Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Application-Permit
Garfield County No. I 10594 I Building & Sanitation Department 108 8th Street, Suite #401 Glenwood Springs, Co. 81601 Office 945-8212 Inspection Line 384-5003 JobAddress: Off~ of~JM.~ CD81bJ.,3 . Locality: o/6f'f1~ g~IJh.{~~dl3a,J-3~!-o1.·0</7 UseofBuilding: ~~ ~ 1!\A ~~~~(~ ~ Owner:. ~·+ . ~~ Contractor: f:J< (J 7-cdCJ Amount of Permit: Date: GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION 108 8'" Street, Suite 401, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: 970·945·8212 1 Fax: 970-384-3470 1 Inspection Line: 970-384-5003 / o6C1L{ 000' 00 A SEPARATE ELECTRJCAL PERMIT IS REQUIRED AND MUST BE ISSUED BY THE STATE OF COLORADO. THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WlTHLN 180 DAYS,· OR. IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFfER WORK IS COMMENCED. l HEREBY CERTIFY THAT 1 HAVE HEAD AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS GOVERNING THIS 1YPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLETED WITHIN WHETHER s"PECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY 1D VIOLATE OR CANCEL TilE OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL OR THE PERFORMANCE OF Parcel/Schedule No: Carport: iX Site Plan Adjusted Zoning: ¢ AGREEMENT .roo PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO THE APPLICANT AS OWNER. CONfRACTOR AND/OR THE AGENT OF THE CONTRACTOR OR OWNER 1D CONSTRUCT THE STRUCTURE AS DETAILED ON PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SUBMITIED TO AND REVJEWED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ISSSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT, THE SIGNER. HEREBY AGREES TO COMPLY 'WITH ALL BUILDING CODES AND LAND USE REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY GARFIELD COUN1Y PURSUANT TO AUTHORI1Y GIVEN LN 30.28.201 CRS AS AMENDED. THE SIGNER FURTI·IERAGREES THAT IF THE ABOVE SAID ORDINANCES ARE NOT FULLY COMPILED 'WITH IN THE LCOATION. ERECTION, CONSTRUCTION, AND USE OF 11-IE ABOVE DESCRIBED STRUCTURE, THE PERMIT MAY BE REVOKED BY N011CE FROM THE COUN1Y AND THAT THEN AND TI-1ERE IT SHALL BECOME NULL AND VOID. TI-IE ISSUANCE OF A PERMT BASED UPON PLANS. SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA SHALL NOT PREVENT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL FROM THEREAFTER REQUIRING TI-IE CORRECTION OF ERRORS IN SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA OR FROM PREVENTING BU1LDING OPERATION BEING CARRIED ON THEREUNDER WHEN IN VIOLATION OF THS CODE OR ANY OTHER ORDINANCE OR REGULATION OF THIS ,JURISDICTION. TI-IE REVJitW OF SUBMITtED PLANS AND SPECIFICA110NS AND INSPECTIONS CONDUCTED THEREAFTER DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ACCEPTANCE OF ANY RESPONSIBILITIES OR LIABLITIES BY GARFIELD COUNTY FOR ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR DISCREPENCIES. THE RE..'WONSI BILITY FOR THESE ITEMS AND IMPLEMENTATION DURING CONSTRUCTION RESTS SPECIFICW..LY WITI-I THE ARTICTECT, DESIGNER BUILDER, AND OWNER COMMENTS ARE INTENDED TO BE CONSERVATfVE AND IN SUPPOH'T OF THE 0\VNERS LNTEREST. ..Jf'u~ ./ .--A/ Pl ct V\ v Fee , HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT r HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE AGREEMEN;~,J30VE rrNrTIALr, ~ -r-10 -.;. 1 ~~5"4 6 ,.t tj '" ( <> l ct :J_ lS$, 7 ~ c~ '3K'& r· ~ 14t.l-"36 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 roof, a lockable house, complete exterior siding, exterior doors and windows installed, a complete kitchen with cabinets, a sink with hot & cold running water, non-absorbent kitchen floor coverings, counter tops and finished walls, ready for stove and refrigerator, an necessary plumbing; 4. All bathrooms must be complete, with washbowl, tub or shower, toilet stool, hot and cold running water, non-absorbent floors and walls finished and a privacy door; 5. All steps outside or inside over three (3) steps must have handrails, guard rails on balconies or decks over 30" high constructed to all IBC and IRC requirements; 6. Outside grading done to where water will detour away from the building; 7. Exceptions to the outside steps, decks and grading may be made upon the demonstration of extenuating circumstances, i.e. weather, but a Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until an 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 instanation, where applicable; as well as any final sign off by the Fire District, and/or State Agencies where applicable. 9. If you will be connecting to a public water and/or sewer system, proof of the tap fees have been paid and the connections inspected by the service provider prior to issuance of a C.O. A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL THE ABOVE ITEMS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. ****A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY TAKE UP TO 5 BUSINESS DAYS TO BE PROCESSED AND ISSUED. ****CANNOT OCCUPY OR USE DWELLING UNTIL A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY (C.O.) IS ISSUED. OCCUPANCY OR USE OF DWELLING WITHOUT A C.O. WILL BE CONSIDERED AN ILLEGAL OCCUPANCY AND MAY BE GROUNDS FOR VACATING PREMISES UNTIL ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE MET. Signature Bpapplicationoctober2006 Date . · .. ·,.:~,...,.,.; ::·· _, __ ; .. ' ·; ... __ VALVA TION/FEE DETERMINATION Applicant_..!G.:::, :.!VLc~<. J!.\, _____ _ Address_....,-~l..J.I ..~::h.__.,.:.,LAn"'-"-""\f"'S"'~-"IA-:;!!Q=-.;O~R- Date. ___ ~""--'-'1 6"--'-o"'--'f)......._ ____ _ Finished (Livable Area): Main 2-Y ">( Upper 11 c1 Lt Lower Other Subdivision C.. E./2-.IS £? ~It-f h. . l Lot/Block 'il Contractor ~ ()\=tt-6 (_<Xf'6l Total Square Feet · ':!;,<!;"1 J' )< 7'1 t B Valuation 21o~, Lf']lf ,bo Basement: Unfinished Conversion of Unfinished to Finished Plan Check Fee for Conversion Garage: Valuation Y(..~ X 1'6 Valuation Crawl Space: . . '2. LIS' I )\. Cj _ ·ValuatiOn Decks/Patios: Covered I Lo X ·z_ y .:::: 3 1 8 'io Valuation Open 3 :2. 'i A. I Z. -~~ I'L .->a Valuation -uuo Total Valuation GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING 970-945-8212 MINIMUM APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS For SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CONSTRUCTION Including NEW CONSTRUCTION ADDITIONS ALTERATIONS And MOVED BUILDINGS In order to understand the scope of the work intended under a permit application and expedite the issuance of a permit it is important that complete information be provided. When reviewing a plan and it's discovered 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 information before the plan review can proceed. Other plans that are in line for review may be given attention before the new information may be reviewed after it has been provided to the Building Department. Please review this document to determine if you have enough information to design your project and provide adequate information to facilitate a plan review. Also, please consider using a design professional for assistance in your design and a construction professional for construction of your project. Any project with more than ten (10) occupants requires the plans to be sealed by a Colorado Registered Design Professional. To provide for a more understandable plan in order to determine compliance with the building, plumbing and mechanical codes, applicants are requested to review the following checklist prior to and during design. Applicants are required to indicate appropriately and to submit the completed checklist at time of application for a permit. Plans to be included for a Building Permit, must be on drafting paper at least 18"x24" and drawn to scale. Plans must include a floor plan, a concrete footing and foundation plan, elevations all sides with decks, balcony, steps, hand rails and guard rails, windows and doors, including the finish grade line and original grade. A section showing in detail, from the bottom of the footing to the top ofthe roof, including re-bar, anchor bolts, pressure treated plates, floor joists, wall studs and spacing, insulation, sheeting, house-rap; (which is required), siding or any approved building material. Engineered foundations may be required. A window schedule. A door schedule. A floor framing plan, a roof 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. wind speed, wind exposure B or C, and a 36 inch frost depth. All sheets 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 IRC. 1. Is a site plan included that identifies the location of the proposed structure or addition and distances to the property lines from each comer of the proposed structure(s) prepared by a licensed surveyor and has the surveyors signature and professional stamp on the drawing? Properties with slopes of 30% or greater must be shown on the· site plan. (NOTE Section: 106.2) Any site plan for the placement of any portion of a structure within 50 ft. of a property line and not within a previously surveyed building envelope on a subdivision final plat shall be prepared by a licensed surveyor and have the surveyor's signature and professional stamp on the drawing. Any structure to be built within a building envelope of a lot shown on a recorded subdivision plat shall include a copy of the building envelope as it is shown on the final plat with the proposed structure located within the envelope. Yes £/' .. 2. Does the site plan also include any other buildings on the property, setback easements and utility easements? Please refer to Section 5.05.03 in the Garfield County Zoning Resolution if the property you are applying for a building permit on is located on a comer lot. Special setbacks do. apply. Yes "'/ 3. Does the site plan include when applicable the location of the l.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) and the distances to the property lines, wells (on subject property and adjacent properties}, streams or water courses? Yes ,.</··.~& / 4. Does the site plan indicate the location and direction of the County or private road accessing . the property? 2 / / v/' Yes ____ _ 5. Are you aware that prior to submittal of a building permit application you are required to show proof of a driveway access permit or obtain 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 ,/· 6. Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all reinforcing steel in accordance with the IRC or per stamped engineered design? Yes ,... ..... / 7. 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 ----'---- 8. Do the plans indicate the size and location of ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces and soffits? Yes 1 9. Do the plans include design loads as required by Garfield County for roof snow loads, (a minimum of 40 pounds per square foot up to & including 7,000 feet above sea level), floor loads and wind loads? Yes v 1 0. Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor, and roof construction? Yes v 11. Does the buildingsection drawing include size and spacing of floor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof rafters or joists or trusses? Yes v··/· 12. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method of positive connection of all columns and beams? Yes v,... 13. Does the elevation plan .indicate the height of the building or proposed addition from the undisturbed grade to the midpoint between the ridge and eave of a gable or shed roof or the top of a flat roof? (Building height measurement usually not to exceed 25 feet) YM • . 14. Does the plan include any stove or zero clearance fireplace planned for installation including 3 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. make and model and Colorado Phase II certifications or phase II EPA certification? Yes '-··/ No ·----:::--:---c--: Does the plan include a masonry fireplace including a fireplace section indicating design to comply with the IRC? 1 Yes No ___ "_/_· __ _..:c(_;v, 'v-."5'0 '-c: 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 IRC? Yes v No ______ _ Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural light and ventilation for aU habitable rooms? Yes /' No _____ _ Do the plans indicate the location of glazing subject to human impact such as glass doors, glazing immediately adjacent to such doors; glazing adjacent to any surface normally used as a walking surface; sliding glass doors; fixed glass panels; shower doors and tub enclosures and specify safety glazing for these areas? Yes v· No ·---'---- Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas furnaces, boilers and water heaters indicated on the plan? Yes v No ------ Do you understand that if you are building on a parcel of land created by the exemption process or the subdivision process, are building plans in compliance with all plat notes and/or covenants? Yes "..-No ------ Do you understand that if you belong to a Homeowners Association (HOA), it is your responsibility to obtain written permission from the association, if required by that association, prior to submitting an application for a building permit? The building permit application will be accepted without it, but you run the risk of the HOA bringing action to enforce the covenants, which can result in revocation of permit issued. Additionally, your Plan Review fee is not refundable if the plans have been reviewed by the Building Department prior to any action by the HOA that requires either revocation or substantial modification of the plans. Yes ~-No ________ __ Will this beth~ only residential structure on the parcel? Yes ,_/· No Ifno-Explain: ______ _ Have two (2) complete sets of construction drawings been submitted with the application? Yes ~..- 4 24. Do you understand that the tninimum dimension a home can be on a lot is 20ft. wide and 20ft. long? Yes No ----- 25. Have you designed or had this plan designed while considering building a?d other constructioy..code requirements? Yes v/ No ----- 26. Do your plans comply with all zoning rules and regulations in the County related to your properties zone district? Yes v·' No ------ 27. Does the plan accurately indicate what you intend to construct and what will receive a final inspection by the Garfield County Building Department? Yes ,/ No _____ _ 28. Do you understand that approval for design and/or construction changes are required prior to the application of these changes? Yes ,/ No_-'----- 29. Do you understand that the Building Department will collect a "Plan Review" fee from you at the time of application submittal and that you will be required to pay the "Permit Fee" as well as any "Road Impact" or "Septic System" fees required, at the time you pick up your building pel')Ilit? Yes ../ No-'----- 30. 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 from 7:30a.m. to 3:30p.m. Monday through Friday. Inspections are to be called ill to 384-5003. Yes ,/ No -----'- 31. Are you aware that requesting inspections on work that is not ready or not accessible will result in a $50.00 re-inspection fee? Yes /' No _______ _ 32. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections requited under the IRC including approval on a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and occupancy of the building? Yes / No ____ ~- 5 33. Are you aware that the Permit Application must be signed by the Owner or a written authority being given for an Agent and that the party responsible for the project must comply with the IRC? / Yes ~ No ------ 34. Do you understand that you will be required to hire a State of Colorado Licensed Electrician and Plumber to perform installations and hookups, unless you as the homeowner are performing the work? The license number of the person performing the work will. be required at time of applicable inspection. Yes \ ... / No ------- 35. Are you aware, that on the front of the Building Permit Application you will need to fill in the Parcel/Schedule Number for the lot you are applying for this permit on prior to submittal of a building permit application? Your attention in this is appreciated. Yes / No _______ _ 36. Do you know that the local fire district may require you to submit plans for their review of fire safety issues? Yes '"/ No (please check with the building department about this requirement) 37. Do you understand that if you are planning on doing any excavating or grading to the property prior to issuance of a building permit that you will be required to obtain a grading permit? Yes v' 38. Are you aware that if you will be connecting to a public water and/or sewer system, that the tap fees have to be paid and the connections inspected by the service provider prior to the issuance ofa Certificate of Occupancy? . . Yes / _ _c__ __ I hereby acknowledge that I have read, understand and answered these questions to the ,.--~ of m~ 'li . . l Phone: 77 o -(n l) -'193f.; Project Name: ~~ . (days); ~£1~ Date I I 97o -927-$!{ e (evenings) Lo 1 CfZ i3vu4.e ~ Project Address: Lor <77 i Ce-;~ ;?~ ~8o1110tta w / Zit. 23 Notes: If you have answered "No" on any of the questions, you may be required to provide this 6 information at the request of the Building Official prior to beginning the plan review process. Delays in issuing the permit are to be expected. Work may not proceed without the issuance of a perrilit. If it is determined by the Building Official that additional information is necessary to review the application and plans to determine minimum compliance with the adopted codes, the application may be placed behind more recent applications for building permits in the review process and not reviewed until required information has been provided and the application rotates again to first position for review, delay in issuance of the permit or delay in proceeding with construction. Bpminreq November2006 7 PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST Applicant bv-""c\t .. Building ~Engineered Foundation . V Driveway Pennit 6Y ~ _0urveyed Site Plan .· Ji./t!-septic Permit and Setbacks _tj:L GradefTopography 30% c /Attach Residential Plan Review List ~Minimuni Application Questionnaire L_subdivision Plat Notes ~Fire Department Review L Valuation Determination/Fees ~ed Line Plans/Stamps/Sticker .Attach Conditions _jL__Application Signed -iLPlan Reviewer To Sign Application __L_Parcel/Schedule No . ...tj!L 40# Snowload Letter-Manf. Hms. ·/Soils Report GENERAL NOTES: · Date __ CJ---~=.-...l\.Jcb,.::-.,..,-Od,__f\L__ Planning/Zoning -±y Line Setbacks ~=Sdb~~. -~-uillddim" Height t<tU~e4 L.. )~, -.--ning Sign-off Jl/A_Ro.ad Impact Fees _LHOA/DRC Approval ~radefTopography 40% Lrlanning Issues ~division Plat Notes T0 39ild To: From: Global Wellness Networks .Independent Nikken Distributors ·. Fax Transmission · · Garfiel Cty Bldg/Planning Bo (R ·sell)Buck ' . I No. Pages: L inqluding cover shee~ Date: . 8/3/2007. [[ Suill,jcct: For Bu' ding Permit & Approval Time: · 9:50 Ant IJ ,, " ii IL To: Gal'field Bu,lding andPlanning. Phlase see attac rd the Design Review Board approval for the Buck Residence to bu 1t on Lot #47 h1 the Cerise Ranch subdivisionin · Carbondale, C Phmse add this ·Thank you, our file for approvaL Che:ers, .Bo Buc. Cell 970-618-99 8 Fax: 970-927-07 1 l PO BQxl732, Basalt CO 81621 Phone: (970) 9Z7-8118 Fax: (970) 927·0111 Creating Balance with "The Five Pillars of Health" Health N!lnd, Healthy Body, Healthy Family, Healthy Society and Healthy finances, :; ' ':; H::l31'553Nll3M'liiHOl9 HL0LG50L5 01:z0 L000/00/80 cerise ranch jbsign review board iz..,~&ll I ' Bo and Cind ~uck Terri-Ann Gio pomenlco Jeff Sponel, K.leinstein,~ Crise Ro P. QA. File. 07-25-07 Cerise Ranch ot #47 _..; · ~ US Moil To: From: CC: Dote: Re: Via: memorand.· m W!nt$rgreen Horrl , LLC 40801 us Highway 6 s :; 203 PO B~ 1530 Avon Colarad~ 1620 =! 970194 4120 Fax: 970/9* 9940 ' ii I Thank you for your submitj 1. The Cerise Ranch DRB lias completed reviewing your su ·: iHal package, drowings, catal g sheets, and colors lor Lot #47 at Cerise Roncl1. All have i: reviewed and meet the re · wirements of the Third Amended Cerise Ranch DRB Guidelines. '! I , We have enclosed two stomp d "reviewed" sets for your files. We ore keeping one original stamps~ for our files and one has beer( ant to the Cerise Ranch POA for their files. · ' During construction please[ !'Jep in mind the following items: I .I I I 4.3.5 Vehicles and Parking i · 1· 5 Vehicles for use durin construction activities shall conform to all provisions of the Covenant,:, nd Garfield County requirements,. Vehicles or construction equipment shall not be ston~d on site. Parkin' ;for construction workers vehicles ii :limited to the lot. At no time will parking be allowed on the streets or· · adjacent lots. i · ' I ~~ 4.3.6 Construction Equipm nt, Materials, Trash and Dogs Temporary plocement of co 1 1ructron equipment on site will be allowed, however storage of const !dian equipment tmyond the dur<:t on of need for such !equipment to be on site sh<:tll be prohibited. Te orc;;ry storage of budding materials th site shall be allowJd In the approved temporary staging area. The siJ ' shall be kept free ,of construction ebris at all times. Temporary placement of debris on site shall be coh/' ined within a dumpster located in e app.roved stag.ing area. Dogs and outdoor radios sholl not be ailo1. d on the construclion site at any ti e. · · , 4.3.7 Dust, Noise and Hour of Construction .; The Contractm shall take pre autions as necessary to obate dust generation due to construction acp ,OIItles at oil times -· there will be ero tolerance for fu\:)ltlve dust. The Contractor shall toke precaut~oJns as necessary to obate excessiv noise generation at all times. The use of explosives on the constructior!site is prohibited. If required, use o driven steel foundation piles shall be subject to approval by the DRB p\ior to the st<:trt of construction. Co struction actiVities shall only occur during the hours of 7;00 A. M. to 7:~01 P.M .. Monday thno:;gh Friday, an 8A.M. to 5:00 P.M. on Saturday unless written authorization from the. IPRB is secured for ,;:<tended or wee end hours. . If further information is req ired, please do not hesitate to contact Terri .. Ann Giandomenic,. j{970) 376-2263. Bo and Cindy Buck PO 1732 Basclil CO 81621 (970) 618-99:38 This document may contain RIVILEGED and/or CONFIDENTIAL information intended ONLY for thel·~se of the specific ndividual or e lty named above. If you are not the Intended recipient, you are ~~reby notified thai ony unauthorize dissemination or copying of this document or the Information contai~~d in it Is strictly pmhioited. if you ave received this document In error, please notify the sender at o\'{::e by telephone ond retur~ t~e ori rnal document to the above address via the US Postal Service. Thank liu. 60 39~d H831:SS3Nll3M:l~ROl9 11L0L650L5 zr:zz L006/60/80 ~tech HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL SUBSOIL STUDY H·..:~_)\Hl:t'h-~',t\\'laiz Geotechnical, Inc. SCZC C<>~_mr:: !Zo;-tt:.~ 154 Gi<::l\\'08:1 .Spring;:;. Colorado 81601 P!·IO!l.l:: Q('----9:! ~-!988 Fax: 97G-Y4 ;,.~454 emai!: hpgeo@:hpgeotech.com FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESIDENCE LOT 47, CERISE RANCH GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO. 106 0469 JULy 10, 2006 PREPARED FOR: BOBUCK P.O BOX 1732 BASALT, COLORADO 81621 Parker 303-841-7119 • Colorado Springs 719-633-5562 • Silverthorne 970-468-1989 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE Al\D SCOPE OF STUDY ............................................................................ - 1 - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ..................................................................................... - 1 - SITE COJ\TDITION'S ...................................................................................................... -2- SUBSIDENCE POTENTIAL ......................................................................................... -2- FIELD EXPLORATION ................................................................................................. -3- SUB SURF ACE CONDITIONS ...................................................................................... - 3 - FOUNDATION BEARING COJ\TDITIONS .................................................................. -4- DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................. - 4 - FOUNDATIONS ......................................................................................................... -4- FLOOR SLABS .......................................................................................................... - 5 - UNDERDRAIN SYSTEJ\1 .......................................................................................... -6- SURFACE DRA.INAGE ............................................................................................. -7- LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................... -7- FIGURE 1 -LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2-LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 -LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 4-SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1-SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS PURPOSE AI'iD SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residence to be located on Lot 47, Cerise Ranch, Garfield County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Bo Buck dated May 15, 2006. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain information on the subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to detennine their classification, compressibility or swell, strength and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report sunm1arizes the data obtained dming this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed residence will be a single story, wood frame structure over a basement level with an attached garage and located roughly in the area of the exploratory borings shown on Figure 1. Basement and garage floors will be slab-on-grade. Grading for the structure is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 4 to 8 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction. If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report. Job No. I 06 0469 ~tech -2 - SITE CONDITIONS Lot 47 is located at the northwest (uphill) side of Larkspur Drive. An abandoned irrigation ditcb crosses through the north part of the building envelope. The ground surface in the proposed building area is relatively flat with a gentle slope down to the southeast, towards Larkspur Drive. A very steep, southeast facing hillside is located beyond the building envelope in the northem part of the lot. Eagle Valley Evaporite bedrock is exposed at the base of the steep hillside. Vegetation consists of grass and weeds. SUBSIDENCE POTENTIAL Bedrock of the Pennsylvanian age Eagle Valley Evaporite underlies the Cerise Ranch Subdivision. These rocks are a sequence of gypsiferous shale, fine-grained sandstone and siltstone with some massive beds of gypsum and limestone. There is a possibility that massive gypsum deposits associated with the Eagle Valley Evaporite underlie portions of the lot. Dissolution of the gypsum under certain conditions can cause sinkholes to develop and can produce areas oflocalized subsidence. During previous work in the area, sinkholes and large depression areas were observed in Cerise Ranch Subdivision. These sinkholes appear similar to others associated with the Eagle Valley Evaporite in areas of the Roaring Fork River Valley. Sinkholes were not observed in the immediate area of the subject lot. No evidence of cavities was encountered in the subsurface matelials; however, the exploratory borings were relatively shallow, for foundation design only. Based on our present knowledge of the subsurface conditions at the site, it cmmot be said for certain that sinkholes will not develop. The risk of future ground subsidence on Lot 4 7 throughout the service life of the proposed residence, in our opinion, is low; however, the owner should be made aware of the potential for sinkhole development. If futiher investigation of possible cavities in the bedrock below the site is desired, we should be contacted. lob No. !06 0469 ~tech -.) - FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on June 15, 2006. Two exploratory borings were drilled at the locations sho\\'11 on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a truck-mounted CME-45B drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 2 inch I. D. spoon sampler. The sampler was driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140 pound hanm1er falling 3 0 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. The subsoils, below about y, foot of topsoil, consist of clayey silt and sand soils with scattered gravel. The soils are slightly moist to moist and medium to stiff in about the upper 4 to 6 feet and very moist to wet and soft with depth. Groundwater level was encountered at a depth of about II Y, feet. Dense gravel alluvium was encountered at a depth of33 feet in Boring 2 down to the maximum explored depth of35 feet. Laboratory testing perfonned on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content density, percent finer than No. 200 sieve (silt and clay fraction) gradation analyses and unconfined compressive strength. Results of swell-consolidation testing perfonned on relatively undisturbed drive samples of the upper sand and silt soils, presented on Figure 4, generally indicate low to moderate compressibility under Job No. I 06 0469 ~tech -4 - conditions of loading and wetting. The sample from Boring 1 at 3 feet showed a low collapse potential (settlement under a constant load) after wetting. Unconfined compressive strength test results indicate values of 950 and 3,000 psf for the very moist and moist soils. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1. FOTJNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS The upper silt and sand soils generally have low compressibility under light loading and become soft and highly compressible below a depth of about 4 to 6 feet. Shallow spread footings placed on the upper soils appear feasible for support of the proposed residence with some risk of settlement. Excavation depths should be kept relatively shallow, less than about 5 feet, to avoid the deeper soft and wet soils. Construction of a basement level (below the recommended excavation depths) may be feasible with a heavily reinforced mat foundation and a risk of settlement, but should still be kept at least 4 feet above the groundwater level. Fill placed to level the building site should be kept to about 4 feet deep or less to reduce the potential for excessive building settlement. As an alternative, a deep foundation system (such as piles) that extends down to the dense gravel alluvium encountered at a depth of 33 feet in Boring 2 would provide a relatively high load capacity with low settlement risk We should be contacted if a deep foundation is considered. DESIGN RECOMMEJ\'DATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread footings or mat foundations bearing on the upper natural soils. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the upper natural soils within 5 feet of the existing ground surface should be designed for an allowahle bearing pressure of Job No. I 06 0469 ~tech -5 - 1,200 psf. Mat foundaticns placed on the undisturbed natural soils below the recommended excavation depths should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 800 psf. Based on experience, we expect initial settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be up to about 1 inch. Additional differential settlement of about I inch could occur if the shallow bearing soils become wetted. 2) The footings should have a minimum width of20 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. 3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of foundations at least 36 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this area. 4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupp01ied length of at least 14 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist lateral a lateral earth pressure corresponding to an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 55 pcf for the on-site soils as backfill. 5) Topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed to expose relatively firm bearing soils. The sub grade in footing areas should then be moistened and lightly compacted as needed. Excavations should not be deeper than about 5 feet below existing ground surface to avoid encountering soft soils. 6) A representative of the geoteclmical engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions. FLOOR SLABS The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab- on-grade construction. The upper soils are compressible and there could be some long- term slab distress. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, non-structural Job No. I 06 0469 - 6 - floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints sbould be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4 inch layer of free-draining gravel should be placed beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with at least 50% retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve. A vapor barrier could be used to reduce moisture migration up through the floor slab. All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95% of maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist ofthe on-site soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM Free water was encountered in the borings below recommended excavation depths, however, it has been our experience in the area that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below-grade construction, such as retaining walls or crawlspace areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with fi·ee-draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1% to a suitable gravity outlet. Free-draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No.4 sieve and have a maximum size of2 inches. The drain h'ravel backfill should be at least I Y: feet deep .. 1\n impervious membrane, such as 20 or 30 mil PVC, should be placed beneath the drain gravel in a trough shape and Job No. 106 0469 ~tech - 7 - attached to the foundation wall with mastic to prevent wetting of the bearing soils. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed: 1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab area:: should be avoided during construction. 2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. 3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 6 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in paved areas. Free-draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 feet of the on- site soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. 5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least 5 feet from foundation walls. LIMITATIONS This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied. "D1e conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled at the locations indicated on Figure I, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our services do not include detennining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or Job No. 106 ~tech - 8 - other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If the client is concerned about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified so that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made, This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recotmnendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engmeer. Respectfully Submitted, Trevor L. Knell, P.E Reviewed by: Steven L. Pawlak, P .E. TLK/ksw Job No. I 06 0469 \49 \ " \ " " ""' " " -- 106 0469 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL I \ \ \. APPROXIMA~ Sc.iu.E , ~ . 1" = 60' . - I I I I ---:--- ' ) ·; ( LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 1 6365 6360 6355 1-6350 w w u. z 0 ~ 6345 ....! w 6340 6335 6330 106 0469 25 - BORING 1 ELEV. =6360' 12/12 wc~a.4 DD~109 8/12 WC~9.4 DD~103 -200~81 uc~3ooo 1/12 1/12 BORING2 ELEV. =6364' 8/12 3/12 WC~16.4 DD~107 1/12 wc~23.6 DD~101 -200~90 uc~e5o 3/12 Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 3. ~tech LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS HEPWORTH·PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL 6365 6360 6355 6350 tu w lL z 0 ~ 6345 [fj ....! w 6340 6335 6330 FIGURE 2 LEGEND: TOPSOIL: sandy sil< with scattered gravel, soft, slightly moist, light brown. SILT AND SAND (SM-ML); clayey, with clay lenses/layers and scattered gravel, medium stiff to stiff and slightly moist to very soft and very moist to wet with depth, light brown. GRAVEL (GM); silty, sandy, with cobbles, dense, wet, brown. Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-inch I. D. California liner sample. Drive sample; standard penetration test (SPT), 1 3/8 inch I.D. split spoon sample, ASTM D-1586. 8/12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 8 blows of 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12 inches. 0,25 Depth of free water measured in the boring and number of days following drilling measurement was taken. Depth at which boring had caved when measured on July 10, 2006. NOTES: 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on June 15, 2006 with 4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from building envelope corners shown on Figure 1. 3. Elevations of exploratory borings were obtained by interpolation between contours shown on Figure 1. 4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. Water level readings shown on the logs were made at the time and under the conditions indicated. Fluctuations in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content ( % ) DD = Dry Density ( pet) -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve UC = Unconfined Compressive Strength ( psf) 106 0469 ~tech HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 3 . ' . I I I I I Moisture Content = 8.4 perce nt I I I Dry Density = 109 pel I I I i Sample of Clayey Silt and Sand with Gravel I I From: Boring 1 at 3 Feet 0 I I -I I I I I I i I i -I I I I I I I I ! I I -I I , ??-1 . I I I -~ r---~ T II z 0 r---r---~1 Ci5 2 UJ ""-, I ["' Compression w a: ~ upon n.. I :::;;: 3 wetting 0 u I \ 4 I I I ' ' I i ' I I I I I I I 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE ( ksf) Moisture Content = 16.4 percent Dry Density = 107 pel Sample of: Clayey Silt and Sand with Gravel From: Boring 2 at 5 Feet 0 ~ "'I 1 -~ "-??- "" I -z 2 0 No movement I i Ci5 ~ UJ upon wetting w a: 3 n.. I I ~ I I ::;;; I I I 0 u I I I\_ I I 4 I I I I 1'\ I 5. ' I I I I I I I I 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE ( ksf) 106 0469 ~tech SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 4 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 1 Job No. 106 0469 :· SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SAMPLE LOCATION NATURAL NATURAL GRADATION PERCENT ATTERBERG LIMITS UNCONFINED BORING MOISTURE DRY GRAVEL SAND PASSING LIQUID PLASTIC COMPRESSIVE SOIL NO. DEPTH CONTENT DENSITY NO. 200 LIMIT INDEX STRENGTH TYPE (%) (%) SIEVE (ftl (%) rocfl (%) (%) (PSF) 1 3 8.4 109 Clayey silt and sand with gravel ·------·- 5 9.4 103 81 3000 Sandy silt and clay . 2 5 16.4 107 Clayey silt and sand wtth gravel 10 23.6 101 90 950 Slightly sandy silty clay Acn:tu ;' fV1 TT ~ .... o>'f· 'fiWv"' ~ , -tJc Due£_ ~.-;··{LovJ;~~ ~ ~ Ldtw~~ ! ' . ' '·· ~ .. < ;; !...;. ,·;:i.AJ\}t\fiNG ; 10 39\:id HL0U:50L5 19 :80 ' L006 /9Z/50 H, .. <:!;ec::tcch HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GE:OTECHNICAL September 5, 2007 Bo Buck P.O. Box 1732 Basalt, Colorado 8 621 Hepworth.~PnwiHk Ct!:otet:hnkJll, lm:., 5020 O . .:JLIJHy RU<1(l J 54 . Olcnww1d Spring:l>, Ct)lorudt,·• 8160'! Ph"ne• 9?0-945-798H h1x: 9/0·945-8454 email: hpgco@h.pg~t)tcch.c\)tn Job No. 10~ 0469 Subject: Ob.ervation of Excavation, Proposed Residence, Lot 47, Cerise Ran<ih, 011 Larkspur, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. Buck: As requested, are tesentative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. observed·the excavation at the s bject site on August 30, 2007 to evaluate the soils exposed for fotmclation suppo . The findings of our observations and recommendations for the , fotmdation design ·e presented in this report. We previously conducted a subsoil study for design offoun ations at the site and presented our findings in a report dated July 10, 2006, Job No. 107 469: ·< · · · '·' ·.· . · .. ' .'····'' . ('. ·_.. ··.•::." A.t'i:li<i Hitie' Mtiur .. isit to the site, the found\>ttloriexcavatiorihad been cufiri'3level$ from 1 to 7 feet below . e adjacent ground surface. The garage slab area was mostly unO)(cavated With t e exception of removal ofthe topsoil. Footing forms were being com:tmcted at the t me of our site visit. The soils exposed in the bottom of the excavation consisted of firm, I01yey silt and sand with scattered gravel. No free water was enc,,tmtered in the xcavation and the soils were slightly moist to moist. A shallow !Pit exce:vated outside f the northeast comer of the excavation was dry doW11 to the bottom pit depth of about • Yz feet below the excavated grade. Th•~ soil condition eXposed in the excavation are consistent with those previously enc:ountered on the site and suitable for support of spread footings designed for the recommended allo able bearing pressure of 1,200 psf. The soils are compressible under load and there is a 'sk of differential settlement if the bearing soils are wetted as indi(:ated in our p vious report. Other reconnnendations presented in our previous repott whii:h are applioab e should also be observed. 'rhti rcco!ririietidali nil submitted iirihis leti:b(a:i:e ba:sed oil our obse!Vatiori•of the soils ·. exposed within the foundation excavation and the previous limited subsurface exploration ~t the site. V ariati · s h1 the subsurface conditions below the excavation could increase Parker 3(3-841·7119 ' Co!otadoSpring~ 719-6.33-5562 • Silverthorne 970-468-1989 60 39\ld H83l:Ss3Nll3M:liiBOl9 TTL0LG50L5 rs:s0 L00Z/9Z/50 £0 39\ld BoBuck September 5, 200 Page2 tht~ risk offoundat on movement. We should be advised of any variations encountered in th" excavation co itions for possible changes to recommendations contained in this letter. Our service do not include determining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or other bioh gical contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If the clieint is con~cmed about OBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. If Y'~u have any qu stions or need further assistance, please call our office. Sin1:erely, !l HEPWORTH-P . 'WLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Trevor L. Knell, P. TLK/ksw cc: Tob:NO: 106 0469 HL0LZ50L5 19:90 L006/96/50 August 30, 2007 POBox Jl732 Basalt, CCI 81621 RE: Buck Residence JVA#l2531 Dear Mr. Buck, Trevor Knell with HP eotech visited the subject site to investigate the excavated subsurface conditions ear ier today. Trevor and I spoke on the phone while he was on site and biased on his fi clings he assured me that the sub-soils for the support of footings m·e good for an allowable bearing pressure of 1200psf. Footings noted on the Construction Doc ents are designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 1200psf. Trevor's pmfessionol eva uation of the subsurface conditions will be documented in a letter to f1)11ow. Sincerely, JV A, !NCO""'"""~ By: Cc: Trevor L. Knell, PE (ax 970-945-8454) BOULDER JVA,Incorporated 11'0 6ox 1860 79050 US Hwy 40 Winter Park, CO 80482 il>h: 970.722.7677 #ax: 970.722.7679 'toll Free: 877.444.1951 \(1/ebs~s: www.Jvajva.corn e-mail: lhfo@.ivajva.com Principals Oavld M. Houdeshell Robert a. Hunnes lihomas P. Skinner Thomas S. Sosll Kevin A. Tone Olndera L. Ward $tructural Engineering Jennifer Arndt Daniel E. Cooke Mark C. Cormier ~thy A. Gilhooly HsldiM. Hall Oerek D. Henderson Michael R. Hope Oraig M. Kobo Brian D. Kirtland ROnald F. Manske Michael J. McDonald David M. Mier Derek M. Pedersen Thomas M. Smith Jeannette M. Torrents Sarah E. Watts Clvilt:nglnoorlng Charles R. Hager Alalna K. Marler Howard M. McHenry C~rplyn A. Sullivan · Mmlnlstr.otlon Gregory A. larson 1'0 39\ld FORTCOLLINS H83l:SS3NII3M:!\Ia019 WiNTER PARK HL0L1:50L5 T~:80 L00l/9l/50 September 12,2007 POBox 11732 Basalt, CO 81621 RE: Buck Residence JVA #12531 I I i ' I I I I I I I Dear Mr. Buck, ! It is my understanding the ICF concrete fom1inl system used on your project for foundation stem walls 't work well with vertical rebar spacing at 16" o.c. and that 18" o.c. is the prefented spacing for vertical rebar. 18" spacing for vertical rebar in lieu of what's shown details 1 & 4 on sheet 83 is acceptable and still meets minimum t;ode recluiretu~11ts. Please call to discuss have any further questions or concerns. Sincerely, JV A, INC:ORPOl~1 By: BOULDER JVA, Incorporated POBox1660 79050 us Hwy 40 Winter Poll<, co 80482 l"h; 970.722.7677 Fax: 970.722.7679 Toll Free:; 87'7.444.1951 Website: www.Jvajva.com E .. mait lnlo@lVajva.com Principals Oavid M. Houd$&hell Robert B. Hunnes lhomas P. Skinne-r llhomas s. Soell Kevin A. Tone Clndera L Ward structural Engineering Jennifer Arndt llanlol e. Cooke Mark. C. Connler Kathy A. Gilhooly HeidiM. Hall Derek D. Hendemon Michael R. Hope Craig M. Kobe Brian D. Kirtland Ronald F. Manske Michael J_ MeOonald David M. Mier DerE!k M. Pedersen · Thoma& M. Smith Jeannette M. Torrents Sarah E;, Watts Civil Engineering · Charles R. Hager Alalna K. Marler Howard M. McHenry carolyn A. Sullivan Administration Gregory A. larson 90 39\ld FORT COLLINS :ss3Nll3Mil\IHDl9 WINTER PARK HL0L1:50L5 19180 L006/96/50 August 30, 2007 PO Box 1732 Basalt, CO 81621 RE: Buck Residence JV A #12531 Dear Mr. Buck, Trevor Knell with HP Geotech visited the subject site to investigate the excavated subsurface conditions earlier today.· Trevor and I spoke on the phone while he was on site and based on his findings he assured me that the sub-soils for the support of footings are good for an allowable bearing pressure of 1200psf. Footings noted on the Construction Documents are designed for an allowable beruing pressure of 1200psf. Trevor's professional evaluation of the subsurface conditions will be documented in a letter to follow. Cc: Trevor L. Knell, PE (fax 970-945~8454) BOULDER FORT COLLINS WINTER PARK JVA, Incorporated PO Box 1860 79050 US Hwy 40 Winter Park, CO 80482 Ph: 970.722.7677 Fax: 970.722.7679 Toll Free: 877.444.1951 Web site: www.jvajva.com E-mail: info@jvajva.com Principals David M. Houdeshell · Robert B. Hunnes Thomas P. Skinner Thomas S. Soell Kevin A. Tone Cindera L. Ward Structural Engineering Jennifer Arndt Daniel E. Cooke Mark C. Cormier Kathy A. Gilhooly Heidi M. Hall Derek D. Henderson Michael R. Hope Craig M. Kobe Brian D. Kirtland Ronald F. Manske Michael J. McDonald David M. Mier Derek M. Pedersen Thomas M. Smith Jeannette M. Torrents Sarah E. Watts Civil Engineering Charles R. Hager Alalna K. Marler Howard M. McHenry Carolyn A. Sullivan Administration Gregory A. Larson Jeff Kehr From: Ron VanMeter Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 9:55AM To: Bo Buck Cc: Jeff Kehr Subject: RE: JVA footing letter This should probably go to Jeff Kerr. I will forward. Thank you sir. From: Bo Buck [mailto:buckawt@sopris.net] Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 8:44 PM To: Ron VanMeter Subject: Fw: JVA footing letter Importance: High Hi Ron, Page 1 of2 Bo Buck here. Attached is one of the two letters required by your inspector: Matt for the soils testing and the depth of the dig on our site: Lot# 47 (0116 Larkspur Dr., Carbondale) in Cerise Ranch. I will forward you the letter from HP Geotech next week when I receive it. Please confirm receipt via e-mail and that this does indeed satisfy the Structural engineer portion of Matt's requirement. Hope all is well with you. Thank you. Cheers, Bo Buck BoBuck International Business Consultant: We are Team Builders who support your Physical and Financial Independence. Global Wellness Networks PO Box 1732 Basalt, CO 81621 Phone: 970-927-0711 Mobile: 970-618-9938 -----Original Message ----- From: I)_erek_p. Henderso.n To: buckawt@sopris.net Cc: Joe R. Biller Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 5:13 PM Subject: JVA footing letter HiBo, n I A V''lf'tl\'1 Page 2 of2 Please find attached letter regarding allowable bearing pressures for footing design. Please call with any questions or concerns. As I mentioned earlier, I will be out of town on vacation starting Monday, September 3rd returning back to the office on Tuesday, September 11th. If you have any questions while I'm out please direct them to Joe Biller. Joe helped me in the design of your home. Thanks and have a nice day! DEREK D. HENDERSON, P.E. JVA, Incorporated i 319 Spruce Street Boulder, CO 80302 Phone: 303.444.1951 Fax: 303.565.4975 www.Jv<~Jva, c9Jn o t 11 n nrn No.-. /0:5'1'-£ Asses~or's Parcel N~/ ..... ].';2( ... 0 )..-t><q Date 8jt7jo? BUILDING PERMIT CARD Job Address 0 Jl{p tfcJ.Jo..Je..Af'-M .IJ., ~ C 1 ~ 0::, Si/6)...~ cf~f'l ~ ~ YJJ. { Owner ~{;,~ • 44Qo..( <t-~ Address f.o ·k 173~ &po.Jf-lf::ot~blJ <f1o-"fJ../-Sll% Contractor f':t:£ f'/ :Zah ~ · Address ~.AQ~ . C:::. · Phone # _. -l..t~ I '<? ~£ Setbacks: Front Rear RH LH _____ Zoning ____ _ S{~~~~k'J~ ..f INSPECTIONS Soils Test ~ ~:;-Weatherproofing )(Footing Weg ole~~ Mechanical ______ ---_____ _ Foundation 7'-G-o7~~;?7w ;; Electrical Rough (State) __ i7~------ Grout Electrical Final (State)---=------,....- Underground Plumbingti=--~Final {.-Jk-<l'6 /Checklist Completed?_::...{/ __ Rough Plumbing /" ~-~~ Certificate Occupancy # =-""'5«--"'?...:......:~c.=:~::..:.----- Framing -Date ~ • liJ:J C8 Insulation Septic System # _,_fJ-+'-j»r<>=---------- Roofing Date ------------ Drywall it ·(J~-cl1!'~ Final Gas Piping /-.:t 5 -~ Other .1--<~-----fJ-(-,...------ NOTES (continue on back) COUNTY OF GARFIELD -BUILDING DEPARTMENT CORRECTION NOTICE 108 8th St., Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Colorado Phone (970) 945-8212 Job located at CJ/16 ~ ... ......z. ..ih . Permit No. 105"7'/f I have this day inspected this structure and these premises and found the following corrections needed: l)~(;;t-~~4~~1~ ~~~~~6-~ ¥c¥-~~51 + ~~.J.· ~~~~~ :~)~~ ~~,3~~ ~ You are hereby notified that the above correction must be inspected before covering. When correction(s) have been made, call for inspection at 970-384-5003. Date f[...3o-o7 20 ___ _ Building Inspector ~2?2~"' Phone (970) 945-8212 INSPECTION WILL NOliE MADE UNLESS THIS CARD IS POSTED ON THE JOB 24 HOURS NOTICE REQlJIRED FOR INSPECTIONS BUILDING PERMIT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Date lssued'2l.p.1Jfl7 .. zoned Area .••..•••.•.•..•••...•.•••.••... Permit No •. l~?!!.Y. .......... . AGREEMENT In consideration of the issuance of this permit, the applicant hereby agrees to comply with all laws and regulations related to the zoning, 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 zoning, location, erection and construction of the above described structure, the permit may then be revoked by notice from the County Building Inspector and IMMEDIATELY BECOME NULL AND VOID. ~~~~C!!!o!.!..'fi!?!!!J!wt!..!oo\ ·,s. 'l~~tc( ~<.. Setbacks Front Side Side Rear Tbis Card Must Be Posted So It is Plainly Visible From Tbe Street Until Final Inspection. 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 APPROVED DO NOT DESTROY THIS CARD Date <2\ MJ~ By~~~ /M(f._ ~LA~~~~;~~ WITH CLEAR PLASTIC Pru;cel Detail Page 1 of3 Garfield County Assessor/Treasurer Parcel Detail Information As~e$sm:IIreaHYreiPmpe!1YSean:;l! I Asses~m· Subset_Ql!f!Y I As_sessor Sales _Se_arch C:lerls: !~'? ReGon:lctReGeption Senr«l! Parcel De_tail I Value Detail Sales Detail I Reside!)tial/C:ommercial Improvement Detail Land Detail I Photographs I Tax Area II Account Number II Parcel Number II Mill Levy I I 084 II R007142 II 239132102047 II 68.789 I Owner Name and Mailing Address IBUCK, B. RUSSELL & CYNTHIA M I IPOBOX 1732 I IBASALT, CO 81621 I Legal Description lsECT,TWN,RNG:32-7-87 SUB:CERISE I IRANCH SUB-DIV. LOT:47 DESC: PHASE 1 I IPRE:R111837 BK:850 PG:81 BK:838 I IPG:205 BK:370 PG:379 BK:367 PG: 147 I IBK:l85 PG:319 BK:142 PG:547 BK:1207 I IPG:399 BK:1207 PG:396 BK:0606 I IPG:0569 BK:1813 PG:23 RECPT:700617 I IBK: 1589 PG:562 RECPT:652490 BK: 1576 I IPG:681 RECPT:649971 BK:1576 PG:677 I IRECPT:649970 BK:1550 PG:552 I IRECPT:643769 BK:1523 PG:60 I IRECPT:637392 BK:1508 PG:376 I /RECPT:634548 BK:1233 PG:546 I IRECPT:573505 BK: 1222 PG:9 I IRECPT:573542 BK: 1222 PG: 1 I IRECPT:573541 BK:1221 PG:942 I http://www .garcoact.com/assessor/ParceLasp? AccountNumber=R007142 7/10/2007 ParDe! Detail Page 2 of3 IRECPT:573540 BK: 1221 PG:922 I jRECPT:573539 BK:1209 PG:906 I IRECPT:570047 BK:1209 PG:888 I jRECPT:570046 BK:1209 PG:877 I IRECPT:570044 BK: 1209 PG:872 I IRECPT:570043 BK: 1206 PG:248 I JRECPT:569106 BK:1181 PG:946 I IRECPT:561931 BK:1069 PG:76 I IRECPT:525654 BK:1036 PG:0356 I IBK:0867 PG:0950 BK:0867 PG:0946 I IBK:0867 PG:0941 I Location Physical Address: 119 LARKSPUR DR CARBONDALE! Subdivision: IJCERISE RANCH SUB-DIV. I Land Acres: 112.102 I Land Sq Ft: JJo Section II Township II Range I 32 II 7 II 87 I Property Tax Valuation Information II Actual Value II Assessed Value I I Land: II 235,oooll 68,1501 I Improvements: JJ OJJ 0 I Total: II 235,oooll 68,1501 Sale Date: 1/6121/2006 Sale Price: JJ242,500 Basic Building Characteristics Number of Residential jo I Buildings: I Number of Comm!lndl Buildings: 0 No Building Records Found http://www .garcoact.com/assessor/Parcel.asp? AccountNumber=R007142 7/10/2007 Parcel Detail Tax Information Tax Year II Transaction Type II Amount I .2006 II Tax Payment: Second Half II ($1,528.84)1 2006 II Interest Payment II ($30.58)1 2006 II Interest Charge II $30.581 2006 II Tax Payment: First Half II ($1,528.84)1 2006 II Tax Amount II $3,057.681 2005 Tax Payment: Whole II ($3,028.68)1 2005 Tax Abatement II ($146.88)1 2005 Tax Amount II $3,175.561 2004 I Tax Payment: Whole II ($1,550.56)1 2004 II Tax Amount II $1,550.561 2003 II Tax Payment: Whole II ($1,201.23)1 2003 II Interest Payment II ($12.01)1 2003 II Interest Charge II $12.011 2003 II Tax Abatement II ($135.81)1 2003 II Tax Amount II $1,337.041 2002 II Interest Payment ($59.46)1 I 2002 II Interest Charge $59.461 I 2002 II Tax Payment: Whole ($1,486.44)1 I 2002 II Tax Amount $1,486.441 I 2001 II Tax Payment: Whole II ($10.44)1 I 2001 II Tax Amount II $10.441 TopofPagG Assessor Database Search O_J2tjnm J Treasurer Datab.itlie_Search Options Clerk & Recorder Data]Jase Search Options Garfield County Home.f'i!gG Page 3 of3 The Garfield County Assessor and Treasurer's Offices make every effort to collect and maintain accurate data. However, Good Turns Software and the Garfield County Assessor and Treasurer's Offices are unable to wan·ant any of the information herein contained. Copyright © 2005 -2006 Good Turns Software. All Rights Reserved. Database & Web Design by Good.T.llnls..SnftwarQ. http://www. garcoact.com/ assessor/Parcel. asp? AccountN umber= R 00714 2 7/10/2007