Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 ApplicationSTEVEN M. BEATTIE GLENN D. CHADWICK JEFFERSON V. HOUPT JULIE S. HANSON JAMIE ROTH BEATTIE, CHADWICK & HOUPT, LLP ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 932 COOPER AVENUE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 October 8, 2007 Garfield County Building & Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 TELEPHONE: 970-945-8659 FAX: 970-945-8671 JHANSON@BEAT IECHADWICK.COM Re: Narrative of Request for Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision 1605 Highway 133, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Parcel Number: 246303200005 (the "Property") Dear Planning Department: This firm represents TLCCO, Inc. ("TLCCO") with regard to an application for Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision. TLCCO is a family corporation consisting of four siblings and is the owner of the above referenced property located in the "County Island". The Property is the remnant of a family homestead that once dominated the Carbondale area and included the Hendrick Ranch, most of River Valley Ranch and the former Big 4 Ranch. TLCCO is in the process of dissolving the corporation and liquidating its assets. TLCCO desires to split the Property into Lot 1 (7.04 acres) and Lot 2 (2.36 acres). Lot 1 is currently under contract with Cerise Park, LLC ("Cerise Park") and closing is contingent upon the approval of this subdivision exemption. Lew Ron Thompson ("Thompson"), a TLCCO shareholder, will retain Lot 2. It is anticipated that both lots will be annexed into the Town of Carbondale and that the annexation process will begin upon completion of the subdivision exemption and the sale. The Property consists of irrigated pasture, three residential units and a number of agricultural structures. The first residence is a brick house built in the late 1890's which functioned as the main ranch house for decades. It currently has Town of Carbondale water service, though it has been unoccupied for many years. The second residence is a carriage house also served by Town water. Both of these structures are on Lot 1. Upon annexation to the Town of Carbondale, the ranch house and carriage house will also be served by the Town wastewater. Lot 2 houses Thompson's cabin which was moved from the west side of the Crystal River by River Valley Ranch. It is served by Town water and wastewater. The Subdivision Exemption Plat depicts an existing 12' Gravel Road. This will continue to be the access to Lot 2 after the sale of Lot 1. Cerise Park and Thompson are in the process of negotiating a temporary access easement for that purpose. At completion of development of Lot 1, it is anticipated that the temporary access easement will terminate and the access will be dedicated to the Town of Carbondale as a public right of way. Enclosed are the following documents: • Application for Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision • Subdivision Exemption Plat with Vicinity Map • Quit Claim deed dated March 1, 1986 from Lewis R. Thompson to TLCCO, Inc. • List of Adjacent Property Owners and Mineral Rights Owners • Evidence of soil types: Two soils reports of adjacent properties are included. • Proof of legal source of water for each lot and method of sewage disposal— Letter from the Town of Carbondale • Approval of Fire Protection Plan — Letter from Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District • Demonstration of existence of parcel in January 1, 1973 • Payment for $300.00 base fee Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or require more information. Enclosures Cc: TLCCO, Inc. Cerise Park, LLC 2 Very truly yours, \J . Gv1'\j f.7'eA. Julie S. Hanson GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone: 970.945.8212 Facsimile: 970.384.3470 www.garfield-county.com OCT 0 8 2007 Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision GENERAL INFORMATION (To be completed by the applicant.) > Street Address / General Location of Property: 1605 Highway 133, Carbondale, CO 81623 within the "County Island" > Legal Description of Parent Property: see attached "Schedule A" > Size of Property (in acres) as of January 1, 1973: Approximately 9.04 Acres > Current Size of Property to be Subdivided (in acres): Approximately 9.40 Acres > Number of Tracts / Lots Created Including remainder of Parent Property: 2 > Proposed size of Tracts / Lots to be Created Including remainder of Parent Property: o Lot #: 1 containing 7.04 acres o Lot #: 2 containing 2.36 acres o Lot #: containing acres o Lot #: containing acres o Lot #: containing - acres ➢ Property's Zone District: A/R/RD :> Name of Property Owner (Applicant): TLCCO, Inc. > Address: 0028 Cheyln Road Telephone: (970) 379-0726 > City: Glenwood Springs State: co Zip Code: 81601 FAX: > Name of Owner's Representative, if any (Planner, Attorney): Julie Hanson, Beattie, Chadwick & Houpt, LLP Address: 932 Cooper Avenue Telephone: (970) 945-8659 > City:Glenwood Springs State: COZip Code: 81601 FAX: (970) 945-8f STAFF USE ONLY Doc. No.: Date Submitted: TC Date: • • I. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS As a minimum, an applicant requesting an Exemption from the Definition from Subdivision ("Exemption") shall specifically respond to all the following items below and attach any additional information to be submitted with this application: 1. Provide a narrative explaining why exemption is being requested. 2. Sketch map at a minimum scale of 1"=200' showing the legal description of the property, dimension, area, and legal description of all proposed lots or separate interests to be created, access to a public right-of-way, and any proposed easements for drainage, irrigation, access or utilities. 3. Vicinity map at a minimum scale of 1"=2000' showing the general topographic and geographic relation of the proposed exemption to the surrounding area within two (2) miles, for which a copy of U.S.G.S. quadrangle map may be used. 4. Copy of the deed showing ownership by the applicant, or a letter from the property owner(s) if other than the applicant. 5. Submit a copy of the appropriate portion of a Garfield County Assessor's Map showing the subject property and all public and private landowners adjacent to your property (which should be delineated). In addition, submit a list of all property owners, private and public, and their addresses adjacent to or within 200 ft. of the site. This information can be obtained from the County Assessor's Office. You will also need the names (if applicable) of all mineral interest owners of the subject property, identified in the County Clerk and Recorder's records in accordance with §24-65.5-101, et seq. (That information may be found in your title policy under Exceptions to Title). 6. Evidence of soil types and characteristics of each type located on the property. 7. Provide proof of legal and adequate source of domestic water for each lot created. 8. Method of sewage disposal. 9. Provide a letter of approval of fire protection plan from the appropriate fire district in which the subject property is located. 10. If connection to a community or municipal water or sewer system is proposed, submit a letter from the governing body stating a willingness to serve the property. 11. It shall be demonstrated that the parcel existed as described on January 1, 1973 or the parcel as it exists presently is one of not more than three parcels created from a larger parcel, as it existed on January 1, 1973. 12. A $300.00 Base Fee: Applicant shall sign the Agreement for Payment form and provide the fee with the application. 13. Submit 2 copies of this completed application form and all the required submittal materials to the Building and Planning Department. Staff will request additional copies once the Exemption application has been deemed technically complete. 2 • • II. EXEMPTION APPLICABILITY Pursuant to section 8:50 of the Subdivision Regulations, the Board of County Commissioners has the discretionary power to exempt a division of land from the definition of subdivision and, thereby, from the procedure in these Regulations, provided the Board of County Commissioners determines that such exemption will not impair or defeat the stated purpose of the Subdivision Regulations nor be detrimental to the general public welfare. The Board has determined that leases, easements and other similar interests in Garfield County owned property, land for oil and gas facilities, and an accessory dwelling unit or two family dwelling that are subject to leasehold interest only and complying with the requirements of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, are exempt from these regulations. A. No more than a total of four (4) lots, parcels, interests or dwelling units will be created from any parcel, as that parcel was described in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder's Office on January 1, 1973. In order to qualify for exemption, the parcel as it existed on January 1, 1973, must have been 35 acres or greater in size at the time and not a part of a recorded subdivision; however, any parcel to be divided by exemption that is split by a public right-of-way (State or Federal highway, County road or railroad), preventing joint use of the proposed tracts, and the division occurs along the public right- of-way, such parcels thereby created may, at the discretion of the Board, not be considered to have been created by exemption with regard to the four (4) lot, parcel, interest or dwelling unit limitation otherwise applicable. For the purposes of definition, all tracts of land 35 acres or greater in size, created after January 1, 1973 will count as parcels of land created by exemption since January 1, 1973. B. All Garfield County zoning requirements will be met. C. All lots created will have legal access to a public right-of-way and any necessary access easements have been obtained or are in the process of being obtained. D. Provision has been made for an adequate source of water in terms of the legal and physical quality, quantity and dependability, and a suitable type of sewage disposal to serve each proposed lot. Proof of a legal supply shall be an approved substitute water supply plan contract; augmentation plan; an approved well permit; legally adjudicated domestic water source or a contract for a permanent legal supply of domestic water to be hauled from an outside site for a cistern. Proof of the physical supply from a well for the public meeting, may be documentation from the Division of Water Resources that demonstrates that there are wells within a 1/4 mile of the site producing at least five (5) gallons/minute. Prior to the signing of a plat, all physical water supplies using a well shall demonstrate the following: 1) That a four (4) hour pump test be performed on the well to be used. 3 • • 2) A well completion report demonstrating the depth of the well, the characteristics of the aquifer and the static water level; 3) The results of the four (4) hour pump test indicating the pumping rate in gallons per minute and information showing draw down and recharge; 4) A written opinion of the person conducting the well test that this well should be adequate to supply water to the number of proposed lots; 5) An assumption of an average or no less than 3.5 people per dwelling unit, using 100 gallons of water per person, per day; 6) If the well is to be shared, a legal, well sharing agreement which discusses all easements and costs associated with the operation and maintenance of the system and who will be responsible for paying these costs and how assessments will be made for these costs. 7) The water quality is tested by an approved testing laboratory and meet State guidelines concerning bacteria and nitrates. For water supplies based on the use of cistern, the tank shall be a minimum of 1000 gallons. E. Method of sewage disposal, and a letter of approval of the fire protection plan from the appropriate fire district. F. All State and local environmental health and safety requirements have been met or are in the process of being met. G. Provision has been made for any required road or storm drainage improvements. H. Fire protection has been approved by the appropriate fire district. I. Any necessary drainage, irrigation or utility easements have been obtained or are in the process of being obtained. J. All applicable taxes and special assessments have been paid. III. PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS (The following steps outline how the Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision application review process works in Garfield County.) 1. Submit 2 copies of this completed application form (pages 1-6) including all submittal requirements and the base fee to the Garfield County Planning Department. It will be received and given to a Staff Planner who will review the application for technical completeness within 15 working days. The Planning Department may request an extension of time from the Board of County Commissioners for such review not to exceed an additional fifteen (15) working days. 2. Once the application is deemed technically complete, the Staff Planner will send you a letter indicating the application is complete in addition to requesting additional copies of the 4 • • application to be provided to the Board of County Commissioners for their review in preparation for the public hearing. 3. Staff will also send you a "Public Notice Form(s)" indicating the time and date of your hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. Prior to the public hearing, Staff will provide you with a Staff Memorandum regarding your requested Exemption application. (If Staff determines you application to be deficient, a letter will be sent to you indicating that additional information is needed to deem your application complete.) 4. It is solely the Applicant's responsibility to ensure proper noticing occurs regarding the petition for an Exemption for the public hearing. If proper notice has not occurred, the public hearing will not occur. Notice requirements are as follows: a. Notice by publication, including the name of the applicant, description of the subject lot, a description of the proposed Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision and nature of the hearing, and the date, time and place for the hearing shall be given once in a newspaper of general circulation in that portion of the County in which the subject property is located at least thirty (30) but not more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of such hearing, and proof of publication shall be presented at hearing by the applicant. b. Notice by mail, containing information as described in the paragraph above, shall be mailed to all owners of record as shown in the County Assessor's Office of lots within two hundred feet (200') of the subject lot and to all owners of mineral interest in the subject property at least thirty (30) but not more than sixty (60) days prior to such hearing time by certified return receipt mail, and receipts shall be presented at the hearing by the applicant. c. The site shall be posted such that the notice is clearly and conspicuously visible from a public right-of-way, with notice signs provided by the Planning Department. The posting must take place at least thirty (30) but not more than sixty (60) days prior to the hearing date and is the sole responsibility of the applicant to post the notice, and ensure that it remains posted until and during the date of the hearing. 5. The Applicant is required to appear before the Board of County Commissioners at the time and date of the public hearing at which time the Board will consider the request for Exemption for the subject property. In addition, the Applicant shall provide proof at the hearing that proper notice was provided. 6. At or within fifteen (15) days of the meeting, the Board shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the exemption request. The reasons for denial, or any conditions of approval, shall be set forth in the minutes of the meeting or in a written Resolution. An applicant denied exemption may follow the subdivision procedure in these Regulations. 7. Once the Board makes a decision regarding the request for an Exemption, Staff will provide the Applicant with a letter affirming the action taken by the Board with a list of conditions, if any, to be completed by the applicant. 8. A plat of an approved or conditionally approved exemption shall be presented to the Board for signature within 120 days of approval. The plat shall include a legal description of the 5 • • exempted property, and Exemption Certificate, the County Surveyor's Certificate and a statement, if four (4) lots, parcels, or interest have been created on the parcel, that "NOTE: No further divisions by exemption from definition will be allowed." The plat shall be recorded with the County Clerk and Recorder no later than thirty (30) days after the Chairman's signature. The Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners shall not sign a plat of a conditionally approved exemption until all conditions of approval have been complied with. 9. The Applicant shall be required to submit a paper copy of the plat and proof that all the conditions of approval have been met to the Building and Planning Department at least twenty-one (21) days prior to the expiration of the 120 -day deadline required for signing the plat by the Board. This is to ensure timely Staff review of the materials submitted as well as proper scheduling the plat to be signed by the board. 10.Once all of the conditions, if any, have been satisfied, an Exemption Plat shall be presented to the Board for signature within 120 days of approval. The plat shall include a legal description of the exempted property, and Exemption Certificate, the County Surveyor's Certificate and a statement, if four (4) lots, parcels, or interest have been created on the parcel, that "NOTE: No further divisions by exemption from definition will be allowed." The plat shall be recorded with the County Clerk and Recorder no later than thirty (30) days after the Chairman's signature. The Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners shall not sign a plat of a conditionally approved exemption until all conditions of approval have been complied with. I have read the statements above and have provided the required attached information which is correct and accurate to the best of my knowledge. /4411 (Signature of Property Owner) Date Last Revised: 07/2007 6 • • GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE Garfield County, pursuant to Board of County Commissioners ("Board") Resolution No. 98-09, has established a fee structure ("Base Fee") for the processing of each type of subdivision and land use applications. The Base Fee is an estimate of the average number of hours of staff time devoted to an application, multiplied by an hourly rate for the personnel involved. The Board recognized that the subdivision and land use application processing time will vary and that an applicant should pay for the total cost of the review which may require additional billing. Hourly rates based on the hourly salary, and fringe benefits costs of the respective positions combined with an hourly overhead cost for the office will be used to establish the actual cost of County staff time devoted to the review of a particular project. Actual staff time spent will be charged against the Base Fee. After the Base Fee has been expended, the applicant will be billed based on actual staff hours accrued. Any billing shall be paid in full prior to final consideration of any land use permit, zoning amendment or subdivision plan. If an applicant has previously failed to pay application fees as required, no new or additional applications will be accepted for processing until the outstanding fees are paid. Checks, including the appropriate Base Fee set forth below, must be submitted with each land use application, and made payable to the Garfield County Treasurer. Applications will not be accepted without the required application fee. Base Fees are non-refundable in full, unless a written request for withdraw from the applicant is submitted prior the initial review of the application materials. Applications must include an Agreement for Payment Form ("Agreement") set forth below. The Agreement establishes the applicant as being responsible for payment of all costs associated with processing the application. The Agreement must be signed by the party responsible for payment and submitted with the application in order for it to be accepted. The complete fee schedule for subdivision and land use applications is attached. • • GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT FORM (Shall be submitted with application) GARFIELD COUNTY (hereinafter COUNTY) and 11-t- C 0 , Snr C (hereinafter APPLICANT) agree as follows: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to COUNTY an application for S u, ID a i 4;s i o n.) e.v. erckrt i o rJ (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that Garfield County Resolution No. 98-09, as amended, establishes a fee schedule for each type of subdivision or land use review applications, and the guidelines for the administration of the fee structure. 3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT agrees to make payment of the Base Fee, established for the PROJECT, and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT. APPLICANT agrees to make additional payments upon notification by the COUNTY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. 4. The Base Fee shall be in addition to and exclusive of any cost for publication or cost of consulting service determined necessary by the Board of County Commissioners for the consideration of an application or additional COUNTY staff time or expense not covered by the Base Fee. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial Base Fee, APPLICANT shall pay additional billings to COUNTY to reimburse the COUNTY for the processing of the PROJECT mentioned above. APPLICANT acknowledges that all billing shall be paid prior to the final consideration by the COUNTY of any land use permit, zoning amendment, or subdivision plan. APPLICANT Signature Date: JO -—OI I 11,40/41f51,1) Print Name Mailing Address: 002 43 C..ved f,.► eel Gkeawooa S ft-, c s. C 0 VIta01 10/2004 Page 4 • Recorded at t=5' 5t/ o'clock Reception No. 371747 10198.6 QUIT CLAIM DEED THIS DEED, Made this lst day of March . 1996 , between LEWIS R. THOMPSON of the 'County of Garfield and State of Colorado. grantor(s), and TLCCO, INC. whose legal address is 0028 Cheyln Road, Glenwood Springs, Colorado of the County of Gazfield rder. BOOK 6813 PAGE6Z 1 i and State of Colurado, grantee(s), WITNESSETH, That the grantor(s), for and in consideration of the sum of ONE DOLLAR AND OTHER VALUABLE CONSIDERATIONS gRAMN the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has remised. released. sold. conveyed and QUIT CLAIMED, and by these presents dreg remise. release. sell. convey and QUIT CLAIM unto the grantee(s), i is heirs. successors and assigns, forever, all the right, rifle. interest. claim and demand which the grantor(s) ha . in and to the real property, together with improvements, if any, situate, lying and being in the County of Garfield and State of Colorado. described as follows: A parcel of land situated in Lots 3, 4, 5 & 6 Sec. 3, Tp. 8 S., R. 88 w., 6th P.M., lying South-westerly of Colorado State Highway No. 133, said parcel of land being described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Westerly right-of-way line of said Highway, whence the N: corner of said Sec. 3 bears N. 58°38'54" E. 620.32 ft.; thence S. 00°36'32" W. 987.74 ft.; thence N. 55°26'28" W. 802.62 ft.; thenc( N. 27°20'27" W. 161.92 ft. to a point on the Northerly line of said ,Lot 5; thence N. 07°59'28" W. 31.28 ft. to a point in a fence as constructed and in place; thence N. B7°56'06" E. 525.33 ft. along sat fence; thence N. 00°41'23" E. 627.92 ft. along said fence to a point on the Westerly right-of-way line of said Highway; thence along the Westerly right-of-way line of said Highway, S. 42°32'37" E. 70.6]1 ft.; thence S. 40°10'24" E. 110.70 ft.; thence S. 34°35'45" E. 91.77 ft; thence S. 31°06'56" E: 89.90 ft. to the point of beginning, containing 9.06 acres, more or less; Together with one-half of one cubic foot per second of time of water from the Carbondale Ditch & the water adjudicated thereto under Priority No. 169 in said Decrees -of -Water District No. 38. also known by street and number as: not in City Limits TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same, together with all and singular the appurtenances and privileges theteunto belonging or in anywise Mere unto appertaining, and all the_ estate. right. tide, interest and claim whatsoever, of the grantor(s)• either in law or equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of the grantee(s), i tS heirs and assigns forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The grantor(s) ha s executed this deed on the dam set forth above. KteZe.4•44 A STATE OF COLORADO. County of f.kp,Pf141-0C The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me in the Stam of L'.&-rfl-ti.v , this 2,01-b4 by •LEw15 2.7VrOMP5ONI Mrs urmNlSSSten.expires cL� Mf in,6cater• insert ';City and." • -2 .19C0 i T EMS P, THIOM:PEON )ss. day of County of preATetkE , , 196(°. . Witness my hand and official seal. 469/ Cc. LiAld-e,n —64 No. 933. Rev. 1.84. Qati CLAIM Dern enit. Qy023°)l/1965 a 4t,,,t Pahl,M,ns. Ulf W. Mt. A.c.. t..te....r. CD alt 4 —ILe)1 :JibNm 1/ Recorded at. y: r/ pp o'clock. F M, / _ IJ. L 12 19.77 C • Reception No 2!,7`aL-C71. ��1 r; f'ACE 347 TIIIS DEED, Made this 12th day of July between LEWIS R. THOMPSON ,Ie70, of tho • County ofGarfjeld and State of Colorado, of the first part, and THE GRA:'LIlE COMPANY, an Illinois Corporation, of the County of Cook, State of Illinois ofc l)c QepHftAstcx STATE OOCU WITARI FIE JUL ; " 1977 i shoo xesitMfjo-AoLf,,Aljtixioxof the second part: WITNESSETH, That the said part v of the first.part, for and in consideration of the sum. of Ten and no/100ths - .DOLLARS. to the said part y of the fust part in band paid by the said part y of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby confessed and acknowledged, ha s granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents do grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the said part y of the second part,' i t s successors* heixocand assigns forever, all the following described lot or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the County of Garfield and State of Colorado. to -wit: A11 that part of :.ots 3, 6, 7, & 9 Sec. 3, T8S, R881,'., 6th P.M., lying Southerly & West- erly of the right of way conveyed to the Colorado Department of Highways .by Document #199710 in Book 305 at Page 333, except that part 46of 8 Highways, 9, Sec. 3, conveyed by Document #243990 in Book 403 at • Page Lots 6, 7, 8, 9 & 5E -5E„'- Sec. 4, T8S, R88W., 6th P.M.., k that part of Lot 1 Sec. 4, lying Southerly & Westerly of the centerline of the Crystal River. Lots 5, 10 L1, 12.& 14 Sec. 3, T8S, 8881/., 6th P.M.; Lot 13, Sec. '3, T85, R8&W., 6th P.M, except that part conveyed to Eugene H. Grubb by Document #35474 in Book 75 at Page 194. Lot 16, Sec. 3, T8S, R88W., 6th P.M., except that portion lying Easterly of the east bank of the Crystal River, formerly:known as Rock Creak, of the center l..ip That part of Lots 15 & 19 Sec. 3 T8S, R88(J., 6th P.M.., lying West/ of the Crystal.River, (font r1y Nock Creek) & 'dorth of the old lino fence, running East �: West (Var 15°E) thru a point 400' North of the 1/4 corner between Secs. 3 & 10. Together with ail ditch a water rights appertaining to or used in connection with the above described lands &, more particularly, the interest of theGrantox in the Holland -Bowles Ditch & in & to the aDI cubic feet of water per second of time adjudicated thereto the same being Ditch No. o6 with Priorities Nos. 81, 1803 & 311, dr the Decrees of the District Court of Garfiel'd2ounty, Coloradoil in & to the Carbondale Ditch & approx. 6.7 cu. ft. of water per second of time adjudicated thereto„.the same being Ditch No. 117 with Priorities N. 169 & No. 408 in said Decrees, all in Water Dist.#38; & reserving. 'parcel of land -situated in Lots 4, 5, & Sec. 3 T8S R88W., btt1 P.M., lying South-westerly of Coloradoc::AcePting tat'eHigl'Iway No. 133, said parcel of land being described as fanoi.As: eginning, at a point on the Westerly ri ht -of -way line of said Higay, whenc the N; orn r of sand Sac be rs $ °8'554" E. 620.'2'; h. 5.00°9'32"W. 9�7.7�+' th. N.55°2b' 8" �J, $02.2 ih. N. 27°27" W. 161.92' to a point' on the Northerly line of said Lot 5; th. .07°59'28" W. 31.28' to a point in a fence as constructed & in lace; th. N.87 56'06"E. 525 33' along said fence• th. N.00°41'23" . 627.92'along said fence to a point on the Westerly right-of-way ine of said Highway; th. along the Westerly right-of-way line of said Highway 5. L B,?°32' 7" E. 70.61'• th S.40°10'24" 110.70'; -th. S.34°35'45" 91.77'; th. 5,31°06'56" E. 89.90' to the point of beginning, containing 9.06 acres, more or less; • Together with onehalf of one cubic foot per second of time of wate from the Carbondale Ditch & the water adjudicated thereto under Priority No. 169 in said Decrees of Water District No. 38. TOGETHER with all and singular the .hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof; and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the said part y o the first part, either to law or equity, of. in and to tho above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtcaancw. No. 463. WARRANTY DEED—For ?holographic Retard.—DradfordPubluhinr Co., 132416 Stoat Store, D,ur,r,Colo r.Ja 5,fur:4b8 IRGE X48. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the said part of the second �oahaigs1�;Yis forever. And the said y part, S�uar9c part y- of the first part, for him solve heirs, executors, and adminiggst�t�r,��ators, does covenant, grant, bargain and agree to and with the said part y of the second port, itshofta andgasaig s, that at the time of the enaealing and delivery of these presents he ie wall oeizod of the premises above conveyed, as of good, sure, perfect,- absolute and indefeasible estate 'of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and ha s good right, full power and lawful authority to grant. bargain. sell and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same tire free and clear from ail former and other grants, bargains, sales, hens, taxes, assessments and encumbrances of whatever kind or nature aoever.gxcept existing easements and rights of way, and patent reservations and restrictions, and thetabo ebarOiined premises In the quiet and peaceable possession of the said party of the second part, its AE�o_r and assigns against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming or to claim the whole or any part thereof, the said part y of the first part shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said part y of the first part has hereunto set hi s hand and seal 12th the day and year first above written. /7 Signed, sealed and Delivered In the Presence of Zvi;_ 4SEAL] �. _..:.._....... _ _... [SEAL] [SEAL] STATE OF COLORADO, las. ...... r•4%, County of Garfield 1111 The'Yoregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 12th day ad July bx:.'Lewis R . Thompson C i • r{I(y�comrnisuon expires June 17 .19 73 . Witgess my hand and official seal. f �F C O ~ � — NeLo,y PubnG_' - STATE OF COL SIV o Ps E o � w as FIRE • EMS • RESCUE August 8, 2007 Julie Hanson Beattie & Chadwick, LLP 932 Cooper Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Thompson Property 1605 Highway 133, Carbondale Dear Julie: The Thompson property at 1605 Highway 133 in Carbondale is located within the service area of the Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District. The District provides both fire and emergency medical services. Please contact me if you have any questions or if I may be of any assistance. Bill Gavette Deputy Chief RECEIVED AUG 1 3 2007 Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District 300 Meadowood Drive • Carbondale, CO 81623 • 970-963-2491 Fax 970-963-0569 SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS PARCEL NO: 246303213001 Jeffrey P. Jackel 2420 Holland Drive Carbondale, CO 81623 PARCEL NO: 246303213002 Kelvin E. Osborn 2426 Holland Drive Carbondale, CO 81623 PARCEL NO: 246303213003 Janelle & Randall A. Johnson 2434 Holland Drive Carbondale, CO 81623 PARCEL NO: 246303209004 Allan Higdon & Judy Higdon as Trustees of the Allan K. Higdon Trust 1-26-89 3 Colonial Court Wichita, KS 67207 PARCEL NO: 246303209005 Steven R. & Sharon E. Weinstein 24 The Grasslands Woodbury, NY 11797 PARCEL NO: 246303213006 River Valley Ranch Master Association 1000 Highway 133 Carbondale, CO 81623-1884 PARCEL NO: 246303210007 Town of Carbondale 76 S. 2nd Street Carbondale, CO 81623-2104 PARCEL NOS: 246303200009 Cerise Park LLC 246303200008 C/O Freida K. Wallison 1880 Lazy 0 Road Snowmass, CO 81654 PARCEL NOS: 246303200006 Colin R. Chapman & Lisa A. Chapman 246303200007 1537 Highway 133 Carbondale, CO 81623 PARCEL NOS: 246303200004 William Hurd & Nancy Lajoy 246303200014 P.O. Box 790221 Paia, HI 96779 MINERAL RIGHTS OWNERS Mineral rights were never severed. TLCCO, Inc. owns all mineral rights. • L e'D� zl O (-0CQs C4 CD C October 3, 2007 TOWN OF CARBONDALE 511 COLORADO AVENUE CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Mr. Fred Jarman, Director Department of Building and Planning, Garfield County 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Will Serve Letter: TLcco Subdivision Exemption Dear Fred: Please consider this a "will serve" letter for what is commonly called the Thompson Property in the County Island Area in Carbondale. The Town now provides water to two units (a historic cabin and a carriage house) and wastewater service to the historic cabin. The Town will continue to provide this level of service. The property is approximately 9.1 acres in size and is bounded roughly by the old Carbondale Elementary School, River Valley Ranch and State Highway 133. If the County grants a subdivision exemption, two parcels will be created. It is our understanding that a 2.33 acre parcel will contain both the historic cabin and a carriage house, to which the Town will continue to provide the services noted above. Freda Wallison, on behalf of the Thompson family, has contacted the Town regarding annexation of the remaining acreage, about 6.7 acres. If the subdivision exemption is granted by the County it is our understanding the property owner will seek to annex the 6.7 acres parcel to the Town before any additional develop will take place on the property. The Town is interested in annexing this property when a suitable annexation agreement can be reached. Should this occur the Town will provide water and wastewater service to that parcel under the terms of the annexation agreement. The Thompson's will keep the 2.33 acre parcel in the County. Please feel free to call to discuss this matter and any other issues related to the Thompson Exemption or other land use matters related to this County Island. Sincerely, ,., /1s-36,1 Do Dotson Community Development Director (970) 963-2733 Fax: (970) 963-9140 qmp CTLITHOMPSON suounommintat GEOLOGIC EVALUATION AND PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION CERISE PARK CARBONDALE, COLORADO Prepared For: CERISE PARK, LLC 1880 Lazy 0 Road Snowmass, CO 81654 Attention: Ms. Frieda Wallison Project No. GS04676-115 May 25, 2006 234 Center Drive I Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone: 970-945-2809 Fax: 970-945-7411 TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE 1 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1 SITE DESCRIPTION 2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 3 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 3 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 5 SITE EARTHWORK 6 BUILDING FOUNDATIONS 8 SLAB -ON -GRADE CONSTRUCTION 8 BELOW -GRADE CONSTRUCTION 8 SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE 9 SURFACE DRAINAGE 9 LIMITATIONS 10 FIGURE 1 - APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURE 2 - SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURES 3 THROUGH 5 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING APPENDIX A - GUIDELINE SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL IT PROJECT NO. GS04676-115 S71GS04575,000111512. Reports1G504676 115 121.dot SCOPE This report presents the results of our geologic evaluation and preliminary geotechnical investigation for Cerise Park in Carbondale, Colorado. Our geologic evaluation was performed to identify geologic conditions at the site and judge their possible influence on the proposed development and discuss preliminary mitigation concepts. Our geotechnical investigation involved exploratory excavation operations and engineering analysis to provide an overview of geotechnical considerations associated with development and construction at the site. A site-specific geotechnical investigation will be required to provide design -level geotechnical engineering recommendations for each building after development and construction plans are further developed. This investigation was performed in general accordance with our Proposal GS -05-352. The criteria presented in this report are intended for planning purposes only and not for design of specific structures. A summary of our conclusions is presented below. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1. We did not observe any geologic conditions or geologic hazards that would preclude development of this site for the intended usage. Our geologic study identified ground subsidence (Le., sinkholes) as a potential geologic hazard at the site, however, we rate the risk as low. Subsurface conditions encountered in our exploratory pots generally consisted of 6 inches to 1 feet of sandy clay "topsoil" over nil to 5.5 feet of clayey sand underlain by clean to slightly silty gravel with cobbles and boulders to the maximum explored depth of 15 feet. Free ground water was not encountered in our exploratory pits. 3. Most excavations in the planned development can likely be laid back to stable configurations without sig nificant excavation retention systems. Excavations within close proximity of property boundaries may require retainage. 4. Our laboratory testing and experience indicate the gravel soil at this site possesses low potential for volume change under foundation loads. The natural soils are suitable for reuse as fill, provided cobbles_ and boulders are removed. CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL. j T PROJECT NO, GS04676-115 S:1GS04676.000111512. Reports1GS04676 115 R1.doc 1 5. Subsoils at the site consist predominantly of gravel with cobbles and boulders. We anticipate buildings at the site can be constructed on footing foundations supported on the undisturbed, gravel soil with low risk of differential settlement. A design -level geotechnical investigation should be performed to develop design -level criteria for each building. 6. Our preliminary information indicates that slab -on -grade construction can be supported by the undisturbed, natural soils with low potential risk of differential movement. Recommendations for slab -on -grade construction, based on site-specific subsurface conditions, should be developed during a design -level geotechnical investigation. 7. Exterior foundation drains should be installed around below -grade areas in the buildings. The recommended drain systems will depend on the garage concept chosen. 8. Control of surface and subsurface drainage is important to the performance of foundations, slab -on -grade construction and pavements. Surface drainage should be designed to provide rapid removal of surface runoff away from buildings and off of pavements. SITE DESCRIPTION The site consists of two parcels that comprise a total of approximately 3 acres in the south part of Carbondale, Colorado. State Highway 133 borders the property at the north (see Figure 1). Single-family residences are on adjacent parcels to the south, east acid west. A two-story residence, a garage and a shed are present on the north part of the site. A one-story residence, a single -story bairn and a shed are present on the center part of the site. A man-made pond with a synthetic liner is present in the north pact ©f the site. The south part of the site is currently utilized as a horse pasture. Vegetation on the site consists of irrigated landscape areas with weeds and grasses, and areas of aspen and spruce trees. Ground surface on the site generally slopes down to the southwest at grades Tess than 5 percent. The ground surface in the corral area is generally lower than surrounding areas. A localized depression is in the central part of the corral. CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL T PROJECT NO. GS04676-115 S:\GS04676.006111512. Reports\GS54676 115 R1.doc 2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Detailed construction plans were not developed at the time of this investigation. Conceptual plans involve construction of about thirty-two, two-story townhome style units with below -grade parking for the units. The parking garage will likely be one large below -grade structure. An alternative would be separate below - grade garages for each building. We expect maximum excavation depths of about 12 to 14 feet will be required. Cast -in-place construction is expected for the parking garage wall and slabs. The buildings will likely be wood -framed. A design -level, geotechnical investigation will be required after building plans are further developed. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS Based on regional mapping and our field observations in the area, bedrock below the site consists of the Pennsylvanian -Aged Eagle Valley Evaporite. During post -glacial and recent geologic time, the bedrock has been eroded and weathered. Overlaying the bedrock are surficial deposits, which have been deposited in more recent geologic times. The surficial deposits at the site are Holocene and Pleistocene -Age terrace and pediment gravel that consist of silty to sandy gravel with cobbles, boulders and lenses of clay and sand. The alluvium tends to be high density with a low potential for consolidation. The Eagle Valley Evaporate is a sequence of evaporite rocks (salts) consisting of gypsum, anhydrite, halite and sylvite interbedded with thin siltstone, sandstone and carbonate beds. Due to tectonic stresses and overburden pressures, these rocks have undergone plastic deformation resulting in highly contorted and "swirled" bedding. The evaporite minerals are susceptible to the formation of solution cavities by circulating ground water resulting in the collapse of overburden soils and subsequent surface subsidence. CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL) T PROJECT NO. GS04676.115 S:1GSD4676.000111512. Reportc1GS04575 115 R1.doc 3 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS We observed no geologic conditions or hazards that would preclude development of the site for the intended use. However, our geologic study identified ground subsidence (i.e., sinkholes) as a potential geologic hazard at the site. Surface subsidence in the vicinity of the site is usually due to solution cavities that form in the underlying Eagle Valley Evaporite bedrock. The Evaporite minerals in the bedrock formation are dissolved and removed by circulating ground water. Most of the flow in the area of this site is subflow related to the Crystal River. A major, man-made source of water over the past 100 years has been flood irrigation practices. The ground water circulates through the permeable alluvial terrace gravel, forming solution cavities in the Eagle Valley Evaporite. Overburden soils collapse into the solution cavities. When caving propagates to the ground surface, ground subsidence and/or sinkholes occur. Formation of sinkholes is random and can occur anywhere and at any time in the geologic environment at this site. The degree of risk related to sinkholes cannot reasonably be quantified. it is possible that the localized depression in the corral area of the property is a result of subsidence. However, our exploratory pits did not expose evidence of sinkholes. We are not aware of buildings in the immediate vicinity of the site that have experience recent subsidence -related damage. Furthermore, development of the site for residential construction will result in less irrigation water as compared to flood irrigation practices. Therefore, we rate the potential risk of sinkhole development at the site as Bow. Rile judge that the risk of subsidence and/©r sinkholes is similar to and no greater than the risk at other nearby developments (e.g., River Valley Ranch, Hendrick Ranch). The risk of sinkholes can be further evaluated during the subsurface investigation for the design -level geotechnical investigation. The site is located in the Western Mountain Seismotectonic Province. We believe faults in the area can be grouped into two general types. One type of fault is related to the large scale continental tectonic environment. These faults penetrate deep into and likely through the earth's crust and are on the order of 30 million years CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL I T PROJECT NO. GSO4676-115 S:1GS04676.0OD111512. Reports\GS04676 115 R1.doc 4 old and older. Although these faults are potentially active and able to produce Targe earthquakes we believe they are essentially dormant and unlikely to cause earthquakes. A second type of fault is related to comparatively small scale localized geologic conditions. We believe these faults are active and likely caused most of the historic earthquakes in the area. One historic earthquake centered in the Glenwood Springs area west of the site exhibited Modified Mercalli Intensity of V. A second earthquake with its epicenter located between Glenwood Springs and Cattle Creek had a magnitude in the range of 4.0 to 4.9. Several earthquakes have occurred with epicenters located in the Thompson Creek area south of Carbondale with magnitudes of up to 4.9. In our opinion, ground accelerations associated with an earthquake intensity of VI can be expected at this site. An intensity VI earthquake would be felt by all and may result in cracking of weak masonry structures but would cause negligible damage to structures of good design and construction. The region is in the Uniform Building Code, Seismic Risk Zone 1, however, the Colorado Geologic Survey recommends considering all of Colorado except the northeast corner of the state to be in a Seismic Risk Zone 2. The potential for an earthquake of sufficient intensity to cause significant damage to structures during a design serviceabiEity of approximately 100 years at the site is low. Structures in the development should be designed to withstand moderately strong ground shaking with little or no damage. We recommend anticipating horizontal ground accelerations on the order of 0.0350 to 0.07E hi the design of structures to be built at this site. Wired loads typically govern structural design for dynamic loads in this area. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions across the site were investigated by excavating six exploratory pits at the approximate locations shown on Figure 1. Exploratory pit locations were chosen by our geotechnical engineer to characterize subsurface conditions across the site. Our pits were excavated using a backhoe and a trackhoe. CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL 1T PROJECT NO. GS04676-115 S:IGS04676.000\11542. Reports4GSO4676 115 R1.4oc 5 Exploratory excavation operations were directed by our staff engineer who logged the soils and obtained samples for laboratory testing. Samples obtained from our pits were returned to our laboratory where they were visually classified and typical samples selected for testing. Graphic logs of the soils encountered in our pits are presented on Figure 2. Subsurface conditions encountered in our exploratory pits generally consisted of 6 inches to 1 foot of sandy clay "topsoil" over nil to 5.5 feet of clayey sand underlain by clean to slightly silty gravel with cobbles and boulders to the maximum explored depth of 15 feet. Free ground water was not encountered in our exploratory pits. The pits were backfilled immediately after exploratory excavation was completed. We performed laboratory testing on samples of the subsoils obtained from our exploratory pits. We performed gradation analyses on six samples of the gravel soil. Gradation test results are shown on Figures 3 through 5. Laboratory test results are summarized on Table 1. The standardized test method used to analyze gradation excluded rocks larger than 3 -inches in diameter. Our observations during exploratory excavation and experience at nearby sites indicate that a large percentage of the soils are cobbles and boulders. SITE EARTHWORK We expect excavations in the soils at this site can be made with conventional, heavy-duty excavation equipment. Most excavations in the planned development can likely be laid back to stable configurations without significant excavation retention systems. Excavation within close proximity of property boundaries may require retainage. Potential excavation retention systems can be evaluated when construction plans are further developed. CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL IT PROJECT NO. GS04676-115 S;lGSD4676.DOD111512. Reports1GS04676115 R1.doe 6 Sides of excavations and utility trenches should be sloped or shored to meet local, State and Federal safety regulations. The natural soils at this site will classify as Type C soils based on OSHA standards. Excavation slopes specified by OSHA are dependent upon types of soils and groundwater conditions encountered. OSHA recommends temporary construction slopes no steeper than 1.5 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) for Type C soils above the water table. Contractors should identify the soils encountered in excavations and refer to OSHA standards to determine appropriate slopes. Our exploratory pits did not penetrate the free ground water table. We do not believe ground water will adversely affect excavations at the site. Excavations deeper than 20 feet need to be designed by a professional engineer. Fill may be required for development of the site. Areas that will receive fill should be stripped of vegetation and organic soils. Existing building elements and utilities should be completely removed from the site. The resulting ground surface in planned fill areas should be scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches, moisture -treated and compacted. Areas to receive fill should be proof rolled with a heavy (18 kip/axle) pneumatic -tired vehicle such as a loaded, tandem dump truck. Soft areas should be reworked or otherwise stabilized prior to placing fill. The on-site soils are suitable for reuse as fill, provided organics, debris and rocks larger than 6 inches in diameter are removed. Grading fill should be placed in maximum 10 -inch thick lifts, moisture - conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor (ASTM D 698) maximum dry density. Placement and compaction of fill should be observed and tested during construction. The existing pond and irrigation ditches sh • uld be excavated to provide a rectangular cross-section of sufficient width such that large, heavy compaction equipment can "work" fill material to obtain uniform compaction. Man-made liners should be removed prior to fill placement. Surface grading will need to ensure that any abandoned or truncated ditches will not direct surface flow or seepage toward buildings or structures. CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL I T PROJECT NO. GS04676-115 S:IGSO4676.000{11512. Reports1G504676 115 R1.doc 7 BUILDING FOUNDATIONS Subsoils at the site consist predominantly of gravel with cobbles and boulders. The natural gravel soil possesses low potential for consolidation under typical building Toads. We anticipate buildings at the site can be constructed on footing foundations supported by the undisturbed, natural gravel with low risk of differential settlement. A design -level geotechnical investigation should be performed to develop design -level engineering criteria for each building. SLAB -ON -GRADE CONSTRUCTION Conceptual plans involve construction of a below -grade parking garage with a slab -on -grade floor. Exterior concrete flatwork, such as patios, may be constructed adjacent to the buildings. Our preliminary information indicates that slab -on -grade construction can be supported by the undisturbed, natural soils with low potentia! risk of differential movement. Recommendations for structural fill below slabs will be dependent on actual construction plans. Recommendations for slab -on -grade construction for each building, based on site-specific subsurface conditions, should be developed during a design -level geotechnical investigation. BELOW -GRADE CONSTRUCTION Foundation walls which extend below -grade must be designed for lateral earth pressures where backfill is not present to about the same extent on both sides of the wall. Many factors affect the values of the design lateral earth pressure. These factors include, but are not limited to, the type, compaction, slope and drainage of the backfill, and the rigidity of the wall against rotation and deflection. For a very rigid foundation wall where negligible or very little deflection will occur, an "at -rest" lateral earth pressure should be used in design. For walEs which can deflect or rotate 0.5 to 1 percent of wall height (depending upon the backfill types), lower "active" lateral CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL IT PROJECT NO, GS04676-115 S:1GSD4676.0001115.Z. Reports\GSO4676 115 R1.dec 8 earth pressures are appropriate. Our experience indicates typical basement walls in residential buildings can deflect or rotate slightly under normal design loads, and that this deflection results in satisfactory wall performance. Thus, the earth pressures on the walls will likely be between the "active" and "at -rest" conditions. Actual earth pressure conditions and values can be developed during the design -level geotechnical investigation. SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE Water from rain, and surface irrigation of landscaping frequently flows through relatively permeable backfill placed adjacent to a building and collects on the surface of relatively undisturbed soils at the bottom of the excavation. This can cause wetting of foundation soils, hydrostatic pressures on below -grade walls, and wet or moist conditions in below -grade areas after construction. We recommend installation of exterior foundation drains around below -grade areas in the buildings. The exterior foundation drains can likely consistof4-inch diameter, slotted, PVC pipe encased in free draining gravel. A prefabricated drainage composite may be required adjacent to foundation walls. The recommended drain systems will depend on the garage concept chosen (Le., one large parking garage versus separate garages for each building). The drains should lead to positive gravity outlets, or to sump pits where water can be removed by pumping. SURFACE DRAINAGE Control of surface drainage is critical to the performance of foundations, floor slabs and concrete flatwork. The ground surface surrounding the exterior of buildings should be sloped to drain away from the buildings in ail directions. The buildings should be provided with roof gutters and downspouts. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. Splash blocks and downspout extensions should be provided at all discharge points. Plants used near CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL I T PROJECT NO. G504676-115 S:1GS04676.DOD111512. Reports\GSD4676 115 R1.doc 9 foundation walls should be limited to those with low moisture requirements; irrigated grass should not be located within 5 feet of the foundations. Sprinklers should not discharge within 5 feet of the foundation and should be directed away from the buildings. Impervious plastic membranes should not be used to cover the ground surface immediately surrounding the buildings. These membranes tend to trap moisture and prevent normal evaporation from occurring. Geotextile fabrics can be used to control weed growth and allow some evaporation to occur. LIMITATIONS Our exploratory pits were spaced across the site to obtain a reasonably accurate picture of subsurface conditions. Variations in the subsurface conditions not indicated by our pits will occur. The recommendations and criteria presented in this report are intended for preliminary planning purposes and not for design of buildings or structures. A design -level geotechnical investigation should be performed after construction plans are developed and building locations are determined. This investigation was conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by geotechnical engineers currently practicing under similar conditions in the locality of this project. No warranty, express or implied, is made. if we can be of further service or If you have questions regarding this report, please call. CTL J THOMPSON, INC. Reviewed by: Edward R. White, E.I. James D. Kellogg, P.E. Staff Engineer Project Manager ERW:JDK:cd (5 copies sent) CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL I T PROJECT NO. GS04676-115 5:1GS04676.000t11512. Reports1GSO4676 115 R1.doc 10 c13 mod v100S 33e 30.134 01033 060 ' do 80336 :001 V 6 6I6• 3 1 1030 1 133834 una 669 30Yd 1Y 96B 9009 730890 31YN8d >69 3090 19 6111 0009 3083 9600 730894 3196164 991199 '3N 738 730890 3114160 o0 80 WJ '61 3 3M 69636 3.1n31 06363 '91 403 000 61136 3.1n31 O�, _ �v .>I'6119 =140 1 V 60 -0y`� n�.197'61/•i1317 i 11- 0 N. ch.:, v m 60/66/3 W .99305. co H r Depth In Feet 111111 111111111111111 0 a N\\\:v\\ 0 II 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 498.1 u1 y}ded 0 (.4 m v- m O m t O 0 o i m L- c m ° O O c C 7 L°- m G d O c m°; 3-'6= t. 0..:44.3-e O 3 0 O m N Ili - O ° e ` D O acC aa;KX o a. voco ti nm a 't=6 E E. _c o .°ova Er c c'..0 c,N0Oi °0�o c o oiO+ o c v c °°° Cx • X+E 7 o GK•mo—ma+ E t+m 3 m N V) mdICmo O e womUooooOT.° .o z. ° ~ Vi ° F N M 4 0 z 0 z Aggregate base course. Indicates hand drive sample. Indicates bulk sample. SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Project No. GS04676-115 N Li, La- ample of SAND, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (SP -SM) From TP -1 AT 6-8 FEET GRAVEL 44 % SAND 51 SILT & CLAY 5 % LIQUID LIMIT - PLASTICITY INDEX - HYDROMETER ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. "200 '100 '50 "40 "30 '16 '10 '8 100 SIEVE ANALYSIS 90 80 70 60 ILL;;,) 50 40 30 20 10 0 .0 CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS •d spa" ' !A .te' HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN, 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. "200 '100 •50 '40 '30 '16 -10 •8 •4 3!8" 314" 115' 3" 5"6" 8" 100 :........... ... 0 80 --•-------- ----I 70 ' 20 SI)50 a - - - . .......... _60 ........... 20 10 _ I ......_. -"- .. ,--""7" . ,-7 J 1-1 . - 80 .001 0.002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .149 .297 .590 1.19 2.0 2.38 4.76 9.52 19.1 36.1 76.2 127 200 0.42152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SANDS GRAVEL FINE 1 MEDIUM I COARSE FINE 1 COARSE l COBBLES ample of SAND, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (SP -SM) From TP -1 AT 6-8 FEET GRAVEL 44 % SAND 51 SILT & CLAY 5 % LIQUID LIMIT - PLASTICITY INDEX - HYDROMETER ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. "200 '100 '50 "40 "30 '16 '10 '8 100 SIEVE ANALYSIS 90 80 70 60 ILL;;,) 50 40 30 20 10 0 .0 CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS •d spa" ' !A .te' 074 .149 .297 0.42.590 1.19 2.0 2.38 4,76 9.52 19.1 36.1 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 76.2 127 200 152 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SANDS FINE 1 MEDIUM 1 COARSE GRAVEL FINE 1 COARSE 1 COBBLES 0 10 20 30 8 40 50 60 0 0 0 00 Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) GRAVEL 61 % SAND 36 From TP -2 AT 12-14 FEET PROJECT NO. GS04676-115 SILT & CLAY 3 % LIQUID LIMIT - % PLASTICITY INDEX - Gradation Test Results FIG. 3 - - - ........... I ......_. -___._.... -"- .. ,--""7" . ,-7 J 1-1 . 074 .149 .297 0.42.590 1.19 2.0 2.38 4,76 9.52 19.1 36.1 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 76.2 127 200 152 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SANDS FINE 1 MEDIUM 1 COARSE GRAVEL FINE 1 COARSE 1 COBBLES 0 10 20 30 8 40 50 60 0 0 0 00 Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) GRAVEL 61 % SAND 36 From TP -2 AT 12-14 FEET PROJECT NO. GS04676-115 SILT & CLAY 3 % LIQUID LIMIT - % PLASTICITY INDEX - Gradation Test Results FIG. 3 Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) From TP -3 AT 8-10 FEET GRAVEL 51 % SAND 36 % SILT & CLAY 13 % LIQUID LIMIT - % PLASTICITY INDEX - % HYDROMETER ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. '200 100 90 80 0 70 g 60 w 50 0. 40 30 20 10 0 .0 SIEVE ANALYSIS U.S. STANDARD SERIES '100 '50 "40 "30 '16 '10 8 CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS '4 318" 314" 1 h•' G" N� 0 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S, STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN, 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. 200 '100 '50 '40 '30 '16 '10 .8 '4 318'• 3/4" 115" 3- 5•'6" r 100 o ' __f 80 — ......... ._._. •----•--F 10 - { .....f .. 20 Z . ... 30 w70 ° 40- a--._ 40 �-• ...64. --....----......------- 50 0 a 3D . _.._._._. I ---... I- J1 0.002 (MS WA n,o ,t,I. -.........._ -- t --- ; r • • 6D 20 1 - 10 • _ I80 .590 1. -r--1-- ---- .001 , 1, 0.002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .149 .297 1.18 2.0 2.38 4.75 9.52 19.1 35.1 76.2 127 200 0.42 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILUMETERS Inn CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NDN -PLASTIC) SANDS GRAVEL FINE I MEDIUM 1 COARSE FINE I COARSE 1 COBBLES Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) From TP -3 AT 8-10 FEET GRAVEL 51 % SAND 36 % SILT & CLAY 13 % LIQUID LIMIT - % PLASTICITY INDEX - % HYDROMETER ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. '200 100 90 80 0 70 g 60 w 50 0. 40 30 20 10 0 .0 SIEVE ANALYSIS U.S. STANDARD SERIES '100 '50 "40 "30 '16 '10 8 CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS '4 318" 314" 1 h•' G" N� 0 074 .148 .297 590 1.1 B 2.0 2.36 4.76 9.52 19.1 36.1 0.42 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 76.2 127 200 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SANDS GRAVEL FINE MEDIUM I COARSE FINE I COARSE I COBBLES 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 0 0 00 Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) GRAVEL 62 % SAND 33 % SILT & CLAY 5 % LIQUID LIMIT - % From TP -4 AT 4-6 FEET PROJECT NO. GS04676-115 PLASTICITY INDEX - % Gradation Test Results FIG.4 __f — ......... ._._. - ......._... .....f .. .- . I ---... I- J1 0.002 (MS WA n,o ,t,I. t --- 1 074 .148 .297 590 1.1 B 2.0 2.36 4.76 9.52 19.1 36.1 0.42 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 76.2 127 200 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SANDS GRAVEL FINE MEDIUM I COARSE FINE I COARSE I COBBLES 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 0 0 00 Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) GRAVEL 62 % SAND 33 % SILT & CLAY 5 % LIQUID LIMIT - % From TP -4 AT 4-6 FEET PROJECT NO. GS04676-115 PLASTICITY INDEX - % Gradation Test Results FIG.4 amp e ot GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) From TP -5 AT 14-15 FEET GRAVEL 75 % SAND 20 % SILT & CLAY 5 % LIQUID LIMIT - % PLASTICITY INDEX - % HYDROMETER ANALYSIS I SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. '200 '100 '50 '40 '30 '16 '10 '8 '4 318' 3/4" 1W 3 5'6" 8" 100 90 .. .......... .......... ........... .. ....... ......____ -1 ..... ___. • , ._____ .• • _____ _ • , ' _._ 0 80''''''' __ — - t • ...... ''''' _ 10 70 — -- — . • ....... .. ' ..... 20,.... Z 2 60 -- ...... ........... ....... ..._ ..._ ..... .. . - ..... ..4: ... ._ . ...... . ....... ; ... 30 fil a ft. 50 .... ....... ..... ............. y •I• ....._...... . ....... , ...... ., __ .__ ..... _ .... ...... ::::: ..... :: 4 40 b 40 L) Ill 6. 40 ' . •, ...... -.1 .. .......-.... ...... ....... . ..... - • . 30 30 . ........ .. ....... ... ....... .... I — ........ . ..... . .. .......... ..... ........... ' — .... 60 20 60 20 . ___. ..... .. ..... 4'r ' , ... - 10 70 10 __ ._ ..... _. • ...... ........ , 80 0 I 80 o .... . , . t . . . ... ........ . ............ [ I 90 .001 0.002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .149 .297 0.42.590 1.19 2.0 2.38 4.76 9.52 19.1 38.1 76.2 127 200 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS I CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SANDS I 90 t t .001 0.002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .149 .297 .590 1.19 2.0 2.38 4.76 9.52 19.1 36,1 76.2 127 200 0.42 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS FINE I COARSE I COBBLES CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SANDS GRAVEL FINE I MEDIUM I COARSE FINE j COARSE I COBBLES amp e ot GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) From TP -5 AT 14-15 FEET GRAVEL 75 % SAND 20 % SILT & CLAY 5 % LIQUID LIMIT - % PLASTICITY INDEX - % Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) From TP -6 AT 6-8 FEET PROJECT NO.GS04676-115 GRAVEL 70 % SAND 26 % SILT & CLAY 4 % LIQUID LIMIT -% - % PLASTICITY INDEX Gradation Test Results FIG. 5 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. '200 '100 '50 '40 '30 "16 '10 '8 '4 oar 1243/4" l 3" 5"6" 8" 100 .. .......... .......... ........... .. ....... -1 ..... ___. i _____ _ . .... ..... ... _._ 80 __ t - 10 76 — . 1 I t t ..... 20 z 60 -- ...... ........... ....... ..._ ..._ ..... .. 1 . i ... ._ . ............ ...... _._. ..... ...... • ... 30 o.< c.) 50 ...... : ...... :::: .._ ...._.. ....._...... • i:: :: ...... _.... ...... ., ..._.....__....., 7: ::::: ..... :: , ... ....... 1.4_ 40 b = 40 ' ...... -.1 .. .......-.... ...... ....... . ..... - • 50 cY, 30 . ........ .. ....... ... ....... .... I — ........ . ..... . .. .......... ..... ........... ' — .... 60 20 ....... 7- — 10 " ..... • ...... ........ , 80 0 , . . . .... . , . t T..; _ .. ........ ;. . ... ........ . ............ ..... ...................... I 90 .001 0.002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .149 .297 0.42.590 1.19 2.0 2.38 4.76 9.52 19.1 38.1 76.2 127 200 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS I CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SANDS GRAVEL FINE I MEDIUM I COARSE FINE I COARSE I COBBLES Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) From TP -6 AT 6-8 FEET PROJECT NO.GS04676-115 GRAVEL 70 % SAND 26 % SILT & CLAY 4 % LIQUID LIMIT -% - % PLASTICITY INDEX Gradation Test Results FIG. 5 PROJECT NO. GS04676-115 PASSING NO. 200 SOIL CLASSIFICATION SIEVE (%) H 1 0 O z Q W 0 d 0) 0 J= (n J 2 0 0 0 g 0 W g 0 -1 0) w g 0 Q 0) 0 J (75cn -I = 0 CD 0 g 0 W g 0 0 J -1 = 0 0 0 ILI Q fY 0 q 0 _ (n _- 2 0 CO 0 g 0 LJLII CC 0 q 0 (!3 J 2 0 0) I- W 00 QW fY 0 q LL) ch M r ix> to vt CC) M COff CMS) N NCV d' CD CD r- OL j ATTERBERG LIMITS 1.PLASTICITY INDEX (%) 0 z 0 0:� _l J z LI \ NATURAL DRY DENSITY (PCF) NATURAL MOISTURE (%) ® a cv © r c i- d W mCD .:i- O 1- co 0 z o m ‘- 1- CV C? C`) ° 1" u) a C1j i 1 • 0 .175a 0 0 O U CCI c m 0 ns Q) CU z N C1 O 0 0 O 0) (U Q a m c 0) (U 0i d 0 a) 0 CO 0) 0 z APPENDIX A GUIDELINE SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS CERISE PARK CARBONDALE, COLORADO CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL IT PROJECT NO, GS04676-115 S:1G5O4676.000111512. Reports1GSO4676 115 R1.doc GUIDELINE SITE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS CERISE PARK CARBONDALE, COLORADO 1. DESCRIPTION This item shall consist of the excavation, transportation, placement and compaction of materials from locations indicated on the plans, or staked by the Engineer, as necessary to achieve preliminary ground surface elevations. These specifications shall also apply to compaction of materials that may be placed outside of the project. 2. GENERAL The Geotechnical Engineer shall be the Owner's representative. The Geotechnical Engineer shall approve fill materials, method of placement, moisture content and percent compaction, and shall give written approval of the completed fill. 3. CLEARING JOB SITE The Contractor shall remove all buildings, structures, trees, brush and rubbish before excavation or fill placement is begun. The Contractor shall dispose of the cleared material to provide the Owner with a clean, neat appearing job site. Cleared material shall not be placed in areas to receive fill where the material will support structures of any kind. 4. SCARIFYING AREA TO BE FILLED All topsoil and organic matter shall be removed from the ground surface upon which fill is to be placed. The surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches until the surface is free from ruts, hummocks or other uneven features which would prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. 5. BENCHNG OF NATURAL SLOPES Where natural slopes are steeper than 20 percent (6 horizontal to 1 vertical) in grade and the placement of fill is required, cut benches shall be excavated into the natural slopes to facilitate placement of fill. Benches shall be wide enough to accommodate large earthmoving and compaction equipment. Fill shall be placed on excavated benches as outlined within these site grading specifications. 6. COMPACTING AREA TO BE FILLED After the foundation for the fill has been cleared and scarified, it shall be brought to the proper moisture content (within 2 percent of optimum) and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum density as determined in accordance with ASTM D 698. The foundation materials shall be worked, stabilized, or removed and replaced if necessary in accordance with the Geotechnical Engineer's recommendations in preparation for fill. CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL j T PROJECT NO. GSD4676-115 S:IGSD4676.000111512. Reports1GS04676 116 R1.dec A-1 7. FILL MATERIALS Structural fill deeper than 3 feet below foundation elevations should consist of the on-site gravels free of rocks larger than 4 inches, organics and debris. The upper 3 feet of structural fill below the building should consist of an AASHTO Class 6 aggregate base course or similar soil. Fill outside the building footprint can consist of the on-site soils free from organic matter or other deleterious substances, and rocks with diameters greater than six (6) inches. Fill materials shall be obtained from cut areas shown on the plans or staked in the field by the Engineer or imported to the site. Soils with significant percentage of organics, concrete, asphalt, and other deleterious materials or debris shall not be used as fill. Samples of desired import soils should be submitted to the Geotechnical Engineer for approval prior to hauling. 8. MOISTURE CONTENT Fill materials shall be moisture treated to within limits of optimum moisture content specified in "Moisture Content and Density Criteria." Sufficient laboratory compaction tests shall be made to determine the optimum moisture content for the various soils encountered in borrow areas or imported to the site. The Contractor may be required to add moisture to the excavation materials in the borrow area if, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Engineer, it is not possible to obtain uniform moisture content by adding water on the fill surface. The contractor will be required to rake or disc the fill soils to provide uniform moisture content through the soils. The application of water to embankment materials shall be made with any type of watering equipment approved by the Geotechnical Engineer, which will give the desired results. Water jets from the spreader shall not be directed at the embankment with such force that fill materials are washed out. Should too much water be added to any part of the fill, such that the material is too wet to permit the desired compaction from being obtained, raiding and all work on that section of the foil shall be delayed untit the material has been allowed to dry to the required moisture content. The Contractorwill be permitted to rework wet materiai in an approved manner to hasten its drying. 9. COMPACTION OF FILL AREAS Selected fill material shali be placed and mixed in evenly spread layers. After each fill layer has been placed, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than the specified percentage of maximum density given in "Moisture Content and Density Criteria." Fill materials shall be placed such that the thickness of loose material does not exceed 10 inches and the compacted lift thickness does not exceed 6 inches. Compaction, as specified above, shall be obtained by the use of sheepsfoot rollers, multiple -wheel pneumatic -tired rollers, or other equipment approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. Compaction shall be accomplished while the fill material is at CERISE PARK, LLC A-2 CERISE PARK CTL IT PROJECT NO. GS04676-116 S:\GS04676.0D0111512. Reports1G504576 115 R1.tloc the specified moisture content. Compaction of each layer shall be continuous over the entire area. 10. MOISTURE CONTENT AND DENSITY CRITERIA Structural fill below the building shall be substantially compacted to at least 100 percent of maximum ASTM D 698(AASHTO T 99) dry density within 2 percent of optimum moisture content. Fill material outside the building footprint shall be substantially compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum ASTM D 698 (AASHTO T 99) dry density within 2 percent of optimum moisture content 11. COMPACTION OF SLOPES Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compaction operations shall be continued until slopes are stable, but not too dense for planting, and there is no appreciable amount of loose soil on the slopes. Compaction of slopes may be done progressively in increments of three to five feet (3' to 5') in height or after the fill is brought to its total height. Final fill and cut slopes can be graded at 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical), provided erosion protection is present. 12. DENSITY TESTS Field density tests shall be made by the Geotechnical Engineer at locations and depths of his choosing. Where sheepsfoot rollers are used, the soil may be disturbed to a depth of several inches. Density tests shall be taken in compacted material below the disturbed surface. When density tests indicate the density or moisture content of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below that required, the particular Layer or portion of the fill shall be reworked until the required density or moisture content has been achieved. 13. INSPECTION AND TESTING OF FILL inspection by the Geotechnical Engineer shall be full-time during the placement of fill and compaction operations so that they can declare the fill was placed in general conformance with project specifications. All inspections necessary to test the placement of fill and observe compaction operations will be at the expense of the Owner. 14. SEASONAL LIMITS No fill material shall be placed, spread or rolled while it is frozen, thawing, or during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy precipitation, fill operations shall not be resumed until the Geotechnical Engineer indicates the moisture content and density of previously placed materials are as specified. 15. NOTICE REGARDING START OF GRADING CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL T PROJECT NO. GS04476-115 5:1G504676.000111512. Reports\GSO4676 115 R1.doc A-3 The contractor shall submit notification to the Geotechnical Engineer and the owner advising them of the start of grading operations at least two (2) week in advance of the starting date. Notification shall also be submitted at least 1 week in advance of any resumption dates when grading operations have been stopped for any reason other than adverse weather conditions. 16. REPORTING OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Density tests made by the Geotechnical Engineer, as specified under "Density Tests" above, shall be submitted progressively to the Owner. Dry density, moisture content and percentage compaction shall be reported for each test taken. 17. DECLARATION REGARDING COMPLETED FELL The Geotechnical Engineer shall provide a written declaration stating that the site was filled with acceptable materials, and was placed in general accordance with the project specifications. CERISE PARK, LLC CERISE PARK CTL T PROJECT NO. GS04676-115 S,1GS04576.000111512. Reports1G504676 115 R1.doc A-4 SOILS AND FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION 73 LOTS, WITHIN BLOCKS A AND F RIVER VALLEY RANCH CARBONDALE, COLORADO Prepared For: Falori Homes 9785 Maroon Circre, Suite 120 Englewqd,, CO 80112 Attention: tewart Miller Job No. GS -2250 September 30, 1997 CTL/THOMPSON, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 234 CENTER DRIVE ■ GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 • (970) 945-2809 TABLE OF CONTENT SCOPE 1 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1 SITE CONDITIONS 2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 SITE GRADING 3 RESIDENCE FOUNDATIONS 4 Type 1 Foundation - Footings On Gravels 5 Type 2 Foundation - Footings On Clayey Sands or Man Placed Fill 6 FLOOR SLABS AND EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLATWORK 6 BASEMENT CONSTRUCTION 7 SURFACE DRAINAGE 8 LIMITATIONS ^ 8 FIGURE 1 - LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PITS \ - C�) FIGURES 2 THROUGH 4 - SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY Bor. AND PITS FIGURE 5 - DEPTH TO GRAVELS CONTOURS FIGURES 6 THROUGH 8 - SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST RES FIGURE 9 THROUGH 11 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 12 - EXTERIOR FOUNDATION WALL DRAIN TABLE 1 - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS FALCON HOMES CTUT Gs -2951) SCOPE This report presents the results of our soils and foundation investigation for 73 residential lots within Blocks A and F at River Valley Ranch in Carbondale, Colorado. Specifically, Tots 1 through 23 and 46 through 54, Block A and Tots 1 through 19 and 44 through 65, Block F. We explored the subsurface conditions to provide foundation recommendations for single family buildings. This report includes a description of the subsurface conditions found in our exploratory borings and exploratory pits, recommended foundation systems and geotechnical and construction criteria for details influenced by the subsoils. Our report was prepared from data developed during our field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis and our experience with similar conditions. A summary of our conclusions is presented below. SUMMARY F Cs*ICL JSJONS Subsurface conditions at the 73 lots are a surface layer of aver burden consisting of man placed fill, sandy clays and clayey sa f organic clays underlain by silty to sandy gravels with Cobb *-d boulder. Free ground water was found in our borings on lot 1 lot 6, Block A at 11.5 feet and 14 feet, respectively, the day of our field investigation. 2. Depending on the site specific subsurface conditions we recommend founding the buildings with footings bearing on the undisturbed natural gravels, footings bearing on the natural clayey sands or footings bearing on the existing fill after proof rolling and stabilizing (see SITE GRADING and FOUNDATIONS). Based on our visual inspection of the foundation excavation, soil bearing pressures may need to be adjusted. Soil bearing pressures are presented in the FOLD DATION section. 3. Foundation supported floors and slabs -on -grade floors will be built in living areas. Slabs -on -grade floors can bear on the natural gravels, clayey sands or granular fill surface after proof rolling and stabilization of any loose areas (see SITE GRADING and LINING AREAS FLOORS AND EXTERIOR FLATWORK sections). All "topsoil", existing clay fill or other deleterious material should be removed from beneath slabs - on -grade floors. FALCON HOMES /`s: rr r_c nncn 4. A ground surface slope away from the buildings should be maintained at all times to reduce the risk of wetting soils below foundations. SITE CONDITIONS S River Valley Ranch is a large golf course and residential development located in the southwest part of Carbondale, Colorado. The development consists of a golf course and singe family residences from comparatively inexpensive homes to Targe custom homes. Highway 133 brders the development to the east. Single family residences and agriculture land border River Valley Ranch to the south and west. The Crystal River flows through the development from south to north. Block A is hi the northeast and Block F is in the s east part of the development. The Crystal River is to the west and High = 3 is to the east. Ground surfaces are comparatively flat to gently undulatind slope down to the west towards the Crystal River at gentle grades visually estimated at 2 to 6 percent. Along the Crystal River the terrace drops to the river down an embankment approximately 15 to 20 vertical feet at grades estimated at 40 to 50 percent. Utility and infrastructure construction at the site has stripped vegetation and roughed in roadways. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION Single family residential homes are to be built. The buildings will be one or two stories tall and wood framed. Basements will be an option. Basement and garage floors will be slabs -on -grade. Other floors in living areas will likely be structurally supported by the foundation with a crawl space below. Foundation Toads we assumed for our analysis were between 1000 and 3000 pounds per lineal foot on continuous footings and maximum interior column Toads of 15 kips. We should be informed if actual construction is different than described above. FALCON HOMES SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions were investigated by drilling twenty-one (21) exploratory borings and excavating seven (7) exploratory test pits at the approximate locations shown on Figure 1. Drilling , excavating and sampling was directed by our personnel. Exploratory borings were drilled with a track mounted drill rig and exploratory pits were excavated with a rubber tire backhoe. Summary Togs of soils found in borings and pits are shown on Figures 2 through 4. Subsurface conditions at the 73 lots are a surface layer of over burden consisting of man placed fill, sandy clays and clayey sas or organic clays underlain by silty to sandy gravels with cobble and boulde e ground water was <>> found in our borings on lot 1 and lot 6, Block A at 11.5 f apd 14 feet, respectively, the day of our field investigation. We encountered augur refusal and backhoe refusal on cobbles and boulders up to 3 feet in diameter. In our opinion excavations for foundations and utilities can be accomplished with medium to large, heavy earthmoving equipment. We do not believe excavations into the granular soils will be more difficult at this site than at adjacent developments. Depth to gravels contours are presented on Figure 4. Laboratory testing to confirm field classifications and determine physical characteristics of the soils was performed. Results of our laboratory testing are shown on Figures 6 through 11 and summarized on Table 1. S6YE GRADING We understand that grading will be limited to that required to construct basements and foundations. We anticipate maximum excavation depths of 10 feet. No fill will be below foundations but may be needed to achieve subgrade elevations for garage floor slabs and exterior concrete flatwork. Areas to receive fill or bear slabs -on -grade should be stripped of vegetation, organic soils, existing clay fill or FALCON HOMES other deleterious materials. The resulting surface should be moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). On-site soils free of organic matter, rock larger than 6 inches in diameter or other deleterious materials can be used as fill. Fill should be moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content, placed in 12 inch maximum loose lifts and compacted to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density. Where existing granular fill will be below footings fill surface should be proof rolled with a heavy (18 vehicle. Loose areas or areas showing deflectio otherwise stabilized. (l -=sl%b-on-grade floors the Ter axle) pneumatic tire uld be recompacted or Excavation sides will need to be sloped or braced. We believe the gravels are Type C as described in the October, 1989 Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standard governing excavations published by the Department of Labor. The publication indicates that temporary slopes should be no steeper than 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) for Type C soils above the ground water level. SoiOs removed from an excavation should not be stockpiled at the edge of the excavation. We recommend the excavated soils be placed at a distance from the top of the excavation equal to at least the depth of the excavation. Free ground water was encountered in our exploratory borings.. Depending upon excavation depths and time of year water may be present. If free ground water is encountered, we recommend the excavations be sloped to sumps where water can be removed by pumping. RESIDENCE FS%FIND a TIONS At footing elevations (approximately 4 feet deep or 8 feet deep) our exploratory borings and exploratory test pits encountered man placed fill, medium FALCON HOMES dense clayey sands or medium dense, sandy or clayey gravels with cobbles and boulders. Topsoil, existing clay fill or other deleterious material should be removed from beneath the building footprints. We judge the natural gravels to have excellent bearing characteristics. The clayey sands tested were compressible. We recommend the buildings be founded with footings. At Tots where gravels are exposed at foundation elevations footings with a comparatively high soil pressure bearing can be used. At lots where clayey sands are anticipated, footings with a lower soil bearing pressure can be used. We need to inspect completed foundation excavations to verify the foundation bearing strata. Where footings will bear on the proof rolled granular fill surface (Lots 1 through 10, Bloc l the maximum allowable soil bearing pressure recommended below may ned,to be reduced. We have assumed light structures that are sufficiently flexiblywithstand some differential foundation movement will be built. The recom j ded maximum soil pressures presented below should result in total settlement on the order of one inch. Maximum differential settlement may be one half of the actual total settlement. The risk of excessive differential or localized settlement can be reduced by careful attention to drainage precautions discussed under SURFACE DRAINAGE. Where excavations expose the natural gravels at foundation depths, we recommend footings at a comparatively high soil bearing pressure. Where the clayey sands are exposed at foundation depths, we recommend footings at a lower soil bearing pressure. In most cases where clayey sands are found, the sands only extend 5 feet below the existing ground surface. Excavations for basements would generally extend through the sands and expose gravels. Footings can be designed using the following criteria: Type 1 Foundation - Footings On Gravels 1. Footings bearing on the natural gravels can be designed for a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 5,000 psf. Material loosened during the excavation or forming process should be removed from footing areas or compacted prior to placing concrete; FALCON HOMES 2. Foundation walls for continuous footings should be reinforced top and bottom to span undisclosed loose soil pockets. We recommend steel reinforcement equivalent to that required for a simple span of 10 feet. Reinforcement should be designed by a qualified structural engineer; 3. !inimum footing sizes are desirable. We recommend a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous footings and at least 2 feet by 2 feet for isolated column footings. Larger sizes may be required based on the structural loads; 4. The soils beneath exterior footings should be protected from freezing. We recommend footings be at least 36 inches below finished exterior grades. The local building department should be contacted to verify required frost protection depth. Type 2 Foundation - Footings On Clayey Sands or Man Placed Fill 1. Footings bearing on clayey sands can b��designed for a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 • Material loosened during the excavation or forming process s be removed from footing areas . r compacted prior to placing r • rete; 2. Foundation walls for continuous footings should be reinforced top and bottom to span undisclosed loose soil pockets. We recommend steel reinforcement equivalent to that required for a simple span of 10 feet. Reinforcement should be designed by a qualified structural engineer; 3. Minimum footing sizes are desirable. We recommend a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous footings and at least 2 feet by 2 feet for isolated column footings. Larger sizes may be required based on the structural Toads; 4. The soils beneath exterior footings should be protected from freezing. e recommend footings be at least 36 inches below finished exterior grades. The local building department should be contacted to verify required frost protection depth. FLOOR SLABS AND EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLATWORK We anticipate excavations will expose clayey to sandy gravels, clayey sands or existing fill. We understand living area floors in some buildings will be structurally supported by the foundations with a crawl space between the floor and ground. Slabs -on -grade floors will be built for other buildings. Exterior concrete flat work is FALCON HOMES usually placed on grade. Structurally supported floors are excellent from the geotechnical viewpoint. Crawl spaces should be well ventilated. On sites where clayey sands are exposed the thickness of the sand layer is relatively thin. We believe, that slabs -on -grade on the lots on which the clayey sands are located will perform with only normal cracks forming if the subgrade soils moisture content does not get wet. We recommend the following design and construction criteria for slab - on -grade floors: 1. Slabs -on -grade should be placed directly clayey sands or existing gravel fill after proo, discussed above under SITE GRADING. other deleterious material should be re and replaced with non -swelling struc, than 3 inches at 2 percent below to 2 content, placed in maximum 8 inch thic at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698); he natural gravels or g and stabilizing as psoil, existing clay fill or beneath slabs -on -grade ill with 100 percent finer nt above optimum moisture loose lifts and compacted to 2. Slabs -on -grade should be separated from exterior walls and interior bearing members. Vertical movement of slabs should not be restricted; 3. Plumbing below the slabs should be pressure tested. Trench backfill should be moisture treated to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698); 4. Frequent control joints should be provided. The American Concrete Institute (ACI) recommends maximum joint spacing of 15 to 20 feet to control cracking. The above precautions will not prevent movement of slabs -on -grade floors in the event the soils become wet, but they will reduce damage when the movement occurs. BASEMENT CONSTRUCTION Basement walls will be subject to lateral earth pressure. These walls are restrained and cannot move, therefore, they should be designed for an "at rest" lateral earth pressure. We assume on-site soils will be used as backfill. The native FALCON HOMES soils Tess than 4 -inches in diameter are appropriate for backfill. Where the on site gravels or clays are used as backfill an equivalent fluid density of 50 pcf can be used to calculate the "at rest" lateral earth pressure. The lateral earth pressure values do not include allowances for sloping backfill, hydrostatic pressures or surcharge loads. The risk of wet basement conditions can be reduced by careful attention to drainage precautions and recommendations discussed under SURFACE DRAINAGE. We recommend foundation drains to reduce the risk of accumulation of surface moisture adjacent to foundation walls. Drains should consist of a 4 -inch diameter open joint or slotted pipe encased in free draining gravel. The drains should lead to a positive gravity outfall. A detail for a typical foundation drain is presented in Figure 12. SURFACE DRAINAGE The performance of foundations and concrete fl moisture conditions in the subsoils. The risk of wet reduced by planned and maintained surface drain a'twork is influenced by the i foundation soils can be Wetting or drying of open e foundation excavations should be avoided. The ground surface surrounding the residences should be sloped to drain away from the residences in all directions. We recommend a slope of at least 6 inches in the first 5 feet. Backfill of the foundation walls can be with on-site material, less than 4 inches in diameter, moisture treated to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. Splash blocks or extensions should be provided at all downspout discharge locations. LIMITATIONS Our exploratory borings and exploratory pits were spaced to obtain a reasonably accurate picture of the subsurface. Variations in the subsurface conditions not indicated by our exploratory borings and exploratory pits will occur. FALCON HOMES We should observe the completed excavations to confirm the soils are as anticipated from our exploratory pits. Our report was based on conditions disclosed by our exploratory borings and exploratory pits, results of laboratory testing, engineering analysis and our experience. Criteria presented reflects the proposed buildings as we understand them. We should be advised if the final design differs from our assumptions to permit ens to re-evaluate our conclusions and recommendations. This investigation was conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by geotechnical engineers curly practicing n) under similar conditions in the locality of this project. No other(warranty, express or implied, is made. if we can be of further service or if ' i have questions regarding this report, please call. CTL/TE-E0 LI'SOPC ENC. Wilson L. "Liv" Bowden Professional Geologist Reviewed by: John Mechling, P.E. Branch Manager L :JM:cd (5 copies sent) FALCON HOMES OSZZ—S0 '0N gor SNOLLV001 0 11 AMMIO1dX3 w 0 z0 z 0 i.C4y 2-i 4,0 tra aup 100010114 • .11114re • NORTH B t. TANDY #411111**** GE DD RIVE 71! • 400Z=. :81D0S 3id A.104ZUOICIX3 upoq tfuoloaloidx3 0 *4 > 0 pi oj ° r" 0 z < (1)(1) > r - m > z 0> -T1 z 0 0 0 0 BLOCK B \-, 4,0 tra aup 100010114 • .11114re • NORTH B t. TANDY #411111**** GE DD RIVE 71! • 400Z=. :81D0S 3id A.104ZUOICIX3 upoq tfuoloaloidx3 0 *4 > 0 pi oj ° r" 0 z < (1)(1) > r - m > z 0> -T1 z 0 0 0 0 OSZZ—SO .0N qo a0iVeig1dX3 w 0 z o (1) Depth In Feet Oi 0 w r- 00 -1- 0) fn 0 co 0 o 0 01 7.1 r- 0 0 iJ 00 d I.. 11 11 to qtd®q w r- 0 Depth In Feet 1 1 0 01 0 0 0 • )000000(1 iso © 0 0) ____,...-..0.0..y.b...i0..c;w0..„.::0,1.• • •.!,:,.,„..0.../.0.0.1 0) 01 0 leej UI qldea CO r- 0 0 -1 -4- 3 (Li w r- 0 OGZZ—So '0N got' SO01 AelViliNns 0 SJJd CNV SON1808 Ae101.V8011:1X3 Depth In Feet 1JTTTTfTTr 0 01 01 0 01 499A ILI Ludea Depth In Feet 01 0 0 0 • 01 0 0 >000<XXX r.) w r- 0 r— 0 • >. 01 (11 ul 0 -On 0 \)••aftif:00?,(5;3G.:.?r- • °*°•'L 0) 01 0 409A uI 1-11d9C1 r" O 0 1 • r - o 0 ogzz—s -oN qo SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PITS Depth In Foot 01 01 17.1 00 -I -4' O 0 0 • 0 co 6 A r- O 0 (""; 1 1_,LL I ul Llida0 01 Depth In Feet (11 - 01 ---- 499J U1 LUdea 0 01 0 a • riag.%-I;-,..Y,,` 1 01 01 0 01 0 0 w w r- 000 0 3 oi (0 to • r - o 0 • th co 0 0 w 0 0 LEGEND: Main made fill, clays, sandy with some gravels or gravels, sandy, stiff or medium dense to dense, moist, tan or brown. Organic sands and clays, silty, loose to medium dense, slightly moist to moist, tan or brown. (OL) Sands, clayey, loose to medium dense, moist, brown. (SC,CL) Gravels, silty to clayey with cobbles and boulders, medium dense to dense, moist, brown. (GC,GM) Gravels, sandy to silty with cobbles and boulders, medium dense to dense, moist, brown. (GP,GM) Drive sample. The symbol 11/12 indlc©tes that 11 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive a 2.0 inch 0.D. sampler 12 inches. Drive sample. The symbol 15/67-f---- indicates that 15 blows of a 140 pound hammer failing 30 incl s-1 were required to drive a 2.5'h 0©D. sampler 6 inches. 0 lndioatcs free ground water level. Numeral Indicates number of days after drilling that measurement was taken. tr NOTES: Indicates drill rig or backhoe refusal. Multiple ie symbols indicate more than one boring at the same location.• 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on September 10, 12 and 15, 1997 with a four inch diameter continuous filghf power auger. Exploratory pits were excavated on September 1 9,1 997 with a backhoe. 2. These exploratory borings and pits are subjected the explanations, limitations and conclusions as contained in this report. SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PITS Job No. GS -2250 Fit_ d OSZZ-SO '0N qar 3I'WIX0eiddV all01N00 A \ C1 oo!w pA�ag?� 0 o ,DmII ®� o; 6 0 w0 own M 0- �0 X n.+ w(a Q�� Q. o 0 ® A w a' `< 3 it7 < O co 0ao0 r - 7C0 Z DrD vi rr mm> -{ Z 0 7 O z n D = 0 O 7 6 5 4 3 2 0 4 z 0 • 5 >u • 6 z ab O O 8 ADDITIONAL C CONSTANT PR SSION UNDER E DUE TO WETTING 0.1 APPLIED PRESSURE — KSF Sample of From 10 CLAY, SANDY (CL) LOT 6. BLOCK A AT 14 FEET 10 100 NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 1 24 PCF NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT= 9 . 6 Swell Consolidation T--= n--- �l— COMPRESSION /O EXPANSION 4 4 5 6 7 8 3 NO ADDITIONAL MOVEMENT UNDER (.:4; -------- CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE CNJETT I NG C� 0.1 APPLIED PRESSURE — KSF 1.0 10 100 Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 1 16 pa From LOT 48 , BLOCK A AT 3.5 FEET NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT= 14.9 Swell Consolidation +�_ _1 w _ _ 11_ G' TG 7 12 10 ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 10 0z <12 z14 0 w X16 0 01 0.1 APPLDED PRESSURE — KSF 1.0 10 100 Sample of CLAY, SANDY ( .1 ) NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 94 PCF From 1 FIT 5C) , RI fC'K A AT 3. 5 FFFT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT= 6.2 % Swell Consolidation '1"- _1 I - -- -u1_ L PERCENT PASSING HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR 45 MIN 15 MIN 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 TIME READINGS 60 MIN 19 MIN 4 MIN 1 MIN '200 ' 100 U.S. STANDARD SERIES '50'40'30 '16 '10'8 CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS '4 3/8" 3/4" 11/2" 3" 5'6` 8" 0 10 20 30 40 20 60 70 80 90 0 100 001 002 005 009 019 .037 .074 149 297 590 1 19 2.0 2 38 4.76 9 52 19 1 36 1 76 2 127 200 0.42 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NONPLASTIC) SAND GRAVEL FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE J COARSE I COBBLES PERCENT RETAINED Sample ofSAND, CLAYEY ( SC) GRAVEL 9 % SAND 57 From LOT 1, BLOCK A AT 11.5 TO 13 FEET SILT & CLAY 34 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX % PERCENT PASSING HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR TIME READINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. '200 '100 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 U.S. STANDARD SERIES '50 '40'30 '16 '10'8 • c 3/¢L ill SQUARE OPENINGS /4" 11/2" 3" 5"6" 6" 0 10 20 30 40 50 Z 60 70 80 10 90 0 100 001 002 005 009 019 037 .074 149 297 590 1 19 2 0 2.38 4 76 9 52 19 1 36 1 76.2 127 200 0.42 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SAND FINE J MEDIUM 1 COARSE FINE J COARSE 1 COBBLES CLAY (PLASTIC) 10 SILT (N3N-PLASTIC) GRAVEL Sample of GRAVEL , SILTY ( GM ) GRAVEL 46 % SAND 34 From LOT 11 , BLOCK A AT 4 FEET SILT & CLAY 20 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX Gradation Tact Deici cite % PERCENT PASSING HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR 744R 45 MIN 16 MIN 60 MIN, 19 MIN 4 MIN 1 MIN ' 200 ' 100 TIME READINGS 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 U.S STANDARD SERIES '50 '40'30 '16 '10'8 CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS '4 3.'8" 3i4" i1/2" 3" 5"6" 8" 0 0 .001 002 005 .009 019 037 074 149 .297 .590 1.19 2.0 2 38 4 76 0.42 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 9.52 19.1 36.1 10 20 30 40 60 70 80 90 100 76 2 127 200 152 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NONPLASTIC) SAND GRAVEL FINE MEDIUM COAI:SE FINE COARSE COBBLES PERCENT RETAINED Sample of GRAVEL , S IL TY ( GM ) GRAVEL 45 % SAND From LOT 47 , BLOCK A AT 4 FEET SILT & CLAY 13 % LIQUICY�I-I PLASTICITY INDEX l ` ) % % % HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR TIME READINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN '200 '100 100 90 80 70 L7 60 "9 50 U 40 a 30 20 10 U.S. STANDARD SERIES '50 '40'30 '16 '10'8 CLEAR SQUARE! '4 3/8" 314" 11/2 0 001 002 005 009 3"9 037 074 149 .297 .590 1 19 2 0 2 3E 4 76 0,42 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS 9 52 19 1 36.1 GS 3' 5"6" 8" 0 10 20 30 40 2 50 60 70 80 90 100 76.2 127 200 152 CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SAND GRAVEL FINE I MEDIUM 1 COARSE FINE 1 COARSE • I COBBLES Sample of GRAVEL, SANDY ( GP ) GRAVEL S0 % SAND 40 0/0 From LOT 52 , BLOCK A AT 4 FEET SILT & CLAY I 0 % LIQUID LIMIT 0/0 PLASTICITY INDEX Gradation Sample of SAND, CLAYEY (SC) GRAVEL 12 From LOT 52, BLOCK F AT 4 FEET SILT &CLAY 43 PLASTICITY INDEX SAND 45 LIQUID LIM(1(\____% ° CENT PASSING HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR TIME READINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN 4 MIN. 1 MIN '200 '100 '50 '40'30 '16 '10'8 '4 3/8 5"6" 8" 100 0 U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE 047 90 80 7C 60 50 40 30 20 10 10 20 30 0 40 z 50 Z 60 c 70 80 90 0 100 001 002 005 009 019 037 074 149 297 .590 1 19 2 0 2 38 4 76 9 52 19 1 36.1 76.2 127 200 0 42 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SAND GRAVEL FINE MEDIUM 1 COARSE FINE l COARSE 1 COBBLES Sample of GRAVEL % SAND % From SILT & CLAY % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX % Gradation Tact Diaz' i fc 25 45 100 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS I SIEVE ANALYSIS HR 7 u7 TIME READINGS U.S STANDARD SERIES MIN 16 MN 60 MIN 19 MIN 4 MIN 1 MIN '200 ' 100 '50 '40'30 ' 16 '10'8 '4 CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 3/8" 3/4" Iv:" 3" 5"6" 8" 0 90 10 BO 20 70 30 (9 0 EZ-, a 60 40 2 50 .,0 Z w a 40 60 c a 30 70 20 80 10 90 0 100 001 002 005 .009 019 037 074 149 297 .590 1 19 2 0 2.38 4 76 9.52 19 1 36.1 76.2 127 200 0.42 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SAND GRAVEL FINE 1 MEDIUM I COARSE FINE I COARSE I COBBLES Sample of SAND, CLAYEY (SC) GRAVEL 12 From LOT 52, BLOCK F AT 4 FEET SILT &CLAY 43 PLASTICITY INDEX SAND 45 LIQUID LIM(1(\____% ° CENT PASSING HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR TIME READINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN 4 MIN. 1 MIN '200 '100 '50 '40'30 '16 '10'8 '4 3/8 5"6" 8" 100 0 U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE 047 90 80 7C 60 50 40 30 20 10 10 20 30 0 40 z 50 Z 60 c 70 80 90 0 100 001 002 005 009 019 037 074 149 297 .590 1 19 2 0 2 38 4 76 9 52 19 1 36.1 76.2 127 200 0 42 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SAND GRAVEL FINE MEDIUM 1 COARSE FINE l COARSE 1 COBBLES Sample of GRAVEL % SAND % From SILT & CLAY % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX % Gradation Tact Diaz' i fc • SLOPE PER OSHA SLOPE PER REPORT I _ BACKFILL BELOW GRADE WALL�T V r 1 e 1 � ENCASE PIPE IN WASHED ; CONCRETE AGGREGATE (ASTM �i C33. NO. 57 OR NO. 67). EXTEND GRAVEL TO AT LEAST 41 1/2 HEIGHT OF FOOTING. 1 1 COVER GRAVEL WITH FILTER FABRIC OR ROOFING FELT. L NOTE: DRAIN SHOULD BE AT LEAST 2 INCHES BELOW BOTTOM OF VOID AND FOOTING AT THE HIGHEST POINT AND SLOPE DOWNWARD TO A POSITIVE GRAVITY OUTLET OR TO A SUMP WHERE WATER CAN BE REMOVED BY PUMPING. PROVIDE PVC SHEETING GLUED TO FOUNDATION WALL TO REDUCE MOISTURE PENETRATION. REINFORCING STEEL PER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS. PROVIDE POSITIVE SLIP JOINT BETWEEN SLAB AND WALL FLOOR SLAB,, (c _ I OR PAD F00 8" MINIMUM OR BEYOND 1:1 SLOPE FROM BOTTOM OF FOOTING. (WHICHEVER IS GREATER) 4 --INCH DIAMETER PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE. THE PIPE SHOULD L31 LAIn IN A TRENCH WITH A OP(. RANGING BETWEEN 1/8 INCH ANI) 1/4 INCH DROP ('( P 1 001 OF DRAIN. EXTERIOR FOUNDATION WALL DRAIN PASSING_ I PASSING 1 �I NO. 4 NO. 200 SOIL TYPE II SIEVE SIEVE (%) (%) 91 I 34 SAND, CLAYEY (SC) CLAY, SILTY (CL -ML) CLAY, SANDY (CL) CLAY, SANDY (CL) GRAVEL, SILTY (GM) GRAVEL, SILTY (GM) CLAY, SANDY (CL) CLAY, SANDY (CL) GRAVEL, SANDY (GP) SAND. CLAYEY (SC) 1 r 73 O c) O r) 54 55 50 88 UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE S®L6BL'E. STRENGTH SULI='ATE (Ps1) (%) W NATURAL DENSITY (pcf) N T. T. N N T r NATURAL MOISTURE (%) 23.7 10.6 Q1 O N ® N N N b 2.4 5.0 DEPTH (FEET) 11.5-13 6.5 14 24 V C Q B L6A Q Q J m J OJ=_ -a L52A L52F 0:\1006)330.6071nwOnommn sub-EP.iwg 5'u e vu 200 .S:OSpm R'ofte2 l.ro, 'n0 '007 02200, War* S00'47 23 626'99 wu '+- ti U.; c3 2 5837/13 7 N311d3iS 0 as o a4 S F oys s, -51 uia/I 0 a pori o ao:.R O S Yt" I• ma w a b u • 4 4 p m 4 N G N w •• ? rl FO' a ^N npn J °3.q m r` Nay O y 0>„ J ' w S q b O ti "p p �6, rzl i �44,cel. qa y �+1 i`j 4h ( O '`V ry o� ' w 0 a c N .,�, m V n` g 1 Z j p 4S c P �' no 4 Cy. A n N N a ZO" 4 q uorsrArpq ns J