Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication- PermitJob Address Nature of Work Use of Building GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING, SANITATION and PLANNING DEPARTMENT 109 8th. Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601{970) 945-8212 No. 8578 few,- r \t(k5ci1 Ln Com, Contractor Amount of Permit$ Date ` E—OD Clerk GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION GARFIELD COUNTY (GLENWOOD SPRINGS), COLORADO) TLEPHOIV: (970) 945-8212 INSPECTION LINE: (970)384 5003.= PERMIT NO. PARCEL/SCHEDULE NO. ra3 %3 i 30 ,foo? r0DADDREss: 202 Cotton Hollow Ln. Carbondale,Co. 81623 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LOT NO. 8 BLOCK NO. sUBDJVISION/Bx fpTToN Cotton Hollow ° Marc Bassett coxm ur l Marc Bassett AFJZFUTECIYENVINENEL $%Fr.OFBUnDB3O 15 6 0 /go '-7ryr(j`beU� USII OF BDE.D:NO • Shop/adut to DDRFSS Cotton Hollow Ln. ,Carbon ADmlm3 Same ADDRBAS aq.F1ORLOT 5 acres .01,m,.,Shop with ADU obove CLASS OF WORK: *ONEW CADDI13ON OARAO R oa:0102 o DRIVEWAY PWCI VAEIIAMONOSWORK;= 5PpC/AF, CQ7 DTT:ON3: 9DOUBLE OAL•FBxAITAN otic LOVE cpRPORT: oegYOUS dale m94.5-1278 PFE liEloErr 24 ft .REMOVE .DOUBLE * a0N3IIE3EWA013D®POSAL(=MC) * o9ermAN ARAPSTED VALUATIONS This building is existing built by John Legg,we are just trying to get it legalized NOTICE A SEPARATE ELECTRICAL PERMIT IS REQUIRED) ANI) MUST EZ ISSUED EY THE STATE OF COLORADO. THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND 'VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTIIORUZRD IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 180 DAYS, OR IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FORA PERIOD OF 180 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. I THEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH VVHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OP A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCLELTEE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATING CONSTRUCTION OR THE PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION. Bullldinpt. Appravaf/Date to8-12-0 .417 Planning 1•. provaj/D '1'945-1278 LIC. NO: LIC NO, NO.OFFL00RS 2 . 44444 ��1•C-��J,�'s� ° � � — 3 QCs PLAN CHECKFEI3: ©©. $4 PERMIT FEE: 74"9.75' TOTAL FEE: 2037,84 DATE PERMIT ISSUED: OCC: GROUP: KJ -3 c)-/ CONST: TYPE: NQ. Fkt. 99, IfPNG: 75. IvtANLI, HOME: SETBACKS: .( I ENO.&FEE: AGREEMENT 1 -- (0V71(.0 J PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO THE APPLICANT AS OWNER, CONTRACTOR AND//OR THE AGENT OF THE CONTRACTOR ORO To CO STRUC:I THE STRUCTURE I DETAILED ONFLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SUBMITTED TO AND REVIEWED BY THE BUI.DINGDEPARTMENT. IN CONSIDERATION OF TEM ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT, THE SIGNER HEREBY AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL BUILDING CODES AND LAND USE REGULATIONS ADOPTED B GARFIELD COUNTY PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GIVEN IN 30.28.201 CRS AS AMENDED. THE SIGNER FURTHER AGREES THAT IF THE ABOVE SAID ORDINANCES ARE NOT FULL COMPLIED WITH IN THE LOCATION, ERECTION, CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED STRUCTURE, THE PERMIT MAY THEN BE REVOKED BY NOTICE FRO TSR COUNTY AND THAT THEN AND THERE IT SHALL BECOMRNULL AND VOID: THE ISSUANCE. OF A PERMIT BASED UPON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA SHALL NOT PREVENT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL FROM TBEREAFrER REQUIRING T1 CORRECTION OF ERRORS IN SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA OR FRO PREVENTING BUILDING OPERATION BEING CARRIED ON THEREUNDER WHEN 1 VIOLATION OFTBIS CODE OR ANY OTHER ORDINANCE OR REGULATION OF THIS JURISDICTION. THE REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTED PIANS AND . SPECIFICATIONS ANEF INSPECTIONS CONDUC L l.0 THEREAFTER DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ACCEP'T'ANCE OF AI RESPONSJSILSIIES OR LIABILITIES IES BY GARFIELD- COUNTY FOR ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR DISCREPANCIES, THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE ITEMS ANI) EVIPLEMENTATIC DURING CONSTRUCTION RESTS SPECIFICALLY WITH THE ARCILITECT, DESIGNER, BUILDER AND OWNER. COMMENTS ARH INTENDED TUBE CONSERVATIVE AND DI SUPPO OF THE OWNERS INTEREST. GmF=10o3 I HERE.BYACICKOWLEDGEIHAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE AGREEMENT ABOVE. (INITIAL) / t VALUATION/FEE DETERMINATION Applicant 1374.Z Subdivision CO -*n G/�� Address s Co -W- i f/((Duo i. v E Lot/Block Date l 0/A4 Contractor 0 123 OR -1r' Finished (Livable Area): Main 180# G Upper Lower Other Total Square Feet Valuation Basement: Unfinished Conversion of Unfinished to Finished Plan Check Fee for Conversion Valuation Garage: Crawl Space: 180 ) Valuation Valuation Decks/Patios: Covered Valuation Open Valuation .",6 £'20 Total Valuation 41 no Building Permit Fee 7b 76' Plan Review Fee 500.34-) Total BP & PR O. o9 ,.v, , -z 741, 7' ?o39,2 PLAIN REVIEW CHECKLIST Applicant gjigErr Building A. Engineered Foundation if-Aj Driveway Permit Surveyed Site Plan f401"§eptic Permit and Setbacks 'Grade/Topography 30% SIA Plan review -File Notes 44 Attach Residential Plan Review List L."' Minimum Application Questionnaire Subdivision Plat Notes /4/01. Fire Department Review Valuation Determination/Fees Red Line Plans/Stamps/Sticker 'J' a • Attach Conditions Application Signed er To Sip Application Parcel/Schedule No. Date az Planning/Zan Property ine Setbacks 30ft 5 r earn Setbacks Fl od Plain Building Height Zoning Sign -off Subdivision Plat Notes Road Impact Fees HOA/DRC Approval Grade/Topography 40% °r/ Planning Issues ,5Cir e57 4Z7 5„444. ll re Die 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. 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. 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, an 80 M.P.H. windshear, wind exposure B, windload of 15 pounds per square foot, 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 1997 ,TBC, UMC and 1997 UPC. 1. 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 yith slopes 020% or greater must be shown on the site plan. Yes 2. Does the site plan also include any other buildings on the property, setback easements and utility easements? 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 prope ies), streams or water courses? Yes /- 4. Does the site plan indicate the location and direction of the County or private road accessing the proper ,�, Yes 5. Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all reinforcing steel in accordance with the uniform building code or per stamped engineered 2 design? 12,— Yes 6. 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 7. Do the plans indicate the size and location of ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces's and soffits? Yes L 8. 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 L 9. Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor, and roof construction? Yes ll/ 10. Does the building section drawing include size and spacing of floor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof rafters or joists or trusses? Yes 11. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method ofpositive connection of all columns and beams? Yes f� 12. Does the plan indicate the height of the building or proposed addition from the highest point of the building or addition measured at mid span between the ridge and the eave down to existing (undisturbed) grade contours? Yes 13. Does the plan include any stove or zero clearance fireplace planned for installation including make and model and Colorado Phase certifications or phase II EPA certification? Yes No 14. Does the plan include a masonry fireplace including a fireplace section indicating design to comply with the Uniform Building Code C pter 37? Yes No 3 15. 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 Uniform Building Code? Yes No 16. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural light and ventilation for all habitable rooms? Yes No 17. 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 g1a g for these areas? Yes No 18. Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas furnaces, boilers and water heaters indicated on t e plan? Yes fe No 19. 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 20. Do you understand that if you belong to a homeowners association, 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? If you do not have written permission from the association, do you understand that the plan check fee will not be refunded should the architectural committee deny or reject your building plans? Yes No 21. Will this be the only residential structure on the parcel? Yes No LI If no -Explain; j (1) (..) 22. Have two (2) complete sets of construction drawings been submitted with the application? Yes 23. Do you underst d that the minimum size a home can be on a lot is a 20ft. x 20ft.? Yes No 24. Have you designed or had this plan designed while considering building and other construction code requirements? 4 Yes No 25. Does the plan accurately indicate what you intend to construct and what will receive a final inspection by the Garfield County Building Department? Yes c No 26. Do you understand that approval for design and/or construction changes are required prior to the applicatio f these changes? Yes No 27. Do you understand that the Building Department will collect a "Plan Review" fee fromyou 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 requited, at the time you pick up your building permit? Yes �/ No 28. Are you aware that twenty-four (24) hour notice is required for all inspections? Inspections will be made from Battlement Mesa to West Glenwood in the mornings and from Glenwood Springs to Carbondale in the afternoon. Morning inspections must be called in by 12:00 p.m. the day before; afternoon inspections must be called in by 4:00 p.m. the day before. Failure to give twenty-four (24) hour notice for inspections will delay your ins ection one (1) day. Inspections are to be called in to 384-5003. Yes No 29. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections required under the Uniform Building Code including approval on a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and occupancy of the building? Yes No 30. Are you aware that the person signing the Permit Application, whether the "Owner", "Agent of the Owner", "General Contractor", "Contractor" or otherwise, is the party responsible for the project compl ' g with the Uniform Building Code? Yes No 31. Are you aware that prior to issuance ofa building permit 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 !�` No 32. Do you understand that you will be required to hire a State of Colorado Licensed Electrician 5 and Plumber to perform installations and hookups, unless you as the homeowner are performing the work? The license number ofthe person performing the work will be required at time of applicable inspection. Yes t.— No 33. 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 issuance of a building permit? Your attention in this is appreciated. Yes � No I hereby acknowledge that I have read, understand and answered these questions to the best of my ability. AtoLe, emb-LaA\--- "3-72- -ag. Signature Date Phone: '116— q(716---- JZ7' (days); SI" e. (evenings) Project Name: /3ak.tLoA, C V Project Address: goo_- Coz-cylA I -k, Lw' t- ,'z& , (etALNLIh Notes: If you have answered "No" on any ofthe questions, you may be required to provide this information at the request of the Building Official prior to beginning the plan review process. Delays in issuing the permit are to be expected. Work may not proceed without the issuance of a permit. If it is determined by the Building Oficial 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 04/02 6 July 3, 2002 Maio Bassett Bassett Residence 202 Cotton Hollow, Lane Carbondale, CO 8123 RE: Bassett Residence — Existing ISDS System, 202 Cotton Hollow Lane, Carbondale, Garfield County, CO SE Job No. 22104.01 Dear Mr. Bassett: Pursuant to your request, attached herewith is a letter/report presenting our findings in regard to our evaluation of the adequate size and design of an existing Individual Sewage Disposal System (ISDS) at the above referenced Site. Our opinion is based on our evaluation of the site conditions with information provided by you for use in supporting your application to the Garfield County. This evaluation is pursuant to the approved Condition 3, listed in the letter from Garfield County, dated March 25, 2002 concerning the approval of the Bassett Special Use Permit Application. Our opinions and recommendations are in accordance with Garfield County and the State of Colorado ISDS Regulations. We have reviewed the information forwarded to us, evaluated the existing ISDS design and have presented recommendations for the continued use of the system to accommodate a total of 4 bedrooms as a part of our scope of work. Conclusions: Based on our findings we believe that the design of the existing approved ISDS system is adequate to serve the needs of a total of 4 bedrooms in accordance with the Regulations of Garfield County and the State of Colorado. The existing septic system is currently in use and adequately functioning to serve the needs of a total of 4 bedrooms. Therefore we recommend that its use continue to accept wastewater from the existing 3-bedr000m single-family unit and that it be utilized to accept wastewater from the accessory dwelling unit (ADU). The accessory dwelling unit would need to be limited to a single bedroom with no more than 2 persons in residence. We recommend the installation of an Orenco System Effluent Filter at the outlet in the secondary chamber of the existing Septic tank during a periodic septic tank pumping and sewer line cleaning. We would recommend that the existing sewer line be cleaned by jetting and that the tank be pumped out in the near future if it has been over 2 years. Site Location: The subject site is located at 202 Cotton Hollow Lane, Lot 8 in the Cottonwood Hollow Subdivision, adjacent to the south side of County Road 113, in Garfield County, Colorado. The site is situated in Section 14, T 7 S, R 88 W of the 6th P.M. 502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313 SOPRIS ENGINEERING • LLC civil consultants Marc Bassett SE Job No. 22104.01 July 3, 2002 Page 3 Existing ISDS Analysis The design flow for the existing system is based on a 4 -bedroom house using water -conserving fixtures is as follows: From the State of Colorado I. S. D. S. Regulations; Average daily flow (Q) = # of people x gal/person/day (avg. flow) Existing Design flow (Qd) = # of people x gal/person/day x 1.5 (peaking factor) = gal/day Design Flow Reduction (Qdr)= Qd x 0.80 based on 20% maximum reduction for permanently installed water -conserving devices/fixtures. Maximum number of people is assumed to be 8 people. Gallons per day for residential = 75 gal/person/day Qd=4x2x75x1.5= 900 gal/day Qdr = 900 x 0.80 = 720ga1/day Septic Tank Volume Volume (V) of tank = Design Flow Reduction * 1.25 (30 hour retention time) V=Qdr x1.25 V = 720 gal/day * 1.25 = 900 One double compartment, concrete 1000 -gallon septic tank installed. OK Existing Absorption field The existing absorption field system is adequate to serve the needs of a 4 -bedroom reduced design flow equivalent. Based upon the reported average percolation rate, the standard absorption area equation yields: A (SF) = Qdr *(t) : where A = Area; Qdr = design flow reduction (gal/day) 5 t = time in minutes This equation will give a recommended minimum absorption area: A = = 720 *(17) 1" = 594 S.F. 594 S.F. (design check) < 720 S.F (installed) OK 5 System Recommendations An effluent filter should be installed in the secondary compartment of the existing septic tank to reduce the suspended solids loading to the absorption field and extend the life of the treatment media in the absorption field. No garbage disposal systems are currently installed and we discourage their use with the existing ISDS. We recommend that the tank be pumped every two years and that a new evaluation of the performance of the ISDS be performed approximately 8 years from now. This evaluation should include the feasibility of designing a replacement or relocated absorption field and possibly the tank. The average useful functioning life of a conventional soil absorption system is 20 — 30 years. An alternative may include the retrofit installation of an advanced treatment unit. n• KURTZ & ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED 5012 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 To: Garfield County Building Department c/o: Mare-Bsew•�-- 202 Cotton Hollow Lane Carbondale, Co. 81623 RE: Bassett Shop/ Accessory Dwelling Unit 202 Cotton Hollow Lane, Garfield County, CO Dear Gentlemen; Structural Consultants Phone (970) 945-6305 Fax (970) 945-1093 RECEIVED October 24, 2002 OCT 2 9 AV GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING & PLANNING1 Brian Kurtz, P. E. of our office performed a structural inspection of the noted structure on October 10, 2002. The shop/ accessory dwelling unit (ADU) is a one story, wood framed structure constructed over a walk -out basement with cast -in-place concrete foundation walls. We understand that the structure was constructed approximately 10 years ago. We also understand that the structure was originally constructed as an agricultural building without the benefit of a formal set of construction documents or a building permit. The purpose of this structural inspection and report is to verify the structural capacity of the structure at this point in time. To supplement my observation of the completed structure Mr. Bassett provided `as -built' drawings which he had commissioned. These drawing are dated 08/05/02 and depict existing framing and foundation conditions. I understand that Mr. Bassett contacted the original builder to verify foundation information that was not readily available via a visual inspection. Brian Kurtz was able to observe the roof framing system from the attic, and the main level floor framing from the basement level. . STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION In plan, the structure is `T' shaped: the main wing measures approximately 31'-0" north -south by 20'-0" east -west. attached to this, the east wing, on the main level, measures 14'-0" north -south by 11'-0" east -west. The basement level floor for the entire structure is a cast -in-place, concrete slab on grade. Perimeter foundations on the east side of the main wing and on three sides of the east wing consist of 6" thick by 8'-O" high continuous concrete foundation walls bearing on continuous 10" thick by 16" wide concrete footings. The concrete foundation walls were formed with stay -in-place, Styrofoam forms. I understand that the basement wall reinforcement consisted of # 4 rebar spaced at 18" on center each way, that footing -to -wall dowels consisted of #4 dowels spaced at 18" on center, and that continuous footing reinforcement consisted of (2)- # 5's. I understand that the 28 day concrete compressive strength for the project was 3000 PSI 2 Boulder retaining walls on the north and south side of the structure facilitate the transition to a walk -out basement on the west, north and south sides of the main wing. The exact amount of frost protection at the walk -out portion of the main wing has not been verified. The roof framing for each wing consists of 2x8 rafters and 2x6 ceiling joists , spaced at 2'-O" on center. Roof pitches in each wing are 6 over 12. In each wing the ceiling joists and rafters are placed parallel and adjacent to one another, and at the bearing walls each ceiling joist is nailed to the adjacent rafter, so that the rafter and joist act as a truss. The trusses in the main wing span 20'-0" east -to -west. The trusses in the east wing span 14'-0" north -to -south. All of the roof framing appeared to be in good condition: there was no sign of excessive movement or deflection, and no sign of distress or deterioration_ Based upon a truss analysis and their condition, the trusses appear to be structurally adequate to support a design snow load of 40 PSF plus dead load of 10 PSF. In the attic two of the 2x8 rafters in the main wing were `headed off' to create a 6'-0" wide access to the east wing attic. The header at this location is supported by single 2x8 rafters. These two individual rafters are overstressed when subject to the full design roof load. I recommended that they be strengthened by adding posts beneath each rafter adjacent to the header, and that each post be supported by a 6x6 by 4'-6" long `stiff -back' beam bearing on, and placed parallel to the ceiling joists. Floor joists for both wings consists of Douglas -Fir Larch No. 2, 2x12's spaced at 16" on center. In the main wing the 2x12's clear span 20'-0". In the east wing the 2x12's span 8'-0" north -to -south and cantilever 3'-0" on each end to support the upper level exterior bearing walls. In both wings the 2x12 floor joists appeared to be in good condition, Based upon the allowable stresses for Douglas -Fir material available 10 years ago, the floor framing in each wing is structurally adequate to support a residential design live load of 40 PSF plus a dead load of 10 PSF. STRUCTURAL CONCLUSIONS Our office performed a load run-down to evaluate soil bearing pressures, and analyzed the roof and floor framing members. The structural system as described in the previous section of this report is structurally adequate to support the dead load of the building plus a design roof snow load of 40 PSF plus and floor live load of 40 PSF with one exception: the header support rafters in the attic should be supported as described. The structure as constructed, in our professional opinion is also adequate to resist a design wind load for Exposure B with a basic design speed of 80 MPH. Please be aware that this report is limited in scope to those conditions which are readily observable and related to the building structure. By its nature, a one-time inspection cannot determine areas of active movement or the age of any previous movements. If you have any questions, or require further information, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Kurtz & Associates, Inc. Brian J. Kurtz, P.E. -INSPECTION WILL NOT BE MADE UNLESS THIS CARD IS POSTED ON THE JOB 24 HOURS NOTICE REQUIRED FOR INSPECTIONS BUILDING PERMIT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Date IssuedjJ et Owl Zoned Area Permit No SVa 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. 1 Use Abu J.✓ Addres or Legal Descriptio Setbacks. Front Side Side Rear This Card Must Be Posted So It is Plainly Visible From The Street Until Final Inspection. INSPECTION RECORD Footing Foundation . ',5i .- k iggf4 L - Underground Plumbi g Insulation Rough Plumbing Drywall Chimney & Vent Electric Final (by State Inspector)/2 P - Gas Piping Final l2, -4o„0 4.1 Electric Rough (By State Inspector) Septic Final, , °a� L. .. J ,I._. 7 (9l Framing Rg..04,p. A) ao r t.. (To include Roof in place and Windows and Doors installed). /2.ao. at. L.S. Notes: ALL LISTED ITEMS MUST BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BEFORE COVERING - WHETHER INTERIOR OR EXTERIOR, UNDERGROUND OR ABOVE GROUND. THIS PERMIT IS NOT TRANSFERABLE •Phonic 384:5003'. 109 8th Street County Courthouse Glenwood Springs, Colorado. A P P F Q V E DDo NOT DESTROY THIS CARD Date By IF PLACED OUTSID - COVER WITH CLEAR PLASTIC