HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Application—,r tow
6/11/96.
Sketch 1;1an
Preliminary Plan
Final Plat
SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM
SIif3UTVTSTON NAME: Petts-Holmes
Robert F. Petty, Cathleen E. Holmes
OWNER: 109 Weinmanns Blvd. Wayne, New Jersey 07470
ENGINEER/PLANNER/SURVEYOR: Survco. 214 8th St. Suite 21 0enL9-a_d-Bpr111gs, ('o.
LOCATION: Section 4 & 33 Township 6 & 7 Range - 8.7 w.______ _
WATER SOURCE: Shared Well 15 gpm max, Permit # 188850_(coPY_-. a.t_t-ac_tie0.)._c1.1,1na-d
to individuallnt-.r. r.
SEWAGE DISPOSAL, METHOD:
Septic leach field.
PUBLIC ACCESS VIA:
County road #113
EXISTING ZONING:
Ag-ricultural
EASEMENTS: Utility Norie exclusive 60ft: easPmPnt, bonk_637 I,g-2_6-5--041- ac.
Ditch Water ditch #116A on proposed 37.5ac
TOTAL UL;VELOT'MrN'.r APFA c
(1) Residential
Number Acres
Single Famiy __-Two (2) �r -�-5 ac.
Duplex --
Multi-family
Mobile Home
(2) Commercial Floor Area --
(3) Industrial
(4) Public/Quasi-Public
(5) Open Space/Common Area
TOTAL:
PARKING SPACES:
Residential- 5-6
Commercial
Industrial
sq. ft.
sq. ft.
Acres
39.8
Form No., ,
GWS -25 '
APPLICANT
OFFICE OF THE Slip ENGINEER
COLORADO DIVISICM OF WATER RESOURCES
618 Centennial Bldg., 1313 Sherman 8t., Denver, Colorado 80203
(303) 866-3581
•
894
WELL PERMIT NUMBER 188850
DIV. 5 CNTY. 23 WD 38 DES. BASIN MD
Lot: Block: Filing: Subdiv:
ROBERT F PETTS & CATHLEEN E HOLMES
130 RIDGE RD
WEST MILFORD NJ 07480-
(201) 728-1845
PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A WELL
APPROVED WELL LOCATION
GARFIELD COUNTY
SE 1/4 SW 1/4 Section 33
Twp 6 S
RANGE 87 W 6th P.M.
DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES
900 Ft. from South Section Line
2900 FL from East Section Line
ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT
CONDfi'IONS OF APPROVAL
1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of the
permit does not assure the applicant that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another
owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action.
2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless
approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump
Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18.
3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(II)(A) as the only well on a tract of land of 39.11 acres described as
that portion of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 33, Twp. 6 South, Rng. 87 West, and that portion of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 4, Twp.
7 South, Rng. 87 West of the 6th P.M., Garfield County, being more particularly described on the attached exhibit
A.
4) Approved for an amendment of legal description of permit no. 169139 (canceled). The issuance of this permit
hereby cancels permit no. 169139.
5) The use of ground water from this well is limited to fire protection, ordinary household purposes inside three single
family dwellings, the irrigation of not more than one (1) acre of home gardens and lawns and the watering of
poultry, domestic animals, and livestock on a farm or ranch.
6) The maximum pumping rate shall not exceed 15 GPM.
7) The return flow from the use of this well must be through an individual waste water disposal system of 'the
non -evaporative type where the water is returned to the same stream system in which the well is located.
8) This well shall be constructed not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit.
y,--) 7-.) 7-y'—
OWNER'S GOPY
APPROVED 1//
JD2 74/414
SUte Engineer - BY
,% GG
Receipt No. 0385635B DATE ISSUED j U 1, 2 7 1995' EXPIRATION DATE J U L 2 7 1997
4.40001, TO' 44401 7" "
.•, a 7,,f
eta totnrnluttine ' 1410: Rev; ,
J —�
f •i;
OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL 1111.E INSURANCE COMPANY, a Minnesota torporetion, herein Called the Company, for a
valuable consideration, hereby commit: m issue its policy or policies of tido insurance. as identified in Schedule A, in favor
* * of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mongeges of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land
described or referred m in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiurne end chargas therefor; ell subject to the previsions of
71C Schedule A and B and to the Conditions end SvDulations hereof.
This Commitment shell be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or
* policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of die issuance of this
* * Commitment or by subsequent endorsement.
This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and ell liability and obilgations
hereunder shell cease and terminate ais months altar the Ouija date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for
shell issue, whichever first occurs. provided that the failure to issue such pricy or policies is not the fault of the Company.
CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS
1. The term "mortgage", when used herein, shall include deed of trust, mist deed. or other secunty instrument.
2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other
matter affecting me estate or interest or mongege thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule 5 hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge
to the Company in wrung, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced
by failure of the proposed Insured to se disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowtedge to the Company. or if the Company otnerwise acquires
actual knowledge of any such defect, hen, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company et its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly. but
such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipuletions.
3. Liability of the Company under this Commitrnent shad be only to the named proposed Insured and such parries
included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith lel to
comply with the requirements hereof or (bI to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule 8. or lc) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this
Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for end such liability is subject m the insuring
provisions and the Condroons and Stipulations and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of poky or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are
hereby incorporated by reference and made a pan of this Commitment except as expressly modified heroin,
4. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bong against the Company
arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment muat be based on end are subiact to the
provisions of this Commitment.
STANDARD EXCEPTIONS
In addition to the matters contained in the Conditions end Stipulations and Exclusions from Coverage above
referred to, this Commitment is also subject to the following
1. Rights or deems of parties In possession not shown by the public records,
2. Easements, or claims Of easements, not shown by the public records
3, Discrepancies, conflicts In boundary lines, shortage in arae, encroachments, and any facts which • correct
survey and inspection of the premises would disclose end which are not shown by the public records.
4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore of hereafter furnished, imposed by mew
5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created. first appeanng in the public records
or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior in the dere the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this
Commitment.
end not shown by the public records.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Old Republic National tide Insurance Company has caused its corporate name end vel to
be hereunto affixed by its duly euthonied officers on the dere shown in Schedule A to be valid when countersigned by a vandadng officer or other authorised signatory.
Autha ted Signatory
WRs Fro 2612
01.0 MPUMLIC NATIONAL TRU INSURANCE COMPANY
A Snack Compaq
400 Srcond Aiwa SouW, Mitelego/is, Minnesota 55401
15111371-1111
Attest
FEB 3 '93 15:27 3039273763
FAGE.02
LAND T•LE GUARANTER•CQMPANY
Representing Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ORDER
February 01, 1993
Our Order No.: GW1677
BUYER/OWNER:
SELLER:
ADDRESS:
1031 EXCHANGE CO., INC.
Po>it•It" brand fax transmittal memo 7671
N of p►ON ►
MARVIN L. FENDER and ROBERTA B. FENDER, as Joint
Tenants
GARFIELD COUNTY
ASPEN TITLE CORPORATION
SUITE 102
600 E. HOPKINS AVENUE
ASPEN, CO 81611
1 Attn: ESCROW 303 920-4050
BASALT REALTY
P.O. BOX 737
BASALT, CO 81621
1 Attn: LESLIE NEWBURY 303 927-3174
PICKED UP FOR DELIVERY ,AM PM
COVENANTS ATTACHED YES NO
FOR TITLE QUESTIONS CALL DAVID HARRIS 303 945-2610
FOR CLOSING QUESTIONS CALL MARGARET R. JOY 303 945--2610
rrr
ALTO COMMITMENT •
SCHEDULE A
Our Order No. OW1677
For Information Only
GARFIELD COUNTY
- Charges -
ALTA Owner Policy $528.00
Alta Lender Policy $50:00
Tax Certif. $10.00
- - TOTAL - - $588.00
****WITH YOUR REMITTANCE PLEASE REFER TO OUR ORDER NO. GW1577.****
1. Effective Date: January 21, 1993 at 8:00 A.M.
2. Policies to be issued, and proposed Insured:
"ALTA" Owner's Policy $115,000.00
1987 Revision (Amended 1990)
Proposed Insured:
1031 EXCHANGE CO., INC.
((Robert F. Petts and Cathleen E. Holmes)
"ALTA" Loan Policy $15,000.00
1987 Revision (Amended 1990)
Proposed Insured:
MARVIN L. FENDER AND ROBERTA B. FENDER, AS JOINT TENANTS
3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in
this Commitment and covered herein is:
A Fee simple
4. Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the
effective date hereof vested in:
MARVIN L. FENDER and ROBERTA B. FENDER, as Joint Tenants
5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as
follows:
PAGE 1
FEES 3 '93 15:27 303327371;3 PHGE . 03
BENT 6r': ENSHLT F'EPLTv; 2- 3-Q3
•
12:20PM ; 303Q273T63-) 201 nnnnnnnn;t$ 4
ALTA COMMITMENT
SCHEDULE A
•
Our Order No. GW1677
A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN GARFIELD COUNTY COLORADO DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 4: TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE SIXTH
PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN
LOT 3.
SECTION 33: TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE SIXTH
PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN
SE1/4SW1/4, AND THAT PART OF THE W1/2SW1/4SE3./4
WHICH IS LOCATED IN GARFIELD COUNTY; AND ALL THAT
PART OF THE W1/2SW1/4NW1/4SE1/4 WHICH LIES
WESTERLY OF THE COUNTY ROAD RIGHT OF WAY AND
WHICH IS LOCATED IN GARFIELD COUNTY.
PAGE 2
SENT B`r': BNSPLT PENLT`r' ; 2- 3-93 12: 20PM ; 30392777F,3-) 201 nnnnnnnn; kt 5
ALTA COMMITMENT •
SCHEDULE B-1
(Requirements) Our Order No. GW1677
The following are the requirements to be complied with:
1. Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of
the full consideration for the estate or interest to be
insured.
2. Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be
insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to -wit:
3. PARTIAL RELEASE OF DEED OF TRUST DATED April 27, 1990, FROM MARVIN
L. FENDER and ROBERTA B. FENDER, as Joint Tenants TO .14E PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF
GARFIELD COUNTY FOR THE USE OF THE FARM CREDIT BANK OF WIC8ITA TO SECURE
THE SUM OF $280,000.00 RECORDED April 27, 1990, IN BOOK 777 AT PAGE 759 AND
RE-RECORDED MAY 15, 1990 IN HOOK 779 AT PAGE 31.
4. CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OR CERTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING OF 1031
EXCHANGE CO., INC. A COLORADO CORPORATION, ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE
OF COLORADO MUST BE DELIVERED TO AND APPROVED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE
COMPANY.
5. WARRANTY DEED FROM MARVIN L. FENDER and ROBERTA B. FENDER, as Joint Tenants
TO 1031 EXCHANGE CO., INC. CONVEYING SUBJECT PROPERTY.
6. DEED OF TRUST FROM 1031 EXCHANGE CO., INC. TO THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF
GARFIELD COUNTY FOR THE USE OF MARVIN L. FENDER AND ROBERTA B. FENDER, AS
JOINT TENANTS TO SECURE THE SUM OF $15,000.00.
sss
THE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDERS OFFICE REQUIRES RETURN
ADDRESSES ON DOCUMENTS SENT FOR RECORDING!!
=
PAGE 3
SEI IT B'r': Bi 45 LT PENLT`r'
; 2- 3-93 12:21Ph1 ;
•
ALTA COMMITMENT
7.;n7g273 ; F.3-4 271 lltll1G901f1111;
SCHEDULE B-2
•
(Exceptions) Our Order No. GW1677
The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the
following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of
the Company:
1. Standard Exceptions 1 through 5 printed on the cover sheet.
6. Taxes and assessments not yet due or payable and spacial
assessments not yet certified to the Treasur'er's office.
7. Any unpaid taxes or assessments against said land.
8. Liens for unpaid water and sewer charges, if any.
9. THE EFFECT OF INCLUSIONS IN ANY GENERAL OR SPECIFIC WATER CONSERVANCY, FIRE
PROTECTION, SOIL CONSERVATION OR OTHER DISTRICT OR INCLUSION IN ANY WATER
SERVICE OR STREET IMPROVEMENT AREA.
10. WATER RIGHTS OR CLAIMS TO WATER RIGHTS.
11. RIGHT OF PROPRIETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORE
THEREFROM SHOULD THE SAME BE FOUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES
AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED September 06, 1928, IN BOOK
112 AT PAGE 466.
RITY OF
12. UNITED STATES FAS RESERVED IN UNITED OR DITCHES OR CANALs CSTA ES PATENT RECORDEDONSTRUCTED BY THE September THE
RIGHT OF WAY September06,
1928, IN BOOK 112 AT PAGE 466.
13. EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY FOR DITCHES AND CANALS AS SET FORTH IN THE MAPF
AND STATEMENTS FOR: LANDIS CANAL RECORDED MAY 13, 1959 AS RECEPTION
NO. 205365, N
WATERS COULTER CREEK&DITCHCANDEVON D SPRINGS1RESERVOIR 888 AS C0
NOS.THE MCNULTY DITCHES 1 1 a
NO. 7298,,AND
2 RECORDED JULY 29, 1899 AS RECEPTION NO. 21910.
14. RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT DER INAINSTRUMENTHOLY
RE ORDEDEAUGUSTCIZ$SO980TINNBOOK 55:
INC. BY HAROLD
AT PAGE 707.
15. EASEMENT FOR ACCESS AND UTILITY PURPOSES AS GRANTED BY HAROLD E. FENDER
ET. AL., IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 13, 1983 IN HOOK 637 AT PAGE 265.
PAGE 4
SEHT Er': EHSHLT FEALTY.
2- 3-9.3 12:22F'H
3n392 3 53� 2n1 nnnnnnnn; 4
LAND TITLE GUARANTE COMPANY
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Required by Senate Bill 91-14
A) The subject real property may be located in a special taxing
district.
B) A Certificate of Taxes Dua listing each taxing jurisdiction
may be obtained from the county Treasurer or the County
Treasurer's authorized agent.
C) The information regarding special districts and the boundaries
of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County
Commissioners, the County Clark and Recorder, or the County
Assessor.
Required by senate Bill 92-143
A) A certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction
shall be obtained from the County Treasurer or the county
Treasurer's authorized agent.
May 31, 1996
Mr. Bob Petts
104 Weinmanns Blvd.
Wayne, New Jersey 07470
Subject: Geologic Hazards Evaluation
Petts Property, Missouri Heights
Garfield County, Colorado
Job No. GS -1848A
Gentlemen:
EDI
This letter presents the results of our geologic hazards evaluation for the
Petts Property in the Missouri Heights area of Garfield County, Colorado. The
purpose of our evaluation was to identify geologic conditions and determine any
potential geologic hazards that may influence development of the property and
determine percolation rates to establish the feasibility of using Infiltration Sewage
Disposal Systems (ISDS).
Information presented herein was developed from a review of published
geologic maps and literature, a reconnaissance level geologic and geologic hazards
mapping of the site, widely spaced exploratory borings, percolation testing and our
experience. None of the geologic conditions found will prevent the development of
the property as planned, however, several geologic conditions should be considered
when siting structures and planning access drive alignments. The following
paragraphs provide descriptions of the planned development site conditions,
geologic conditions, potential geologic hazards and presents percolation test results
and our recommendations.
Planned Development
The Petts Property is locatedl in the Missouri Heights area of Garfield County,
Colorado. Highway 82 is approximately 6 miles to the south. Access is from
Highway 82 via either Catherine Store Road or Cattle Creek Road to County Road
113 which is along the west property boundary. The Petts Property is approximately
39.81 acres and is made up of two parcels separated by County Road 113. The
Petts Parcel is approximately 37.5 acres and is located south and east of County
Road 113. A 2.3 acre parcel is north of County Road 113. Plans are to subdivide
the Petts Property into the 37.5 acre Petts Parcel and a 2.3 acre parcel for
development with a single family residence to be built on each parcel.
CTL/THOMPSON, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
234 CENTER DRIVE • GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 81601 • (970) 945-2809
Site Conditions
Shippees Draw trends from the east down to the southwest through the
property. The Petts property occupies the valley floor and the south side of the
Shippees Draw valley. The 2.3 acre parcel is on the slopes above the valley floor
on the north side of Shippees Draw. Ground surfaces on the valley floor slope down
the center of the valley at grades visually estimated at 5 to 20 percent. Ground
surfaces on the south side of the valley slope down to the north at approximately 20
to 50 percent. Ground surfaces at the 2.3 acre parcel slope down to the south at
approximately 10 to 15 percent. Vegetation consists of irrigated pasture grasses and
weeds on the valley floor with sage, scrub oaks and sparse grasses and weeds on
the valley sides.
We investigated geologic conditions by reviewing published geologic
literature and maps, drilling three (3) exploratory borings, one (1) profile boring and
six (6) percolation borings and performing a reconnaissance level geologic and
geologic hazards mapping of the site. Locations of our exploratory borings are
shown on the attached Figure 1. Summary logs of our exploratory borings are
shown on the attached Figure 2.
Geologic Conditions
At the site, surficial deposits of Quaternary aged colluvium and alluvium
overlie bedrock consisting of the Pennsylvanian aged Eagle Valley Formation and
the Pennsylvanian to Permian aged Maroon Formation. The colluvium consists of
silty to clayey sands and gravels with cobbles deposited by slope wash and gravity
action. The alluvium consists of sandy clays deposited by water. The Eagle Valley
Formation consists of grey and reddish grey, poorly cemented sandstones and
siltstones with layers of evaporite minerals (gypsum, anhydrite and halite). The
Maroon Formation consists of reddish brown, well cemented, interbedded
sandstones and siltstones with claystone layers. Interpreted geologic units are
shown on the attached Figure 3.
Potential Geologic Hazards
Our investigation identified a potential subsidence hazard area and a
potentially unstable slope area on the Petts Parcel. No potential geologic hazards
were identified on the 2.3 acre parcel. Potential Geologic hazards are shown on the
attached Figure 4.
The Evaporite minerals in the Eagle VaI ey Formation are prone to forming
solution cavities when exposed to groundwater. Overburden materials tend to cave
into the solution cavities. When caving propagates to the ground surface,
subsidence features or "sinkholes" are produced. We observed three surface
subsidence features in the west part of the Petts Property. We recommend avoiding
aligning access drives or siting structures in the potential surface subsidence hazard
area shown on Figure 4.
MR. BOB PETTB
JOB NO. GS -1848 2
• i
We did not observe any evidence of active slope instability at the site,-
opinion,
ite:opinion, slopes with grades in excess of 25 percent should be considered to be
potentially unstable. Excavations into the potentially unstable slope area shown on
Figure 4 will need to be addressed by a qualified geotechnical engineer.
Percolation Testing
Percolation tests were performed at the Petts Parcel and the 2.3 acre parcel
at the approximately locations shown as P-1 through P-6 on the attached Figure 1.
Percolation borings P-1 through P-3 are on the 2.3 acre parcel. Percolation borings
P-4 through P-6 and the Profile 1 boring are on the Petts Parcel. Results of
percolation tests are shown on the attached Figures 5 and 6. In our opinion use of
Infiltration Sewage Disposal Systems (ISDS) will be appropriate for the Petts Parcel
and the 2.3 acre parcel.
This Investigation was conducted in a manner consistent with the level of
care and skill ordinarily exercised by engineering geologists currently practicing
under similar conditions in the locality of the project. No other warranty, express or
implied, is made.
We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have
any questions, please call.
Very truly yours,
CTL/THOMPSON, INC.
Wilson L. "Liv" Bowden
Professional Geologist
WLB:JM:Ip
Review- - by:
n Mechling;P
anch Manager •
3
•
MR. BOB PETTs
JOB NO. 09-1818 3
•PROPOSED PITS PROPERTY SUBD ' SION
PETTS PARCET AND 2.3 ACRE PARCEL
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
• -••••..-•• ..—..•'\SIYIAF
• Fs
TH-2
Job No. GS- 1848A
RSFILE 1
P-4
P-5
TH-3
P-6
APPROXIMATE
BUILDING ENVELOPE
PETTS PROPERTY
•
COUNTY ROAD 113
CATTLE CREEK
ROAD
To GLENWOOD
SPRINGS
HIGHWAY 82
VICINITY N,AP
NO SCALE
To ASPEN
SCALE: 1 INCH = 200'
PROPOSED PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
TO CIIONWOOD PASS
SI TE
2.3 ACRE PARCEL
COUNTY ROAD 113
Fig. 1
•
Depth In Feet
F°
IMM
IMO
INMP
5
IMO
-10
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
0
5
10
15
-- 20
IMM
25
TH-1 • TH-2 TH-3
2.3 Acre Parcel
50/0
] 50/8
3 50/3
2.3 Acre Parcel
P-1 P-2 P-3
Job No. GS -1848A
•
Petts Parcel 7
•
7/12
••e
j•,] 18/12
•
i
�•s
�; 25/12
•
i•
• •s
50/3
Petts Parcel
P-4 P-5
•
•e
13/12
8/12
12/12
P-6 Profile 1
0
5
10
—
20
25
0
5
10
MN
MM
MM
—
MW
MN
199,4 III tdeli
CS
1 •
LEGEND:
NOTES:
SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
Organic sandy clays, soft,
moist, brown. (OL)
Sand, clayey to silty, loose to medium
dense, slightly moist to moist, brown.
(SC, SM)
Clay, sandy, medium stiff to stiff,
slightly moist, brown. (CL,CL-ML)
Gravel, sandy to silty with cobbles,
dense to very dense, moist, reddish
brown. (GP,GM)
Sandstone and Siltstone, hard to very
hard, moist, reddish brown and gray.
Drive sample. The symbol 50/0
indicates that 50 blows of a 140
pound hammer falling 30 inches
were required to drive a 2.0 inch
O.D. sampler 0 inches.
Drive sample. The symbol 50/8
indicates that 50 blows of a 140
pound hammer falling 30 inches
were required to drive a 2.5 inch
O.D. sampler 8 inches.
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on
May 21 and 22, 1996 with a four inch
diameter continuous flight power
auger.
2. No free groundwater was found
in our exploratory borings during
our field investigation.
3. These borings are subject to the
explanations, limitations and
conclusions as contained in this
report.
Fig. 2
PROPOS* PETTS PROPERTY �
PETTS PARCEL AND 2.3 ACRE PARCEL
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
Job No. GS -1848A
.•••*---•
QAL
••SHIPPEES
QCL
LEGEND:
QAL
QCL
LPPM
Surficial Deposits consisting of
Quaternary aged Alluvium
Surficial Deposits consisting of
Quaternary aged Colluvium
Underlying bedrock consisting of
Pennsylvanian to Permian aged Maroon Formation
13\1;3 Underlying bedrock consisting of
�E V Pennsylvanian aged Eagle Valley Formation
L ��O
W
Approximate contact between
underlying bedrock units
QAL Approxirnate contact between
•a
QcL
surficial deposits
QCL
INTERPRETED GEOLOGIC UNITS MAP
SCALE: 1 INCH = 200 FEET
J
Fig. 3
PROPED PETTS PROPERTY SUBDIVISION
PETTL. PARCEL AND 2.3 AC. PARCEL
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
SUBSIDENCE FEATURES
POTENTIAL SUBSIDENCE
HAZARD AREA
•
• • • . • • s,
•
. `SORgk/
POTENTIALLY UNSTABLE
SLOPES HAZARD AREA
i •
SCALE: 1 INCH = 200 FEET
POTENTIAL GEOLOGIC HAZARDS MAP
Job No. GS -1848 A
Fig. 4
SATURATION AND PREPARATION
DATE: 05-29-96
TIME AT START OF SATURATION: 6:00
PERCOLATION TEST
DATE: 05-30-96
WATER IN BORING AFTER 24 HOURS
YES x NO
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
HOLE
NUMBER
DEPTH
(INCHES)
TIME AT
START OF
INTERVAL
TIME
INTERVAL
DEPTH TO WATER
CHANGE
IN WATER
DEPTH
(INCHES)
PERCOLA-
TION RATE
(MIN/INCH)
(MINUTES)
START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
P-1
27.0
10:15
20
12.75
14.5
1.75
11
10:35
20
14.5
15.5
1.0
20
10:55
20
15.5
16.25
0.75
26
11:15
20
16.25
17.25
1.0
20
11:35
20
17.25
17.75
0.5
40
11:55
20
17.75
18.25
0.5
40
12:15
20
18.25
18.75
0.5
40
12:35
20
18.75
19.25
0.5
40
P-2
20.5
10:15
20
7.25
7.75
0.5
40
10:35
20
7.75
8.75
1.0
20
10:55
20
8.75
8.75
11:15
20
8.75
9.25
0.5
40
11:35
20
9.25
9.75
0.5
40
11:55
20
9.75
10.0
0.25
80
12:15
20
10.0
10.25
0.25
80
12:35
20
10.25
10.5
0.25
80
P-3
19.5
10:15
20
6.25
8.75
2.5
8
10:35
20
8.75
10.0
1.25
16
10:55
20
10.0
11.0
1.0
20
11:15
20
11.0
11.75
0.75
26
11:35
20
11.75
12.25
0.5
40
11:55
20
12.25
12.75
0.5
40
12:15
20
12.75
13.25
0.5
40
12:35
20
13.25
13.75
0.5
40
Job No. GS -184.8A
Fig. 5
SATURATION AND PREPARATION
DATE: 05-29-96
TIME AT START OF SATURATION:
PERCOLATION TEST
DATE: 05-29-96
WATER IN BORING AFTER 24 HOURS
YES x NO
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
HOLE
NUMBER
DEPTH
(INCHES)
TIME AT
START OF
INTERVAL
TIME
INTERVAL
DEPTH TO WATER
CHANGE
IN WATER
DEPTH
(INCHES)
PERCOLA-
TION RATE
(MIN/INCH)
(MINUTES)
START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
P-4
42.0
2:15
120
11.0
14.5
3.5
34
4:15
30
14.5
15.5
1.0
30
4:45
30
15.5
16.75
1.25
24
5:15
30
16.75
18.0
1.25
24
P-5
40.75
2:15
120
17.75
22.5
4.75
25
4:15
30
22.5
23.5
1.0
30
4:45
30
23.5
24.75
1.25
24
5:15
30
24.75
25.75
1.0
30
P-6
33.75
2:15
120
13.0
17.0
4.0
30
4:15
30
17.0
18.25
1.25
24
4:45
30
18.25
19.75
1.50
20
5:15
30
19.75
21.25
1.50
20
Job No. GS -184.8A
Fig. 6
CTL/THOMPSON, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
•
SCOPE
•
This report presents the results of our soils and foundation investigation for
the Proposed Petts Residence to be built on the Petts Property adjacent to County
• Road 113 in Garfield County, Colorado. We explored subsurface conditions at the
site to provide foundation recommendations for the building. This report includes
a description of the subsurface conditions found in our exploratory borings, a
recommended foundation system and geotechnical criteria for it 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. A summary of our conclusions is presented below.
•
•
•
•
•
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
1. Our exploratory borings in the planned building footprint penetrated
0.5 feet of organic, sandy clays underlain by 24.5 feet of medium
dense to dense, slightly moist to moist, clayey to silty sands in our
T1-1-2 and 19.5 feet of medium stiff to stiff, slightly moist sandy clays
in our Thi -3. No free groundwater was found in our exploratory
borings the day of drilling.
2. The building can be founded on footings bearing on a mat of densely
compacted granular structural fill (See "Foundation" section).
3. The basement slab -on -grade floor should be constructed on a mat of
densely compacted granular structural fill (See "Basement Slab -On -
Grade").
4. A ground surface slope away from the residence should be maintained
at all times to reduce wetting of soils below foundations.
SITE CONDITIONS
The building footprint is near the middle of a triangular piece of land that
makes up the majority of the Petts Property. The footprint occupies the more
• moderate slopes which form the south side of the Shippees Draw valley. To the
north of the building footprint is Shippees Draw with County Road 113 beyond. The
MR. BOB PETTS
CTL/T GS -18488
•
1
•
•
•
valley floor is irrigated pasture. The ground surface of the lower part of the south
slopes on which the building will be constructed is covered with sage, sparse
grasses and weeds.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The Petts Residence will be a single family residence. The building will be
a two story post and beam home. The lower level will be a walkout basement.
• Plans are for the basement floor to be a slab -on -grade. Part of the upper level living
area floors will be above the lower level and part will be above a crawlspace.
Maximum excavation depths for the basement will be approximately 8 feet. We
assumed maximum exterior wall loads will be approximately 3 kips per lineal foot
• and maximum interior column Toads will be 15 kips. We should be informed if the
final design differs to allow re-evaluation of the recommendations and criteria
presented herein.
•
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Two (2) exploratory borings(TH-2 and TH-3), three (3) percolation holes(P-4
• through P-6) and one (1) profile hole (Profile 1) were drilled at the approximate
locations shown on Figure 1 to investigate subsurface conditions for the proposed
Petts Residence. Drilling was directed by our laboratory/field manager who logged
the soils and bedrock and obtained samples for testing in our laboratory. Summary
• logs of the soils found in our exploratory borings are shown on Figure 2.
•
1
•
Our exploratory borings in the planned building footprint penetrated 0.5 feet
of organic, sandy clays underlain by 24.5 feet of medium dense to dense, slightly
moist to moist, clayey to silty sands in our TH-2 and 19.5 feet of medium stiff to stiff,
slightly moist sandy clays in our TH-3. No free groundwater was found in our
exploratory borings the day of drilling.
MR. BOB PETTS
CTUT GS -1848B
2
•
SITE GRADING
•
The building will be stepped into the natural slope of the site. Grading plans
were not available at this writing, however, it appears that maximum depths will be
• 8 feet for the basement. The recommended foundation is footings bearing on an at
least 3.0 feet thick mat of densely compacted structural fill (see"Foundation"
section). We recommend that slabs -on -grade bear on structural fill (see "Basement
Slab -On -Grade"). Structural fill should extend horizontally a distance equal to the
• depth of fill beyond the edges of all footings.
We should review grading plans when available to provide geotechnical input
regarding excavation stability. Sides of excavations deeper than 5 feet should be
• sloped or braced. We recommend no slopes steeper than 1 to 1 (horizontal to
vertical). Excavated slopes will tend to collapse and flatten when wetted. We need
to view the excavation prior to constructing the mat of structural fill to confirm that
• soils exposed are as anticipated from our exploratory borings and that our
recommendations presented herein are appropriate.
We believe that the sandy clays are Type B as described in the October, 1989
• Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standards published by the
Department of Labor governing excavations. The publication indicates a maximum
temporary slope of 1 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) for Type B soils.
0
•
Soils removed from the excavation should not be stockpiled at the edge of
the excavation. We recommend the excavated soils be placed at a horizontal
distance from the top of the excavation equal to at least the depth of the excavation.
Free groundwater was not found in our exploratory borings the day of drilling.
Depending on cut depths and time of year, groundwater may enter the excavation
during construction. The excavation floor should be sloped to direct groundwater to
• a positive gravity outfall or sumps where water can be removed by pumping, if
needed.
MR. BOB PETTS
CTL/T GS -1848B
•
3
s
•
Areas to receive fill and floor slab and exterior concrete flatwork subgrade
should be stripped of roots and organic matter. The resulting surface should be
scarified to at least 8 inches deep, moisture conditioned to within 2 percent below
• to 2 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent
of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). Structural fill below
footings, floor slabs or exterior concrete flatwork can be constructed of granular
soils with 100 percent finer than 3 inches and between 10 and 30 percent silt and
• clay sized particles (passing the No. 200 sieve) with a maximum liquid limit (LL) of
30 and a maximum plasticity index (PI) of 10. The soils should be moisture
conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and placed in 8 inch
maximum loose lifts and compacted to at least 100 percent of the maximum dry
• density determined by a standard Proctor density test (ASTM D 698). Placement and
compaction of fill should be observed and tested by a representative of our firm
during construction. If material that does not meet the above specifications is
• considered for use as fill below the building, we should be contacted to evaluate the
suitability of the fill material.
FOUNDATION
•
Our exploratory borings penetrated low density, slightly moist clays which will
consolidate when subjected to increased moisture associated with building on the
site. The consolidation of the soils will likely result in unacceptable building
• settlements. In our opinion these soils are not suitable to support the building
footings. The building can be founded with footings bearing on at least 3.0 feet of
structural fill constructed as discussed above under "Site Grading". The fill should
extend a minimum horizontal distance beyond the edge of footings equal to the
•
depth of fill. The maximum bearing pressure recommended below should result in
total settlements on the order of 1 inch. Differential settlement of about one-half of
the actual total movement should be anticipated along 12 feet of continuous footing
a and between adjacent footing pads. Footings can be designed and constructed
using the following criteria:
MR. BOB PETTS
CTL/T GS -1848B
•
4
•
•
•
•
•
1. Footings should bear on at least 3.0 feet of densely compacted
granular structural fill (see "Site Grading") and be designed for a
maximum soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf on the fill surface;
2. Foundation walls for continuous footings should be reinforced top and
bottom. We recommend the amount of reinforcing steel equivalent to
that required for a simple span of 12 feet with at least two (2)
continuous No. 5 bars in the top and bottom of all foundation walls.
Reinforcement should be designed by a qualified structural engineer;
3. Minimum footing sizes are desirable. We suggest a minimum width of
16 inches for continuous footings and at least 2 feet by 2 feet for
isolated column pads. Larger sizes may be required based on the
structural loads;
4. The soils under exterior footings should be protected from freezing.
We suggest a frost protection depth of 36 inches. The owner should
verify the frost depth requirement with the local area building
department;
5. Backfill along foundation walls and in utility trenches should be
• compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM D 698.
BASEMENT FLOOR SLAB -ON -GRADE
•
The soils which will provide subgrade for slabs -on -grade include low density,
low moisture, highly compressible clays and silts. These soils are not suitable to
support slab -on -grade floors. We recommend basement slab -on -grade floor
• movement be controlled by construction of a structural floor supported by the
foundation system with a crawlspace between the floor and the subgrade soils or
slab -on -grade floors should bear on an at least 2.0 feet thick mat of granular
structural fill. The structural fill below slabs should be similar to material
•
recommended for fill below footings. The fill should be moisture treated and
compacted as recommended for structural fill below footings.
• Structurally supported floors are normally not used in the garage, walks or
patios areas. Driveways, sidewalks and exterior patio slabs are also constructed as
MR. BOB PETTS
CTL/T GS -18488
5
•
• slabs -on -grade. Performance of slabs -on -grade on highly compressible soils is
unpredictable. Slight increases in soil moisture content can cause considerable
settlement and cracking of slabs -on -grade. Slabs -on -grade should bear on a
uniform subgrade. Slabs -on -grade in the garage, walks and patio areas can bear on
• prepared subgrade as discussed under "Site Grading". We recommend the following
precautions for construction of slabs -on -grade at this site:
•
•
•
•
•
1. The usual gravel layer under a slab -on -grade should be omitted to
reduce the risk of water finding its way under the entire slab from a
single source;
2. Slabs should be separated from exterior walls and interior bearing
members with a slip joint which allows for free vertical movement of
slabs;
3. Underslab plumbing should be eliminated where feasible. Where such
plumbing is unavoidable, it should be thoroughly pressure tested
during construction for leaks and should be provided with flexible
couplings. Gas and water lines leading to slab -supported appliances
should be constructed with flexibility;
4. Plumbing and utilities which pass through slabs should be isolated
from the slabs. Heating and air conditioning systems supported by
the slabs should be provided with flexible connections to allow vertical
movement so that slab movement is not transmitted to the duct work;
5. Frequent control joints should be provided in all slabs to reduce
problems associated with shrinkage. The American Concrete Institute
(ACI) recommends control joints be provided at 15 to 20 feet intervals
in both directions;
6. Exterior patio and porch slabs should be designed to function as
independent units. Movement of these slabs should not be
transmitted directly to the residence foundations.
• These precautions will not prevent movement in the event the underlying soils
become wetted, however, they tend to reduce damage if movement occurs.
•
MR. BOB PETTS
CTL/T GS 18488 6
•
•
•
•
•
FOUNDATION AND CRAWLSPACE WALLS
Foundation walls and crawlspace will be subjected to lateral earth pressures.
These walls are restrained and cannot move, therefore, they should be designed for
the "at -rest" lateral earth pressure. Assuming the on site soils are used as backfill,
we recommend using an equivalent fluid density of 50 pcf to calculate lateral earth
pressure. The above equivalent fluid density does not include allowances for
sloping backfill, hydrostatic pressures, live Toads or loads from adjacent structures.
Water from surface run-off (precipitation, snow melt, irrigation) frequently
flows through backfill placed adjacent to foundation walls and collects on the
surface of the comparatively impermeable soils occurring at the bottom of the
• foundation excavation. This can cause damp or wet conditions in below grade areas
of the building. To reduce accumulation of water, we recommend a foundation drain.
The drain should consist of a 4 -inch diameter open joint or slotted PVC pipe
encased in free draining gravel. The drain should lead to a positive gravity outfall
•
or to a sump to be mechanically pumped. A typical foundation drain detail is shown
on Figure 6. Backfill placed adjacent to foundation walls should be moisture
conditioned and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry
• density (ASTM D 698). Adequate crawlspace ventilation should be provided.
•
•
0
SURFACE DRAINAGE
Performance of foundations and concrete flatwork is influenced by moisture
conditions within the subgrade soils. During spring snowmelt, sheetwash will occur
over the ground surfaces at this site. A drainage swale should be constructed uphill
of the building to channelize and direct surface drainage down, around and away
from the building. Surface grading should cause rapid run-off of surface water away
from the building in all directions. Snow from the roof or plowing should not be
piled adjacent to the building. The following precautions should be observed during
construction and maintained at all times after the construction is completed:
MR. BOB PETTS
CTL/T GS -1848B
7
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1. Wetting or drying of the open excavation should be avoided;
2. A drainage swale should be constructed uphill of the building to direct
surface drainage down, around and away from the building;
3. Water should not be allowed to pond adjacent to the building. The
ground surface surrounding the building exterior should be sloped to
cause rapid run-off of surface water away from the building. We
recommend a finished ground surface slope down and away from the
building of at least 12 inches in the first 10 feet;
4. Plastic membranes should not be used to cover the ground surface
immediately surrounding the building. These membranes tend to trap
moisture and prevent normal evaporation from occurring. Geotextile
fabric such as Mirafi or Typar can be used on the ground surface
immediately surrounding the building for weed growth control while
allowing evaporation to occur;
5. Roof downspouts, drains and other water collection systems should
discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. Splash blocks or
extensions should be provided at all discharge locations;
6. Snow from the roof or snow removal should not be piled adjacent to
the building.
LIMITATIONS
Our exploratory borings were spaced to obtain a reasonably accurate picture
of the subsurface. Variations in these subsurface conditions not shown by our
exploratory borings will occur. We should observe the completed excavation to
confirm the soils are as anticipated from our exploratory borings.
Our report was based on conditions disclosed by our exploratory borings
results of laboratory testing, engineering analysis and our experience. Criteria
• presented reflects the proposed building as we understand it. We should be
advised if the final design differs from our assumptions to permit us to re-evaluate
our conclusions. Placement and compaction of structural fill should be observed
by a representative of our firm during construction. Drilling of piers should be
•
observed by a representative of our firm to verify the bearing strata and that
subsurface conditions are as anticipated.
MR. BOB PUTS
CTL/T GS -1848B 8
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
0
•
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 other warranty, express
or implied, is made. If we can be of further service or if you have questions
regarding this report, please call.
Very truly yours,
CTL./l H
n Mechling, P.E.
ranch Manager
JM:Ip
(5 copies sent)
MR. BOB PETTS
CTL/T GS -1848B
9
rrcUt UStll 1J11 b 1-tt5111tiN C
PETTS PARCEL ADJACENT TO COUNTY ROAD 113
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
TH-2
• Job No. GS -1848B
IpA
•�FFS ,-44
PR FILE 1
P-4
-5
TH-3
P-6
APPROXIMATE
BUILDING ENVELOPE
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
COUNTY ROAD 113
CATTLE CREEK
ROAD
To GLENWOOD
SPRINGS
HIGHWAY 82
To COTTONWOOD PASS
VICINITY MAP
No SCALE
To ASPEN
SCALE: 1 INCH = 200'
PROPOSED PROPERTY BOUNDARY
•
• • •
P-3 P-2 P-
APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
SITE
2.3 ACRE PARCEL
Fig. 1
Depth In Feet
m
w
4)
NEM
inimm
IMM
IUM
0
5
lomm
0
5
10
10
15
20
25
TH-1
2.3 Acre Parcel
50/0
r2.3 Acre Parcel
TH-2
50/8
50/3
TH-3
Petts Parcel
7/12
18/12
25/12
50/3
Anticipated
Footing 0
Elevation
13/1.2
8/12
12/12
Anticipated
Footing
Elevation
Petts Parcel
P-1 P-2 P-3 P-4 P-5 P-6 Profile 1
Job No. GS -1848B
•
5
10
mml
NMI
15-
20
25
0 —
5
mml
emml
mml
owl
10 --
co
5'
LEGEND:
■
NOTES:
Organic sandy clays, soft,
moist, brown. (OL)
Sand, clayey to silty, loose to medium
dense, slightly moist to moist, brown.
(SC, SM)
Clay, sandy, medium stiff to stiff,
slightly moist, brown. (CL,CL-ML)
Gravel, sandy to silty with cobbles,
dense to very dense, moist, reddish
brown. (GP,GM)
Sandstone and Siltstone, hard to very
hard, moist, reddish brown and gray.
Drive sample. The symbol 50/0
indicates that 50 blows of a 140
pound hammer falling 30 inches
were required to drive a 2.0 inch
O.D. sampler 0 inches.
Drive sample. The symbol 50/8
indicates that 50 blows of a 140
pound hammer falling 30 inches
were required to drive a 2.5 inch
O.D. sampler 8 inches.
1. :Exploratory borings were drilled on
May 21 and 22, 1996 with a four inch
diameter continuous flight power
ty auger.
co
2. No free groundwater was found
in our exploratory borings during
54 our field investigation.
.51
(4- 3. These borings are subject to the
explanations, limitations and
conclusions as contained in this
report.
SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
Fig. 2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Z
0
Z 5
X
W
ae 6
z
0
oe7
a
0
U
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION
AT CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO
WETTING
0.1
APPLIED PRESSURE — KSF
1.0
10 100
Sample of SAND, CLAYEY (SC) NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 80 PCF
• From TH-2 AT 4 FEET NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT= 7.7 %
Swell Consolidation
• JOB No. GS -1848B Test Results FIG. 3
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
COMPRESSION % EXPANSION
5
6
7
8
vtx
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION AT
CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO
WETTING
0.1
APPLIED PRESSURE — KSF
1.0
10 100
Sample of CLAY. SILTY (CL -ML) NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 103 PCF
From Thi -2 AT 19 FFET
NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT = 11.7 %
Swell Consolidation
•SOB ND. GS -1848B Test Results
FIG. 4
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
7
6
5
4
3
2
0
2
3
4
Z
0
Q Z 5
X
de 6
Z
0
LJ
c
a.
0
0 8
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION AT
CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO
WETTING
0.1
APPLIED PRESSURE — KSF
Sample of CLAY, SANDY ( CL )
• From TH-3 AT 9 FEET
1.0
10
100
NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 109 PCF
NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT= 8.6 %
Swell Consolidation
• Test Results
JOB NO. GS -1848B
FIG. 5
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SLOPE
PER
OSHA
SLOPE
PER REPORT
I _
BACKFILL
BELOW GRADE WALL\ --,,...----/V71-1-
1
ENCASE PIPE IN WASHED 1 : 1 CONCRETE AGGREGATE (ASTM
C33, NO. 57 OR NO. 67). �..
EXTEND GRAVEL TO AT LEAST 1:
1/2 HEIGHT OF FOOTING. •
COVER GRAVEL WITH
FILTER FABRIC OR
ROOFING FELT.
1
•
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 8E
REMOVED BY PUMPING.
PROVIDE PVC SHEETING GLUED
TO FOUNDATION WALL TO REDUCE
MOISTURE PENETRATION.
REINFORCING STEEL
PER STRUCTURAL
DRAWINGS.
PROVIDE POSITIVE SUP JOINT
BETWEEN SLAB AND WALL
FLOOR SLAB
.........................
2" MINIMUM
8" MINIMUM
OR BEYOND 1:1
SLOPE FROM BOTTOM
OF FOOTING.
(WHICHEVER IS GREATER)
4 -INCH DIAMETER PERFORATED
DRAIN PIPE. THE PIPE SHOULD
BE LAID IN A TRENCH WITH A
SLOPE RANGING BETWEEN
1 /8 INCH AND 1 /4 INCH DROP
PER FOOT OF DRAIN.
..............
FOOTING OR PAD
EXTERIOR FOUNDATION WALL D RAI N
JOP N() GS -1848B
FIG. 6
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SATURATION AND PREPARATION
DATE: 05-29-96
TIME AT START OF SATURATION: 6:00
PERCOLATION TEST
DATE: 05-30-96
WATER IN BORING AFTER 24 HOURS
YES x NO
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
HOLE
NUMBER
DEPTH
(INCHES)
TIME AT
START OF
INTERVAL
TIME
INTERVAL
DEPTH TO WATER
CHANGE
IN WATER
DEPTH
(INCHES)
PERCOLA-
TION RATE
(MIN/INCH)
(MINUTES)
START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
P-1
27.0
10:15
20
12.75
14.5
1.75
11
10:35
20
14.5
15.5
1.0
20
10:55
20
15.5
16.25
0.75
26
11:15
20
16.25
17.25
1.0
20
11:35
20
17.25
17.75
0.5
40
11:55
20
17.75
18.25
0.5
40
12:15
20
18.25
18.75
0.5
40
12:35
20
18.75
19.25
0.5
40
P-2
20.5
10:15
20
7.25
7.75
0.5
40
10:35
20
7.75
8.75
1.0
20
10:55
20
8.75
8.75
11:15
20
8.75
9.25
0.5
40
11:35
20
9.25
9.75
0.5
40
11:55
20
9.75
10.0
0.25
80
12:15
20
10.0
10.25
0.25
80
12:35
20
10.25
10.5
0.25
80
P-3
19.5
10:15
20
6.25
8.75
2.5
8
10:35
20
8.75
10.0
1.25
16
10:55
20
10.0
11.0
1.0
20
11:15
20
11.0
11.75
0.75
26
11:35
20
11.75
12.25
0.5
40
11:55
20
12.25
12.75
0.5
40
12:15
20
12.75
13.25
0.5
40
12:35
20
13.25
13.75
0.5
40
Job No. GS -1848B
Fig. 7
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SATURATION AND PREPARATION
DATE: 05-29-96
TIME AT START OF SATURATION:
PERCOLATION TEST
DATE: 05-29-96
WATER IN BORING AFTER 24 HOURS
YES x NO
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
HOLE
NUMBER
DEPTH
(INCHES)
TIME AT
START OF
INTERVAL
TIME
DEPTH TO WATER
CHANGE
IN WATER
DEPTH
(INCHES)
PERCOLA-
TION RATE
(MIN/INCH)
INTERVAL
(MINUTES)
START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
P-4
42.0
2:15
120
11.0
14.5
3.5
34
4:15
30
14.5
15.5
1.0
30
4:45
30
15.5
16.75
1.25
24
5:15
30
16.75
18.0
1.25
24
P-5
40.75
2:15
120
17.75
22.5
4.75
25
4:15
30
22.5
23.5
1.0
30
4:45
30
23.5
24.75
1.25
24
5:15
30
24.75
25.75
1.0
30
P-6
33.75
2:15
120
13.0
17.0
4.0
30
4:15
30
17.0
18.25
1.25
24
4:45
30
18.25
19.75
1.50
20
5:15
30
19.75
21.25
1.50
20
Job No. GS -1848B
Fig. 8
TABLE I
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
HOLE
DEPTH
(FEET)
NATURAL
MOISTURE
(%)
NATURAL
DENSITY
(Pet)
TH-2
4
7.7
9
4.7
14
11.7
80
115
103
TH-3
9
8.6
109
JOB NO. GS -1848B
ATTERBERG LIMITS
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(P�
SOLUBLE
SULFATE
(%)
PASSING
NO. 4
SIEVE
(%)
PASSING
NO. 200
SIEVE
(%)
SOIL TYPE
LIQUID
LIMIT%%INDEX
PLASTICITY
(%)
5
58
CALY, SILTY (CL)
CLAY, SANDY (CL)
CLAY, SANDY (CL)
26
CLAY, SANDY (CL)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SOILS AND FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED PETTS RESIDENCE
PETTS PARCEL ADJACENT TO COUNTY ROAD 113
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
Prepared For:
Mr. Bob Petts
104 Weinmanns Blvd.
Wayne, New Jersey 07470
Job No. GS -1848B
May 31,1996
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 1
• PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 2
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2
SITE GRADING 3
•
FOUNDATION 4
BASEMENT FLOOR SLAB -ON -GRADE 5
FOUNDATION AND CRAWLSPACE WALLS 7
SURFACE DRAINAGE 7
• LIMITATIONS 8
FIGURE 1 - APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 2 - SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURES 3 THROUGH 5 - SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
• FIGURE 6 - EXTERIOR FOUNDATION WALL DRAIN
FIGURES 7 AND 8 - PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE 1 - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
•
•
•
MR. BOB PETTS
CTL/T GS•1848B
•
•
eh°
•
•
S
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRAINAGE PLAN
FOR THE
PETTS/HOLMES SUBDIVISION
-PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBMITTAL-
HCE JOB NO. 96049.01
June 12, 1996
Prepared by:
7/.>., -. k
Deric J. Walter, C.E.T.
Civil Engineering Technician
Reviewed by:
othy P. Beck, P.E.
Principal Engineer
923 Cooper Avenue • Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Telephone: (970) 945-8676 • FAX: (970) 945-2555
INTRODUCTION
OFF-SITE BASIN
HYDROLOGY
DRAINAGE PLAN
SUMMARY
DRAWINGS:
APPENDIX:
• •
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Vicinity Map (8-1/2" x 11")
Drainage Plan (11" x 17")
Calculations
Bureau of Public Roads Nomograph
• •
INTRODUCTION
1
The proposed Petts/Holmes Subdivision is located in Section 33, Township 6 South, Range
87 West of the 6th P.M., bounded on the north, east and south by County Road 113 near the
top of Cottonwood Pass. The proposed single family residential development is
approximately 2.23 acres. See the enclosed Vicinity Map for site location.
OFF -SI '1'h BASIN
Only one off-site basin affects the project as shown on the Vicinity Map. Storm runoff from
this basin is rather evenly dispersed across the property. Calculations showing the estimated
peak stormwater discharges are included in the Appendix. There is no floodplain shown on a
Flood Insurance Rate Map for this area, but from observation of the topography, it is
apparent that the site would be above the expected flood level for flows in the adjacent
draws.
HYDROLOGY
The hydrologic methods for this study are outlined in the Soil Conservation Service
publication "Procedures for Determining Peak Flows in Colorado" (1980). Peak on-site
flows in this area will be primarily rainfall derived since the snowmelt would be spread over
a longer time period. Therefore, the storm drainage system should be adequate to handle on-
site spring snowmelt, as well as rainfall runoff.
DRAINAGE PLAN
The storm runoff flows from this site will, in general, be quite diffuse and should not
particularly affect any part of the project, except where the existing County Road 113
drainage ditch exists. Flow in the drainage ditch will be minor and consist primarily of
storm runoff collected from the basins since Coulter Creek and Shippees Draw do not affect
the ditch.
The storm runoff flow rate of the drainage ditch has been calculated for the 25 and 100
year, 24 hour storms. Using these flow values, along with a Bureau of Public Roads
nomograph, a corrugated metal pipe has been sized to accommodate flow under the proposed
driveway. A 12" corrugated metal pipe is capable of conveying the predicted flow for both
the 25 and 100 year storms, but we recommend that a 15" or 18" corrugated metal pipe be
installed for ease and maintenance. Please see the calculations and nomograph provided in
the Appendix.
SUMMARY
The Preliminary Drainage Plan for the Petts Property includes minimal drainage
improvements, but should be adequate in view of the small and generally diffuse flows.
I O WNS HZ P E S OUT I-(
AKV 6 87 kJES r
/
7663 )/•
HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC.
923 COOPER AVENUE
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
(970) 945-8676 • Fax (970) 945-2555
•
/
Vcr,vrT/ /V\ 0,-P
tPE`rr,/Et%LryiE5 SUE.
NCE 6Pec` _r
co/1219(c
0
V 2
10
A
•
1 !:
•
l•.
4
.i
fi
t
7460
S 49'03' 16"E
27.10'
!Amos os ` Petervon
P.O, Oqx 1714
A3 Via, CO. >j
`81'61 g x
x
I '"' 74
1
x
40
7430
14.5°
142°
140
7 41 0
Bob Petts/Cathleen Holmes
104 Weinmanns Blvd.
Wayne, N.J.
07470
7420
•
e •
APPENDIX
/�
Project PETS) -11Z-0140/ Job No. !‘• G O/
By w Date 6/496, Ck'd by Date
Subject ,r'/1—:77147 Page of
it/SeiLt-zf61‘,7.
T7 f
S.�
aF
f/E
1/64T4T1-u
>E1C615-Pfie5E
NI)
coreie
r-,
/-a/
25
/2
5C,„
tRePt.K.
7'-
2-I Mt
z
990
z2
�jk l
`5"
2.40
041 n
'315
1
(90
I
r
.T�
OFF - -r76
)
v•
01
4
Q Zc s
L7N
./
et
i
•
z
2.
s = 0,0(
3ZcOa
I
:
LIT
-�nrSL'L"7.Z - iv4.'N
FCU A3 Df f opJ � I �1/1/<' %ScS/4�, ' / - st( 1?ETTT f� bE E
P14 -LEL A AS r /tit a %/ ,z11113 , ,E;z j I J
, �cj,� uc
923 Cooper Avenue • Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 /i'IR "/ ? 1 , 1 ID
Telephone: (970) 945-8676 • Fax: (970) 945-2555
Project 1 I R_5t , Job No.
By ��� Date 6/%Z (:;,Ck'd by Date
Subject ''-7117/-/C7 .---- Page of
A'l1)
reE /4
7
I
ET 6 FETE,
/I'
i
7
�/f, ?IL -f�l
LAWN
/U
rrvf,-!t
1
i;
C
4 -
yCcce
f
6)-4/L,
C
0
77/€42",'t'
r
`j e.. z q
(10
7/
3 LI "
g9
C. M..
/1
Z,
17?1cO ;tet
l
”`o
97 3!
1
tu
IJ,=1-
ND 11;
T1s
i
1r
- 1,
Q, 3 l
c
s -E-
0,1
}
0 LIZ
c{ 5
/2
>I
(ATE
CO '77
/1
31� � +
J,/`l
CT;
Z5 s
orkvk
923 Cooper Avenue • Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Telephone: (970) 945-8676 • Fax: (970) 945-2555
DIAMETER OF CULVERT (D) IN INCHES
STANDARD C
-180
—- 168
— 156
— 144
— 132
— 120
— 108
— 96
— 84
• 72
— 60
STRUCTURAL PLATE C.M.
N
w
0
— 54 0
w 100
c9
— 48 D= 80/
•
10,000
8,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
800
600
500
400
300
200
a
U 60
—42 N 50
D
40
30
20
r36
— 33
— 30
— 27
— 24
— 21
— 18
— 15
BUREAU OF PUBLIC ROADS JAN. 1963
10
8
EXAMPLE
0.36 inches (3.0 feet)
0.66 Os
NW" NW
0 (feet)
(1) 1.8 5.4
(2) 2.1 6.3
(3) 2.2 6.6
"0 in feet
AMETERS
(1)
CHART 5
4.
3.
-1.5
(3)
—(.5
1.0_—
h—
a 1.0
_ w -
i
—1.0
1.5
HW ENTRANCE Ir
0 SCALE TYPE I- .9
(I) Headwall l 0 .8
(2) Mitered to conform C
w
jto slope S
(3) A Projecting
6
5 To use scale (2) or (3) project
4 horizontally to scale (1), then
use straight inclined line through
D and 0 scales, or reverse as
illustrated.
1.0
5-25
— .7
.5
.5
.6
HEADWATER DEPTH FOR
C. M. PIPE CULVERTS
WITH INLET CONTROL
—D
f�
iumPerN
ft-
HCE
j !
• •
STATE OF COLORADO
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Division of Minerals and Geology
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman Street, Room 715
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone (303) 866-2611
FAX (303) 866-2461
August 8, 1996
Garfield County Department Building and Planning
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Petts/Holmes Subdivision Land Use Review
Dear County Planner;
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL
GA -97-0002 RESOURCES
P4k,f),' p
r �
AUG i 2 1996
Citi-�i t O Cti.hiNT Y
Roy Romer
Governor
James S. Lochhead
Executive Director
Michael B. Long
Division Director
Vicki Cowart
State Geologist
and Director
At your request and in accordance to Senate Bill 35 (1972) this office has reviewed the
materials submitted for this proposed subdivision and conducted a site inspection on August 1,1996.
The site is located adjacent to County Road #113 within Shippees Draw on the border with Eagle
County. Proposed are two lots: Lot #1 is 2.3 acres, west of CR #113, and on the ridgeline; Lot #2
is 37.5 acres, east of CR #113, and occupies the bottom land of Shippees Draw. Lot #2 contains
active subsidence features to the west of the creek, one of which has been fenced. They were most
likely created by soil and bedrock dissolution from sheet flood irrigation from the roadside ditch that
runs from the pond on the property. The land is currently being used as pasture.
This office has reviewed the Geologic Hazards Evaluation and Soils and Foundation
Investigation reports by CTL Thompson, Inc. and the Drainage Plan by High Country Engineering
and generally concurs with the conclusions and recommendations that they contain. We agree that
there is no inherent geologic hazard that would impact the development of Lot #1. The consultant
has reported ground subsidence, potentially unstable slopes, and hydrocompactive soil hazards for
lots #2 and has made the appropriate engineering recommendations to mitigate the hazards. At the
time of our inspection an access road (?) was stripped of vegetation through the subsidence hazard
zone to the wet bottom lands where it terminates in severe ruts. Across the creek from CR #113
there are two sites where vegetation has been stripped and lot grading has apparently begun. One
is within the proposed building envelope for the lot, the other is to the north partially within the
mapped Potentially Unstable Slopes Hazards Area. The site within the mapped slope hazard area
was not investigated by the consultant with drill borings and will need to be is that is to be a home
site.
Provided the owner abides by the recommendation of the geotechnical consultant this office
has no undue concerns with the subdivision as planned. We reiterate that a on-site inspection be
completed of the final building pad excavation prior to the placement of structural fill so the
consultant can verify soil conditions. Because of the moisture sensitive soils we recommend that
Petts/Holmes Sub., Page 2
the infiltration septic system be located a sufficient distance down slope from the building pad so
if moisture induced ground subsidence or settlement occurs it will not impact the residence or any
other structures. If you have any questions please contact this office at (303) 866-2645.
Sincerely,
Jonathan L. ite
Engineering Geologist
GEOLOGICAL_SURVEY TEL No.
Hug 8,96 17:17 No.018 P.01
•
STATE OF COLORADO
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Division of Minerals and c.ieninhy
Department of Natural Resources
1 313 Sherman Street, Ruorn 715
Denver, Colorado 80703
Phone (303) ((ht -2b1 1
FAX (303) 866 7461
August 8, 1996
Post -Ir Fax Note
To 60,
Go /NO
PhOtle
7671
7g5'
Garfield County Department Building and Planning
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Potts/Holmes Subdivision Land Use Review
Dear County Planner;
Fax
)EPARTML'N7 OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES
1 ny Ifbnlfr
I ;river nrxi
lanae S Loehhe.,d
Executive Director
Michael U. Lon);
Division rlirecioi
Vicki Cowart
Stale rueuiogio
and Director
At your request and in accordance to Senate Bill 35 (1972) this office has reviewed the
materials submitted for this proposed subdivision and conducted a site inspection on August 1,1996.
The site is located adjacent to County Road 4113 within Shippees Draw on the border with Eagle
County. Proposed arc two lots: Lot #1 is 2.3 acres, west of CR #113, and on the ridgeline; Lot #2
is 37.5 acres, east of CR #113, and occupies the bottom land of Shippees Draw. I,ot #2 contains
active subsidence features to the west of thc crock, one of which has been fenced. They were most
likely created by soil and bedrock dissolution front sheet flood irrigation from the roadside ditch that
runs from the pond on the property, The land is currently being used as pasture.
This office has reviewed the Geologic Hazards Evaluation and Soils and Foundation
Investigation reports by CTL Thompson, Inc. and the Drainage Plan by High Country Engineering
and generally concurs with the conclusions and recommendations that they contain. We agree that
there is no inherent geologic hazard that would impact the development of Lot #1. The consultant
has reported ground subsidence, potentially unstable slopes, and hydrocompactive soil hazards for
lots #2 and has made the appropriate engineering recommendations to mitigate the hazards. At the
time of our inspection an access road (?) was stripped of vegetation through the subsidence hazard
zone to the wet bottom lands where it terminates in severe ruts. Across the creek from CR # 113
there are two sites where vegetation has been stripped and lot grading has apparently begun, One
is within the proposed building envelope for the lot, the other is to the north partially within the
mapped Potentially Unstable Slopes Hazards Area. The site within the mapped slope hazard arca
was not investigated by the consultant with drill borings and will need to be is that is to be a home
site.
Provided the owner abides by the recommendation of the geotechnical consultant this office
has no undue concerns with the subdivision as planned. We reiterate that a on-site inspection be
completed of the final building pad excavation prior to the placement of structural fill so the
consultant can verify soil conditions. Because of the moisture sensitive soils we recommend that
GEOLOGICAL_SURVEY TEL No. Aug 8,96 17:17 No.018 P.02
111
1
Pais/Holmes Sub., Pup 2
the infiltration septic system be located a sufficient distance down slope f'roni the building pad so
if moisture induced ground subsidence or settlement occurs it will not impact the residence or any
other structures. If you have any questions please contact this office at (303) 866-2645.
Sincerely,
:-7
/1 4
,/ Jonathan L. lite
Engineering Geologist
• •
Public Service®
1995 Howard Ave.
Rifle CO 81650
July 10,1996
Garfield County Planning Department
109 8th St. Suite 303
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
Dear Mr. McCafferty
Public Service
Company of Colorado
We have no comments or objections to the Petts-Holmes land use
request. If I may be of any further assistance please call me at
(970)625-6017.
Sincerely,
Paul Weaver
-REFERRAL FORM
Garfield County Planning Department
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
imm oec_Q�1' /T �• (Q7f11 Qd5_77R5
•
Date Sent: 7//4
Return Requested:
File Name(s)
Project Name(s)
Type of Application(s)
1 % f- I-/iie S
6piv/s16,
,,..,g0ri//S/pN
School District
/ C '
9 . s 212_
Staff Planner: al c Ai c�4 F'FL p-("7"
Road & Bridge
Phone: / 76
��C2 �C_ 1
Applicant: . E- i g_ -_ --r--; 5 € c4-7,-/&(„--61\-;
/ ! " i... "Lt c --S-
Phone: *LC (
i SG (/J 3
Contact Person:
X
Phone:
Location:
Cl
��
l ' C r �i
�' �`' F / �� G l
2,3 N -L 2c. 3 4 /9
2 l
( 1 // 3
_3_3
-- 4 c. !Z c S
Summary of Request: .; i✓ / -r C, ;. t i) I v is/ or,'
The Garfield County Planning Department has received a land use request as referenced above. Your comments
are an important part of the evaluation process. In order to review all appropriateagency comments and
incorporate them into the Staff Report, we request your response by ,;e -/77,-;,f <,-7 4 � ���
GARFIELD COUNTY
School District
/ C '
'-': 4 e, L4.' C. , Pc 4Nwf n% (".
Road & Bridge
!'
j)
County Attomey
X
1 COLORADO STATE
Water Resources
X
9
BLNI
Geological Survey (Fee)
X
7
Health Department
Forest Service (Fee)
Wildlife Division
,(
SERVICE DISTRICT
IU.S. West
J(.
Public Service
%(
Holy Cross Electric
G. / Carbondale Fire District 1
k
/ v
Silt/New Castle/Rifle Fire District
Soil Conservation i)itnA
/ lq T.
2
S
1 Planning Commission
IBOCC
•
STATE OF COLORADO
OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER
Division of Water Resources
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman Street, Room 818
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone (303) 866-3581
FAX (303) 866-3589
Mr. Eric McCafferty, Planner
Garfield County Planning Department
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
July 17, 1996
RE: Robert Petts & Cathleen Holmes
SE 1/4 Sec.33, Twp.6 S, Rng.87 W, 6th P.M.
Water Division 5, Water District 38
Dear Mr. McCafferty:
opco�
0
Roy Romer
Governor
James S. Lochhead
Executive Director
Hal D. Simpson
State Engineer
We are in receipt of your subdivision referral to subdivide approximately 39 acres into
2 single family homesites, located about twelve miles southeast of the Town of Glenwood
Springs, Colorado. The proposed water supply will be a common well for the two lots. The
applicant has obtained a well permit, no. 188850, from our office.
The permit was approved on July 27, 1995 on a condition that it shall be the only well
on the tract of 39.11 acres. The permit expires on July 27, 1997, unless the well is
constructed prior to that date. The use of the well is limited to fire protection, ordinary
household purposes inside not more than three single family dwellings, the irrigation of not
more than one acre of home gardens and lawns and the watering of poultry, domestic
animals. Pursuant to Section 30-28-136(1)(h)(I), C.R.S., it is our opinion that the proposed
water supply will not cause material injury to senior water rights. Our office has no
information if the well is constructed. The applicant has not provided information about the
adequacy of the water supply.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact Mr. Kris
Murthy of this office or Mr. Orlyn Be!! of our Division office in Glenwood Springs at 945-5665.
Sincerely,
Steve ILautenschlager
Assistant State Engineer
SPL/km
cc: Orlyn Bell, Division Engineer
Joe L. Bergquist, Water Commissioner
holmes.sub
James P. Pet =-rson
Garfield County Planning Commission
109 Eight Street
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
Re: Pitts/Holmes Subdivision Application
Dear Commissioners;
3039257796
•
September 1 1 , 1996
Two years ago the above applicants attempted to create the 2.3 acre lot
proposed in this application under an exempt subdivision application. The applicants
property is adjacent to our 2100 acre ranch.
At that time we were part of nine other property owners (approximately UUU
total acres) within a mile radius of the subject property, who opposed 'hat application
primarily based on Section 8:52B of the Garfield County Land Use codes which stats
"Compatibility of the proposed exemption with existing land uses in the urrounding
area" should be considered when evaluating that application.
It is surprising and of great concern that the above provision is no part of the
criteria for evaluating the current application for subdividing this property. if you
approve this application, you are creating a non.excmpt parcel of 2.3 acrs within an
area of the county characterized by large agricultural parcels and a hall hours drive
from Glenwood Springs where a 2.3 acre lot size is more common.
Garfield County tax payers should be concerned with the cost of subsidizing the
extension of fire and police protection, as well as school bus service to a small, rendre
2.3 acre lot which will not have the tax basis to support its share ot` thcscost.
It seems that a reasonable person would not approve such an application as it
does not support good land use planning. If it is not within your power t deny this
application, then it's about time the rules are changed to prevent it from happening,
again.
Sincerely,
es D. Petersen
General Partner
Coulter Creek Valley Ranch L
' 1654 County Road 121
Carbondale. Colorado 81623
(1.
P.02
•
Commonwealth Title Company
of Garfield County, Inc.
127 East 5th Street - P. 0. Box 352
Rifle, Colorado 31650
(970) 625-3300 FAX (970) 625-3305
August 7, 1996
Stuver & George, P.C.
Attn: Tom Stuver
Re: Petts / Holmes proposed subdivision exemption
Dear Tom,
Pursuant to your request we have examined ownership within
200 feet of the above described proposed exemption. The
following represents our findings:
Dr. Charles A.M. Restivo Gertrude Peet 2-3(Th 4L ee7- /L'.2
P.O. Box 17131, 0. 3.�A-- o0 o/) 9738 113 Rd.
Glenwood Strings, CO 81602 Carbondale, CO 81623
Rancho Minnesota, Inc. 2189-334/1
40-67-
9738 113 Rd.
Carbondale, CO 81623
Russell F. Sanders III
and Deborah L. Sanders
Box 657
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
Coulter Creek Valley Ranch Ltd. Robert Holmes III 2-51,_ U1-Uaz-r7
Box 1714 4r8q-32-i- oo- 03 , Box 264
Aspen, CO 81611 Snowmass, CO 81654
We do not find any outstanding oil and gas leases or
severed mineral interests. Although we deem thi=
information reliable nothing herein shall be construed as
a guaranty of title, an abstract of title nor an opinion of
title and the liability of this company is hereby limited
to the amount paid for this service.
If you have any questions please contact this office.
Sincerely,
Dean H. Hubbell
DH\dk
Bill $75.00 - title
-
2J ,.off/ . 11� -/d7
0#2--- OD J7
research J U
,j\� Pry, d6' 17��
� .. O i/- � � � G G)S , (� /GOA - /7/g
354- 00-az_2
• •
Robert F. Petts
104 Weinmanns Blvd
Wayne, N.J. 07470
Mark L. Bean, Director
Building & Planning Dept.
Garfield County. Co.
109 8th St, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, Co. 81601
RE: Preliminary plan, Petts-Holmes Subdivision
Dear Mr. Bean,
Oct. 15,1996
I would like to request that the subdivision applied for be based on the
possibility of obtaining an individual well permit for the 2.3ac lot as well as the
shared well initially stated. If a individual well permit is granted by the water
division, use of a shared well will not be needed.
This being based on the granting of an individual well permit by the division of
water resources at a future time,and if a permit is granted by the water division,
this will satisfy part VII, #4 of the project information and staff comments
recommendation.
Sincerely,
Robert F. Petts