The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutApplication - Permit' . Garfield County L---1 N_o_. _1_02_86 ___ __j Building & Sanitation Department 1 OBit" Street, Suite #401 Glenwood Springs, Co. 81601 Office-945-8212 Inspection Line-384-5003 Permit No: 3 4 5 6 Use of Building: 7 Describe Work: 8 Class of Work: a 9 G>Uage: Cl GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING PERMJT APPLICATION . J.OII a· •. Street, lluit.e 201, Olenwoo4 Sprisiii)O, (l(] 81601 Phoa.CJ 970-945-8212 { Fu= 970-384-3470 I tnspedJoA Ll!le: 970-384-5003 l08S(o , Parcel/Schedule No: Jf 2-lfO 7{8' I{)+ () 2-3 c ·f Viwu~ "CA r 0-. eo '6 ''=' 3~ New Single Double a Alte.-aUon Addition 0 Move Cruport: o Remove a Single 0 Double 10 o Driveway Permit 0 Site Plan l .!1 t I , I 11 Valuation of Work:$ 12 Special Conditi.ous: a . On-Site sewage Disposal Adjusted Valuations: S ~0 -1 i , I I ! ' I I i NOTICE A SEI'ARAT£ ELECTRICAL PERMIT IS REQUlRED /\.NO MUST 11& ISSUED BY TUE STA.lt; OF COLORADO. 5 :J i ., ! :l l! 1HIS PEIWlT I!ECOMES J1ULL AND VOID IF WORK OR COliSTRUCTION A11THOR1ZED I S NOl' COMMEN!:EO Wlt'HLN 180 DAYS, OR. IF 'i I · CON.STRl.ICTlON OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANOONBD FOR A PERIOD OP 180 DAYS AT NO' UM~ AFl'ER WORK i.s COMM8NCEO. -~ t I I HEREBY CliRTIPY 'l'RAT I HAv.B REAl> AND EXAJ<IIIaD TRIS M'P.U:CAttOR AND KNOW TltE SAME TO BE "ffiliEAND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF tAWS GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF 'WORK WILL BE COMPLEr.ED WITHIN WHEl'&£R SPBCIFIED REREil1f OR NOT_ TRE GRANllNO OF" A PERMIT DOES NOT FRB6UJU) TO OIVEAOTHORI'n' TO VIOLATB ORCAffCU THE PROVISlONS OF ANY OTHBR. STA1E OR LOCAL r..AW REG 11NO C'YlNSTRUC110N OR THE PERPOR14ANC£ ~$!FCONST j Const. TYpe: Setbacks: ; AOREEMSNT j PEKMISS!ON IS HEREBY GRANrEO TO THE API'lJCANf liS OWNER. CONTRACOOR AND/OR THE AGENT' OF '!'HE CONTRACI'OR OR OWNER TO CONSTRUCT' i . Sltl.UCTt:JRl!: AS DETI\JLED ON l'UNS AND SPEC!FlCATfONS S\JBMmED TO AND R&VJEWED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. ~ IN CONSIDERATION OF THE JSSSUANCE OF' THIS PERMIT, TIIB SIGNER. HEREBY AGREES TO cOMPLY Wrnt ALL BUR..OINO CODES AND r..AND ' J ·arouLATIONS·ADOPTEO B"t GARFIELD C:Ol.INTY Pl.IRSUANT TO AlJTHORITY OIVBtf. LN 30.28.20\ CRS AS AMENDED. t1{E SIGNER FURTIIER AO.~I!S THA j 11-lE ABOVE Sl\10 ORDJNANCES ·ARE NOT FULLY.COMPJLEO wnH lN 'I'H.il f..COATION, ERF..cTION, CONSTRt:ICnoN, e,ND US8 OF· THE· 'ABOVE· OESCRJI j STRUCTURE, THE PERMIT MAY BE REVOKED BY NOTICE FROM TltECOUNlY AND 'l"HATTHEN AND TffERE IT SKALLBECOME NULL AND VOID. ! THE ISSUANCE OF A. PERMT BASED UPON Pt..ANS SPECIFICATIONS /\.NO afHER DATA SHALL NOT PREVENT THE BUJU)lNO OFFICIJ\L FROM .THEREAF ! REQIJIRINO THE CORRECTION OF ERRORS IX SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA OR FROM PR.E\IEN11NO BUJLDINO OPI::RA'l'lON BE ~ CARRIED ON THEREUNDER WHEN IN VIOLATION OF TtiS CODE OR 1\.NY OTHER ORDINANCE OR REGUlATION OF TillS JURISDICTION. THE Rli:VlEW OF SUBMIT'I'ED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND INSPEC'I'!ONS CONDUCTED TH.EREI\FTER DOES NOT CONSllTIJTE AN ACCEPTANCE OF REsPoNSIBIUllE:S OR UABU'OBS BY GARFIELD COUifiY FOR EAAORS, OMJSSlONS OR OISCREPENCIES. lltE RESPON SIBILllY FOR ntESE ITEMS • ; IMPL&MSNTATION DURING CONSmUCTtON RESTs SPECIFICI.IU.LY WIT1i nu;: ARilC'llOCT DESIGNER, BUILDER, AND OWNER. COMMENTS ARE INTENt TOBECONSERVA11VEANDINSUPPORTOF111EOWNERSUfl'EREST. ' ~p · /1\ ' Ga.rlonJ.003 .. ~. {..J; I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE-THAT I HAVE Ra.\0 AND UNDERSTII.ND THE AGREEMENT AliOVK (INIT1AL)~,_,ta;;.:-=--~· --- ;J~ / /1 /2-?5:/~(f j 1 7~~~ w cJlff z_-, fo2 ·---·-·----------·--· .. ~------r-·-·• ... -•-.. o.•-•·-••·--···--···----------·--·--• .... -.--·-··-··-··-••--·-·-·-·-·------··••--•-·•••••·---' ....... ····-··-------------..... ·-·-·--··-----···-~-.. ----·--···· ·-··· --·········· --- I i j The following items are required by Garfield County for a final inspection: 1. A final Electrical Insp~tion from the Colorado State El~trical Inspector; 2. Permanent address assigned by Garfield County Building Department posted where readily visible from access road; 3 . A finished roo~ 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. all :necessary plumbing; 4. AU 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. AU steps outside or inside over three (3) steps must have handrails, guard rails on balconies or decks over 30" high constructed to aU me 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 circwnstances, i.e. weather, but a Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until all the required items are completed and a final inspection made; · 8. A final inspection sign off by the Garfield County Road & Bridge Department for driveway installation, where applicable; as well as any final sign off by the Fire District, anchor State Agencies where applicable. · A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL THE .ABOVE ITEMS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. *"'**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. I understand and agree to abide by· the above conditions· for occupancy, use and lhe issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the dwelling under building permit# /~P Signature Bpcont0ct2004 )( lt(2r(ob Date l I I I I l I I . i i l I ! I I i ! I i I .I ! l ! l 1 I i i 1 t !. i ~ ' i . : ---··-····--·-··--·-···-··--·--· --··--·-···--····-·· .. --.. ·····--······-···-··--···· .... ···-· -· .. --···-----···-·-·· ... ············ ---·-·-·-··-·-·"··~·· . ---· VALUATION/FEE DETERMINATION Finished (Livable Area): Main 34q 2.. Upper I S rof /5 fo ~ Lower Other Subdivision J !HI~ tJ, t>f;J VJJ I "'a< Lot/Block ~~-3 ,J Contractor~~ ~ /vftf-1 ~-,4 ./o.Jq /J./;11~ C. l'P~o /). IOSTP $-. ¥0 IJppC!Tl-· 8. ?~t.{ Total ~quare Feet 5oGo X7lffd'..-...v:::;7 7,Y<ilo - C. • 1 7<( ValuatiOn Basement: Unfinished Conversion ofUnfmished to Finished Plan Check Fee for Conversion Valuation A-r3 t. D } G araQe: ~4, ~bCo) 3o<.:.' 2.f.t( O Ot7 ·~() ~ZC> gs2 Valuation J /4 0 )( I o ._.-/-1./' Crawl Space: Valuation Decks!fatios: Jr. ., \ c. Z.l 0. St./ ~~J---=""21ft,oo~ A.5~, s,c.., · Covered j )o /X. v-·1 ....J. f"t Valuation Open Valuation Total Valuation c:J1 (;2_1tY6>0 ~ , \ 00qlf -Oo~O --Cl: (f:' Vc'~C1 r GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING 970-945-8212 MINIMUM APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF COMMERCIAL OR MULTI-FAl\'flLY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS Including NEW CONSTRUCTION ADDITIONS ALTERATIONS And MOVED BUILDINGS In order to understand th_e scope -of the work intended under a pennit application and expedite · the issuance of a pennit it is important that complete information be provided. When reviewing a·plan and i.t's cliscover~d that required information has not been provided by the applicant, this will result jn the delay oftb.e permit is suance and in proeeeding with buildmg construction. The owner or contractor shall be required to provide this information befo re 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 havt enough infornution 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 P.rofessi.onaL To provide for a more understandable plan an.d in order to determine compliance \.\oith the . building , plumbing and mechanical codes) applicants an; requ.ested to review the following . checklist prior to and during design . Plans to be inc1uded for a Bu:ilding Permit must be on draft paper at least 18''x 24'"' an.d 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 and original g..-ade 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 spa.cing, insulation, sb.eeting, honse·rap, (which is required), sidi.ug or any approved building material. Engineered foundations may be required. Check .with the Building Department. A window schedule. A door schedule. A floor :framing plan, a roofing framing plan, roof must be designed to withstand a 40 pound per square foot up to 7,000 feet in elevation, a 90 M.P.H. windspeed, wind exposure B or C, and a 36 inch :frost depth. All sheets need to be identified by number and indexed. All of the above requirements must be met or your plans will be retwned. All plans submitted must be incompliance with the 2003 IBC, IPC, IMC and IFOC. Applicants are required to indicate appropriately and to submit completed checklist at time of application for a permit: 1. Is a site plan included that identifies the location of the proposed structure, additions or other buildings, setback easements, and utility easements showing distances to the property lines from each corner of the proposed structure prepared by a. licensed surveyor and has the surveyors signature and professional stamp on the drawing? Slopes of 30% or more on properties must be show on site plan. (NOTE: Section 106.2) Any site plan for the placement of any portion of a structure within 50 ft. of a proper(y line and not within a previously surveyed building envelope on a subdivision final plat shall be · prepared by a licensed surveyor and have the surveyors signature and professional stamp on the drawing. Any stmcture to be built within a building envelope of a lot shovlll on a recorded subdivision plat, shall include a copy of the building envelope as it is shown on the fln?lat with the proposed structure located withi.n the envelope. Yes . 2. Does the site plan when applicable include the location of the I.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) and distances to the proper(y lines, wells (on subject property at~d adjacent properties), streams or water courses? This information must be certified by a licensed surveyor with their signature and professional stantp on the design. Yes · '( No Not nece8Sary for this project __ _ 3. Are the plans submitted for application review construction drawings and not drawings that are stamped or marked identifying them as ''Not fur construction, for pennit issuance only"1 . "Approval drawings only", "For penuit issuance only" or sinrilar language? Yes 't' No__ Not necessary for this project'---- .2 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Is the I.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) designed, stamped and signed by a Colorado Registered Engineer? Yes+ No__ Not necessary for this project __ _ Does the site plan indicate the location lllld. direction ofthe State, County or private road accessing the property? Yes+- Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all' reinforcing steel in accordance with the unifonn building code or per stamped engineered design? Yes~ No__ Not necessary for this project __ If the building is a pre-engineered. structure, is there a stamped, signed engineered foundation plan for this building? Yes-+-No_ Notnecessaryforthisproject __ Do the plans indicate the location and size of ventilation openings for under floor crawl spaces and the clearances required between wood and earth? Yes__ No__ Not necessary for project1._ Do the plans indicate the size and location of tbe ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces and soffits? Yesf No__ Notnecessaryforthisproject_ Do the plans include design loads as required under the IBC or IRC for roof snowloads, (a minimum of 40 pounds per square foot in Garfield Cotmty)? Ye~ No__ Not necessary for this project__ · Do th\{!ims include design loads as required for floor loads un.der the IBC or IRC? Yes No_ Notnecessaryf<Drthisproject_._ · . Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor, and roof construction? Yes--+-No__ Not neo;essary for this project __ Is the wind speed and exposure design included in the plan? Yes-t-No__ Not necessary for this project __ Does the building section drawing include size and spacing of floor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof rafters or joists or trusses? Yes~ No__ Notnecessaryforthisproject __ 3 'rs. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method of positive connection of all columns aJJd beams? Yes.L No__ Notnecessaryfurthisproject_ 16. 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 to.p of a flat roofl (Check applicable zone district for building height maximum) Yes No__ Not necessary for this project_ 17. · Does the plan include any stove or zero clearance fireplace plann~ for installation including make and model and Colorado Phase li certifications or Phase II EPA certification? Yes No__ Not necessary fur this project_l_ 18. Does the pi!UI include a masonry fireplace mcluding a fireplace section indicating design to comply with the lBC or IRC? . Yes_ No__ Not necessary fur this project..L__ 19. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that egress/rescue windows from sleeping rooms and/or basements comply with the requirements ofthe IBC or IRC? Yes_L No__ Not necessary fur this project __ 20. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windoWS provide natural light and ventilation fur all habitable rooms? Yes+ No__ Notnecessaryforthisproject __ 21. Do t!le p.lans indicate the location of glazing subject to human impact such as glass doors, glazing immediately adjacent to such doors; glazing adjacent to WlY surfuce normally used as a walking surfilce; sliding glass doors; fixed glass panels; shower doors and tub · enclosures and specey safety glazing fur these areas? Yes1__ No_-_ Not necessary for this project_ 22. Do the plans include a complete design fur all mechanical systems planned for installation lo this building? Yes__ No 'f' Not necessary for this project'----- 23. Have all areas in the building been accurately identified for the intended O!ie? (Occupancy as identified in the me Chapter 3) Yes _:e._ No__ Not necessary furthls project. __ _ 24. Does the plan indicate the quantity, fOrm, use and storage of any hazardous materials that may be in use in this building? Ye.s._____ No__ Not necessary for this project;_:t_ 4 25. fs the location of all natural and liquid petrolelllll gas fumacr:s, boilers and water heaters indicated on the plan? · Yes---)':_ No __ ._ Notnece$saryfortlrisproject __ 26. Do the plans indicate the location and dimension of restroom facilities and if more than four employees and both sexes are employed, facilities for both sexes? Yes__ No__ Not necessary for this projectL 27. Do the plans indicate that restrooms and access to the building are handicapped accessible? Yes_L No Notnecessaryforthisproject __ 28. Have two (2) complete sets of construction drawings been submitted with the application? Yes-f-. No __ 29. Have yoa designed or had this plan designed while considering building and other constrnction code requirements? Yes..!_ No__ Not necessary for this project __ . 30. Do~s the plan accurote]y indicate what you intend to construct and what '.~-ill receive a final inspection by the Garfield County Building Department? YesL._ No__ · 31. Do your plans comply with aU zoning rules and regulations in the County related to your zone district? For comer lots see supplemental section 5.05.03 in the Garfield County Zoning Resolution for setbacks. Yes T No __ _ 32. Do you understan.d that approval for design and/or construction changes ari: required prior to the implementation of these changes? Yes_\_ No __ 33. Do you understand that the Building Department will collect a "Plan Review" fee from you at the time of application and that you will be required to pay the "Pennit" fee as well as any "Septic System" or "Road Impact" fees required, at the time you pick up your building permit? Yes--1!----No_ 34. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections required 1.1llder the IBC including approval on a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and occupancy of the building? Yes¥-No __ 5 35. Are you aware that the Permit Application must be signed by the Owner or a written authority be given for an Agent and that the party responsible for the project .must comply with thynifom:J. Codes? Yes No __ 36. Are you aware that you must call in for an inspection by 3;30 the business day before the requested inspection in order to receive it the foJiowing business day? Inspections will be made between 7:30a.m. and 3:30p.m. Monday through Friday. Inspections are to be called in to 384-5()03. · 37. 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, __ _ 38.· Are you aware that prior to issuance of a building permit you are.required to show proof of a driveway access pemrit o~.obtain a statement from the Garfield County Road & Bridge Department stating one is not necessary? You can conta.ct the Road & Bridge Department at 625·8601. Yes Jt' Noc__ __ 39. Do you understand that you will be required to hire a State of Colorado Licensed Electrician and Plumber to perform installations and hool<:ups? The license number will be required at time of inspection. Yes f No. ___ _ 40. Are you aware, that on the front of the building pemrit application you will need to fill ifl the Parcel/ Schedule Number for the Jot you are applying for this permit on prior to submittal of the building pemrit application? Your attention in this is appreciated. Yes 'r No __ _ 41. . Do you know tpat 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) 42. Do you understand that if you arc planning on doing any excavating or grading to the . property prior to issuance of a building permit that you wJJJ be required to obtain a grnding permit? Yes 'f 43. Did an Architect seal the plans for your commercial project? S.tate Law requires any commercial project with occupancy of more than 10 persons as per Section 1004 of the me to prepare the plans and specifications for the project. Y cs f . No Not Necessary for this project-----. 6 I hereby acknowledge that I have read, understAnd, and ~wered these questions to -~~ th~t of my ability. f 1 / 2 7 ( ~ ~Y~ -1J.~r Signature Date Phone: 2 'f ~ -<t5 21-(days ); (evenings) Project Name: lk f4y Vie----1;;/(qf ~~ c -t:u r -f--if [_L c_ Project Addre ss: OOifLt .-()(/50 {/U {f lJ;w-U Note : · If you answered "No" on any of these questions you may be required to provide this information at the request of the Building Official prior to beginning the plan review process. Delays in issuing the permit are to be expected. Work may n.ot proceed. without the _ issu ance of the permit. *If you have answered "Not Decessary for this project'' 9n any of the qu es tion s and it is determin ed by the Buildlng Official' that the information is neces s ary.to revi.ew the application and plans to determine mi njm.um compliance with the adopted..codes,·pJease expect the following: · · · A. The application may be placed behind more recent applications fo r building permits in the review process aod not reviewed until requir.ed.information has been provided and the application rotates again to frrst positi,on for re vjew, B. Delay in issuance of the permit. C. Delay in proceeding wi.th con struction . *If you answered ''No" to this qu estion the circumstances described in the question could result ·in a "Stop Work Order" being is sued or a "Ce~ificate of Occupancy~' not being issued . Bpcomm April 2006 7 · f +utl:~REVIEW CHECKLIST Applican~ffl!A:: Ll>m:l Date /J · ::7;2 ·0 G Building ~gineered Foundation ~Driveway Permit ~1rvg~ PlaD ~Septic Permit and Setbacks GraEle/Topdgraphy 30% ~ttach Residential Plan Review List _vMinirnurn Application Questionnaire __ l..:'S1:ihdivision Plat Notes ._...----Fire Department Review ---0f aluation Determination/Fees _~d Line Plans/Stamps/Sticker _1.--1\ttach Conditions __ k:::::'Application Signed ~an Reviewer To Sign Application t./l"arcel/Schedule No. 40# Snowloa9 Letter Manf. Hms. _--Soils Report GENERl>.L NOTES: • Planning/Zoning __ Property Lin Setbacks 30ft Stre Setbacks __ B · ding Height --+-Road Impact Fees -1-HOA/DRC Approval -1-Gradeffopography 40% v--Suhdivision Plat Notes ·;" !. l38/l34/2EJ€13 . 21: 36 97€12438487 BATTLEMENT MESA SERVICE ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL COMMlTTEEAPPLICATION SUBMl'ITAL FORM (For New Home Cri.nstmction) INSTRUCTIONS: PAGE: 132 . This Application &: Checklist is to be used for all project submittals to the Battlement Mesa Service Associa:ti< Art;~ctural Coromittee (BMSA/AC). This form is intended to 1!8sist in ensur:iog that the applic;ation submit\ is complete. This will help provide.a quicker, more thoroUBhreview process. · It iS ,recomtl16.1lded that each Applicant tllorougbly review tho r~ of the current .An;hjt~ty.r Stan~•nis. the AmeJ!ded and Y,emi,teg .12es)!rs.tion gf Co~enan~ (ins!udingRgoiJJ;tionl!) and thereco.rdc ll'lnai Plat .fur their respective neigbborll.ood prior to prepannS a submittaL . . . . . . . . · AppliGaJJtS pxeparing a submittal should compl!Te the information they are about to submit with the requjremen1 ofthis furm and "check off' each required item on the fbzm. If any item is not checked, the Application submi.tb is not complete and should ru>t be submitted, Incoli!PleteApplicationsw.ill not be processed and wilt be.~ .to the Appl.fua¢. ln addition to the checklist, Applicants should .fill in all of the places on the Application Foz:m where io1.i:tt.maiiol is requested. 'Thi;AtchitectuJ:al Committee will usetbisinfutmationinevaluatingyourAppllcation.Jf'~tmatiol is requested but is not applicable to ynur specific project submittal. write "NiA"hl tOe space providc:d. Ifsom requil.'ed infbnn:tt.ion is yet to be dete.rmined (such 2$ exterior pllint colors you may not .have yet selected) wrltt "TBD" in the appropriated space provided~ You will then be required to make a ibllow-up submittal With these ~lectlons Itt. a .later date but be.Wre installation in the home • . . · DO NOT fill in any infonnationin the "COnditions for Approval" section of this 1b.r.rn. This portion of the form is for Arcbitectonll Committee use only. . . When ail Applioafion is COlllpJ~te, please mail or deliver .it to the fOllowing address: Battlement Mesa. Service Asso.ciati.on Architectural Comn;dttee Applk:atiotl 73-G Sipprell~Drive P.O. Box6006 Battle.m.ent Mesa, ColomdO 81636 . Tii.e An:.hitectJ.tr:al Committee meets tmee~ontbJ,y on·tlie 1., and3"' W¢doesM.v. andAppllilatii'l11sare.due · o~;~e week prio.J"'ti) the Sclledulild MeetingDilt~ fOr prior review by Comndttee memJ)ers. l'&;iise contact . Jane Chapman at (97Cl) 285-9740 to co!lfhmtbe next lldleduled .meeti.os date orto.nquest further k!fQ~<J.!t. · We thank you ~ advance fur yo1l!' coopenltion and ·m coll;lplyhlg with the At4Jlikctunll Stand@rd§ ·oftlie f);rttlemelit Mi:!Sa ServiCe Association. · Page 1 of 6 08/04/2883 21:36 9782438407 PAGE £l3 • ,! • ' .: , . . · .. BAT.I'L.EMENT MESA SERVICE ASSOOATION' · ARC,...t:u.rrr-ol""'ECI'URAL COMMITIEE A.PJ>LICATION & CJIECK.LIST (for New Home Co:mtru«ion projects) SubroittaiDate: _ __:_ ___ EstimatedStartDate:.,__ ____ .EstlmatedCompletionDate: __ _ SUBMl'lTAL.REQUlREMENTS: Two Copill$ each ofltemsl, 2 & 4 need to be submitted.. (Check·Offitems attached to the Application. :Fill in spaces as indicated.) _.....:J<:v---~ · -1.· SitePlanD:rawing (l" =tO' or rn..,zo• scale) ~the!Qllowing information shoWn: ~ Lot, Bl()ck & SulxtivisioniJaiDe. ---.!<~::..... · · Street Address ofl'r4:Jjeet. . _.........!,. ~~ ·. Building Setback Lines (also .fill-in the sb,ortest distlmcti between prl',lp<:Ity lfue to t1: exterior wall closest to that property Hne). Pll!ase be aware that aU Bu,ildingSetbae Lixtes. are taken .li-o'U.I your Property Lme Plllsll Your Property Line fs'NOT tb Curb LineU . Dwetlirtg Unit . Front Setback: Left Side Setback: Right Side Setback: Rear Setbac}(: ~ Utility Ea$ementS. . ~ · 55' Clear Site-Line. at Intersection Comer-Lots,· . _J<.z;-:;__ ··.·.. Site GrildJJig Etevatloris & Drainage. · · · · -· · _ _..f.Z:::;::;:' -~· · · • . First (main) flai)i·Heig!itin re1!\iion to tOp ofstreet.cutlrat #cuit•center oflot; _...;.,~:::;':~·. · · ·. ·. . Dmrewe.js (mchtdltJg width ofdrlvew.ay); Wa!hvays, Pat~oS; et:e. . · · -~ Outbuildings. . . . . . . --~~ . . ·· Page2 of 6 ·. 08/64/2063 21:36 9702438407 SUNDANCE PAGE 64 . . ," ' .. ~2. Architectural Drawings (l/4"-1 • or 1/8" = 1 • scale) with the following information. show: ~ Floor Plan( a) with overall dimensions (:fill-in the folloWing square fuot ar~). Fxm Floor Finished Living Area: Second Floor F.it!Wled Liv.ing Are~~= Lower Floor Finished Living~ Total Finished Living Area; Total Unfinished Living Area: Garage Area: I .. ~# square teet ~'2.--__ _,square ;teet ____ square feet v nv'6" square;feet . ____ square :teet ?{.,... __ __,square feet ~ BuitQ.ing Elevations ~lans indica~ dotin, windows, exterior materials, buUdiDg heigl: - roof pitch, roof..mouuted evaP.Otative coolers, etc. (filtcin maximum height below). Maxitnum buikling height to highest ridge line or bttilding stxuctural projectic ____ feet above top ofstreet curb at front-center of your lot · · . / E~(stampet!)FoundationPlan. · . . ~OUtbuildings indicating dbne.rJ.Sions, el~vations and overnll height to ridge line. ~3 . .Eitterior Materials (~-in the selections belo~): ~ R~ofins~eiial: 3~)!A.-«~ gjj!e Color:.__:.l.v{~,:.:..~~_:_·,J=-~-0..;.;c..l:__ __ ---'~!<::· :...... . PrimaryS.idfugMatetJa1: Ahte.roca~ ~... COlor:_~~~!!l' .. ~a ___ __,..:.,... . ~ Ac;Q~m~;Sid.i.ogMatetial: A-.,.v;..,M Dr.,.... Color:._,....__:.M..;;.:. :..::ilt:...------ ~-TrimMaiPI: A"'trt~ ... V,....,.. h~t · Color:· l,t/h•1c. · ~-. . . . M~nry Material:........:f~~;.::...Vt;.;...-_.;.;R:.:::c'~"''------color:.--. -M.:.::e.:: .. :..:.:t-,::...,_..,...( -. ~--- --Al.flr-_ . StuccoMaferl3ls; · IJ jA · · Colot:_..8~--J... A)Jj..<l,.{tr:t:-.:...· ---- ~...I.•....:.C::.::.. . FrontDoorMaterial: __ ~&i~tt~ .. I~----Color:_-.!!w~nrt:.L_ __ _.........,""- ~ GamgeDoorMat6ria.l:__.:.-_::cSI1~ ... :.:...' ---~ Color: __ ;:..M->.;.:i._:,.f.c.,__ __ ~~ COLOR SAMPLE COLOR SA:MPLE. COLOR SAMPLE COLOR SAMPLE COLORSA:MPtB COLOR SAMPLE Page3 of 6 ··. .08/64/2003 21:36 9702438467 SUNDANCE PAGE 65 ... '• ' I --l::~~ . 4. Landscape/brigation .Pla.os with the following fufurmation: ~ Planting Plan (mcate areas of irrigated Ia~ tree ,Placem~ shrub beds, ground cov1 ~ / etc.). · · . V Plant Material listing by species oftTees, shrubs and grasses. . V . Groundcovcr Material with weed control barrier. ~Fences, ~ Other Landscape Improvements (decks, site lighting, flag poles, etc.) . . ~ 5. Vatfunce Req~est (If applicable) Give details below: . ~ 6. RCllidential Col!.Stniotion Monetary Deposit: JJWe herebya.:knotrledge an<hmder$tand that our failure to complete Home Construrnon,1mprovetn!l),lt1 . l'ro.Jects or Landscaping Construction within the time conitrabrts noted in Cottdi.tlons .2. & 3. On ~~ .6 of this AppliCation wiD ~ult in a Notice and Oppo:rtu.nity for a Hearing befon; dt& ~n«SA Board, !>l /Qirectol'l!. · ltJIWe II~ found in VfQ;}aifun of the5e Condition~ at the l{earl.u,g it Jrill. r¢.8~ fu a firie ta.th,~ ·· .·Owner of not leu than $500~00 per month for ~ch full month in e)g:ess of.the all&tte<J .~mpletJon tinu :fhnne, . . :. . . I/We ~reby acknowledge that Hom~ Co~st.ruction or Improveme~t Pl!'oj.ects or Landscape Constructili.D feaftlxeS which are buill in DDD"CIUifunnance with tbi& full application, ~ncJud~' tb'e ConditfQllB. qj .. *P.praval noted on Page 6 of 6 her.eiii; i:!We·lt'll.l be cited by theJJMSMAC in l'fritt~a ci'bt,tio» funn, . .lit Ui.e tim.~ of cUSco~. In extenuating; chtcu~;nstances a Va~~cv JilaY .be requested. ~W the BMSNA(f;, . provid~:d· such Y~ce ~queat it~-u wff)iin the-pw;riew and approvalJ.urisdictJOli ofibe BMSA/AC. H a Yariane!l unotgn~nted bytl,lli·~AIAC and lft.li.e No:a.;conlonnWg.ltews•are 1\0(.correctechv.itlim 60 t&yufterthe date Of 'Written cii3tion,~e wm be Se,n'ed·Nii'f:t~e ~~a Rearing lie!o~ theB.MSAU~liJ!d pfl)jreetors;. aiiditiiWe are fo~UJd·in-vjoiAJi!lu of.thes.eNon-Col-®n!rlng Iteii:as. at th:ell~Jiing 1/W-Q .\VUl I!~ ~~4 a. mirii~Ulil ofSSOo.oo. p:er. ~!)n;;¢onfonni.Og .X.fe.D(~ .N"otwithatan~~iHthe {oxeg~blg, J/!JV·t lfcknowleoge· that t.li:e BMSA Board o.f;Ji)frtct:ors and/or Arcl»tec'tural Conimittee· may ~Qmle any let~l ·. hi.bled;Y' avaUabl~ in the e~ent of a non~Qnipliance. . . Page4 of 6 . '. ll8/EJ4/2EIOS 21: S!) 971l24S8487 . . . . ·. ' . . . . .· . . · ... · .... .· . ,. . . AS PER. TilE An.CBITECTURAL STANDARDS,PLEASE INDICATE TJIE .. . . . . .· . . .. FOLLOWING POINTS. ON THE PLOT PLAN AND BELOW: ... . . : · · ELBV ATIONS AT EAcH CORNER OF TilE LOT .. . . . :LOCATION. '1.. . El.fiYAIIOJY; ~ FEET j 2 . . . ,' . . . . , 3. .... 4. . :. ,' 5 • . ·.. ·.· 6.--THE HIGH POlNT OF 11m LOT. ·. 7 • .:...nm LOWPOINT OF THE LOT, 8.-HEIGIIT OF GARAGE FLOOR. •' 9.--HBIGHT OF HQUSB .MAIN FLOOR· ·: . ·1 0.-HEiGR.f OF ROOF A'BOVEFOUNPATION. ( MAXlMU.M-3S FEET) 11.--.HBrGBT OF ROOF ABOVE CENTER OF 'IHI:lli4ID CURB. · ·(~-2~FEETl -- . --- ---.:.. . . ·l2c--DRAiNAGS FLOWLINBS ON THE PLOT l'LAN. 13.-ROOF PITCHBS.:--:--1·-··-··-· · i.~-.. -~ 3 .. -----~- ~S.-$QUARB FEBT OFLIV1NG SPAci.: .. . . '. P~GE EJG .. "· .• ,1118/1!!4(2003 21:36 9702<138407 PAGE Failure to pay fines levied as determined at the Bearing may also resnlt in a Lien being phtced 011 Property or litigation :Process fuitiated by the BMSA :B.oatd o!J)irecton to-seeute conformance wll full Applli:ation and its respective Cond~l)ns Of' Approval. ·. · · .. 1/'W~underatand thatARhitecturalCommittee approvald0«1.oot conatitateapprov!dofthelocalbu: d~al"biiBJJt, d.l:ainage design· or stNctul'al soll:lldness, nor does it constitute ass~ dl~ dte compzy wifh all appfkable codes, .-egnlations, erdinanf!CS and Js:w&; · J/We fuJfb.e.r a-cknowledge that any subsequellf field changes which .'f!We may d. to the J Coll8truetion or In:tproventent Projects oftbiH origbtal.Applii:atlon Submlttal3Rdthe. origiQafCond . . of Approval iSSued by the B:MSA/AC Will. reqWt'e an additional R~Wfsed AppJk:ition Sttbmittaf 91 behalf;. and that IJWe. will J:Jo.t ~eed With any stdllleqttent ;Oeld dia~es 1ltltfl s. Revised Condfiit · App.rov~.have been issnlld to us by the BMSAJAC: · · ..... ·---·-.. · 0--· ~~~""'-' ~·· . Ow-~u-~ Pr,'l.l<J Ncc"e~:Jr leefef:{'>L Ve~+e:){ <O/A . ~~~~u~------------~~~~~. ·.· ,. esta4/2aB3 21:36 97024384137 PAGE 08 ...... ·-;., , .. ~ \ .. • 'I'hls portion of the Application Fonn b to be c:ompleted by the · Architectural Committee (not the Applicant). ~ONPlTlONS QFAppROV ALorDISA.PPROV AL 1. No sitework or buUding construction tney p.rooeed em any Lot (molur:ling oo pretimioazy site clearh: grubbing. grade. alteration. storing ofiXlllteriaJ. fuundation excavation,. extension ofundergl'ound utilitil etc.) until the Project has received a Project approval ftom the Arohitectlltll1 Co.mmittee and .bas be issl.Ied a Building l'e:anit (as requned by Garfield County for new home or Renovation projects). Z. All general boil~ and site improvemelllS co»;Stn~¢on;.for any l'loject shaH be completed~ sJr.all.lur issued a Certificate uf OccupfillQy .from the Garfield County 73Wlding Dcpruttne.IJ.t no later than!!!!.£ :mar afte-r the issualtce date of this Arohit~ Committee A,Rproyal. 3. · ThecompletelandscapingandteVf:getationofthcinlprovedLot,to~mcludetbefr!;mt.•m: l!ll!!: }'tlt'd areas; sball be completed no later than six (6) mo.nt.hs ftum the date of the Certificate 1 Occup;mcy . . 4. If1he sel~on of.coloxs and /or landscapillg plans zm, not :inelwied with-this application they must b sl.lhmitted fo:t approval beibre any oolion is tsken to ~all the misSJng ite;ms. s. 7 .. .Appliq,tion DCUiJed Qtliiials of.Atchitectur.at Co~ Melilbers): ·.s,y: ApPtimmoii De.riied for nlllSon(iJlstat.ea abo-v.e:· ~ CJiaiJ;fiwn• . . . Date:_,.,-____ _ ... Page6of 6 GRADING PLAN REOLIJREM~ 1. strip cmd .toc:ilpll• tcpiiOI frarn bulldiRg footprint. ~~ and 1!f lricte pertnetor around buldlng bei'Cir8 construction begins. 2. Buldfng flniDhed floor elevcrtJon to be bt:IHd Cln projsct ben.ehrnarlc E ~ Ccr Soc 18 3• braaa cap LSf1164J elev. 5<5J.3l 3. The Qr'0Unc1 llllfface lllll"l'"cxMd(ng the a..U.rlor Of the buldlng llholl be lllopod frcm th11 founcratJon In all crntctlons Wfth a minimum elope of 8"' In the flnlt 10 foat In unpcrved Clnlaa and 3'" In the flrat 10 feet for PQYIITMnt and Wlllkway IIJllae.. Roof ~oub and dralna should ~ weD be,yond the l&ntta of all boddll. Lan~ ..... kb requires rogviGr heavy Irrigation lhould be loccrted at leaat 5 toot fram founcraUon walls. 4.. Repl®e lrtockpl!tld tap.oll In landseoped ~ 5. Sewer, wahlr connect.lcms to be to provided atuba. 6, Conto~ CIRI 1rDm dalgn and rnay not r'llflect actud eonatructrcn. Contractor 8hould Wllffy topography and notify fnglnoer for design alternatives If """'-l' SCALE 2tJ100 20 Property Line ~ • :g, zo..! <..,= -'o> D.o;: CJo!l., :=!: c6' > c ... .., <<>co a::O= CJrD'5:, ~g. J-0(/) => ·w o~::.: ;..oo <O:r; ..JSw w ·2 o t::::>~ (/) CJ GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN· DeVORE, Inc. ~ GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS · GEOLOGISTS 1441 ).[otor St. Grand Junction, CO 81505 Grace Homes 786 Valley Court Grand Junction, CO 81505 June 22, 2006 Re: Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Job #92355-GJ Valley View Village, Phases C and D, Battlement Mesa, CO Gentlemen: TEL' (970) 242-896H FAX, (970) 242-1561 As requested, Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore personnel completed a limited geotechnical exploratory program at the above--referenced site. Ten shallow exploration pits were excavated in the vicinity of the proposed buildings, as shown on the attached sketch. These exploration pits were excavated to a total depth of3 feetto I 0 feet. These exploration pits were logged and sampled by personnel of Grand Junction Lincoln De Yore on May I 0, 2006. The purpose ofthese pits was to determine the types and character of the in-place overJet grading fill placed on the site to the dale of our exploration and the types and character of the underlying subgrade soils, particularly the potential expansive characteristics, and to relate these characteristics to the proposed fonndation system. The slope stability of the embankment fill overlooking the stormwater detention pond was modeled to confirm that the building setbacks are adequate. This particular site was the subject of two previous geoteclmical studies conducted prior to initial subdivision development. The principal report is a preliminary geotechnical study, "Proposed Roan Cliff Village Development, Parcels 2-5 and 2-6, Battlement Mesa, Garfield County, CO," prepared by Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc., Job #102 526, dated September 16,2002. A second geotechnical report was prepared by Yeh & Associates, "Test Pit Observations, Lots 1-7, 38 and 39, Battlement Mesa, Phase II, Garfield County, CO," Project #24-116, dated June 1, 2005. The Hepworth-Pawlak report provided the principal geotechnical parameters for the design and construction of this subdivision. The Hepworth-Pawlak report identified some areas of low expansive clays and one moderately expansive clay. These expansive clays, combined with the proposed structural fill on the site, presented some limitations on the construction and ultimate performance of individual residential construction. The Yeh & Associates report was a very limited study. It appears that five exploration pits were excavated to a total depth of approximately 6 feet. Bulk samples were obtained, and basic soils classification and moisture determinations were made. This report did not determine in-place dry density of the soils, nor were relatively undisturbed samples taken for swelVconsolidation testing, so very little additional information is provided that can be utilized for predicting residential foundation performance. Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C and D June 22, 2006 Page 2 The following laboratory tests were performed on representative soil samples to determine their relative engineering properties. ASTM D-2487 Soil Classification ASTM D-3080 Direct Shear Strength, Cd ASTM D-2937 In-Place Soil Density ASTM D-2216 Moisture Content of Soil FHA Swell by PVC Meter (Shelby Tube Samples) Tests were performed in accordance with test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials or other accepted standards. The results of our laboratory tests are included in this report. The in-place soil density, moisture content, and the standard penetration test values are presented on the attached exploration pit logs. This letter contains general recommendations for construction of a residential foundations within this subdivision but it is not a foundation design and cannot be used as such. An additional study was conducted on the slope located at the north end of the development overlooking the stormwater detention pond. The purpose of this additional study is to provide a factor of safety for the assumed developed conditions regarding slope stability and placement of the building foundations at the top of the slope. Our conclusions and recommendations for this site are presented below. Excavation Observation: Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore personnel should be contacted to observe the tow1dation soils after the excavation has been completed and prior to placing forms or concrete. The purpose of this is to observe the type and condition ofthe foundation soils throughout the excavation. If the soils are found to differ from those encountered in our exploration pits, or if they appear to be unstable, additional recommendations may be required prior to construction of the foundations. Soil Classification: During our field exploration of the existing man-made fills and upper 2 to 3 feet of the native soil, three soil types were identified. These soils are all quite similar, being fme-grained, oflow to very low plasticity, and derived from the same geologic source. These in-place materials have been naturally reworked due to alluvial activity and wind activity. Soil Type No. I is a slightly sandy lean clay. Soil Type No. ll is a somewhat sandier lean clay with some strata being a sandy silty clay. Soil Type No. III is a low plastic, slightly sandy silt. The actual characteristics of these soils are described on the attached soil analysis and summary sheets. The principal concern of Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore was the presence oflow expansive strata. A nwnber of tests were made on relatively undisturbed samples obtained using thin-walled shelby tubes and tested in an FHA PVC meter. This method allows a rather quick test to be performed and can be reasonably correlated back to the test methods utilizing the consolidation test apparatus. Based upon our testing oftl1ese soils, the possibility of minor amounts of soil expansion being encountered is relatively low; however, the potential appears to exist in both the native and man-made fill soils. Based upon our testing, it would be reasonable to expect between 0. 7% and 2.1% swell under conditions of relatively low surcharge pressure. The corresponding swell pressures range from 286 psfto 645 psf. These particular values may only slightly affect a properly designed and proportioned footing and Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C and D June 22, 2006 Page 3 stemwall foundation but would affect more noticeable distortion or movement of a thickened edge slab (monolithic-type) foundation system. Man-made Fill: Portions of this site contain newly placed man-made fill, ranging from only a few inches to as much as 12 1/2 teet measured in test pit #I at the northeast comer of the site at the top of the bank overlooking the stormwater retention pond. It is our understanding that more fill has been placed over portions of this site since our exploration pits. The site grading map plan, which Lincoln DeVore utilized during some of our soil density testing of utility trench backfill, indicates that up to 13 feet of fill can be expected. It is not known if this man-made fill bas been placed under controlled moisture and compactive effort conditions during this subdivision grading. This office does not have any records regarding the placement of the fill and is not able to verifY the overall condition of fill. Based upon our exploration pits, the majority of the fill appears to have been placed in manner that would produce percent compaction results in the range of90 to 1 00"/o ofthe standard proctor (ASTM D-698). The native soils typically contain strata with percent compaction significantly less than 90%, with many of these native strata exhibiting slight to moderately severe collapsible properties. Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore has not been provided with any geotechnical reports or specifications for site improvement, which provide guidelines and requirements for structural fill. It is not known what actual requirements are in effect for this fill which is expected to support buildings, slabs and subdivision improvements. Based upon our experience in this area, it is common to have structural fill placed during site grading at a minimum of 95% of the soil's maximum standard proctor density (ASTM D-698). It is normally required that the fill be placed at a moisture content ranging from -2% to +2% of the optimum moisture content (ASTM D-698). Some modification of these speCifications are possible, particularly when dealing with potentially expansive soils. Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore typically recommends that the soils be compacted to a minimum of90% of the soil's modified proctor dry density (ASTM D-1557). The requirements for the moisture content are usually± 2% of the· optimum moisture, but in the ease of slightly expansive soils, the preferred moisture range would probably increase. Soil Moisture Conditions: No free water was encountered during excavation on this site. ln general, the man-made fills and the very upper portion ofthe native soils were in a slightly damp condition, with the native soils usually being somewhat drier. TI1ere exists a distinct possibility of perched water tables developing in the native alluviaVdebris fan soils which are present across this entire site. There is also the possibility of a perched water table developing in the compacted man-made fills. This perched water would probably be the result of increased irrigation due to the presence of lawns, landscaping and roof runoff. Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C and D June 22, 2006 Page 4 While it is believed that under the existing conditions at the time of our exploration the actual construction progress would not be affected by any free flowing waters, it is very possible that after development is initiated and for several years later, a troublesome perched water condition may develop on individual lots that will provide some problems for existing or future foundations on this tract. Therefore, it is recommended that the future presence of perched water tables be considered in the design and constrnction of all proposed residential strnctures. Prevention of perched water tables, and minimizing the effects of any developed perched waters around residential buildings, is usually accomplished by prudent site grading, good control of roof runoff, and very good compaction practices regarding backfill against stn1ctures, backfill of utility trenches, and extra compaction effort in the areas between strnctures, particularly in narrow side yards that tend to have slow to very slow surface drainage. In the experience of Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore, good attention to site grading, drainage, and particularly compaction of all backfills is more effective than the installation of shallow perimeter drains around foundations. In some instances, particularly in the side yards between two structures, a shallow drain may be required. Foundation Type Recommended: The foundation recommendations contained in the Hepworth- Pawlak geotechnical report provide general design infonnation for a standard continuous spread footing and stem wall-type foundation system. The preliminary allowable bearing pressure for this foundation system was given as 1,500 psfto 3,000 psf. Further note was made that if expaosive clays are encountered in the building areas, removal or redesign may be required. The recommendations are general in nature as is typical with a preliminary geotechnical study. Grand Junction Lincoln De Yore has significant experience in the Battlement Mesa area, and on a preliminary basis, provides the following recommendations for lightweight single and attached residential foundation systems. Grand Junction Lincoln DeVQry Foundation Recommendations: Assuming that some amount of differential movement can be tolerated, then a conventional shallow fow1dation system, possibly underlain by up to 18 inches of stT"uctural fill (may be native, reworked soils) and placed in accordance with the recommendations contained within this report, may be utilized. The foundation would consist of continuous spread footings beneath all bearing walls and isolated spread footings beneath all columns and other points of concentrated load. Such a shallow foundation system, resting on the properly constructed sb11ctnral fill, may be designed on the basis of an allowable bearing capacity of1,500 psf maximum and 500 psfminimum. Recommendations pertaining to balancing, reinforcing, drainage, and inspection are considered extremely important and must be followed. Contact stresses beneath all continuous walls should be balanced to within ± 200 psfat all points. Isolated interior column footings should be designed for contact stresses of about I 50 psf less than the average used to balance the continuous walls. The criteria for balancing will depend somewhat on the nature of the strncture. Single story, slab on grade structures may be balanced on the basis of dead load only. Multi story strnctures may be balanced on the basis of dead load plus one-halflive load for up to three stories. Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C aud D June 22, 2006 Page 5 If the potential effects of frost heaving are either mitigated or discounted, and if the design of the upper structure is such that loads can be balanced reasonably well, and if minor amounts of differential settlement can be tolerated, a floating structural slab or raft type offoundation could be used on this site. Ifthe slab is to be a floating structural slab (similar in appearance to the "monolithic" slab), the slab should be underlain by a minimum of 2 feet of non-expansive and non frost-susceptible fill, placed in accordance with recommendations contained in this report. Such a slab would require heavy reinforcing to resist differential bending. This structural slab, using the granular structural fill as part of the foundation system, could be designed assuming the top of the structural fill has a modulus of sub grade reaction ofk = 220 pci. If large concentrated loads are located in the interior of this fill, or if minor construction problems are encountered in the placement of the fill, the use of geosynthetic fabric or geogrid as part of the fill construction would significantly improve the performance of the fill and foundation system. It is possible to design either the floating structural slab or the raft type of slab either as a solid or ribbed slab, but in either case a rimwall must be used for confinement. Any such slab must be specifically designed for the anticipated loading. Such a foundation system will settle to some degree as the softer, underlying soils consolidate, but differential movement is held to a minimum. Because the soils may settle in varying amounts, some minor cracking and heave are possible unless the slabs are specifically designed with the movement in mind. Structural FiiVSoil Improvement: For use in conjunction with a shallow foundation system, a structural fill may be required to replace any upper metastable soils, low expansive soils, or to provide a non frostheave-susceptiblesubgrade. This structural fill may be placed in conjunction with structural fill beneath concrete slabs on grade. Any existing metastable soil, expansive soil, or frost susceptible soil beneath slabs should be removed to a minimum depth up to I -1/2 feet below the proposed bottom footing elevation and at least 2 feet below the bottom slab elevation for a thickened edge structural slab. The excavation/fill width is to extend atleastl6 inches from the interior and exterior of the proposed foundation wall or hearing pad in contact with the fill. Once it is felt that adequate soil removal has been achieved, it is recommended that the excavation be closely examined by a representative of Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore to ensure that an adequate overexcavation depth has indeed occurred and that the exposed soils are suitable to support the proposed structural man-made fiJI. At the specific direction of the geotechnical engineer, water soak the overexcavated portion of the site for at least I day prior to the installation of any required perimeter drain and the structural fill. The purpose of this wetting or soaking is to provide initial settlement/collapse of the sub grade soils and to allow proper subgrade. This wetting or soaking must be controlled and must not be allowed to adversely affect nearby structures. After any required soaking has been accomplished, the subgrade soils are to be mechanically compacted to a minimum of 86% of the soil's maximum modified proctor dry density (ASlM D-1557) for a depth of at least 6 inches. Once this examination has been completed, it is recommended that a coarse-grained, non-expansive, non free-draining, man-made structural fill be imported to the site and placed on the properly prepared subgrade soils. Non-expansive, native soils may be utilized as structural fill if specifically approved by tbe geotechnical engineer. The upper 6 to 12 inches (minimum) of the fill is to be a sandy gravel ( -3/4 inch and GM/GW) or a gravelly sand (-3/4 inch and SM/SW). The structural fill should be placed in the 1 l I I ~ Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C and D June 22, 2006 Page 6 overexcavated portion ofthis site in lifts not to exceed 6 inches after compaction. A minimum of90% ofthe soil's maximum modified proctor dry density (ASTM D-1557) must be maintained during the soil placement. These soils should be placed at a moisture content conducive to the required compaction (usually proctor optimum moisture content± 2%). Very low expansive to non-expansive, native soils may be utilized as structural fill if specifically approved by the geotechnical engineer. If these native soils have a slight expansive potential, the soils should be placed as structural fill in lifts not to exceed 6 inches after compaction. These soils must not be over- compacted but compacted wet ofthe soil's "optimum" moisture content. These soils should be placed at a minirmun of86% and a maximum of92% of the soil's maximum modified proctor dry density (ASTM D- 1 557). These soils must be placed at a moisture content conducive to the required compaction while being wet of the optimum moisture content. These soils must he placed at optimum moisture content or up to 4% over optimum moisture content. The granular material must be brought to the required density by mechanical means. No soaking, jetting, or puddling techniques of any type should be used in placement of fill on this site. To confirm the quality of the compacted fill product, it is recommended that surface density tests be taken at maximum 2-foot vertical intervals. It is recommended that any required perimeter drain be placed in the exterior portion of the structural fill, at the base of the fill, in order to prevent or at least minimize the collection of water in the soils and fill beneath the structure. Reinforcing: All foundation stem walls should be designed as "grade beams" capable of spanning at least I 0 feet. Where the foundation stemwalls are relatively shallow in height, vertical reinforcing will not be necessary. However, in the walls retaining soil in excess of 4 feet in height, vertical reinforcing may be necessary to resist the lateral pressures (restrained case) of the soils along the wall exterior. To aid in designing such vertical reinforcing, an equivalent fluid pressure (E.F.P) on the order of 55 pcf would be appropriate for the native and the man-made fill soils. Floor Slabs: Non-structural floor slabs on grade, if any, should be positively separated from all structural portions of this building and allowed to float freely. Frequent scoring (control joints) of the slabs should be provided to allow for possible shrinkage cracking of the slab. TI1ese controljoints should be placed to provide maximum slab areas of approximately 200 to 360 square feet. Any man-made fill placed below floor slabs on grade should be compacted to a minimum of90% of its maximum modified proctor dry density (ASTM D-1 557). These soils should be placed at a moisture content conducive to the required compaction (usually proctor optimum moisturecontent±2%). Drainage and Gmding: Adequate site drainage should be provided in the foundation area both during and after construction to preventthe ponding of water and the wetting or saturation Of the subsurface soils. We recommend that the ground surface around the structure be graded so that surface water will be carried quickly away from the building. The minimum gradient within I 0 feet of the building will depend Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C and D June 22, 2006 Page 7 on surface landscaping. We recommend that paved areas maintain a minimum gradient of 2% and that landscaped areas maintain a minimum gradient of 8%. It is further recommended that roof drain downspouts be carried at least 5 feet beyond all backfilled areas and discharge a minimum of 10 feet away from the structure. Proper discharge of roof drain downspouts may require the use of subsurface pipiugio some areas. Under no circumstances should a "dry well discharge" be used on this site unless specifically sited by a geotechnical engineer. Planters, if any, should be constructed so that moisture is not allowed to seep into foundation areas or beneath slabs or pavements. The existing drainage on the site must either be maintained carefully or improved. We recommend that water be drained away from structures as rapidly as possible and not be allowed to stand or pond within 15 feet of the building or foundation. We recommend that water removed from one building not be directed onto the backfill areas of adjacent buildings. Should an automatic lawn irrigation system be used on this site, we recommend that the sprinkler heads, irrigation piping, and valves be installed no less than 5 feet from the building. In addition, these heads should be adjusted so that spray from the system does not fall onto the walls of the building and that such water docs not excessively wet the backfill soils. It is recommended that lawn and landscaping irrigation be reasonably limited so as to prevent undesirable saturation of subsurface soils or backfilled areas. Several methods of irrigation water control are possible, to include, but not be limited to: Metering the irrigation water. • Sizing the irrigation distribution service piping to limit onsite water usage. • Encourage efficient landscaping practices. Enforcing reasonable limits on the size ofhigh water usage landscaping within 5 feet of the building or foundation. • Incorporating "xeriscaping" landscaping and irrigation techniques. A plastic membrane placed on any crawlspace ground surfaces may retain/trap excessive amounts of water beneath the membrane. If future moisture problems develop or are anticipated, the foundation design engineer or the geoteclmical engineer may require that the membrane be partially or completely removed from the crawlspace area. Provided that all recommendations found herein pertaining to site surface drainage, grading, and soil compaction are closely followed, a perimeter foundation drain would not be required. For fully finished basements, however, the use of a perimeter foundation drain would significantly reduce potential moisture related problems which can arise from subsequent area development. Backfill: To reduce settlement and aid in keeping water from reaching beneath this building, all backfill around this building should be mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90% of its maximum modified proctor dry density (ASTM D-1557). The only exception to this would be the components of the perimeter foundation drain, if any. All backfill should be composed of the native soils and should not be placed by soaking, jetting or puddling. All backfill placed in utility trenches around this structure or below 1 l I I f f r Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C and D June 22, 2006 Page 8 foundation walls should be mechanically compacted to a minimum of90% ofits maximum modified proctor dty density {ASTM D-1557)_ These soils should be placed at a moisture content conducive to the required compaction (usually proctor optimum content± 2%). Cement Tvoe: Type II, Type I-II, or Type II-V cement is recommended for all concrete in contact with the soils on this site. Calcium chloride should not be added to a Type II, Type I-II, or Type II-V cement under any circumstances. Remarks: We recommend that the bottoms of all foundation components rest a minimum of 3 feet below fmished grade or as required by the local building codes. Foundation components must not be placed on frozen soils. Slope StabilitvAnalysis: Slope stability calculations were performed on the existing embankments overlooking the stormwater detention pond. The stability analysis addresses the individual slope and the "global" condition of the entire embankment. The soils were subjected to wetting due to lawn irrigation and frequent use of the stormwater detention pond. Saturation of the lawn areas and the slope toe at the detention pond were modeled using the SEEP/W module. The analysis was performed using the PC software SLOPEIW module within GeoStudio 2004, Version 6.19, Geo-Siope International LTD, Calgaty, Alberta, Canada. The analysis utilized the Limit Equilibrium Theory for the factor of safety, incorporating the following four methods. Fellenius or Ordinary Method Bishop Simplified Method Janbu Simplified Method = Morgenstern-Price Method Moment Equilibrium Moment Equilibrium Force Equilibrium Moment and Force Equilibrium The Morgenstem-Price Method, incorporating both Moment and Force Equilibrium Theory is generally considered to be the more "accurate" of the four methods. The Fellenius or Ordinary, Bishop Simplified, and the Janbu Simplified Methods are commonly utilized in older slope stability software and are included for comparative purposes. No seismic coefficient was assumed in these calculations. Several models were assumed for the existing embankments. The critical model assumed that lawn irrigation would be excessive, causing seepage on the upper slope and complete saturation of the slope toe area. Based on slope stability calculations, the constructed fill slope is reasonably stable. The analysis indicated that the embankments have a sufficient factor of safety, equal to or greater than 1.5. The majority oflow factors of safety indicate that the steeper slopes are "sloughing" under the conditions of nearly saturated embankment fill. Grace Homes Limited Subsurface Soils Exploration, Valley View Village, Phases C and D June 22, 2006 Page 9 Limitations: This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or his representative to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and are incorporated into the plans. In addition, it is his responsibility that the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and his subcontractors carry out these recommendations during construction. The fmdings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in acceptable or appropriate standards may occur or may result from legislation or the broadening of engineering knowledge. Accordingly, the fmdings of this report may be invalid, wholly or partially, by changes outside our controL Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of3 years. The recommendations ofthis report pertain only to the site investigdted and arc based on the assmnption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those described in this report. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that plarmed on the day of this report, Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be provided, if appropriate. · Grand Junction Lincoln DeVore makes no warranty, either expressed or implied, as to the findings, recommendations, specifications or professional advice, except that they were prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional in the field of geotechnical engineering. Respectfully submitted, GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN DeVORE, INC. Principal Engineer GJLD Job # 923 55-GJ ~ I I f ! ' CR/r1CAL DRAINACE ZONf TWCi" 1HE: \lf01H OF THE ORIGINAL CXCAVA1fDN LJUIT (VAAI£S -fJIN/UU!.I OF 6 FITT FRDIJ BU!WINQ) SOIL PREFMtED 6" to a• DEEP TO UNDSCN'E. USC 'LOW WAtt:ft USf' Tl'P£" Pl.ANffi 011d/Dr "X£RISO»''HG' TE"OHN!OUES WI1HIH THF 'CRinCN.. DRA/NAOE Zt:JNE'. RO<Y oo•"'"'wr----. ~ I IiI ·~n~~~~R:~r~~~ n:g Bt: I ~ I RCWORI<CD "' C®PACTEO FOR \ I ~ J A U/NI/JU!.l OF 12 /Na-/£S \ n ~ n .~, ••c•mc ~ IFILL 7111c<N~:ssu-UFILL mJc<NEssl smucTVRAL FiLL CDI.IPAC1£D TO MIN/MlZ~ Ul a o o D o o o o o o o o o o o o o / FILL TO EXTEND 8£N£A TH ~~~=:.~<g/J'01LS fa \ ; f .0 .ti r ;.H';; f ;; :' .0,;. ~~ ALL FOUNDATION £LEM£NTS. ~ \ ooooooo oooooeo oocoo.-..o SEENo=s \ ........................ ~,; ...... ., •• ···~·· lc;. \ ' I ..... I •• o I ...... I. 0 • .. Jio l'oO \ ooooooooaooooooo, .. EXCAVAnoN ttMIT'-'T--1 ~· !' • .i..& ,·;;r .& ; ''.O.O!'; ~ .:'! GEOT£XTILE FABRIC ::f \ OOoOOtsO 0000000 GGOODoo / h C )80 C: \ •• • ..... ---..~··•• • ... -:··~···· • !•''• • / such ns Contec -INSTALL DRAIN ' •J!. ~~'1...•...!_.!..·-,~~-..,, ~11 fl 500 X AS REQUIRED BY ENGINEER or ,. ra - StE NOIES FOR DETAILS. ·--AS REQU!RED DRAINAGE I LANDSCAPING CONCEPT ' 'NO WATER ZONE' BY FOUNDATION CRtnCAL DFM.IN,t,GE ZONE TWC£' mE: 'MD1H OF' 'tHE ORIGINAL EXCAV.A.T1aN U/1/T ( VARICS -IJIN/41UM OF 8 FEF:.T FROI.I BUILDWG ) SOIL PRD'IoRffi s• to B" DEEP TO LJ.NDSCAPE. USE 'l.OW WA1FR US£' TYPE' PLANTS ofld/or •X!RfSC)J31NG" TE.CHNIQU!S "MTHIN THE 'CR/11CIJ. DRAINAGe ZONE', ROOF 001,nspour---. GROUND ACIWSS FILL TO EXTE:ND B£NEA TH ALL FOUNDATION ELEMENTS. S£[ NOTES GEDTEXT!LE FABRIC such as Contech C-180 or Mlrafl 500-X AS REQUIRED DRAINAGE / LANDSCAPING CONCEPT 'NO WATER ZONE' BY FOUNDATION a GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN-DeVORE, Inc. GEOTllCilllid.IL ENODIJ;TI;JRS-OEOLOGJSTS IC.\1£: EXTERIOR DRAINAGE / NONE IDI LANDSCAPING CONCEPT ""' 9-16-2005 File 1 D-DRAIN2 1 I I i I PLAN Adapted From HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING Drawing GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. NO SCALE SITE LOCATION DIAGRAM VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Date Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction, Colorado Job No. Drawn 92355-GJ EMM I I I ! i ! J ! PLAN Adapted From HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING Drawing SKETCH From G.J.L.D. Field Personnel Notes GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. ~ SLOPE LOCATION DIAGRAM ~ VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa, Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Date Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction, Colorado Job No. Drawn 92355-GJ EMM j ' I ' ' I I OPEN SPACE PLAN Adapted From HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING Drawing SKETCH From G.J.L.D. Field Personnel Notes GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. L Tf'-1 J.JN<A>~N Pli"~le Tesr 11r • J" • IP·M S Ht'·l , HEP~RTH • PAw>IIK 'Tesr ll~!I!N~-N6·rn.· NO SCALE PIT LOCATION DIAGRAM I VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Date Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction, Colorado Job No. Drawn 92355·GJ EMM I i ' I I I. r I • '.-·-----------------------------, TH DEP (FT .) - -- -5 - - - - -10 -- - --15 TH DEP (FT .) -_, - -5 - - - - -10 -- - - -15 SOIL LOG v SOIL LOG A, I 0 l -· EXPLORATION PIT NO. 1 SHEAR SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEY.: NORTHEAST CORNER of SITE, LOT 24 Torvane DENSITY WATER DESCRIPTION psi pel % CL LEAN CLAY Sl. SANDY I SJ. COMPRESSIBLE SJ. MOIST MAN-MADE FILL MEDIUM DENSITY ST 107.2 15.0% STRATIFIED NO Strata of LOW DENSITY 5 96.6 15.4% CL LEAN CLAY SJ. SANDY Sl. MOIST ST 103.7 10.7% I SJ. COMPRESSIBLE MEDIUM DENSITY Sl. MOIST Bulk 15.0% MAN-MADE FILL 10 CL LEAN CLAY SJ. SANDY MEDIUM DENSITY I Sl. COMPRESSIBLE Sl. MOIST Bulk 13.3% ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE 15 Pot Total Depth: . 12-1/2 NO Free Water Durong Observatoon: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. EXPLORATION PIT NO. 2 SHEAR SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: SOUTH PORTION, LOT 24 Torvane DENSITY WATER DESCRIPTION jpsl pel % CL MAN-MADE FILL MEDIUM DENSITY Sl. MOIST ND 100.5 13.2% SJ. COMPRESSIBLE ST 105.3 10.4% ALLUVIAL/DEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdl 104.8 10.2% ML SANDY SILT MEDIUM DENSITY Sl. DAMP NO JJI COLLAPSIBLE STRATA LOW DENSITY 5 97.1 13.6% ST 86.8 16.5% STRATIFIED 10 ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE--= 15 Pot Total Depth: 4' NO Free Water During Observation: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. LOG OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN • DeVORE, Inc. Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction, Colorado VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado Job No. Drawn 92355-GJ EMM Date '6-17-2006 fJ l l i I TH DEP (FT .) so IL LOG -' I I -I - -5 -' I I - - - -10 -- - --15 H .) DEPT (FT _I --· -5 - --- -10 -- - - -15 SOIL LOG I I I I EXPLORATION PIT NO. 3 SHEAR SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: Property Line LOT26& 26 Torvane DENSITY WAl'ER DESCRIPTION /psi pel % CUT AREA for SITE GRADING DRY_ ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf ML SANDY SILT LOW DENSITY ND" 88.3 10.1% Ill COLLAPSIBLE STRATA DRY ST 6.2% STRATIFIED MEDIUM DENSITY 5 10Q.4 9.6% NO - - --w- ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE-= 15 Pit Total Depth: 5' NO Free Water Ourong Observatoon: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. EXPLORATION PIT NO. 4 SHEAR SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: Property Line LOT 27 & 28 Torvane DENSITY WATER DESCRIPTION lpsf pel % CUT AREA for SITE GRADING SI.DAMP ML SANDY SILT Ill COLLAPSIBLE STRATA Slrala of LOW DENSITY MOIST NO 89.1 19.5% ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf DRY ST 84.1 9.0% STRATIFIED ____§ -MOISTURE ACCUMULATION ABOVE 3' 10 -ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE-- 15 Pot Total Depth: 3' NO Free Water During Observatton: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. LOG OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction, Colorado VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Pbase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado Job No. Drawn 92355-GJ EMM Date 6-17-2006 2 H .) DEPT (FT SOIL LOG EXPLORATION PIT NO. 5 PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: Property Una LOT 14 & 15 DESCRIPTION SHEAR SOIL Torvane DENSITY WATER Ips! pel % -1i·~ CL MAN-MADE FILL MEDIUM DENSITY ND 110.3 11.2% DRY ST 106.8 6.9% -ML SANDY SILT LOW DENSITY -Ill COLLAPSIBLE STRATA ND 89.1 12.7% -5 -- - - -10 -- - - -15 TH DEP (FT SOIL .) OG -I' _I I -I I 5 -, I --I -I I - -10 - - - - -15 STRATIFIED 5 10 ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE 15 P1t Total Depth: ' 3 NO Free Water During Observation: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. EXPLORATION PIT NO. 6 SHEAR SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: NORTH PORTION, LOT 23 Torvane DENSITY WATER DESCRIPTION psf pcf % ML SANDY SILT LOW DENSITY Ill COLLAPSIBLE STRATA Sl. DAMP ND 89.6 18.1% ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf ST 15.6% MEDIUM DENSIT'!'-5 STRATIFIED Slrata of LOW DENSITY ML SANDY SILT DRY~ 92.2 8.1% Ill COLLAPSIBLE STRATA MEDIUM DENSITY ST 96.6 4.6% 10 ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE 15 P1! Total Depth: 8' NO Free Water During Observation: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN • DeVORE, Inc. Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction, Colorado LOG OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Grand Junction, ColQrado Job No. Drawn 92355-GJ EMM Date 6-17-2006 3 TH DEP (FT .) SOIL LOG _I I I -I I - -I I 5 -- - - -10 -- - - -15 DEPT (FT H SOIL .) LOG EXPLORATION PIT NO. 7 SHEAR SOIL PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: Property Line LOT 22 & 23 Torvane DENSITY WATER DESCRIPTION psf pcf % CUT AREA for SITE GRADING ML SANDY SILT Ill COLLAPSIBLE STRATA NO_ 92.2 9.4% ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf ST 81.1 13.4% Sl. EXPANSIVE STRATA@ 4' 645 psf@ 2.1% Swell 5 93.2 6.0% 107.5 6.9% 10 ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE 15 Pit Total Depth: 4' NO Free Water Dunng Observation: 5·1 0-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. EXPLORATION PIT NO. 8 SHEAR SOIL PIT lOCATION & ELEV.: Property Line LOT20 & 21 Torvane DENSITY WATER DESCRIPTION psf I pct % -~~ MAN·MADE FILL CL LEAN CLAY Sl. SANDY MEDIUM DENSITY Sl. DAMP ~ 95.8 15.2% -II S/. EXPANSIVE STRATA@ 2' 286 psf@ 0.7% Swell .§I_ 106.3 13.2% -Strata of LOW DENSITY NO 89.3 11.5% -ML SANDY SILT MEDIUM DENSITY DRY 5 99.2 4.7% 5 -- - - -10 --- - -15 Ill COLLAPSIBLE STRATA ST ALLUV/AUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf 10 ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE ND NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE 15 P1t Total Depth: 4' NO Free Water During Observation: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. LOG OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN • DeVORE, Inc. Geotechnical Consultants Orand Junction, Colorado VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado Job No. Drawn 92355-GJ EMM Date 6-17-2006 4 I I ., I i l i I TH DEP (FT .) so JL LOG -· - - .-5 ·- - - - -10 -- - - -15 TH DEP (FT .) I I I "/ SOIL LOG -~ - -.-·-5 - - - -10 ·- - - - -15 EXPLORATION PIT NO. 9 SHEAR SOil PJT LOCATION & ELEV.: Property Line LOT 18 & 19 Torvane DENSITY WATER DESCRIPTION losf ocf % MAN-MADE FILL ML SANDY SILT LOW DENSITY SJ. DAMP II COLLAPSIBLE STRATA NO 87.6 14.9% ALLUVJAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf DRY ST 90.7 11.0% CL-ML SILTY CLAY LOW DENSITY 5 /Ia Sl. EXPANSIVE STRATA@ 5' 62 psf@ 0.3% Swell DRY ..!iQ__ 94.5 10.1% MEDIUM DENSITY ST 89.6 4.1% . Strata of LOW DENSITY 97.0 6.1% 10 ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE 15 Pit Total Depth: 5' NO Free Water Durmg Observation: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. E:XPLORATION PIT NO. 10 SHEAR SOil PIT LOCATION & ELEV.: Prooertv Line LOT 16 & 17 Torvane DENSITY WATER DESCRIPTION lost pel % MAN-MADE FILL NO 110.3 14.4% CL LEAN CLAY MEDIUM DENSITY SJ. DAMP I COMPRESSIBLE Strata of LOW DENSITY NO 87.5 19.6% ALLUVJAUDEBRJS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf ST 109.0 7.8% ML SANDY SILT MEDIUM DENSITY DRY 5 II COLLAPSIBLE STRATA __jQ ST SHELBY TUBE DENSITY/MOISTURE NO NUCLEAR DENSITOMETER DENSITY/MOISTURE 15 Pit Total Depth: 3-112' NO Free Water During Observation: 5-10-2006 Pit Excavated By: Tracked Excavator, Mountain Valley Construction, G.J. GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. Geotechnical Consultants Grand Junction, Colorado LOG OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa Colorado GRACE HOMES Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado Job No. Drawn 92355-GJ EMM Date 6-17-2006 5 ., Soil Sample: LEAN CLAY (CL) Sf. Sandy Sample No.: I (Typical) 1 GeololjiC Ori~in: ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf Test b~: LRS Natural Water Content (w): 10.7% Pit No.: 1 Depth: 5' In-Place Density (pel): 103.7 Soil Specific Gravity (Gs): Estimated COBBLE to GRAVEL SAND SILT!oCLAY 100 ·~ Effective size mm 00 Cu Cc 80 70 Plastic Limit (PL) j! Liquid Limit (LL) 30 "' 60 Plasticity Index (PI) 12 c . Skempton's Activity 0.3 ·u; ~50 Shrinkage Limit (SL) 0.. Shrinkage Ratio ~ 40 \ (j) 0.. 30 20 -DIRECT SHEAR: CD Peak Res. 10 Shear Angle: deg. Tan Shear: 0 Cohesion: psf 125 75 50 37.5 25 w, 12.5 9.5 4f:f 2 0.85 0.425 0.15 O.gj'&, 0.02 0.005 Particle Grain ize {mm} Sieve (mm) %Passing MOISTURE I DENSITY RELATIONSHIP: 5" 125 ASTM Method: D-698 A D 4718-0% Rock Correction 3" 75 Max. Dry Density : pel pel 2" 50 Optimum Moisture : 1-112" 37.5 Maximum HVEEM-CARMANY: FHA Soil Swell: 1" 25 Size AIIQ'iied 'R' Value @ 300 psi: Swell 314" 19 By SamQI~r Displacement 300 psi: psf 1/2" 12.5 2-1/2" Expansion @ 300 psi: psi Remolded Sample 3/8" 9.5 ALLOWABLE BEARING (net): psf by Consolidometer #4 4.75 Standard Penetration (SPT): psf by Penetrometer #10 2 Unconfined Compression (qu): est #20 0.85 COLLAPSE @Wetting: @ psf #40 0.425 100 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf #100 0.15 99 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf #200 O.D75 94.2 SULFATE SALTS: <50 ppm 0.02 42 PERMEABILITY: 0.005 30 K (20 C): Remolded em/sec @..__JJg SOIL ANALYSIS and SUMMARY VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa, Colorado GRAND JUNCTION GRACE HOMES Inc. Date LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Job No. Drawn Grand Junction, Colorado 92355-GJ EMM Soil Sample: LEAN CLAY (Cl) Sl. Sandy Sample No.: I (Typical) 2 Geoloaic Origin: MAN-MADE Fill From Alluvial Debris Fan Soils Test bt LRS Natural Water Content (w): 7.8% Pit No.: 10 Depth: 2' In-Place Density (pel): 109.0 Soil Specific Gravity (Gs): Estimated COBBLE to GRAVEL SAND SILT!o CLAY 100 - ....... Effective size mm 90 'I. Cu " Cc 60 Plastic limit (PL) 19 70 Liquid limit (ll) 35 OJ60 Plasticity Index (PI) 16 " Skempton's Activity M 'iii ~ 50 Shrinkage Limit (Sl) 0.. Shrinkage Ratio -1\. ijj 40 - ~ ...... ., 0.. 30 20 DIRECT SHEAR: CD Peak Res. 10 Shear Angle: deg. Tan Shear: 0 Cohesion: psf 125 75 50 37.5 2s 10, t2.5 9.5 •1r 2 o.65 0.425 o.t5 ow&, o.oz o.oos Particle Grain ize {mm} Sieve (mm) %Passing MOISTURE I DENSITY RELATIONSHIP: 5" 125 ASTM Method: D-698A D 4718-0% Rock Correction 3" 75 Max. Dry Density: pcf pcf 2" 50 Optimum Moisture : 1-1/2" 37.5 M~ximum HVEEM-CARMANY: FHA Soil Swell: 1" 25 !;lizeAIIowed 'R' Value @ 300 psi: Swell 3/4" 19 B~ Samgler Displacement 300 psi: psf 1/2" 12.5 2-1/2" Expansion @ 300 psi: psi Remolded Sample 3/8" 9.5 AllOWABLE BEARING (net): psf by Consolidometer #4 4.75 Standard Penetration (SPT): psi by Penetrometer #10 2 100 Unconfined Compression (qu): est #20 0.85 98 COLLAPSE@ Wetting: @ psf #40 0.425 97 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf #100 0.15 94 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf #200 O.Q75 85.3 SULFATE SALTS: ~ ppm 0.02 44 PERMEABILITY: 0.005 34 K (20 C): Remolded em/sec ~ SOIL ANALYSIS and SUMMARY VALLEY VIEW VJLLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa, Colorado GRAND JUNCTION GRACE HOMES Inc. Date LINCOLN • DeVORE, Inc. Grand Jnnction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Job No. Drawn Grand Junction, Colorado 92355-GJ EMM Soil Sample: LEAN CLAY (CL) $1. Sandy Sample No.: II (fypical) 3 Geologic Origin: MAN-MADE FILL From Alluvial Debris Fan Soils Test by: LRS Nalural Water Content (w): 13.2% Pit No.: 8 Depth: 2' In-Place Density (pcf): 106.3 Soil Specific Gravity (Gs): Estimated COBBLE to GRAVEL SAND S!LT!oCLAY 100 1'-, Effective size mm 90 \ Cu Cc 80 ' 70- Plastic Limit (PL) 20 1\ Liquid Limit (LL) 29 0)60 Plasticity Index (PI) i " \ Skempton's Activity 0.2 "iii m so -Shrinkage Limit (SL) a. -\. Shrinkage Ratio ID 4o 0 \ ~ "' a. 30 20 DIRECT SHEAR: CD Peak Res. 10 Shear Angle: deg. Tan Shear: 0 125 75 50 37.5 25 P1?, 12.5 9.5 4.~ 2 0.85 0.425 0.15 0.~ 0.02 0.005 Cohesion: psf article Grain ize {mm} Sieve (mm) %Passing MOISTURE I DENSITY RELATIONSHIP: 5" 125 ASTM Method; D-698 A D 4718-0% Rock Correction 3" 75 Max. Dry Density : pcf pcf 2" 50 Optimum Moisture : 1-1/2" 37.5 Maxi!JlY!ll HVEEM-CARMANY: FHA Soil Swell: 1" 25 Size AllO:t<S:Q 'R' Value @ 300 psi: 0.7% Swell 314" 19 B~Sam~l~r Displacement 300 psi: 286 psf 1/2" 12.5 2-1/2" Expansion @ 300 psi; psf Remolded Sample 318" 9.5 ALLOWABLE BEARING (net): psf by Consolidometer #4 4.75 Standard Penetration (SPT): psf by Penetrometer #10 2 100 Unconfined Compression (qu): psf #20 0.85 99 COLLAPSE @Wetting: @ psf #40 0.425 98 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf #100 0.15 94 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf #200 0.075 73.2 SULFATE SALTS: <50 ppm 0.02 44 PERMEABILITY: 0.005 32 K (20 C): Remolded em/sec @...Jl&f SOIL ANALYSIS and SUMMARY VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D I Battlement Mesa, Colorado GRAND JUNCTION GRACE HOMES Inc. Date LINCOLN -DeVORE, Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Job No. Drawn Grand Junction, Colorado 92355-GJ EMM Soil Sample: SILTY CLAY (CL-ML) Sl. Sandy Sample No.: Jla (Typical) 5 Geolo9ic Ori9in: ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf Test b~: LRS Natural Water Content (w): 4.1% Boring Nclo.: 9 Depth: 6' In-Place Density (pel): 89.6 Soil Specific Gravity (Gs): Estimated COBBLE to GRAVEL SAND SILT to~'-'" 100 r--., 1'\.' Effective size mm 90 'r.... Cu Cc 80 \ Plastic Limit (PL) 22 70 Liquid Limit (LL) 28 .. rnBO Plasticity Index (PI) .2 c \ Skempton's Activity .!!J 'iii ~50 \ Shrinkage Limit (SL) a. Shrinkage Ratio -@ 40-\ (J) f---n. 30 20 DIRECT SHEAR: CD . I . Peak Res. 10 Shear Angle: deg. Tan Shear: 0 Cohesion: psf 125 75 50 37.5 25 ~ 12.5 9.5 4.it 2 0.85 0.425 0.15 O.g],)l, 0.02 0.005 rticle Grain ize {mm} Sieve (mm) %Passing MOISTURE I DENSITY RELATIONSHIP: 5" 125 ASTM Method: ~ D 4718-0% Rock Correction 3" 75 Max. Dry Density : pel pel 2" 50 Optimum Moisture : 1-1/2" 37.5 M9ximum HVEEM-CARMANY: FHA Soil Swell: 1" 25 Size Alloweg 'R' Value @ 300 psi: 0.3% Swell 3/4" 19 B~ §amgler Displacement 300 psi: 62 psi 1/2" 12.5 2-1/2" Expansion @ 300 psi: psi Remolded Sample 3/8" 9.5 ALLOWABLE BEARING (net): psf by Consolldometer #4 4.75 Standard Penetration (SPT): psi by Penetrometer #10 2 100 Unconfined Compression (qu): est #20 0.85 99 COLLAPSE@ Wetting: @ psi #40 0.425 95 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf #100 0.15 87 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf #200 0.075 75.4 SULFATE SALTS: <SO ppm 0.02 40 PERMEABILITY: 0.005 28 K (20 C): Remolded em/sec @...J12f SOIL ANALYSIS and SUMMARY VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa, Colorado GRAND JUNCTION GRACE HOMES Inc. Dale LINCOLN ·DeVORE, Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Job No. Drawn Grand Junction, Colorado 92355-GJ EMM Soil Sample: LOW PLASTIC SILT (ML) Sl. Sandy Sample No.: Ill (Typical) 4 Geologic Origin: ALLUVIAUDEBRIS FAN DEPOSITS, Qa/Qdf Test b~: LRS Natural Water Content (w): 6.0% Pit No.: 7 Depth: 3' In-Place Denstly (pcf): 93.2 Soil Sp_ecific GravltyLGs): Estimated COBBLE to GRAVEL SAND SILT to CLAY too -. Effective size mm 90 ' Cu Cc 80 70 Plastic limit (PL) ~ Liquid limit (LL) ~ 0> 60-Plasticity Index (PI) ~ <:: Skempton's Activity 0.1 'iii ~50 Shrinkage Limit (SL) 0.. Shrinkage Ratio -~ 40 \. OJ 0.. 30-\ 20 --DIRECT SHEAR: CD . Peak Res. 10 -Shear Angle: deg. Tan Shear: 0 Cohesion: psf 125 75 50 37.5 25 w, t2.5 9.5 ··~ 2 o.s5 0.425 o.t5 o.g]&, o.o2 o.oo5 Particle Grain ize {mm} Sieve (mm) %Passing MOISTURE I DENSITY RELATIONSHIP: 5" 125 ASTM Method: D-698A D 4718-0% Rock Correction 3" 75 Max. Dry Density : pcf pcf 2" 50 Optimum Moisture : 1-112'' 37.5 Maximum HVEEM-CARMANY: FHA Soli Swell: 1" 25 Size Allowed 'R' Value @ 300 psi: 2.1% Swell 314" 19 B~ S~mgler Displacement 300 psi: 645 psf 112" 12.5 2-112" Expansion @ 300 psi: psi Remolded Sample 3/8" 9.5 ALLOWABLE BEARING (net): psi by Consolidometer #4 4.75 Standard Penetration (SPT): psf by Penetrometer #10 2 100 Unconfined Compression (qu): ~sf #20 0.85 98 COLLAPSE @Wetting: @ psf #40 0.425 97 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf #100 0.15 95 CONSOLIDATION: @ psf #200 0.075 86.6 SULFATE SALTS: ~ ppm 0.02 36 PERMEABILITY: 0.005 22 K (20 C): Remolded em/sec @___Qf! SOIL ANALYSIS and SUMMARY VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE, Phase C & D Battlement Mesa, Colorado GRAND JUNCTION GRACE HOMES Inc. Date LINCOLN • DeVORE, Inc. Grand Junction, Colorado 6-17-2006 Geotechnical Consultants Job No. Drawn ~: l I Grand Junction, Colorado 92355-GJ EMM I ' VAlLEY VIEW Sub. BATTLEMENT MESA. CO. FILLED SLOPE OVERLOOKINtJ STORU DETENTION POND 923-551rliga1ed.gsz 6J27noo6 SEEP TraMiilnt 20 ",L-~,.--wL_~,.~~L_~'"~'~"~M~M~~~~,oo~'~'"~"~"-'~'"~,~~'~'"~''"~'~'"~"~"~'~oo~m~,=,.~~=L.-,~~~,oo~! FEET-View is lo West BASIC PROBLEM SLOPE OVERLOOKING IRE STORM WATER DETENTION POND, SEEP\W ANALYSIS VALLEY VIEW Sub. 8AffiEMENT MESA, CO. FILLED SLOPE OVERLOOKING STORM DETENTION POND 92355 Stabilize lnigaled.gsz 612712008 SEEP Transient 20 10 00 eo 70 0 0 o 10 w oo ~ ~ oo ro oo oo 100 110 1m 100 1~ m * 1ro 100 100 ~ 210 ~ ~ ~ ~ FEET -View is to West SEEP\ W ANALYSIS The Site has been developed, the Yard areas are Landscaped and HEAVILY IRRIGATED. Standing Water is in Front Yard and Seepage is occurring on Slope leading to the Pond. The Storm Water Detention Pond is heavily used, due to Storm Runoff and Irrigation Runoff. 1be soils beneath the Pond and at the Toe of the Slope are SATURATED in about 20 feet into the TOE. GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN DeVORE, Inc. GEUfECHNICALENGlNEERS-GEOLOGISTS Figure I VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE Phase C & D GJLD # 92355-GJ, June 28,2006 .. ~ + VAllEY VIEW Sub. BA.Tl'\.a.1ENT MESA. CO. FltlEO SLOPE OVERLOOKING STORM DETENTION POND 92l55 Stablllz& ln!slaledSiope.gaz M8/2000 SLOP!': l.lorgen51~m-PIIce 20 .. . . . . ·-'12~ . . . • 10 w m ~ w M ro w ~ 100 tm m ~~ ~~ 100 100 tro 100 1~ m ~ m w m FEET • View is to West 00 ro SLOPE\ W ANALYSIS The previous SEEP\ W analysis was utilized for the soil moisture parameters and the most extensive failure at or near a Factor of Safety of!. (F.S. = 1.023) is shown. We recommend the Pond Sides be well compacted, to prevent this modeled deep penetration of water into the Slope Toe. VAlLEY VIEW Sub. BATilEUENT MEI>A. CO. FlllEO SLOPE OVERLOOKING STORM OETENTION POND 92355 stabit;ze trrlgmed Sklpe.gu 6128120CI(l SLOPE Morgens1ern-Pnca 20 • • • • • . • • • . . • .Ufl# . • • to ~ w ~ oo ro ro w ~ 100 tro w tw ~ tro roo rro roo too m ~o m ~ m FEET-View is to west SLOPE\W ANALYSIS The previous SEEP\W analysis was utilized for the soil moisture parameters and the most extensive failure at or near a Factor of Safety of 1.5 (F.S. = 1.494) is shown. The computed failure surface is more than 40 feet from the structure and foundation. GRAND JUNCTION LINCOLN DeVORE, Inc. GEO'IT~ICAL ENGINEERS-GEOLOGISTS Figure II VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE Phase C & D GJLD # 92355-GJ, June 28, 2006 I l I f I ~ ~ Ooo "' '""' '''''" Lower Valle~ Engineering S70-243-84SS Lower Valley Engineering and Consulting, Inc. 569 South Westgate Drive, Suite 2 Grand Junction, Colorado 81505 Ph (970) 243-8778 Fax ('170) 243·8199 Garfield County Building Department Fax: 970-384-3470 12-04-07 RE: 4 Plex at 0044-0050 Cliff View Circle, Grace Homes Valley View Village Subdivision, Battlement Mesa, Colorado. Building Department: I have been retained by Grace Homes to provide engineering services for the above referenced project. I have supervised inspection of the foundations and walls prior to concrete placement to ensure conformance with the drawings that I prepared and were submitted for permit. The foundations are structurally adequate to satisfY the building codes currently adopted by Garfield County. Please contact me ifthere are any questions concerning this project. Signed, DarrenR. Adams, P. E. F • 1 COUNTY OF GARFIELD -BUILDING DEPARTMENT CORRECTION NOTICE 108 8th St., Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Colorado Phone (970) 945-8212 Job I ocated at -"'CO=· L-0_._l!_-_ __,D"-'CJ~50-=--~=';I'I·'""K--"~'-"~""'~IJ_d ,_c/"'-. Perm it No. -LAv'{) .... Z-""8.ub""----'-:.___.!_I~O""Z$=---Cf-L-_____ _ I have this day inspected this structure and these premises and found the following corrections needed: ~~/Wf J~ 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 _.'---1-/----"--8_ ~-/,____,___/ ----+.£\;:'-+-,/ 0 :3{)} Building Inspector __ __,.l'fceUI-q,<t,-'!7-L1.11<>~./k'*--------- Phone (970) 945-8212 /08&0 No. _J_~~~~~------ IXTIRIOR Address No.------------- Drainage-------------- Decks-support & clearance to wood ------ Decks-stairs & ralls----------- Exterior locks---~------- Flashing around doors & windows------- Insect screens------------ INTERIOR GARAGE Fire wall separation __________ _ Service doors-Hi" min.---------- Door (20 min.) w/auto closer-H'" min. _____ _ Mech. equip. 18" above floor _______ _ No opening into sleeping area _______ _ BASEMENT·CRAWL AREA Access ______________ _ Insulation-------------- Headroom/Stairs ___________ _ Ventilation------------- Assessor's Parcel NodfD?-/[f{D?r-nf1? Date I-s: a .£__ Lo-\ a~ 1}.\f-Uiil~~ ?he FINAL CHECKLIST MECHANICAL ROOM BoUer ___________ _ Hot water _________ _ F.A gas/oil _________ _ Floor dralno _________ _ Clearance _________ _ Air con. system ________ _ Hot water heater-------- Combustion air'--------- Gas piping, valves _______ _ LPG Drain---------- FIREPLACE/STOVE Clearance to combustibles _____ _ Termination of chimney• ______ _ Combustion air ________ _ Hearth (12" or 20" on sides)----- Glass doors _________ _ Certified by: _________ _ REMARKS (continue on back) STAIRWAYS Headroom (6'6'') ---------- Railing & guardrails --------- Width ____________ _ Rise & run------------ KITCHEN Clearance above grill ________ _ Exhaust fan __________ _ Broiler exhaust (1 hr. chase)------- BEDROOMS Egress ____________ _ Smoke detector __________ _ BATHROOMS Exhaust fan. ___________ _ Shatterproof glass _________ _ OTHER 1\. 0 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 Issued.f::S.~.C.1 .•• Zoned Area •..•......••..................• Permit No ... J.o.a~ ..... . 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 . • Setbacks Front Side Sjde Rear Tbis Card Must Be Posted So It is Plainly Visible From Tbe Street Until Final Inspection. INSPECTION RECORD Footing Driveway Foundation tv L b-'1 -07 "?<-«--- Underground Plumbing l!;-oJ ~ Insulation 1-!:3-{) 1 il)m Rough Plumbing &-1-0'1 Qh l Drywall 9-/9-&7 /JI;A._ Chimney & Vent k-../0.;/[1 Electric Final (by State Inspector) ';?'~/ / Gas Piping 'l)-q-o7 .:fs.k Final ;;Z. -/;7. • o 7 ;{)11<-~ Electric Rough (By State Inspector) )(:-( Septic Final ~ Framing n1_:IO-o1 ~- (To include Roof in place and Windows and Doors instaUed). Notes: /~ ;:"'; Jf · tJI< h!WJ fo-;so <n ;!..&. 1 r.M-«J ' b"" ~ (,p -l't ·01 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 Call 384-5003 108 8th Street Glenwood Springs, Colorado APPROVEDDO NOT DESTROY THIS CARD Datel•5•07 By o/-ra IF PLACED OUTSIDE-COVER WITH CLEAR PLASTIC Parcel Detail Page 1 of 3 Garfield County Assessor/Treasurer Parcel Detail Information Assessor!freaS!lrerProp~rtySe<lrc;h I Assessor Substl.Query I Assessor Sales Search C!erk_&_Rec:onlerReception_Sean.:h I?.a.sk:Bui]dingChan.Kteristics I Taxlnformmion Parcel Detail I Value Detail I Sales Detail I Residential/Commercial Improvement Detail Land Detail I Photographs I TaxArea II Account Number II Parcel Number II Mill Levy I I o8o II R043096 II 240718104023 II 39.826 I Owner Name and Mailing Address IDARTERLLC I 1786 VALLEY COURT I !GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81505 I Legal Description ISECT,TWN,RNG:18-7-95 SUB:VALLEY !VIEW VILLAGE SUB PHASES C & D ILOT:23 PRE:R040986 BK:586 PG:524 IBK:0615 PG:0487 BK:1831 PG:941 IRECPT:704369 BK:1812 PG:167 IRECPT:700392 BK:1807 PG:663 I IRECPT:699425 BK: 1767 PG:909 I IRECPT:691345 BK:1767 PG:899 I IRECPT:691343 BK:1767 PG:887 I IRECPT:691342 BK:1756 PG:427 I IRECPT:688665 BK: 1756 PG:422 I IRECPT:688664 BK: 1754 PG:986 I IRECPT:688326 BK:1546 PG:979 I IRECPT:643048 BK:1546 PG:964 I IRECPT:643045 BK:1546 PG:954 I IRECPT:643041 BK:1546 PG:946 I http://www .garcoact.com/assessor/parcel.asp?Parce1Number=2407181 04023 12/28/2006 Parcel Detail ' ' IRECPT:643039 BK:1518 PG:822 IRECPT:636574 BK:0748 PG:0893 IBK:0642 PG:0065 BK:0641 PG:0278 Location Physical Address: II Is CLIFF VIEW CIR PARACHUTE! Subdivision: I VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE SUB PHASESC&D Land Acres: 111.117 I · Land Sq Ft: I 0 Section II Township II Range I 18 II 7 II 95 I Property Tax Valuation Information II Actual Value II Assessed Value I I Land: 64,68011 I Improvements: II Oil I Total: 64,68011 l lli==========S~ale~D~a~te~: I I Sale Price: I Basic Building Characteristics Number of Residential 0 Buildings: Number of Comm/Ind lo Buildings: No Building Records Found Tax Information No Tax Records Found IopotPage 18,7601 0 18,7601 I A~sessor Data\)<.lse Search Options I TreasllrerDatf!Pase SearcbQptions Clerk & Recorder Database Search Options http://www .garcoact.corn/assessor/parcel.asp?ParcelNumber=2407181 04023 Page 2 of 3 12/28/2006