Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication-PermitI Garfield County Building & Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite #401 Glenwood Springs, Co. 81601 Office:970·945·8212 Fax: 970·384-3470 Inspection Line: 970·384-5003 Building Permit No. Parcel No: 2393-071-05-027 Locality: Use of Building: ___ _§!fpwelling on unfinished basement w/patios & attached gara_~-- Owner: Contractor: ---~-~--~--_§l<yyiew Homes, LLC Fees: Plan Check: Septic: Bldg Permit: Other Fees: 933.07 Total Fees: $ 4,540.88 Clerk: Date: I II Garage: 12 Driveway Permit: Grc-."'1ELD COUN1Y BUILDING PERMIT APPLICAT• 108 8ili Street, Suite 401, Glenwood Springs, Co 8!601 Phone: 970-945-8212/ Fax: 970-384-3470 I Inspection Line: 970-384-5003 www.garfield-countv.com at the assessors office 970~945·9134) 0 Authoritv. This application for a Building Penn it must be signed by the Owner of the property, described above, or an authorized agent. If the signature below is not that of the Owner, a separate letter of authority, signed by the Owner, must be provided with this Application. Legal Access. A Building Pennit cannot be issued without proof of legal and adequate access to the property for purposes of inspections by the Building Department. Other Permits. Multiple separate permits may be required: (1) State Electrical Pennit, (2) County ISDS Pennit, (3) another permit required for use on the property identified above, e.g. State or County Highway/ Road Access or a State Wastewater Discharge Pennit. Void Permit. A Building Permit becomes null and void if the work authori:r.ed is not commenced within 180 days of the date of issuance and if work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days after commencement. CERTIFICATION I hereby certifY that! have read this Application and that the information contained above is true and correct. I understand that the Building Department accepts the Application, along with the plans and specifications and otl1er data submitted by me or on my belmlf(submitta!s), based upon my certification as to accuracy. Assmning completeness of the submittals and approval of this Application, a Bull ding Pe1mit will be issued granting permission to me, as Owner, to construct the structure(s) and facilities detailed on the submittals reviewed by the Building Department. In consideration of the issuance of the Building Permit, l agree that I and my agents will comply with provisions of any federal, state or local law regulating the wo1k and the Garfield County Building Code, ISDS regulations and applicable land usc regulations (County Rcgulation(s)). I acknowledge that the Building Permit may be suspended or revoked, upon llotice fi:om the County, if the location, conslluction or use of the stmcture(s) and facility(ies), described above, are 11ot in compliance with County Regulation(s) or any other applicable law. I hereby grant permission to the Building Department to enter the property, described above, to inspect the wol"k. I further acknowledge that tlle issuance of the Building Penni! does not prevent the Building Official from; (1) requiring the correction of errors in the submittals, if any, discovered after issuance; or (2) stopping construction or usc of the structure(s) or facility(ics) if such is in violation inspections of the work by the Building Department do not constitute an acceptance of responsibility or liability by the County of errors, omissions · · with federal, state and local Jaws and County Regulations rest with me and my authorized agents, including without STAFF USE ONLY Special Conditions: 11~-... ,M-1>. /') Adjusted Valuation: 0 Plan Checl\ Fee: 'ZJ.. Permit Fee: <)"" Manu home Fee: Mise Fees: ~.,.,..<{ ~"'"~ o)?--3.c.::/' \\{'2\ .21 Si.,5 f) fft13397 ISDSFee~ Total Fees: Fees Paid: Balance Due'sl,{ BP No & Issue Date: ISDS No & Issued Date: L-\ <: L-j 0 ~~ \ Jt-t).~Y IJoS {, 't /:Jft<tl•<.? ~('k 3 Jbt Setbacl\s: OCCGroup: ConstType: { Zoning: ::t/1'2-C P« D BI,DG DEPT: PLNGDEPT: 1b \lh 1-')..l-01':" u Ul -;}-?-1--o<:. AP' DATE APP DATE The following items are required by Garfield County for a final Inspection: I) A final Electrical Inspection from the Colorado State Electrical Inspector. 2) Permanent address assigned by Garfield County Building Department and posted at the structure and where readily visible from access road. 3) A finished roof; a lockable building; completed exterior siding; exterior doors and windows installed; a complete kitchen with cabinets, sink with hot & cold running water, non-absorbent kitchen floor covering, counter tops and finished walls, ready for stove and refrigerator; all necessary plumbing. 4) All bathrooms must be complete, with washbowl, tub or shower, toilet, hot and cold running water, non-absorbent floors, walls finished, and privacy door. 5) Steps over three (3) risers, outside or inside must be must have handrails. Balconies and decks over 30" high must be constructed to all IBC and IRC requirements including guardrails. 6) Outside grading completed so that water slopes away from the building; 7) Exceptions to the outside steps, decks, grading may be made upon the demonstration of extenuating circumstances., i.e. weather. Under such circumstances A Certificate of Occupancy may be issued conditionally. 8) A final inspection sign off by the Garfield County Road & Bridge Department for driveway installation, where applicable; as well as any final sign off by the Fire District, and/or State Agencies where applicable. A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY (C.O.) WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL THE ABOVE ITEMS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. A C.O. MAY TAKE UP TO 5 BUSINESS DAYS TO BE PROCESSED AND ISSUED. OWNER CANNOT OCCUPY OR USE DWELLING UNTIL A 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. I understand and agree to abide by the above conditions for occupancy, use and the issuance of a C.O. for the building identified in the Building Permit. OWNERS SIGN Bapplicationdecember2007 VALUATION FEE DETERMINATION Applicant Address Date ..:P.:;in~y:-'o-"n-"M:;:.e:;:s;;:;a,::D:.::ec.ve:;:l;:.op"'m"'e=n:.:t~~~~-Subdivision _,1c:6,..:S:.::a""-ge=:M:,:::e:::ad,o::.:w.:...R=d·:.._~~~~~-Lot/Block ..:3.:...11,_,8.:...12,0,_,0:::8~~~~~~~~--'~-'-Contractor Pinyon Mesa ff( i 1\.J ( 27 Skyview Homes Finished (Livable Area): Main Upper Lower Other Total Basement: Unfinished Square Feet Valuation Conversion of Unfinished to Finished Total Valuation Garage: Valuation Crawl Space Valuation Decks/ Patios Valuation Covered Open Type of Construction: Occupancy: Valuation Total Valuation 1658 sf 1362 sf sf sf X $74.68 3020 sf 1658 sf X $41.00 sf X $33.68 476 sf X $18.00 sf X $9.00 225,533.60 67,978.00 8,568.00 0.00 228 sf X $24.00 : 5 '-II ;;l.. 401 sf X $12.00 .: '1 'K I~ 10,284.00 Commercial sf X sf X sf X sf X sf X sf X 0.00 312,363.60 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. TWO (2) SETS OF CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS & TWO (2) SITE PLANS MUST BE SUBMITTED FOR ALL APPLICATIONS. M 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. I 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 of the 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. I. Is a site plan included that identifies the location of the proposed structure or addition and distances to the property lines from each corner 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 corner lot. Special setbacks do apply. / Yes \::;;- 3. Does the site plan include when applicable the location of the I.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 fv' \'1 4. Does the site plan indicate the location and direction of the County or private road accessing the property?/ Yes. _ __c"'---- 2 5. Are you aware that prior to submittal of a building permit application you are required to show proof of a legal and adequate access to the site? This may include (but is not limited to) proof of your right to use a private easement/right of way; A County Road and Bridge permit; a Colorado Dept. of Highway Permit, including a Notice to Proceed; a permit from the federal government or any combination. You can contact the Road & Bridge Department at 625-8601. See phone book for other agencjes Yes __ v"--- 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 ..f 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 ,/ No ____ _ 8. Do the plans indicate the size and location of ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces and soffits?/ Yes ___ No ____ _ 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 _____ _ 10. Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor, and roof constructi911? Yes,_--l<l/_ ___ _ 11. Does the building section drawing include size and spacing of floor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof rafters pr joists or trusses? Yes __ ,_v ___ _ 12. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method of positive connection of all columns ansi' beams? Yes __ V:c__ ___ _ 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 r90f? (Building height measurement usually not to exceed 25 feet) Yes, _ _,_/ ___ _ 14. Does the plan include any stove or zero clearance fireplace planned for installation including make and mod7nd Colorado Ph~ certifications or phase II EPA certification? Yes~ Mt ~(j()}3ifl· , 15. Does the plan include a masonry fireplace including a fireplace section indicating design to comply with the IRC? Yes ______ No_~V ____ _ 16. 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 / 17. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural light and ventilati' for all habitable rooms? Yes _____ _ 18. 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 foy these areas? Yes .I' No ------- 19. Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas furnaces, boilers and water heaters indicated on the plan? /) '""'.../.-_ . _ A~ ·-Yes~ ~1Yl.M}h_. U:H~ 20. Do you understand that if you are building on a parcel of land created by the exemption process or the subdivis1op process, are building plans in compliance with all plat notes and/or covenants? Y es_-'IL_"----- 21. 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 __ _L_ __ _ 22. Will this be th,e only residential strytture on the parcel? Yes v' No Ifno-Explain: ______ _ 23. Have two (2~omplete sets of construction drawings been submitted with the application? Yes 1 • 24. Do you undeptand that the minimum dimension a home can be on a lot is 20ft. wide and 20ft. long? Yes._-'.;'----- 4 25. Have you designed or had this plan designed while considering building and other construction code requiremt;Pts? Yes_--1\L_'----- 26. Do your plans comply with all zoning rules and regulations in the County related to your properties zonedistrL Yes \ 27. Does the plan accurately indicate what you intend to construct and what will receive a final inspection by the Garj.ield County Building Department? Yes __ v.__ __ _ 28. Do you understand that approval for design and/or construction changes are required prior to the applicatiop of these changes? Yes 1L --"---- 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 permit? Yes _ _.,./'----- 30. Are you aware that you must call in for au 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 in to 384-5093. Yes v 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 ../ 32. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections required under the IRC including approval on a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and occupancy of the buildin9 Yes _____ _ 33. Are you aware that the Permit Application must be signed by the Owner or a written authority being given fo}' an Agent and that the party responsible for the project must comply with the IRC? Yes._V_,__ ___ _ 5 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 / 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 pe;mit application? Your attention in this is appreciated. Yes __ ~vr~----------- 36. Do you know that the local fire district may require you to submit plans for their review of fire safety issues? / Yes (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 / 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 of a Certificat_syof Occupancy? Yes __ ...:.~~" _____ _ I hereby acknowledge that I have read, understand and answered these questions to the best of my ability . . k&!Lv Signature of Owner Date 1 I 6 PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST Applicant ~ tJ;cd /'llleA-rt Date __ ~'----.;....-'l'-'6-_v_CfJ __ __c /(.. ¥ ~ow Building \/ilngineered Foundation ~DrivewayPermit ~~­ ~urveyed Site Plan ~Septic Permit and Setbacks ~ ~Grade/Topography 30% ' I ~Attach Residential Plan Review List V'Minirnum Application Questionnaire¢; ~ubdivision Plat Notes *-Fire Department Review . :7valuation Determination/Fees ~ed Line Plans/Stamps/Sticker .h1L_Attach Conditions l.A,.pplication Signed WI-. c. s ~ -bP!an Reviewer To Sign Application 0arcel/Schedule No . .P!JL 40# Snowload Letter-Man£. Hms. t/5~~ . GENERAL NOTES: • Planning/Zoning t/Property Line Setbacks ~Oft Stream Setbacks ~loodPlain ~Building Height r/' Zoning Sign-off _LRoad Impact Fees ~HOAIDRC Approval ~rade/Topography 40% I .<Planning Issues __::,_.L SubdivisionPlat Notes Geotechnical Investigation Lots 20/;;)28, 42 and 48 P~nMesa Garfield County, Colorado Project No. 27-362 January 15, 2008 Prepared for: Skyvlew Developments Attn: Angela Tourney 1024 Centre Avenue Suite 100, C & D Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 Prepared by: Yeh and Associates, Inc. 170 Mel Ray Road Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970-384-1500 Fax: 970-384-1501 Lots 20, 27, 28,42 and 48 Pinyon Mesa Table of Contents Project No. 27-362 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ....................................................................................... 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ••••••••••••.•.•••••.••.•••.•••••••••.••••••••.••.••••••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••.•••••••.•••.• 1 SITE CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................. 1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .................................................................................................. 1 SITE DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................................................. 2 FOUNDATIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................ ~. 3 BELOW-GRADE WALLS ......................................................................................................... 4 SLABS·ON-GRADE ................................................................................................................. 4 SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE .................................................................................. ~ .................. 4 SURFACE DRAINAGE ............................................................................................................. 5 LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 5 Figure Site Location ........................................................................................................................... 1 Test Hole Locations ................................................................................................................ 2 Appendices Test Hole Logs ....................................................................................................................... A Laboratory Test Results ................................ ~ •••••.•.••••.•••••••..••••••••••••••••.•••.••••••••••••••.•••.•••.•••.• B Lots 20, 27, 28, 42 and 48 Pinyon Mesa PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY Project No. 27-362 This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for five proposed single-family residences on Lots 20, 27, 28, 42 and 48 at Pinyon Mesa Subdivision in Garfield County, Colorado. The location of the subject sites are presented oh Figures 1 and 2. · The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for design and construction of single· family residences on the subject lots. The field investigation consisted of drilling one exploratory test hole within the building envelope on each lot. Samples of the subsurface materials were collected and returned to our laboratory for testing. The results of our field and laboratory programs were evaluated to develop recommendations for building foundations and surface and subsurface drainage. This report summarizes the information obtained during our investigation and presents our recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed residences will be one to two-story wood framed structures with or without basements. For non-basement structures, foundation excavations will likely be on the order of 3 to 4 feet deep. For basement structures, foundation excavations will likely be on the order of 8 to 10 feet deep. We anticipate the main level floor will be structurally· supported. Foundation loads will likely be on the order of 1,000 to 3,000 pounds per linear foot. The lots included in this investigation are presented on Figure 2. SITE CONDITIONS Pinyon Mesa is located south of Glenwood Springs, Colorado and more particular, about one mile up and on the south side of County Road 114 from the intersection of Highway 82. The subject lots were vacant within a developed subdivision. Lot 27 had an existing stock pile covering the majority of the building envelope at the time of investigation. Vacant lots are located around the subject lots. Lots 20, 27, 28, 42 and 48 were situated on the eastern half of the subdivision. Streets were paved and utilities have been installed. The site sloped down to the west at grades of about 4 to 13 percent, becoming steeper around Lot 42. The building envelopes on Lots 20, 42 and 48 were partially cleared of scrub and the entire site was covered with snow at the time of this investigation. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS An exploratory test hole was drilled within the building envelope on each lot. The test holes were drilled to depths between 25 and 35 feet. Modified California and split spoon 1 Lots 20, 27, 28, 42 and 48 Pinyon Mesa Project No. 27-362 samples were collected at specified depths. California samples were collected using a 2-inch I. D. sampler driven into the subsoils with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows needed to drive the sampler constitutes the blow count. For example, a value on the log (Appendix A) of 24/12 indicates the sampler was driven 12 inches with 24 blows of the hammer. The blow count can be used as a relatively measure of material stiffness or density. Split spoon samples were obtained in the same manner, but with a 1.5-inch I.D. The collected samples were transported to our laboratory where they were examined and classified. Laboratory tests included moisture content, dry density, swell/consolidation, grain size analysis and Atterberg limit testing. Generally, the subsoils encountered in our test holes consisted of silt and/or clay. Lot 20 terminated on very dense gravel, cobble and boulders. Lot 27 had an existing stock pile covering the majority of the building envelope. The fill (stock pile) consisted of clay materials and was approximately 8 feet in height. Lot 42 had a silty sand layer between the clay and clay- silt layers. Bedrock was not encountered to the maximum depths explored. The silt and clay samples tested had 54 to 78 percent fines (passing NO. 200 sieve) with liquid limits on the silt being non-liquid and non-plastic. The silty sand had 38 percent fines. Five silt and clay samples generally exhibited low consolidation (-0.2 to -1.8 percent) with one sample exhibiting moderate consolidation of -3.5 percent when wetted under an applied pressure of 1.000 psf. The laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B and are summarized in the Summary of Laboratory Test Results table. Groundwater was not encountered during drilling, and the subsoils were slightly moist to moist. We believe variations in ground water conditions can occur. The magnitude of the variation will be largely dependent upon local irrigation practices, the duration and intensity of precipitation, site grading changes, and the surface and subsurface drainage characteristics of the surrounding area. SITE DEVELOPMENT We understand cuts of about 3 to 4 feet from existing grade may be necessary to reach foundation level for crawlspace construction and 8 to 10 feet from existing grade for basement construction, with the exception of Lot 27, where we assumed the 8 feet of stock piled material would be removed prior to construction. Fill placement should be minor. Areas to receive fill should be stripped of vegetation, organic soils and debris. The on-site soils free of organic matter, debris and rocks larger than 6 inches can be used in fills. Fill should be placed in thin, 2 Lots 20. 27, 28, 42 and 48 Plnyon Mesa Project No. 27-362 loose lifts of 8 inches thick or less, moisture conditioned to 0 to 3 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum standard Proctor dry density (ASTM 0 698). Placement and compaction of fill should be observed and tested by a geotechnical engineer. FOUNDATIONS RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of our subsurface investigation, we judge these lots as low collapsible risk overall and therefore believe the residences can be supported on footing foundations placed on the natural soils or properly compacted fill. Based on our experience and laboratory test results, we believe there is a low risk of consolidation and therefore a low risk of foundation movement provided the following recommendations are followed. The following design and construction details should be observed for spread footings placed on the natural soils or properly compacted fill. 1. Foundations should be constructed on undisturbed, natural soils. Loose, disturbed soils encountered at foundation level should be removed and replaced with compacted fill or the foundation should be extended to undisturbed soils. 2. Footing foundations can be designed for a maximum allowable soil pressure of 2,000 psf. The design pressure may be increased by 1/3 or as allowed by local code, when considering total loads that include wind or seismic conditions. 3. Continuous wall footings should have a minimum width of at least 18 inches. Foundation pads for isolated columns should have a minimum dimension of 24 inches. 4. Resistance to sliding at the bottom of the footing can be calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.30. Passive pressure against the side of the footing can also be considered for the sliding resistance if it is properly compacted. Passive pressure can be estimated based on an equivalent fluid density of 300 pcf for a level backfill. 5. Grade beams and foundation walls should be reinforced to span undisclosed loose or soft soil areas. We recommend reinforcement sufficient to span an unsupported _ distance of at least 10 feet. 6. The soils below exterior footings or exterior edges of slabs should be protected from freezing. We recommend the bottom of footings be constructed at least 3 feet below finished exterior grade or as required by local municipal code. 7. All foundation excavations should be observed by a representative of the geotechnical engineer prior to placement of concrete. 3 Lots 20, 27, 28, 42 and 48 Pinyon Mesa BELOW-GRADE WALLS Project No. 27-362 Crawlspaces or basements are planned below the main level for these residences. Foundation walls that extend below grade should be designed for lateral earth pressure where backfill is not present to the same level on both sides of the wall. For walls that can deflect or rotate about 0.5 to 1 percent of the wall height, the wall can be designed for "active" earth pressure conditions. For a very rigid wall where negligible deflection can occur, an "at-rest" lateral earth pressure condition can be used. Typically, below-grade walls for residences can rotate under normal design loads, and this deflection results in acceptable performance. If on-site soils are used as backfill, we recommend using an equivalent fluid density of 45 pcf for design of below grade walls. This value assumes that some minor cracking is acceptable. If negligible deflections are desired, a higher equivalent fluid density of 60 pcf should be used for design. These equivalent densities do not account for sloping backfill, surcharges or hydrostatic pressure. SLABS-ON-GRADE Based on our investigation, garage and driveway slabs will likely be underlain by silt and clay soils. We believe there is a low risk of poor slab-on-grade performance due to collapsible soils. The on-site soils, free of organics and debris, are suitable to support lightly loaded slabs- on-grade. Slabs should be separated from all load bearing walls and columns with expansion joints that allow vertical movement. Control joints should be used to reduce damage from shrinkage cracking. All fill below slabs should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum standard Proctor dry density within 2 percent of optimum moisture content. SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE Groundwater was not encountered during our investigation. Surface water typically flows through permeable wall backfill and collects at the backfill and natural soil interface resulting in saturated foundation soils and/or wet crawlspace conditions. To reduce water accumulation outside foundation walls and reduce moist crawlspace and basement conditions, a foundation drain could be installed around the exterior of the foundation walls. Drains could be installed in crawlspace areas after completion of construction, if groundwater develops. If groundwater or highly saturated soils are encountered during foundation excavation on these lots, we should be contacted for additional recommendations. . 4 Lots 20, 27, 28, 42 and 48 Pinyon Mesa Project No. 27-362 A typical drain should consist of a 4-inch diameter, perforated pipe encased in free draining gravel. The gravel should be % to 1.5-inch washed rock with less than 5 percent fines. The drain should be provided with a gravity discharge such as a sump pit where water can be removed by pumping or be daylighted. The pipe should be sloped at a minimum of 1 percent and should be installed 12 to 18 inches away from and parallel to the footing foundation. The bottom of the pipe should be at least 2 inches below the bottom of footing level at the high point. Crawlspace areas should also be provided with adequate ventilation. SURFACE DRAINAGE Surface drainage is crucial to the performance of foundations and flatwork. We recommend the ground surface surrounding the building be sloped to drain away from the structure. We recommend a slope of at least 6 inches in the first 10 feet for landscape areas and a minimum slope of 1 percent for paved areas. Backfill around foundations should be moisture conditioned and compacted as recommended in the SITE DEVELOPMENT section. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge beyond the backfill area. LIMITATIONS The analyses and recommendations presented in this report are based upon our data obtained from the borings at the indicated locations, field observations, laboratory testing, our understanding of the proposed construction and other information discussed in this report. It is possible that subsurface conditions may vary between or beyond the points explored. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction. If variations appear, we should be contacted immediately so we can review our report in light of the variations and provide supplemental recommendations as necessary. We should also review the report if the scope of the proposed construction, including the proposed loads, finished elevations or structure locations, change from those described in this report. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Yeh and Associates reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. The scope of services for this project did not include, specifically or by implication, any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions or biological conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination, conditions or pollution. other studies should be undertaken. 5 Lots 20, 27, 28, 42 and 48 Pinyon Mesa Project No. 27-362 The report was prepared In substantial accordance with the generally accepted standards of practice for geotechnical engineering as exist in the site area at the time of our investigation. No warranties, express or implied, are intended or made. The recommendations in this report are based on the assumption that Yeh and Associates will conduct an adequate program of construction testing and observation to evaluate compliance with our recommendations. YEH AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Keith E. Asay Staff Engineer 6 Not to scale Site Location Project 27-362 Figure 1 APPENDIX A TEST HOLE LOGS ~ @ ij i ;;: g .<:: . a. "' c lot20 lot27 ---········----------------------------------·--··--· Lot28 lot42 Lot48 ................................................................................................. ·---······················· -----· -·-···145 ! ~rl--------------------------------------------------,,-------------------------------------------------~ <I~ ~ i' j ~ YEH AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS Pinyon Mesa ;~~~:::: ________________________________________ _J~P~ro~je~m~N~u~m~be~r.~2~7~~~~~----------------------------F~~~u~~-N_o._~ __ 1~ l,jyEH AND ASSOCIA • ..:S, INC. Project: Pinyon Mesa ..41· GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS Project Number: 27-362 Legend for Symbols Used on Test Hole Logs Sample Types D Modified Callfomla Sampler. The symbol24/121ndlcates that 24 blows from a 140 pound hammer falling 30 lhches was used to drive 2-lnch 1.0. sampler 121nches . • Split Spoon Sampler. The symbol50/31ndlcates ihat 50 blows from a 140 pound hammer falling 30 Inches was used to drive 1.5-lnch I. D. sampler 31nchas. Other Symbols t Indicates practical drill rig refusal. Soil Lithology ·~~ Clay, silty, slightly sandy, soft, moist to very moist, brown (Fill}. IJ]J Slit. slightly sandy, very stiff, slightly moist to moist, brown (ML). ~~ Clay, silty, slightly sandy, stiff to very stiff, slightly moist to moist, brown (CL}. h'Y9 6...\:J Gravel, cobble, small boulders, very dense, slightly moist, brown (GP). ~ Clay-Slit, slightly sandy, silty, very stiff, slightly mo.lst, brown (CL_ML}. I::JW:I Sand, slightly silty, slightly gravelly, medium dense, slightly moist, brown (SM}. NOTES: 1. The test hole was drilled on December 13, 2007 using 4-!nch continuous flight auger. 2. Groundwater was not encountered during this lnvestlgaUon. 3. Subsoil descrlptlons are subject to explanations w!thfn tho report. Figure A-2 APPENDIXB LABORATORY TEST RESULTS. 2.0 Graphl ~ 0 0.0 • + i ;:;., ,.!, .! -2.0 WATER ADDED " 'CI = C> ~ C> -4.0 \,) -6.0 0.1 1 10 100 Applied Normal Pressure, ksf 2.0 Graph2 ~ • 0.0 f ~ ;! ~ 00. ;:;., ,.!, = -2.0 WATER ADDED ,g " 'CI = C> "' = -4.0 C> \,) -6.0 0.1 1 10 100 Applied Normal Pressure, ksf Graph Boring .~~~ Moisture Swell(+) I SWELL/ cCft1 Content Consolidation(-) Soil Description CONSOLIDATION Number Number (%) (%) GRAPH 1 Lot20 4 93 7.0 -3.5 Silt, sandy (ML) By: KEA 2 Lot28 9 94 7.9 -1.1 Clay, sandy (CL) r1 By: RDJ Job No: 27-362 tMesa Figure B-1 YEH&A "SI t1 :1 J\TES, I Nl . . 2.0 JGrapb 1 ~ ' • 0.0 -f, -._, -~ 1""'-:--~ ~ ,..... -..!..-= -2.0 WATER ADDED -~ .. "CC ·~ -"' ., ~ -4.0 u -6.0 0.1 1 10 100 Applied Normal Pressure, ksf 2.0 1Graph2 ~ • 0.0 :{' ._, il ~ ~ -2.0 = WATERADDED ,g .. "CC = "' ., = -4.0 "' u -6.0 0.1 1 10 100 Applied Normal Pressure, ksf Graph Boring Natural Dry Moisture Swell(+) I SWELL/ Number Number Depth (ft) Density (pel) Content Consolidation(-) Soli Description CONSOLIDATION (%) (%) GRAPH 1 Lot42 9 90 8.1 -0.2 Clay, sandy (CL) Drawn By: KEA 2 Lot48 4 91 7.7 -1.8 Clay, sandy(CL) Checked By: RDJ Job No: 27-362 Project Name: Pinyon Mesa Figure B-2 YJ£H& A ..:s1 II :1 AT]!;:S, lNL. 2.0 Graph 1 ';!. 0.0 i "-' WATER ADDED il ~ :;;._ ...!.-= -2.0 ~ iii! "' "' = -4.0 "' u -6.0 0.1 1 10 100 Applied Normal Pressure, ksf 2.0 !Graph2 ~ 0 0.0 i ~ if; til -'i' 'i' -2.0 ~ .§ . ::::1 "' "' = -4.0 "' u -6.0 0.1 1 10 100 Applied Normal Pressure, ksf Graph Boring Natural Dl'! Moisture Swell(+) I SWELL/ nont" (ft1 Content Consolidation(-) Soil Description CONSOLIDATION Number Number . (pcf, (%) (%) GRAPH 1 Lot48 14 91 8.0 -0.9 Clay, sandy (CL) By: KEA 2 By: RDJ ,Job No: 27-362 .Mesa Figure B-3 YI£H&. A :1 AT~:s. lNl. ·~ YEH & ASSOCIATES, INC Summary of Laboratory Test Results P · tN 27 362 Project Name· Pinyon Mesa rOJec o: -.. Sample Location Grain Size Analysis Atterberg Limits Water Swell(+)/ Moisture Test Depth Sample Content Dry Density Gravel Sand Fines Soluble Consolidation(-) . Soil Description Location (It) Type (%) Lot20 4 CA 7.0 9 CA 5.9 Lot27 19 CA 7.9 Lot28 9 CA 7.9 14.0 CA 8.4 Lo\42 9 CA 8.1 19 CA 3.7 Lot48 4 CA 7.7 9 CA 7.1 14 CA 8.0 CA-Ind1cates Modified Califorma sample NL -Indicates non-liquid NP -Indicates non-plastic (pel) 93 85 82 94 99 90 117 91 86 91 >#4 <#200 LL PL PI Sulfate under 1 ,000 psf (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) 54 -3.5 snt, sandy (ML) 64 NL NP NP SiH, sandy (ML) 71 Clay, sandy (CL) 73 -1.1 Clay, sandy (CL) 75 Clay, sandy (CL) 78 -0.2 Clay, sandy (CL) 38 Sand, siHY (SM) 64 -1.8 Clay, sandy (CL) 72 0.058 Clay, sandy (CL) 60 -0.9 Clay, sandy (CL) . ODDO ENGINEERING, INC. MEMORANDUM To: John Caves, Skyview Developments From: Paul Stoffel E.I.T., Oddo Engineering Cc: Job: Project No.: Date: John, Robert Oddo, P.E., Oddo Engineering; Jerry Caves, Skyview Developments; Misty Berg, Skyview Developments; Pinon Mesa, Lot 27 Saga Meadow, Lodge Pole Model Garfield County, Colorado 2818-01 April14, 2008 In accordance to your request, on April 10 and April 11, 2008, Oddo Engineering's personnel observed the placement of the footing reinforcement and wall reinforcement respectively per Weeks & Associates Structural Engineers drawings dated February 8, 2008 for the above referenced project with the engineer of record being a Colorado Professional Engineer, Gary G. Weeks. Oddo Engineering's scope of service was to verify the correct size of rebar, rebar placement, and foundation and footing dimensions. Our observation was limited to areas with easy access. Oddo Engineering has not verified that the foundation complies with local building codes, ACI 318, or the soils report. We were not present at . time of concrete placement and can not confirm the methods of construction. Please find the following site observations noted by Oddo Engineering: Present: John Caves, Skyview Development.; Luis, Vargas Concrete; Paul Stoffel, Oddo Engineering; Robert Oddo, Oddo Engineering • The counterfort along the East wall shall be extended an additional 14" to reflect the Foundation Plan, S1.1, and detail 3/S5.1 drawing dated February 8, 2208. • A letter shall be supplied by the engineer of record for removal of 4" thick void form under the counterforts. • Oddo Engineering noted edge distance requirements in certain locations still needed to be in accordance to detaii1/S5.1. Vargas confirmed all edge distance would be per engineered details. 713 Cooper Avenue+ Suite 200 +Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-1006 + Fax (970) 945-2966 + E-Mail info@oddogws.com • Along the front porch, garage, and patio an 8" thick x 8' tall wall with #4 bars@ 36" o.c. horizontal and vertical reinforcement was noted and was not in accordance to original detail 6/85.1. Varagas concrete confirmed that the engineer of record had designed and approved the noted site condition revision. Both sides shall be back filled with equal lifts and compacted per soils report. • Provide an additional #4 bar placed around all window opens in detail 5/S5.1 for a total of (3) #4 bars. (2) #5 bars were required around window openings and were not installed. Vargas confirmed that the edge distance around window were in accordance to the detail. • 1 1/2" edge distance was noted on selected locations at the 8" concrete walls as required per details. Vargas concrete confirmed that all edge distance will conform to drawings. • (2) #4 bars top and bottom and at 18" o.c. spacing horizontal and vertical were noted on inspected wall areas. • A 9" edge distance was noted from top of window to top of concrete form which was not per detail 5/85.1. Vargas concrete noted that specific slots in the forms were for the window placement and confirmed that the engineer of record stated it was acceptable. Please submit this report to the engineer of record, Gary G. Weeks of Weeks & Associates Structural Engineers, for the final review. Please feel free to give me a call if you have any additional questions or concerns. Best regards. H:\Paui\Paui2008\Skyview PINON MESA. dot 713 Cooper Avenue • Suite 200 • Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-1006 • Fax (970) 945-2966 + E-Mail info@oddogws.com ODDO ENGINEERING, INC. MEMORANDUM To: John Caves, Skyview Developments From: Paul Stoffel E.I.T., Oddo Engineering Cc: Job: Robert Oddo, P.E., Oddo Engineering; Jerry Caves, Skyview Developments; Misty Berg, Skyview Developments; Project No.: 2818-01 Date: April 14, 2008 John, In accordance to your request, on April 10 and April 11, 2008, Oddo Engineering's personnel observed the placement of the footing reinforcement and wall reinforcement respectively per Weeks & Associates Structural Engineers drawings dated February 8, 2008 for the above referenced project with the engineer of record being a Colorado Professional Engineer, Gary G. Weeks. Oddo Engineering's scope of service was to verify the correct size of rebar, rebar placement, and foundation and footing dimensions. Our observation was limited to areas with easy access. Oddo Engineering has not verified that the foundation complies with local building codes, ACI318, or the soils report. We were not present at time of concrete placement and can not confirm the methods of construction. Please find the following site observations noted by Oddo Engineering: Present: John Caves, Skyview Development.; Luis, Vargas Concrete; Paul Stoffel, Oddo Engineering; Robert Oddo, Oddo Engineering • The counterfort along the East wall shall be extended an additional14" to reflect the Foundation Plan, S1.1, and detail 3/S5.1 drawing dated February 8, 2208. • A letter shall be supplied by the engineer of record for removal of 4" thick void form under the counterforts. • Oddo Engineering noted edge distance requirements in certain locations still needed to be in accordance to detail 1/85.1. Vargas confirmed all edge distance would be per engineered details. 713 Cooper Avenue+ Suite 200 +Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-1006 + Fax (970) 945-2966 +E-Mail info@oddogws.com • Along the front porch, garage, and patio an 8" thick x 8' tall wall with #4 bars@ 36" o.c. horizontal and vertical reinforcement was noted and was not in accordance to original detail 6/85.1. Varagas concrete confirmed that the engineer of record had designed and approved the noted site condition revision. Both sides shall be back filled with equal lifts and compacted per soils report. • Provide an additional #4 bar placed around all window opens in detail 5/85.1 for a total of (3) #4 bars. (2) #5 bars were required around window openings and were not installed. Vargas confirmed that the edge distance around window were in accordance to the detail. • 1 1/2" edge distance was noted on selected locations at the 8" concrete walls as required per details. Vargas concrete confirmed that all edge distance will conform to drawings. • (2) #4 bars top and bottom and at 18" o.c. spacing horizontal and vertical were noted on inspected wall areas. • A 9" edge distance was noted from top of window to top of concrete form which was not per detail 5/85.1. Vargas concrete noted that specific slots in the forms were for the window placement and confirmed that the engineer of record stated it was acceptable. Please submit this report to the engineer of record, Gary G. Weeks of Weeks & Associates Structural Engineers, for the final review. Please feel free to give me a call if you have any additional questions or concerns. Best regards. H:\Paui\Paui2008\Skyview PINON MESA. dot 713 Cooper Avenue+ Suite 200 +Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-1006 +Fax (970) 945-2966 +E-Mail info@oddogws.com April 1 0, 2008 Skyview Homes 1024 Centre Avenue Building E, Suite 1 00 Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 Re: Ponderosa, Douglas, Lodgepole -Pinyon Mesa Garfield County, Colorado Project No. 28026 Gentlemen: Weeks & Associates, Inc. Structural Engineers It has come to our attention Detail 3 for counterforts shows void form in the footing. However, there is no minimum dead load required for the soil recommendations per the Geotechnical Report by Yeh and Associates, project number 27-362, therefore the void form should not be used. If I can be of further assistance please contact me. Sincerely, Weeks & Associates, Inc. Connie J. Schneider, E.I.T. Staff Engineer Weeks & Associates, Inc. 4700 S. College, Suite#! Fort Collins, CO 80525 (970) 225-2422 April 8, 2008 Skyview Homes 1024 Centre Avenue Building E, Suite 1 00 Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 Re: Ponderosa -Pinyon Mesa Garfield County, Colorado Project No. 28026 Gentlemen: Weeks & Associates, Inc. Structural Engineers It is our understanding the vertical distance between the top two horizontal #4 rebar reinforcing in the basement foundation wall and the horizontal #4 rebar directly below was 25" instead of 18" as shown on the Foundation Details. Based on design loads, the 25" horizontal rebar spacing is acceptable. If I can be of further assistance please contact me. Weeks & Associates, Inc. 4700 S. College, Suite #1 Fort Collins, CO 80525 (970) 225-2422 No. Assessor's Parcel No.J39J~o7J .... 05-D:J.] Date 3/(9/6-CJ! I I BUILDING PERMIT CA'RD ~ R&.G.·S¥'/too) rt -~.-" CJ.fo=td-v I Setbacks: Front -;=----~~ . ~ RH LH ____ Zoning ___ _ Sir (JV\.~ ~ uJ(rf INSPECTIONS Soils Test ~~ ~ Weatherproofing / Footing ~ -o--Q · Mechanical ____________ _ ..-Foundation ~ ~ Electrical Rough (State)-=~-=----=,--- Grout Electrical Final (State) E? -zo --0~ Underground Plumbing <.f-;-:;~-cg-~ Final 9Tt?f5' /Checklist Com et~d? )'/t~<J. . ~Rough Plumbing . 5'~aoa '2&t1.. Certificate Occupanc # -;~ . ..t-=:0'='"""~'-=-==---- 7' Framing S -,3o-ce ~ } Date t .. -· 10 · Insulation fb-C,~o8 'f{t'Z? sd'G&t.es Septic System #1-'>4"'-'----------- Roofing Date ----------- Drywall 6-/6-o? .~' final GasPiping:s:..-?c:P-&8~ Other~-#~ ~ ~ ~ <&-~~&~ NOTES (continue on back) COUNTY OF GARFIELD • BUILDING DEPARTMENT CORRECTION NOTICE 108 8th St., Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado • Phone (970) 945-8212 Job located at Permit No. /&f) 6 2 I have this day inspected this structure and these premises and found the following corrections needed: 0 Call for Re-lnspection 0 $50.00 Re-lnspection Fee must be paid prior to Re-lnspection You are hereby notified that the above correction must be inspected before covering. When t:orrection(s) have been made, call for inspection at 970-384-5003. Date 6,__--/~ 20 CZ ~ Building Inspector ~ 4i'4"%? """'= Phone (970) 945-8212 COUNTY OF GARFIELD • BUILDING DEPARTMENT CORRECTION NOTICE 108 8th St., Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado Phone (970) 945-8212 Permit No. -+/._.C?"'-'"o~·_..&=---_,_L ________ _ I have this day inspected this structure and these premises and found the following corrections needed: 0 Call for Re-lnspection 0 $50.00 Re-lnspection Fee must be paid prior to Re-lnspection 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. COUNTY OF GARFIELD -BWLDING DEPARTMENT CORRECTION NOTICE 1 08 8th St., Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado ,. Phone (970) 945-8212 Job located at /.G SA&C /fi.e::APouJ Permit No. /tJ g 6 L I have this day inspected this structure and these premises and found the following corrections needed: D Call for Re-lnspection D $50.00 Re-lnspection Fee must be paid prior to Re-lnspection You are hereby notified that the above correction must be inspected before covering. When C:orrection(s) have been made, call for inspection at 970-384-5003. -INSPECTION WILL NOT BE MADE UNlESS THIS CARD IS POSTED ON THE JOB 24 HOURS NOTICE REQUIRED FOR INSPECTIONS BUILDING PERMIT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO This Card Must Be Posted So It is Plainly ViSible From The St'reet Untirfi'inallnspection. Cflf -'Y Rd. I ~ INSPECTION RECORD Footing -J{~ L .e., ' Driveway Foundation ,tztf, /. A':, Underground Plumbing 1"~5" «~ Insulation tb -{?-08 7'f-t) ~'}-~- Rough Plumbing 503o·c;~---? 2~ Drywall &46 -t'l¢ _c<. Chimney & Vent •"-'~"<?-off~-Electric Final (by State losotcl! lifl_ u 'f'JP/• Gas Piping S' 3o -c,!? 9J?'2. Final 9-'7-08 '7f'/?( Electric Rough (By State lnsp€1ji»-) t7'F Septic Final Framing -s:-3o<;;IC~J5.f"" &~ (To include Roof in place and Windows and Doors installed). Notes:4,/"".f' ~ .,;, &~Zdf ~~ 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 Oate~f\{dg By~~"~ J:...~~ IF PLA~ ~ C~VE-;lwTH CLEAR PLASTIC ? Parcel Detail Page 1 of3 Garfield County Assessor/Treasurer Parcel Detail Information A.ssessor/Tre1\surer Prop.er!y: Search I Assessor Su_bset Query: I A.J>sessor Sales Search Clerk & Recorder ReceptionBearch llasic Building Characterislic_s I Tax Iu[Q;mation Parc;el Detail I Value Detail I Sales Det!!il I Residel'!tial/Commercifl!Jmprovement Detail Land Detail I Photographs I Tax Area II Account Number /1 Parcel Number II 2007 Mill Levy I I . 011 II R044412 II 239307105027 II 60.843 I Owner Name and Mailing Address IPINYON MESA DEVELOPMENT INC j253 SIL VERLODE DRIVE jASPEN, CO 81611 Assessor's Parcel Description (Not to be used as a legal description) ISECT,TWN,RNG:7-7-88 SUB:PINYON MESA jPUD, FLG I LOT:27 PRE:R111957 IPRE:R04!066 BK:995 PG:534 BK:995 IPG:529 BK:982 PG:l03 BK:873 PG:93 IBK:873 PG:379 BK:842 PG:458 BK:775 IPG:165 BK:691 PG:709 BK:650 PG:574 IBK:646 PG:579 BK:633 PG:851 BK:575 lPG: 173 BK:545 PG:99 BK:545 PG: 110 IBK:512 PG:767 BK:510 PG:815 BK:510 IPG:805 BK:454 PG:503 BK:450 PG:257 IBK:438 PG:569 BK:418 PG: 1 BK:417 IPG:600 BK:409 PG:220 BK:1498 PG:270 IBK:1354 PG:600 BK:1230 PG:697 IBK:1230 PG:691 RECPT:734762 IRECPT:734760 RECPT:734759 BK:1932 http://www. garcoact.corn/ assessor/parcel.asp ?Parce!N umber=23 93 071 05027 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2/20/2008 Parcel Detail jPG:l95 RECPT:724453 BK:l932 PG:194 I IRECPT:724452 BK:l893 PG:363 I IRECPT:716948 BK:l825 PG:99 I IRECPT:703003 BK:l825 PG:109 I IRECPT:703007 BK:l825 PG:107 I IRECPT:703006 BK:l825 PG:104 I IRECPT:703005 BK:l825 PG:lOl I RECPT:703004 BK:l561 PG:412 RECPT:646682 BK:l498 PG:271 RECPT:63207 BK:1498 PG:270 IRECPT:632806 I Location I Physical Address: JJcARBONDALE I Subdivision: !/PINYON MESA PUD, FLG 1 I Land Acres: 110 Land Sq Ft: JJ13,825 I Section II Towns hi~ II Range I 7 II 7 II 88 I 2007 Property Tax Valuation Information II Actual Value II Assessed Value I I Land: II I Improvements: II I Total: II lllr=========~S~al~e~Da~te~:J . Sale Price: I 27,58oll Oil 27,58oll Basic Building Characteristics Number of Residential 0 Buildings: Number of Commllnd 0 Buildings: No Building Records Found 8,oool 0 8,oool http://www.garcoact.com/assessor/parcel.asp?Parce!Number=239307105027 Page 2 of3 2/20/2008 Parcel Detail Tax Information Tax Year II Transaction Type II Amount I 2007 II Tax Amount II $486.761 I_op~oJJ:'1J.ge Assessor Datalmse S.ear£hQ];l1ions I Treasurer Database Search Options Clerk &.R.e>:Jlrder Database Search Options Garfield County' Home Page 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 warrant any of the information herein contained. Copyright © 2005 -2008 Good Turns Software. All Rights Reserved. Database & Web Design by Good Turns Software. http://www.garcoact.com/assessor/parcel.asp?Parce1Nurnber=2393071 05027 2/20/2008