: D-§98 A D 4718-0% Rock Correction 3" 75 Max. Dry Density : pcf pcf 2" 50 Optimum Moisture : 1-112'' 37.5 Maximym HVEEM-CARMANY: FHA Soli Swell: 1" 25 ~~ AII2.Yiid 'R' Value @ 300 psi: Swell 3/4" 19 tb: Sam12l~r Displacement 300 psi: psf 1/2" 12.5 ~ Expansion @ 300 psi : _psf Remolded Sample 3/e:" 9.5 ALLOWABLE BEARJNG (net): psf by Consolidometer #4 4.75 Standard Penetration (SPT): psf by Penetrometer #10 2 Unconfined Compression (qu): est #20 0.85 COLLAPSE@ Wetting: @ psf #40 0.425 100 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf #100 0.15 99 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf #200 0.075 94.2 SULFATE SALTS: ~ ppm 0.02 42 PERMEABILITY: 0.005 30 K (20 C): Remolded em/sec ~ SOIL ANALYSIS and SUMMARY VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa, Colorado GRAND JUNCTION GRACE HOMES Inc. Date LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado 6·17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Job No. J Drawn Grand Junction, Colorado 92355-GJ EMM 1 i j j I I i i l i i ' 1 1 I Soil Sample: LEAN CLAY (CL) Sl. Sandy Sample No.: (Typical) Geologic Origin: MAN-MADE FILL From Alluvial Debris Fan Soils Test by: LRS 100 90 80 70 0)60 c ·u; :3 50 a.. -~ 40 ~ Q) a.. 30 20 10 0 - - Natural Water Content (w): 7.8% Pit No.: 10 Depth: 2" In-Place Density (peO: 109.0 Soil Specific Gravitv (Gs): Estimated COBBLE to GRAVEL SAND SILTio CLAY mm ~ j"-..., ~ Effective size "-Cu Cc Plastic Umit (PL) 19 \ Liquid Limit (LL) 35 Plasticity Index (PI) 16 Skempton 's Activity ~ Shrinkage Limit (SL) ~ Shrinkage Ratio '· DIRECT SHEAR : CD Pcnk Res. Shear Angle: deg. Tan Shear: 125 75 so 37.5 25 !& 12.5 9.5 4.]~ 2 o.a5 o.425 o.1s o.p.y, o.o2 o.oos Cohes1on. psf Sieve 5" 3 " 2" 1-112" 1" 314" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #100 #200 Particle Grain 'Size {mm} (mm) % Passing MOISTURE I DENSITY RELATIONSHIP: 125 75 50 37.5 25 19 12.5 9.5 4 .75 2 0.85 0.425 0.15 0.075 0.02 0.005 100 98 97 94 85.3 44 34 Maximum Size Allowed By Sampler 2-112" GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN • DeVORE, Inc. Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction. Colorado ASTM Method : D-698 A D 4718 -0% Rock Correction Max. Dry Density : pcf pcf Optimum Moisture : HVEEM.CARMANY: 'R' Value @ 300 psi: Displacement 300 psi: Expansion @ 300 ps i; FHA Soil Swell: Swell psf sf Remolded Sample ALLOWABLE BEARING (net): psf by Consolidometer Standard Penetration (SPT): psf by Penetrometer Unconfined Compression;.,J(,;s;qu::L)::;..__ ___ ~ps;.;.f ___ _ COLLAPSE @Wetting: @ CONSOUDAnON: @ CONSOLIDATION: @ SULFATE SALTS: <SO ppm PERMEABILITY: K (20 C): Remolded psf psf psf SOIL ANALYSIS and SUMMARY VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Ioc. Date Grand Junction, Colorado 6~17-2006 Job No. Drawn 92355-GJ EMM 2 1-i t I ; I j l I I l j Soil Sample: LEAN CLAY (CL) Sl. Sandy Sample No.: II (fypfcal) Geologic Origin: MAN-MADE FILL From Alluvial Debris Fan Soils Test b;r:: LRS Natural Water Content (w): 13.2% Pit No.: 8 Depth: 2' In-Place Density (pet): 106.3 Soil Specific Gravity (Gs}: Estimated COBSLE to GRAVEL SAND SILT to CLAY 100 -~ Effective size mm 90 \ Cu Cc 80 ' 70- Plastic Limit (PL) 20 \ Liquid Limit (LL) i! en SO -Plasticity Index (PI) I c= \ Skempton's Activity ~ 'iii :Qso 1 Shrinkage Umit (SL) a.. \. Shrinkage Ratio -c: 40 ~ \~-<U a. 30 20 DIRECT SHEAR: CD Peak Res. 10 Shear Angle: deg. Tan Shear: 0 ,1a· 12.5 9 5 4 « 2 0.85 0.425 0.15 0 PI«, 0.02 0.005 Cohesion: 125 75 50 :!7.5 25 psf article Grain lze {mm} Sieve (mm) %Passing MOISTURE I DENSITY RELATIONSHIP: 5" 125 ASTM Method: D-4iiJ8 A D 4718-0% Rock Corrc:ctlon 3" 75 Max. Dry Density : pcf pcf 2" 50 Optimum Moisture : 1-112" 37.5 Mi~Simy!!J HVEEM-CARMANY: FHA Soil Swell : 1" 25 §i!!:~ AIIQW!:!Q 'R' Value @ 300 psi: 0.7% Swell 3/4" 19 Bll§amgl~r Displacement 300 psi: 286 psf 112" 12.5 2-1/2" Expansion @ 300 psi: _J!_Sf Remolded Sample 3/8" 9 .5 ALLOWABLE BEARING (net): psf by Consolidometer #4 4.75 Standard Penetration (SPT): psf by Penetrometer #10 2 100 Unconfined Compression (qu): 2!f #20 0.85 99 COLLAPSE @ Wetting: @ psf #40 0.425 98 CONSOUDATION: @ psf #100 0 .15 94 CONSOUOATION: @ psf #200 0 .075 73.2 SULFATE SALTS: ~ ppm 0.02 44 PERMEABILITY: 0 .005 32 K {20 C): Remolded em/sec .@.....9g SOIL ANALYSIS and SUMMARY VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D I Battlement Mesa, Colorado a GRAND JUNCTION GRACE HOMES Inc. Date LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Job No. Drawn Grand Junction, Colorado 92355-GJ EMM 3 I I I ! I I I I f I i i I I i l L 1 I i I J I i i j I I ~ Soil Sample: SILTY CLAY (CL·ML) Sl. Sandy Sample No.: I Ia (fypical) 5 Geoloaic Origin: ALLUVIAUDEBRJS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf Test b:t: LRS Natural Water Content (w): 4.1% Boring Nclo.: 9 Depth: 6' In-Place DensitY (pc0 : 89.6 Soil SpecifiC Gravi!Y_(Gs}: Estimated COBBLE to GRAVEL ::>ANU o:JILI 10 \#LAT 100 ~ "' Effective size mm 90 "~ Cu Cc eo '• 70 -1\ Plastic Limit (PL) 22 1\ Liquid Limit (ll) .D rn60 Plasticity Index (PI) .2 c: \ Skempton's Activity !U 'iii gJso ' Shrinkage limit (SL) a. Shrinkage Ratio -~ 40 --I- ' Q) Q.30 20 -DIRECT SHEAR: CD Peak Res. 10 Shear Angle: deg. Tan Shear: 0 ~ 12.5 9.5 4.~ 2 0.85 0.425 0.15 0 .~ 0.02 0 .005 Cohesion: psf 125 75 50 37.5 25 rticle Grain lze {mm} Sieve (mm} %Passing MOISTURE I DENSITY RELATIONSHIP: I I 5" 125 ASTM Method: D-§98 A D 4718-0% Rock Correction i I 3" 75 Max. Dry Density : pcf pcf I 2" 50 Optimum Moisture : I l 1-112" 37.5 Mixlmum HVEEM-CARMANY: FHA Soli Swell: I i 1" 25 §iZ§~IIOW~Q 'R' Value @ 300 psi: 0.3% Swell I 3/4" 19 B~Samcl~r Displacement 300 psi : a psf l 112" 12.5 2-1/2" Expansion @ 300 psi: psf Remolded Sample 3/8" 9.5 ALLOWABLE BEARING (net): psf by Consolldometer I #4 4.75 Standard Penetration (SPT): psf by Penetrometer j l #10 2 100 Unconfined Compression (gu): psf l #20 0.85 99 COLLAPSE@ Wetting: @ psf ! #40 0.425 95 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf { #100 0.15 87 CONSOUDATION: @ psf I #200 0 .075 75.4 SULFATE SALTS: ~ ppm 0.02 40 PERMEABILITY: { 0.005 28 K (20 C): Remolded ~ @__gg 1 l I J SOIL ANALYSIS and SUMMARY I VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa, Colorado GRAND JUNCTION GRACE HOMES Inc. Date LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Job No. /Drawn Grand Junction, Colorado 92355-GJ EMM Soli Sample : LOW PLASTIC SILT (ML) Sl. Sandy Sample No.: Ill (Ty pical) 4 Geologic O~in: ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf Test b~ LRS Natural Water Content (w): 6.0% Pit No.: 7 Depth: 3' In-Place Denslty (pcf): 93.2 Soli Specific Gravity (Gsj: Estimated COBBLE to GRAVEL SAND SILT CO ClAY 100 r--, ~ Effective size mm 90 "' Cu Cc 80 -- 70 Plastic Limit (PL) 20 Liquid Limit (LL) 22 0)60. Plasticity Index (PI) ~ c: Skempton's Activity 0.1 'iii :«so Shrinkage Limit (SL) 0. Shrinkage Ratio -8 40 \ ... Q) 0. 30 -\ 20 DIRECT SHEAR: CD Peale Res. 10 -Shear Angle: de g. Ten Shear: 0 37.5 25 \?4 12.5 9.5 .. '« 2 0.85 0.425 0.15 0 Pli 0.02 0 005 Cohesion : psf ! 125 75 50 Particle Grain lze {mm} Sieve (mm) %Passing MOISTURE I DENSITY RELATIONSHIP: I 5" 125 ASTM Method : 0·69§ A D 4718-0% Rock Correction 3" 75 Max. Dry Density : pcf pcf 2" 50 Optimum Moisture : J I 1-1/2" 37.5 Maximum HVEEM-CARMANY: FHA Soli Swell: ! I 1" 25 §!DAllowed 'R' Value @ 300 psi: ~Swell I 3/4" 19 By §ampler Displacement 300 psi: 645 psf I I 112" 12.5 2:.1a: Expansion @ 300 psi: psf Remolded Sample ! J 3/8" 9.5 ALLOWABLE BEARING (net): psf by Consolidometer I I #4 4.75 Standard Penetration (SPT): psf by Penetrometer I I 1 #10 2 100 Unconfined Compression (qu): ~sf i #20 0.85 98 COLLAPSE @Wetting: @ psf , I #40 0.425 97 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf ! i #100 0.15 95 CONSOUDATION: @ psf I #200 0.075 86.6 SULFATE SALTS: ~ppm I 0.02 36 PERMEABILITY: ( 0.005 22 K (20 C): Remolded ~ @...__Qg j ' I 1 SOIL ANALYSIS and SUMMARY VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa. Colorado GRAND JUNCTION GRACE HOMES Inc. Date LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Job No. I Drawn Grand JunctJon, Colorado 92355-GJ EMM FEET -Vi-Is to West BASIC PROBLEM SLOPE OVERLOOKING THE STORM WATER DETENTION POND, SEEP\W ANALYSIS VAU.£Y VIEW SUb. IIAnu:MENT MESA. CO. FILLED SLOPE OVERLOOKING STORM DETENTION POND 923!55 s1111111U rmg.~ec~.on emnoos SEeP TtanSierll 20 o w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ FEET -View Is to West SEEP\W ANALYSIS The Site has been developed, the Yard areas arc Landscaped and HEA VII. Y IRRIGATED. Standing Water is in Front Yard and Seepage is occurring on Slope leading to the Pond. The Storm Water Detention Pond is heavily used, due to Stonn Runoff and Irrigation Runoff. The soils beneath the Pond and at the Toe of the Slope are SATURATED in about 20 feet into the TOE. GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN DeVORE, Inc. CEOJttJINICAL EI'IGINEilRS ·CI!OLOGISTS Figure I VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE Phase C 8L 0 GJLD I# 923SS-OJ, Iunc 28, 2006 I I I I l ' l I I I I i l .I FEET • V.ew Is to Weal • . . . . . . . • . . . . . . .. . . . .fi'Zll* • SLOPE\W ANALYSIS The previous SEEP\W analysis was utilized for the soil moisture parameters and the most extensive failure at or near a Factor of Safety of 1. (F.S. = 1.023) is shown. We recommend the Pond Sides be well compacted, to prevent this modeled deep penetration of water into the Slope Toe. FEET· View Is to West SLOPE\ W ANALYSIS The previous SEEP\ W analysis was utilized for the soil moisture parameters and the most extensive failure at or near a Factor of Safety of 1.5 (F.S. = 1.494) is shown. The computed failure surface is more than 40 feet from the structure and foundation. GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN DeVORE, Joe:. CE011:CJIHIC4L ENGINEERS · GEOLOGISTS Figure II VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE Phase C & 0 GJLD II 9233j-GJ, June 28, 2006 i I l I j f I I J I i i l I j Parcel Detail Page I of2 Garfield County Assessor/Treasurer Parcel Detail Information Assessorffreasurcr Pronerty Search I Assessor Subset Query I Assessor Sales Search Clerk & Record_~r Rec~p.tion Search Basic Building Characteristics I Tax Information Parcel Detail I Value Detail Sales Detail I Residential/Commercial Imnrovement Detail Land Detail I PhotograP.hs I Tax Area II Account Number II Parcel Number II Mill Levy I I 080 II R043096 II 240718104023 II 39.826 I Owner Name and Mailing Address IDARTERLLC I 1786 VALLEY COURT I !GRAND JUNCTION. CO 81505 I Legal Description lsECT,TWN,RNG: 18-7-95 SUB: VALLEY IVIEW Vll..LAGE SUB PHASES c & D ILOT:23 PRE:R040986 BK:586 PG:524 IBK:0615 PG:0487 BK:I831 PG:941 IRECPT:704369 BK:1812 PG:I67 IRECPT:700392 BK: 1807 PG:663 IRECPT:699425 BK: 1767 PG:909 IRECPT:691345 BK:1767 PG:899 IRECPT:691343 BK:1767 PG:887 IRECPT:691342 BK:1756 PG:427 IRECPT:688665 BK: 1756 PG:422 IRECPT:688664 BK: 1754 PG:986 IRECPT:688326 BK: 1546 PG:979 IRECPT:643048 BK:1546 PG:964 IRECPT:643045 BK: 1546 PG:954 IRECPT:643041 BK:1546 PG:946 http://www.garcoact.com/assessor/parcel.asp?ParcelNumber=2407181 04023 217/2007 Parcel Detail IRECPT:643039 BK:1518 PG:822 IRECPT:636574 BK:0748 PG:0893 IBK:0642 PG:0065 BK:0641 PG:0278 Location Physical Address: I lis CLIFF VIEW CIR PARACHUTEj Subdivision: I VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE SUB PHASESC&D Land Acres: llt.ll 7 Land Sq Ft: llo Section II Township II Range 18 II 7 II 95 Property Tax Valuation Information Actual Value II Land: Improvements: Total: III~==========S=al=eD=a=te~:l . . Sale Price: I 64,68011 oil 64,68011 Assessed Value I 18,7601 ol 18,7601 http://www .garcoact.com/assessor/parcel.asp?ParcelNumber=2407181 04023 Page 2 of2 217/2007