Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 ApplicationName: Check List: Preliminary Plat: >c, North Arrow, Scale, Date, Boundary lines and distances with description of tract Property lines, owners adjacent to tract >( Notation of easements and setbacks NC Street names, block and lot numbering system ?( Area of each lot >( Contours each 5' intervals unless approval for 10' on 1/24,000 intervals -� Common open space �C Sites reserved for public, parks, schools etc... )( Fee SUBDIVISION (15 Copies) PRELIMINARY PLAT t yp.: 5 see s a e of maps page 19. Zoning Resolution) Additional Information•: Y. Name of subdivision (unique) k Name and address of owner(s), mortgagees, preparing plat Names and addresses of adjoining land owners Total acreage of subdivided land and acreage of each use. Proposed terms of dedication of public sites etc... Evidence that subdivision complies with Zoning Resolution Total Square Feet of nonresidential floor space. Al Total number of off street parking spaces (excluding S.F.) subdivider, and firm Vicinity Sketch Map: X Scale 1"=1,000' or 1/24,000 if approved, .5 miles in all directions Physical Information: .( Geological Information Soils information .< Vegetation K Wildlife Grading and Drainage Plan: • Generalized grading for all cut and fill X Cross -Sections for difficult grade relationships on roads and building sites *L Street profiles (scale consistent with preliminary plat) Drainage Study -existing water courses and expected tributary flows, plus all proposed culverts, bridges, ditches, channels and easements Utility Plan: >( Water Supply, source proof of quantity and quality and evidence of ownership Historic use and yield X Amenability of rights to change in use. • Proof that public or private will supply water and what amount X% Evidence of potability • • DC Nature of legal entity who Pill own system and method of financing ){„ Information on existing water system (if connection is to be made) Individual wells -proof of availability of water .\ Plan of Augmentation for Junior wells Sewage Disposal: t1/A Description of system (for central system) Treatment -public or private facilities can and will handle it N/A Entity which will own and operate system and method of financing 'VA If connected to existing system -information on existing system NC If individual systems -perk tests, maximum ground water level etc.. results Underground Wiring: Description of the system and evidence of utility Company agreement Comments: nom: ./�.c.4a.eQ cQ� �� �� GARFIELD COUNTY • PLANNING DEPARTMENT GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 01601 2014 BLAKE AVENUE PHONE 945-0212 JI To :("),/,/ � -!/10;.e.,0J- C4:9-ere\,exe/`� Dear for Z;A 0-/\ Enclosed is a copy of the preliminary plat e,„,A aka I would like you to review the information and return your comments by q/43///g1 so that they can be presented to the County Commissioners and the Planning Commission. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Davis S. Farrar Assistant Planner DSF/rgg Enclsure \J PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW AGENCIES Bureau of Land Management P. 0. Box 1009 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Mt. Sopris Soil Conservation Dist. P. 0. Box 1302 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Ray Carpenter, Facilities Mountain Bell -1721/2 West -6th -'.Z 0 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Colorado Public Health Dept. 4210 E. llth Ave. Denver, CO 80220 Colorado Div. of Wildlife 6060 Broadway Denver, CO 80216 Colorado Div. of Water Resources 1313 Sherman St., Suite 818 Denver, CO 80203 Colorado Geological Survey 1313 Sherman St. Denver, CO 80203 ,,) Public Service Co. X 99.5-Howar..d-A-ve- Rifle, CO 81650 NJ g Superintendent RE -2 School District 9th and East Ave. Rifle, CO 81650 Colorado State Highway Dept. 606 So. 9th Grand Junction, CO 81501 City of Rifle 337 East Ave. Rifle, CO 81650 Colorado State Forest Service 1129 Colorado Ave. Grand Junction, CO 81501 Fire Chief Rifle City Hall 337 East Ave. Rifle, CO 81650 Attn: -Ron-Zas-tro- Superintendent RE -1 School District 1405 Grand Ave. Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Holy Cross Electric Assn. 1 -304 ---&rand Ave. Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Basalt Town Hall 214 Midland Ave. Basalt, CO 81621 Carbondale City Hall 190 Main St. Carbondale, CO 81623 Grand Valley Town Hall Grand Valley, CO 81635 Eagle County Planning Dept. 510 Broadway Eagle, CO 81631 Basalt Water Conservancy Dist. Scott M. Balcomb 818 Colorado AVe. Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Western Slope Gas Co. P. 0. Box 840 Denver, CO 80201 Attn: Right-of-way Section Rocky Mountain Natural Gas b9-34--1-64- Road 6'613b 700 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Gene Allen City of Glenwood Springs 806 Cooper Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Glenwood Springs Fire Dept. 806 Cooper Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Leonard Bowlby County Road Supervisor 1015 School Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 County Attorney Laura L. Rodgers Associate Right-of-way Agent Western Slope Gas Co., P. 0. Box 840 Denver, CO 80201 G. SUBDIVISION SUMMARY FORM C11FTIELD County Date June 23, 1981 Subdivision Name: Rifle Creek Type of Subdivision Request for Exemption Preliminary Plan Final Plat Filing See L )cation of Subdivision TOWNSHIP c `'° RANGE 92893W. SEC.30€,25 1/4 Description Owner (s) NAME 1r'homa.S L. and Dorothy Firtner ADDRESS 1.6 State li41ny Col pd_, 81650 Subdivider (s) NAME _S,_ ADDRESS Sane_ Designer NAME TI,.A T C'. ADDRESS 1001 Grand Avenue, Glenwoo(1. Springs, CO 81501 Type of Subdivision Number of Area % of Dwelling Units .(Acres) Total Area /�;� ( ,� ( ) Single Family 3 i.00 ) 80.0, ( ) Apartments ( ) Condominiums ( ) Mobile Home ( ) Commercial N.A. ) Industrial N.A. Street Walkways Dedicated School Sites Reserved School Sites Dedicated Park Sites Reserved Park Sites Private Open Areas Easements Other (specify) 1.67 3.02 7.Oic Total 47.38 \ 103.0`,, Estimated Water Requirements 5250 Proposed Water Source existing well Estimated Sewage Disposal Requirement 5250 Proposed Means of Sewage Disposal lndivi i a1 Systems Gallons/day. Gallons/day. ACTION: Planning Commission Recommendation Approval ( ) Disapproval ( ) Remarks Date , 19 Board of County Commissioners Approval ( ) Remarks Date Disapproval ( ) , 19 KI2NA Scarrowi Walker Incorporated Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors • • PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBMITTAL For RIFLE CREEK ESTATES, FILING 2 In GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Owner: Thomas L. & Dorothy Emmer Prepared by: KKBNA, INC. Consulting Engineers 1001 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Martin S. Oldford, P.E. • • Rifle Creek Estates -2- July 20, 1981 The following supplemental information is submitted with accompanying plans in accordance with Section 4.02 - Preliminary Plan Requirements of the Subdivision Regulations for Garfield County, Colorado, as adopted on January 2, 1979, with subsequent amendments. Section 4.02.01 Preliminary Plan Paragraphs A through I, see Sheet 1 of 2 Paragraph J, cash in lieu of a school site is proposed. Paragraph K: (1) Rifle Creek Estates, Filing 2 (2) Thomas & Dorothy Emmer 0394 Mesa Drive Rifle, CO 81650 Mortgagees: First National Bank of Rifle 100 East 4th Street Rifle, CO 81650 Plans prepared by: KKBNA, Inc. 1001 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 945-8664 (3) Adjacent land owners: Ann Catherine Robinson 0115 Highway 251 Rifle, CO 81650 Bureau of Land Management 50629 Highway 6 & 24 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (4) Total acreage to be subdivided: Single family (15 units) 35.99 Ac. 89% Street right-of-way 1.67 4% Private open area 3.02 7% 40.68 Ac. 100% (5) Not applicab lec' A 4 2 hna.e cy,D c�-•, 4Cdua.eo etc.' (6) On recor with Filing No. 1 submittal Rifle Creek Estates -3- July 20, 1981 (7) Meets current zoning requirements under A/R/RD designation (8) Not applicable 6" (9) Not applicable .41,,A,,2/Vv4-s--• Section 4.02.02 Vicinity Sketch Map - See Sheet 1 of 3 Section 4.02.03 Physical Information a. -.logy detailed in Lincoln Devore report attached. b. Sol s - detailed in Lincoln Devore report attached. c. -•e atioh - consists of sagebrush and bunch grasses with some cedar and pinion trees along the steeper slopes. Some dry -land farming has taken place on the upper terrace evel . d. The normal.wildlife community would include pheasant, cost on ail rabbit, squirrel and some mule deer commonly associated with the existing vegetation. Section 4.02.04 - Grading and Drainage Plan - See attached study and Sheet 3 of 3 Section 4.02.06 - Utility Plan - See Sheet 2 of 3 for existing and proposed water system improvements. Water System. The present water supply, consisting of two wells and a treatment system, located adjacent to the Emmer Ranch will provide domestic water to the Filing 2 lots. Design criteria and State Health Department approval is attached. Storage for fire demand and peak domestic demand has been provided by a(22-76--s-t-7-37-rage0 gal on s ee tanj Deducting 9000 gallons as required by the coca ire District for fire ptrotection, an average daily storage of 310 gallons per unit is available. Since a separate irrigation system is also available and each unit will be separately metered, the treated domestic supply is deemed adequate. The Rifle Creek Water Association has been designated as the legal entity to operate and maintain the water system for Filings 1 and 2. Adjudication of the two wells and the approved augmentation plan is attached. • • Rifle Creek Estates Sanitary Sewage Disposal -4- July 20, 1981 Individual sewage disposal systems are proposed to serve each unit. Since are grea er than two acres and six percolation tests resulted in rates between 20 and 50 m n tes per inch, a standard leach field is anticipated. Should the site specific percolation test fall outside the limits, evapo-transpiration fields will be used. Public Utility Service Electrical power, gas and telephone services are readily available in Filing No. 1 and can be extended to serve Filing No. 2. p�c-rke s�s "J�"eeea�rne KKBNA Scarrow/ Walker Incorporated Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors DRAINAGE STUDY For RIFLE CREEK ESTATES FILING NUMBER TWO GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Introduction: The proposed subdivision is located 2.5 mile North of the City of Rifle and 2 miles South of th •1 le Gap Dam. The 118 acre development is situates -on a mesa 150 feet above the Rifle Creek to the East and Government Creek to the West. The topography within the upper building site area is fairly flat with anIaverage 2% slope to the South. Slopes along the East side range on the order of 20% to 30% and are intersected by the main access road. Vegation is mainly sagebrush, cedar and pinion trees and sparse grassland. Flood Plain Analysis: All of the building sites will be located above contour elevation 5675, which is 75 feet above the adjacent floodplain. Encroachment in the adjacent floodplain areas is non-existant. Surface Drainage: The site generally drains east and west from a diagonal bisecting the_northwest and southeast corner of the development. Because of the extremely low densities _involved developed runoff will be limited to an increase of 9% or less. The paved road will generate additional runoff which can be accommodated by using 15" diameter culverts at all driveway crossings. Present drainage patterns will remain essentially the same, except where fills are graded on lots 1 and 3. Rifle Creek Estate Water System Design Criteria Page Two •July 20, 1981 Culligan KD -1200 Reverse Osmosis Water Conditioner: This unit has a 12,000 gal/day initial capacity and a 9800 gpd capacity after three years. 9450 gpd are required for the subdivision. The unit has a 50% water use efficiency requiring 24,000 gpd (16.6 gpm) of input water if used at maximum capacity. Excess water is used to backwash the R.O. system and then used as irrigation water. Additional specifications on the water treatment system are contained at the end of this report. Culligan CT -10 Chemical Feeder: This feeder can deliver up to 10 gallons per day of liquid bleach (15% chlorine) which will be supplied from a 55 gallon drum to which the feeder is attached. At an estimated 4 to 5 pgd usage, a 55 gallon drum will last 11 to 14 days. This system does not use high pressure chlorine gas and does not require a separate containment area. Culligan HA -800 Dual Water Softener: Two water softeners each capable of removing a maximum of 800,000 grains of hardness before backwashing are used. One unit will be on line while the other is backwashing. This process is auto- matically controlled. The chemical tests on the well water (Figure 2) showed a hardness of 1078 parts per million or 63 grains per gallon. For a 18,900 gpd R.O. unit input (twice the required 9450 average daily requirement at the output) 1,190.700 grains must be removed per day for zero hardness. If each unit is used only 12 hours per day (while the other is backwashing) about 600,000 grains must be removed and this requires 160 lbs. of salt for the unit operating at that capacity. Although the maximum water flow through the operating unit would only be 13.2 gpm, the unit is capable of 100 gpm flow. Larger capacity units were chosen because of the extreme hardness of the water, to avoid excessive back - washing and to operate the units near maximum salt use efficiency. Culligan HD -20 Depth Filter: This unit removes all particles from the incoming water down to 10 microns and operates at a normal flow range of 23 to 33 gpm. A smaller unit could be chosen, but this is the smallest commercial unit available from the manufacturer. The system will have two of these units so that one can be backwashed while the other is on line. This operation is automatic. Rifle Creek Estates 410 Water System Design criteria Page Three July 20, 1981 • Pumps: The Water Treatment System booster pump is required to pump a maximum of 6.6 gpm into a static head of 300 feet and negligible line losses. The well pump is located in the well about 35 feet underground. The pump must supply 13.2 gpm to the R.O. unit which operates at 30 to 125 psi input water pressure and a 10 psi pressure loss in the depth filter. Additional water for backwashing will also be required. The R.O. unit has a self-contained pump and requires a power service of 7.5 hp. A three phase 460 volt power line willto supply all pumps. A step down transformer will supply power automated controls and other low power equipment. Water•Treatment System House: All`water treatment equipmentwill be housed in_a heated metal frame building 12 by 18 feet with a reirifed concrete floor capable of supporting t�e1600 1b. R.O.~ unit, the 21,000 lb. water softerners, the 6500 lb. depth filters and one month supply of salt, 9000 ib. IRRIGATION SYSTEM Irrigation Water System: The 42.. lots in the subdivision will require 41acre_feet of water_ during the irrigation (6 monthse season or an average flow of 34 gpm. In addition the storage pond must be filled during the irrigation season (5 acre feet) and -5 acre feet must be released to the stream during the irrigation season to make up for consup- tive losses of domestic water. This is 12.5 gpm for a total of 46.5 gpm. Additional well water and backwash water can supply the 12.5 gpm for the pond, and the remaining 34 gpm comes from the Grand Tunnel Ditch water. Irrigation water from all sources will be monitored and dumped into the existing 10,000 gal. cistern and then pumped to the subdivision pond for storage and use upon demand. DISINFECTION Contact time in the cb arwell and supply line prior to first use will exceed 30 minutes based on an estimated maximum pumping rate of 23 gpm at the treatment plant. Martin S. Oldford, P.E. -3- July , 1981 Rifle Creek Estates, Garfield County, CO WATER SYSTEM DESIGN CRITERIA SERVICE AREA The proposed system will serve 4i lots of 2 acres or greater in size and located 4 miles north of Rifle, Colorado. The closest ),,toexisting water system in Rifle does not have the capability of supplying water to the site at the present time. A se arate irrigation system using_ untreated water from the -Grand Tunnel '° .Ditch will be provided_ thereby reducing the demand on the ------ -- domestic supply to in-house use only. DESIGN CRITERIA A basis of 100 gallons per resident, 3.0 residents per dw and 42- dwellings will produce an average daily demand of945 ) gallons or 6.6 gpm average supply at the well. The reverse "osmosis treatment unit has been sized to meet this demand. Fire demand as dictated by the local Fire District recommenda- tion, namely, a fire flow of 300 gpm for a 30 minute duration with a minimum pressure of 5 psi at the nozzle. Adding 9000 gallons for fire protection to the average daily domestic needs, a 2,2,000 gallon tank was selected. Fire hydrants will be spaced at 600 foot intervals. The distribution network will consist of 6 "PVC Class 1606 main and a" PVC sup line from the treatfferit treatmentplants. Locating the-tank—at elevation 5920± will provide a minimum of 50 psi at the highest dwelling. Individual pressure reducers will be provided for dwellings exceeding 100 psi along Highway 325 g EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS Water Treatment System: The Reverse Osmosis Water Conditionerrejects 90 to 95% of the total dissolved solids in the incoming water including particulate matter, colloidal suspensions and organic matter. To prevent excessive clogging of the R.O. unit prefilter, a Depth Filter capable of removing particles down to 10 microns is used. To prevent excessive clogging of the R.O. unit due to hard water, a water softener precedes the R.O. unit. The water output from the R.O. unit will be almost distilled water and chlorine will be added from a liquid chlorine feeder system. A 2000 gallon holding tank is required to allow proper mixing time for,the chlorine prior to pumping to the subdivision. JOHN C. !ART & CO. GAN [Al 435 NORTH AVENUE Received From: ATOftS • PHONE 242-7618 • GRAND JUNCT'CN, COLORADO 8,1501 Tom ^miner Rile Colorado Customer No. %11'?ii.v.1.73 ior. 'later Laboratory No. hr 7 Sample Date Received 'n ✓1 0, 1.'976 Sample iia:::l.11., I r,1.an -.rater Conducti•;ity @ 25°C BOD (5 Day) COD 1)0 r;' 20°C '7 Turbidity (.ITU) 3.5 Color (Co/pt units) 1.c:s 'Phan 1 Odor l'h Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Settleable Solids VoLtile Solids Total Solids Oii & (Grease Phenols Pesticides Sodium (Na) Calcium (Ca) P,iagnesiuni (Mg) Chloride (0) Sulfate (SO4) Sulfide (H2S) Sulfite (S03) Phenol. Allsalinity (CaCO3) n . 0 .Total Alkalinity (CaCO3) ,dotal llardness Caet.) Potassium (K) Phosphate (PO4) Amoflia (N114) Nitrate (NO3) Nitrite (NO2) 0.0()5 Iyeidalrl Nitrogen (N) Organic Carbon (IR abs.) (; ot..1 Orga;iic Carbon (i'OC) �iUnllnum (Al) Antimony (Sb) Arsenic (As) 'c211r n•! +. .i–l.,3 1i1''.r': ),001. Barium (3) T Beryllium (Be) 7 n ni007 Boron (li) Cadmium (Cd) J'l i t.' —ice' i''-1.1 n 0.'1i's,5 Cyanide (C:1) Cobalt (Co) Chromium (Cr) •Q,-> ry t. ,.L.^ –%P ; Tt,an I loon c (1) —i l Iron (Fe) Iead (Pb) ;'lereury ti;g'j i Manganese (Mn) r) .01 Molybdenum (Mo) T.c; ; _ '•p )'L i Iir.k:: l (Ni) Selenium (Se) ITono 1.0 • 11 0.1 �.0 Date Reported liov. 12.1076 WATER ANALYSIS mhl.n 0.1 j n- • .:i 0..01 Si!ica (SiC)2) 11 .7 Silver (Ag) Thallium (TI) Tin (Sn) Tilanlurn (Ti) Zinc (Zn) 0 , 05 Other: : ) raj Remarks: ;i iter. mnthos/cm ppm PPm ppm pprn ppm ppm ppm ppm PPm PPm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm PPm PPm ppm ppm PPm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm PPm pprn pprn ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm PPm ppm ppm nnIILLL 1V - K1tLt Lhttn WAJLK ASSULIAJ UN In order to pide for an adequate irrigat- and domestic water supply for RIFLE CREEK ESTATES and any future or existing residential, agricultural or commercial developments, a non-profit corporation, organized under the name ofwhich will be RIFLE CREEK WATER ASSOCIATION (RCWA) will be formed. Th RC ,ill. own and be responsible for all common, domestic and irrigation water systems and their associated buildings, tanks and easements. The Corporation (RCWA) will issue Domestic Water Stock shares and Irrigation Water Stock shares. Each Domestic Water Stock share will entitle the owner to purchase domestic water from the Corporation. Each Irrigation Water Stock share will entitle the owner to purchase one acre foot or more of irrigation water during the yearly irrigation season from the Corporation. Rates for domestic water and irrigation water shall be on a usage plus fixed fee basis. The usage shall not exceed the cost of operation and maintenance with the fee'being pro- portionate to the stockholder's usage up to 300 gal/day/share of domestic water and one acre foot/year/share of irrigation water. Rates for domestic water used beyond 300 gal/day/share or irrigation water used beyond one acre foat/year/share shall be set by the RCWA board of directors. The fixed fee portion of the rate shall not exceed estimated costs of replacement and depreciation and will be equally divided among all stockholders. The board of directors of the RCWA will determine the fees for water usage in accordance with these covenants and the bylaws of the RCWA. Fees will be assessed quarterly with the usage fee portion being determined by water meter readings. Such assessments shall become a lien against the stock owner and the real estate to which the same is appurtanant. Assessments not paid when due, as determined by the by- laws of the corporation, may be collected by legal action together with reasonable attorney's fees and cost of suit. At the discretion of the board of directors, any stockholder's refusal to pay assessments when due can result in the termination of the stockholders' water supply until such assessments and any penalties are paid in full. A water meter for irrigation water and a water meter for domestic water must be installed on every stockholders water lines prior to any hookups. Such meter cost and installation cost are the responsibility of the stockholder but to be installed by RCWA. o IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR WATER DIVISION NO. 5 STATE OF COLORADO Application No. W-3876 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) FOR WATER RIGHTS OF THOMAS L. EMMER ) IN THE COLORADO RIVER ) RULING OF REFEREE OT ITS TRIBUTARIES ) TRIBUTARY INVOLVED: RIFLE CREEK IN GARFIELD COUNTY k 1I #0o •/ FI.LFD IN WATER COURT Division No. 5 STATE OF COLORADO c 1 ^ BY DE WATEF2 CLERP PUTY The above entitled application was filed on August 31, 1978, was amended on October 27, 1978, and was referred tc the under- signed as Water Referee for Water Division No. 5, State of Colorado, by the Water Judge of said Court on the 6th day of September, 1978, on October 31, 1978, and again, after stipulation on April 3, 1979, in accordance with Article 92 of Chapter 37, Colorado Revised Statutes 1973, known as The Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969. And the undersigned Referee having made such investigations as are necessary to determine whether or not the statements in the amended application are true and having become fully advised with respect to the subject matter of the amended application does hereby make the following determination and ruling as the Referee in this matter, to -wit: 1. The statements in the application are true. The statement of opposition has been effectively withdrawn as a result of agreement between the parties involved, and the Referee has made no determination with respect to the statem t -of -.opposition. 2. The name of the structure is Emmer, Well No. 1. 3. The name of the claimant and address is Thomas L. Emmer; 1046 State Highway 325; Rifle, Colorado. 4. The source of the water is a well having a depth of 40 feet, and being tributary to Rifle Creek, tributary to the Colorado River. 5. The well is located in the SWC NWS of Section 30, T. 5 S., R. 92 W. of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the Northwest Corner of said Section 30 bears N. 19°49'W. 2,125 feet. 6 The use_ of he water is munici_pa \ damesc- ._ir`rigation, ;,recreatio , mechanical manufacturin,T, re pyo - ion arid—use for se—wag-0--treatment. l 7. The date of initiation of appropriation claimed is June 1, 1972. This well was completed and the water was used at some time prior to the applicants ownership. mhP unt of water claimed under this application is 0.088 cubic foot of water per second of time, conditional. ,76 • 9. Emmer Well No. 1 (Case No. W-3876), Emmer Well No. 2 (Case No. W-3877), and Emmer Reservoir No. 1 ( Case No. W-3878), are incorporated into a plan for augmentation filed simultaneously herewith under Case No. W-3879. 10. On October 31, 1978, and on December 29, 1978, Statements of Opposition were filed by the City of Rifle, Colorado, and on January 31, 1979, the application was re-referred by the Water Referee to the Water Judge for Water Division No. 5. 11. On February 20, 1979, a Stipulation and Agreement was filed by the applicant and the objector, in which the following pertinent points were agreed to: A. Emmer agrees that of the 2.0 c.f.s. Priority No. 2, Grand Tunnel Ditch original construction water right, decreed in Civil Action No. 103 (Garfield County District Court) on May 11, 1889, and referred to in the Plan of Augmentation (Case No. W-3979), 1.2 c.f.s. of said Priority No. 2 is decreed for diversion into the Grand Tunne Jt h (Structure No. 2) . (Emmer is the owner of the remainin4 '`f . s . of Priority No. 2 which is decreed for diversion at the Rifle Creek Canyon Ditch). Rifle agrees that Emmer is the owner of said 2.0 c.f.s. of Priority No. 2. The parties agree that Emmer has historically irrigated a total of 60 acres with the 1.2 c.f.s_ Grand Tunnel Ditch Priority No. 2 water right. B. Emmer agrees to pay all ditch assessments levied on Emrner's 1.2 c.f.s. by the Grand Tunnel Ditch Company (hereinafter the "Company") pursuant to the By -Laws of the Company regardless of whether any or all of said water is actually diverted into or carried by said Ditch. C. Emmer agrees that the Emmer Well No. 1 (Case No. W-3876) and the Emmer Well No. 2 (Case No. W-3877) shall be administered by the State of Colorado as surface rights on Rifle Creek with and pursuant to the priorities awarded in the above -captioned cases. D. The Plan of Augmentation in Case No. W-3879 shall be subject to and include the following terms, conditions, and limitations: 1. A maximum of one hundred (100) single family dwelling units shall be served from the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 and be covered by the Plan of Augmentation. 2. In-house uses for said one hundred (100) units shall not result in gross diversions from the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 in excess of 40.0 acre feet per year. 3. To augment diversions from the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 which are used for in-house, domestic purposes, Emmer shall during times of vale&senior call on Rifle Creek: (a) During the non -irrigation season when said wells are out of priority, release to Rifle Creek from the Emmer Reservoir No. 1 (Case No. W-3878) that quantity of water which equals twenty-five percent (25%) of the quantity of water being delivered to the potable water distribution system. (b) During the irrigation season when said wells are out of priority, Emmer shall permanently remove from irrigation up to five (5) acres of land historically irrigated with Priority No. 2 from the Grand Tunnel Ditch and curtail his diversions from Rifle Creek into the Grand Tunnel Ditch under Priority No. 2 by up to 0.10 c.f.s. as necessary to defray the consumptive use attributable to Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2. 4. The Potable water supply system will not be used for irrigation. ,376 • ,• \d/ 5. In the event Emmer desires to irrigate land in Rifle Creek Estates from the Grand Tunnel Ditch in lieu of using Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 pursuant to this paragraph, Emmer agrees to remove from irrigation one acre of land historically irrigated with Priority No. 2 from the Grand Tunnel Ditch for each acre irrigated in Rifle Creek Estates. E. Emmer states and represents, with the intent that Rifle rely,t!.) , the waste water disposal/treatment systems cI/ $)J' to be used bral dwelling units within Rifle Creek Estates shall be septic tank leach field waste water treatment system. 1'�uSt hc,.ve: Emmer agrees that, in the event total consumptive use from h Sys, the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 exceeds 10 acre feet per annum he will amend the Plan for Augmentation in Case No. W-3879 and provide additional augmentation water to compensate for the increased consumptive use which results. F. Emmer agrees to install, at his sole expense, any and all measuring devices necessary to monitor the terms of this Stipulation and Agreement that may hereafter be requested by the State Engineer or his representative. G. Upon the approval of the Court of this Stipulation and Agreement, the parties consent to the re-referral of these proceedings to the Referee and for further proceedings as provided for by statute. As a result of the Stipulation and Agreement, on April 3, 1979, the application was again referred to the Water Referee by the Water Judge for Water Division No. 5. The Referee does'therefore conclude that the above entitled application should be granted insofar as it is consistent with the terms and conditions of the Stipulation and Agreement as set forth in paragraph 11 above, and that 0.088 cubic foot of water per second of time with appropriation date of June 1, 1972, is hereby awarded conditionally to Emmer Well No. 1, to be used for municipal, domestic, irrigation, recreation, mechanical, manufacturing, fire protection and sewer treatment purposes, provided always that said 0.088 cubic foot of water per second of time be applied to beneficial use within a reasonable time; subject, however, to the terms and conditions of the Stipulation and Agreement as set forth in pargraph 11 above; subject also to the approval and the terms of the Plan for Augmentation in Case No. W-3879; and also subject to all earlier priority rights of others and to the integration and tabulation by the Division Engineer of such priorities and changes of rights in accordance with law. 3'876 Application for a quadrennial finding of reasonable diligence shall be filed in April of 1984 and in April of every fourth calendar year thereafter so long as claimant desires to maintain this conditional water right or until a determination has been made that this conditional water right has become an absolute water right by reason of the completion of the appropriation. It is accordingly ORDERED that this ruling shall be filed with the Water Clerk and shall become effective upon such filing, subject to Judicial review pursuant to Section 37-92-304 CRS 1973. It is further ORDERED that a copy of this ruling shall be filed with the appropriate Division Engineer and the State Engineer. Done at the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, this 30 day of , 1980. No prat?st was filed in this mater. The foregoing ruling is confirmed and approved, and is made the Judgme, ,and croe f i�. ourt Dated- �r �' 3* WATER JTD'GE BY THE REFEREE: W -Referee Water Division No. 5 State of Colorado (A)<J ( /Jb . 2 IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND FILED IN WATER COURT FOR WATER DIVISION NO. 5 Division No. 5 STATE OF COLORADO N, -;:.i O MO STATE OF COLORADO Application No. W-3877 _ _ WATER CLERK IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR WATER RIGHTS OF THOMAS L. EMMER ) HY DEPUTY IN TIIE COLORADO RIVER ) RULING OF REFEREE OR ITS TRIBUTARIES TRIBUTARY INVOLVED: RIFLE CREEK IN GARFIELD COUNTY The above entitled application was filed on August 31, 1978, and was referred to the undersigned as Water Referee for Water Division No. 5, State of Colorado, by the Water Judge of said Court on the 6th day of September, 1978, in accordance with Article 92 of Chapter 37, Colorado Revised Statutes 1973, known as The Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969. And the undersigned Referee having made such investigations as are necessary to determine whether or not the statements in the application are true and having become fully advised with respect to the subject matter of the application does hereby make the following determination and ruling as the Referee in this matter, to -wit: 1. The statements in the Application are true. The Statement of Opposition has been effectively withdrawn as a result of a Stipulation and Agreement filed by the applicant and the objector, and the Referee has made no determination with respect to the Statement of Opposition. 2. The name of the structure is Emmer Well No. 2. 3. The name of the claimant and address is Thomas L. Emmer; 1046 State Highway 325; Rifle, Colorado. 4. The source of the water is a well having a depth of 50 feet, and being tributary to Rifle Creek, tributary to the Colorado River. 5. The well is located in the NES NWS of Section 30, T. 5 S., R. 92 W. of the 6th P.M., at a point whence the Northwest Corner of said Section 30 bears N. 52°00' W. 1,900 feet. 6. The use of the water is municipal, domestic, irrigation, recreation, mechanical, manufacturing, fire protection, and sewage treatment. 7. The date of initiation of appropriation is April 20, 1978. 8. The amount of water claimed is 0.33 cubic foot of water per second of time, conditional. 9. The well has not been constructed and the water has not been applied to beneficial use. 10. On April 7, 1980, the Office of the State Engineer issued denial No. AD -8632, based on the facts that the well was hydraulically connected with Rifle Creek, and Rifle Creek in over -appropriated and subject to administration, and that a permit cannot be issued until a decreed water right or plan for augmentation is approved by the Division Water Court. 3877 • 11. On October 31, 1978, a Statement of Opposition was filed by the City of Rifle, and as a result, on November 30, 1978, the application was re-referred by the Water Referee to the Water Judge for Water Division No. 5. 12. Emmer Well No. 1 (Case No. W-3876) , Emmer Well No. 2 (Case No. W-3877), and Emmer Reservoir No. 1 (Case No. W-3878), are incorporated into a plan for augmentation filed simultaneously herewith under Case No. W-3879. 13. On February 20, 1979, a Stipulation and Agreement was filed by the applicant and the objector, in which the following pertinent points were agreed to: A. Emmer agrees that of the 2.0 c.f.s. Priority No. 2, Grand Tunnel Ditch original construction water right, decreed in Civil Action No. 103 (Garfield County District Court) on May 11, 1889, and referred to in the Plan of Augmentation (Case No. W-3879), 1.2 c.f.s. of said Priority No. 2 is decreed for diversion into the Grand Tunnel Ditch (Structure No. 2). (Emmer is the owner of the remaining 0.8 c.f.s. of Priority No. 2 which is decreed for diversion at the Rifle Creek Canyon Ditch). Rifle agrees that Emmer is the owner of said 2.0 c.f.s. of Priority No. 2. The parties agree that Emmer has historically irrigated a total of 60 acres with the 1.2 c.f.s. Grand Tunnel Ditch Priority No. 2 water right. B. Emmer agrees to pay all ditch assessments levied on Emmer's 1.2 c.f.s. by the Grand Tunnel Ditch Company (herein- after the "Company") pursuant to the By -Laws of the Company regardless of whether any or all of said water is. actually diverted into or carred by said ditch. C. Emmer agrees that the Emmer Well No. 1 (Case No. W-3876) and the Emmer Well No. 2 (Case No. W-3877) shall be administered by the State of Colorado as surface rights on Rifle Creek with and pursuant to the priorities awarded in the above -captioned cases. D. The Plan for Augmentation in Case No. W-3879 shall be subject to and include the following terms, conditions, and limitations: 1. A maximum of one hundred (100) single family dwelling units shall be served from the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 and be covered by the Plan for Augmentation. 2. In-house uses for said one hundred (100) units shall not result in gross diversions from the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 in excess of 40.0 acre feet per year. 3. To augment diversions from the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 which are used for in-house, domestic purposes, Emmer shall during times of valid senior call on Rifle Creek: (a) During the non -irrigation season when said wells are out of priority, release to Rifle Creek from the Emmer Reservoir No. 1 (Case No. W-3878) that quantity of water which equals twenty-five percent (25%) of the quantity of water being delivered to the potable water distribution system. (b) During the irrigation season when said wells are out of priority, Emmer shall permanently remove from irrigation up to five (5) acres of land historically irrigated with Priority No. 2 from the Grand Tunnel Ditch and curtail his diversions from Rifle Creek into the Grand Tunnel Ditch under Priority No. 2 by up to 0.10 c.f.s. as necessary to defray the consumptive use attributable to Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2. :877 4. The potable water supply system will not be used for irrigation. 5. In the event Emmer desires to irrigate land in Rifle Creek Estates from the Grand Tunnel Ditch in lieu of using Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 pursuant to this para- graph, Emmer agrees to remove from irrigation one acre of land historically irrigated with Priority No. 2 from the Grand Tunnel Ditch for each acre irrigated in Rifle Creek Estates. E. Emmer states and represents, with the intent that Rifle rely, that the waste water disposal/treatment systems to be used by all dwelling units within Rifle Creek Estates shall be septic tank leach field waste water treatment systems. Emmer agrees that, in the event total consumptive use from the Emmer Wells No. 1 and No. 2 exceeds 10 acre feet per annum, he will amend the Plan for Augmentation in Case No. W-3879 and provide additional augmentation water to compensate for the increased consumptive use which results. F. Emmer agrees to install, at his sole expense, any and all measuring devices necessary to monitor the terms of this Stipulation and Agreement that may hereafter be requested by the State Engineer or his representative. G. Upon the approval of,the Court of this Stipulation and Agreement, the parties consent to the re-referral of these proceedings to the Referee and for further proceedings as provided for by statute. As a result of the Stipulation and Agreement, on March 8, 1979, the application was again referred to the Water Referee by the Water Judge for Water Division No. 5. The Referee does therefore conclude that the above entitled application should be granted insofar as it is consistent with the terms and conditions of the Stipulation and Agreement as set forth in paragraph 13 above, and that 0.33 cubic foot of water per second of time, with appropriation date of April 20, 1978, is hereby awarded conditionally to Emmer Well No. 2, to be used for municipal, domestic, irrigation, recreation, mechanical, manufacturing, fire protection, and sewage treatment purposes, provided always that said 0.33 cubic foot of water per second of time be applied to beneficial use within reasonable time; subject, however, to the terms and conditions of the Stipulation and Agreement as set forth in paragraph 13 above, subject also to the approval and the terms of the Plan for Augmentation in Case No. W-3879; and also subject to all earlier priority rights of others and to the integration and tabulation by the Division Engineer of such priorities and changes of rights in accordance with law. 3407 o Application for a quadrennial finding of reasonable diligence shall be filed in April of 1984 and in year thereafter so long as April of every fourth calendar claimant desires to maintain this conditional water right or until a determination has been made that this conditional water right has become an absolute water right by reason of the completion of the appropriation. It is accordingly ORDERED that this ruling shall be filed with the Water Clerk and shall become effective upon such filing, subject to Judicial review pursuant to Section It is further ORDERED that a copy 37-92-304 CRS 1973. of this ruling shall be filed with the appropriate Division Engineer and the State Engineer. Done at the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, this 3e7744 day of 4pe,L , 1980. No pretest was filed in this The foregoing ruling is confirm.:.c' and approved, and is ilade Judgm t a Decree 'Kis cc,'r. Doted: BY THE REFEREE: Waif Wa er State Referee Division No. 5 of Colorado (411 FILED --- 411 IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND IN WATER COURT Division No. 5 FOR WATER DIVISION NO. 5 STATE OF COLORADO Application No. W-3878 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR WATER RIGHTS OF THOMAS L. EMi'IER IN TI -IE COLORADO RIVER OR ITS TRIBUTARIES TRIBUTARY INVOLVED: RIFLE CREEK IN GARFIELD COUNTY ) RULING OF REFEREE ) r\ '(',,i 0 1q80 STATE OF COLORADO WATER CLERK BY DEPUTY .\\, The above entitled application was filed on August 31, 1978, and was referred to the undersigned as Water Referee for Water Division No. 5, State of Colorado, by the Water Judge of said Court on the 6th day of September, 1978, in accordance with Article 92 of Chapter 37, Colorado Revised Statutes 1973, known as The Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969. And the undersigned Referee having made such investigations as are necessary to determine whether or not the statements in the application are true and having become fully advised with respect to the subject matter of the application does hereby make the following determination and ruling as the Referee in this matter, to -wit: 1. The statements in the application are true. The Statement of Opposition has been effectively withdrawn as a result of a Stipulation and Agreement and the Referee has made no determination with respect to the Statement of Opposition. 2. The name of the structure is Emmer Reservoir No. 1. 3. The name of the claimant and address is Thomas L. Emmer; 1046 State Highway 325, Rifle, Colorado. 4. The source of the water is Rifle Creek through the Grand Tunnel Ditch, tributary to the Colorado River. 5. The right abutment of the dam embankment is located in the SES NW of Section 30, T. 5 S., R. 92 W. of the 6th P.M. at a point whence the Northwest Corner of said Section 30 bears N. 42 30' W. 2,440 feet. 6. The use of the water is municipal, domestic, irrigation, recreation, mechanical, manufacturing, fire protection, and sewage treatment. 7. The date of initiation of appropriation is August 9, 1978. 8. The amount of water claimed is 11.0 acre feet, conditional. 9. The reservoir has not yet been constructed and the water has not been stored and applied to beneficial use. 10. The maximum height of the dam forming the reservoir is 10 feet, the length of the dam is 300 feet, and the total capacity of the reservoir is 11 acre feet of water. - • • . 11. On October 31, 1978, a Statement of Opposition was filed by the City of Rifle, and as a result, on November 30, 1978, the application was re-referred by the Water Referee to the Water Judge for Water Division No. 5. 12. Emmer Well No. 1 (Case No. W-3876), Emmer Well No. 2 (Case No. W-3877), and Emmer Reservoir No. 1 (Case No. W-3878), are all incorporated in to a Plan for Augmentation filed simultaneously herewith under Case No. W-3879. 13. On February 20, 1979, a Stipulation and Agreement was filed by the applicant and the objector in which the following pertinent points were agreed to: A. Emmer agrees that of the 2.0 c.f.s. Priority No. 2, Grand Tunnel Ditch original construction water right, decreed in Civil Action No. 103 (Garfield County District Court). on May 11, 1889, and referred to in the Plan for Augmentation (Case No. W-3879), 1.2 c.f.s. of said Priority No. 2 is decreed for diversion into the Grand Tunnel Ditch (Structure No. 2). (Emmer is the owner of the remaining 0.8 c.f.s. of Priority No. 2 which is decreed for diversion at the Rifle Creek Canyon Ditch). Rifle agrees that Emmer is the owner of said 2.0 c.f.s. of Priority No. 2. The parties agree that Emmer has historically irrigated a total of 60 acres with the 1.2 c.f.s. Grand Tunnel Ditch Priority No. 2 water right. B. Emmer agrees to pay all ditch assessments levied on Emmer's 1.2 c.f.s. by the Grand Tunnel Ditch Company (herein- after the "Company") pursuant to the By -Laws of the Company regardless of whether any or all of said water is actually diverted into or carried by said ditch. C. The Plan for Augmentation in Case No. W-3879 shall be subject to and include the following terms, conditions, and limitations: 1. A maximum of one hundred (100) single family dwelling units shall be served from the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 and be covered by the Plan for Augmentation. 2. In-house uses for said one hundred (100) units shall not result in gross diversions from the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 in excess of 40.0 acre feet per year. 3. To augment diversions from the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 which are used for in-house, domestic purposes, Emmer shall during times of valid senior call on Rifle Creek: (a) During the non -irrigation season when said wells are out of priority, release to Rifle Creek from the Emmer Reservoir No. 1 (Case No. W-3878) that quantity of water which equals twenty-five percent (25%) of the quantity of water being delivered to the potable water distribution system. (b) During the irrigation season when said wells are out of priority, Emmer shall permanently remove from irrigation up to five (5) acres of land historically irrigated with Priority No. 2 from the Grand Tunnel Ditch and curtail his diversions from Rifle Creek into the Grand Tunnel Ditch under Priority No. 2 by up to 0.10 c.f.s. as necessary to defray the consumptive use attributable to Emmer Wells No. 1 and No. 2 D. Emmer shall not store in the Emmer Reservoir No. 1 that quantity of irrigation return flow flowing into said reservoir at all times said reservoir water right is not in priority. • • As a result of the Stipulation and Agreement, on March 8, 1979, the application was again referred to the Water Referee by the Water Judge for Water Division No. 5. The Referee does therefore conclude that the above entitled application should be granted insofar as it is consistent with the terms and conditions of the Stipulation as set forth in paragraph 13 . above, and that 11.0 acre feet of water, with appropriation date of August 9, 1978, are hereby awarded conditionally to Emmer Reservoir No. 1, to be used for municipal, domestic, irrigation, recreation, mechanical, manufacturing, fire protection, and sewage treatment in connection with a Plan for Augmentation as described in Case No. W-3879, provided always that said 11.0 acre feet of water are stored and applied to beneficial use within .a reasonable time; subject, however, to the terms and conditions of the Stipulation and Agree- ment as set forth in paragraph 13 above; subject also to the approval and the terms of the Plan for Augmentation in Case No. W-3879; amd also subject to all earlier priority rights of others and to the integration and tabulation by the Division Engineer of such priorities and changes of rights in accordance with law. Application for a quadrennial finding of reasonable diligence shall be filed in April of 1984 and in April of every fourth calendar year thereafter so long as claimant desires to maintain this conditional water right or until a determination has been made that this conditional water right has become an absolute water right by reason of the completion of the appropriation. It is accordingly ORDERED that this ruling shall be filed with the Water Clerk and shall become effective upon such filing, subject to Judicial review pursuant to Section 37-92-304 CRS 1973. It is further ORDERED, that a copy of this ruling shall be filed with the appropriate Division Engineer and the State Engineer. Done at the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, this 39 —` day of �/q/� , 1980. No protest was filed in This rnori The foregoing ruling is confirm- and approved udgmen+ana Fec{{i?/eo�k.t -S Jai Doled \ r G d -1 VA : E R J BY THE REFEREE: W Referee er Division No. 5 State of Colorado • • IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR WATER DIVISION NO. 5 STATE OF COLORADO Application No. W-3879 FILED IN WATER COTJRT Division No. 5 P:11;'V 1 > 1980 STATE Or COLORADO IN TIIE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) WATER� CLERi FOR WATER RIGHTS OF THOMAS L. EMMER) � S IN THE COLORADO RIVER RULING OF REFEREE �� fav oEt'UTY OR ITS TRIBUTARIES ) TRIBUTARY INVOLVED: RIFLE CREEK ) IN GARFIELD COUNTY ) The above entitled application was filed on August 31, 1978, and was referred to the undersigned as Water Referee for Water Division No. 5, State of Colorado, by the Water Judge of said Court on the 6th day of September, 1978, in accordance with Article 92 of Chapter 37, Colorado Revised Statutes 1973, known as The Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969. And the undersigned Referee having made such investigations as are necessary to determine whether or not the statements in the application are true and having become fully advised with respect to the subject matter of the application does hereby make the following determination and ruling as the Referee in this matter, to -wit: 1. The statements in the application are true. The Statement of Opposition has been effectively withdrawn as a result of a Stipulation and Agreement filed by the applicant and the objector and the Referee has made no deteimination concerning the Statement of Opposition. 2. The application is for approval of a Plan and change of water rights involving Emmer We 'o 2, Emmer Reservoir No. 1, and the Grand Tunnel Ditch. for Augmentation mmer 3. The name of the claimant and address is Thomas L. Emmer; 1046 State Highway 325; Rifle, Colorado. 4. The source of the water for all of the structures is Rifle Creek, tributary to the Colorado River. 5. (a) The point of diversion of the Grand Tunnel\ Ditch, as decreed, is located on the West bank of Rifle Creek about five miles above the mouth. (b) Emmer Well No. 1 is located in the SWa NWa of Section 30, T. 5 S., R. 92 W. of the 6th P.M. at a point whence the Northwest Corner of said Section 30 bears N. 19`49' W. 2,125 feet. (c) Emmer Well No. 2 is located in the NE' NWII of Section 30, T. 5 S., R. 92 W. of the 6th P.M. at a point whence the Northwest Corner of said Section 30 bears N. 52°00' W. 1,900 feet. (d) Emmer Reservoir No. 1 is located in the SE NW'4 of Section 30, T. 5 S., R. 92 W. of the 6th P.M; the right abutment of the embankment is located at a point whence the Northwest Corner of said Section 30 bears N. 42°30' W. 2,440 feet. 6. (a) On May 11, 1889, in Civil Action No. 103, the Garfield County District Court awarded to the Grand Tunnel Ditch, Structure No. 2, Priority No. 2 for 2.0 cubic feet of water per second of time, Priority No: 24 for 2.0 cubic feet of water per second of time, Priority No. 40 for 4.0 cubic feet of water per second of time, Priority No. 82 for 12.0 cubic feet of water per second of time, Priority No. 100 for 4.0 cubic feet of water per second of time, and Priority No. 124 for 2.5 cubic feet of water per second of time, to be used for irrigation. The 2.0 cubic feet of water per second of time granted under Priority No. 2 is the subject of this Plan for Augmentation and change of water right, and is owned by the applicant herein. (b) Emmer Well No. 1 has been granted, by the Water Court for Water Division No. 5, in Case No W-3876, a conditional water right for 0.088 cubic foot of water per second of time, to be used for municipal, domestic, irrigation, recreation, mechanical, manu- facturing, fire protection, and sewage treatment purposes, with appropriation date of June 1, 1972. (c) Emmer Well No. 2 has been granted, by the Water Court for Water Division No. 5, in Case No. W -3877,.a conditional water right for 0.33 cubic foot of water per second of time, to be used for municipal, domestic, irrigation, recreation, mechanical, manu- facturing, fire protection, and sewage treatment purposes, with appropriation date of April 20, 1978. (d) Emmer Reservoir No. 1 has been granted by the Water Court for Water Division No. 5, in Case No W-3878, a conditional water storage right for 11.0 acre feet of water, to be used for municipal, domestic, irrigation, recreation, mechanical, manufacturing, fire protection, and sewage treatment, all in connection with this Plan for Augmentation, with appropriation date of August 9, 1978. 7. This is an application for change of water right and approval of Plan for Augmentation in which the applicant seeks to provide a dependable supply of domestic water for a 100 unit Sub -Division known as Rifle Creek Estates Subdivision by the use of Emmer Well No. 1 and Emmer Well No. 2. 8. A Statement of Opposition was filed by the City of Rifle on October 31, 1978, and as a result, on November 30, 1978, the application was re-referred by the Water Referee to the Water Judge for Water Division No. 5. 9. As a result of negotiations between the parties involved an agreement was reached, and on February 20, 1979, the following Stipulation and Agreement was filed in Water Court for Water Division No. 5: THIS STIPULATION AND AGREEMENT, entered into this 19th day of February, 1979, by and between the Objector City of Rifle, Colorado (hereinafter "Rifle"), by and through its Special Counsel Musick, Williamson, Schwartz, Leavenworth & Cope, P.C., and the Applicant Thomas L. Emmer (hereinafter "Emmer"), by and through his attorneys Delaney and Balcomb; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Emmer is the Applicant in the above -captioned cases and Rifle filed timely Statements of Opposition to said application; and WHEREAS, Emmer intends to utilize the water rights which are the subject of the above -captioned proceedings to provide a water supply for Rifle Creek Estates Subdivision (hereinafter "Rifle Creek Estates"), the legal description of which is set forth on Appendix A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and WIIEREAS, Rifle is the owner of junior and senior water rights on Rifle Creek and its tributaries; and WIIEREAS, Rifle and Emmer have resolved their differences and desire to redue their agreement to writing. J • • NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties stipulate and agree as follows: A. Emmer agrees that of the 2.0 c.f.s. Priority No. 2, Grand Tunnel Ditch original construction water right, decreed in Civil Action No. 103 (Garfield County District Court) on May 11, 1889, and referred to in the Plan of Augmentation (Case No. W-3879), 1.2 c.f.s. of said Priority No. 2 is decreed for diversion into the Grand Tunnel Ditch (Structure No. 2). (Emmer is the owner of the remaining 0.8 c.f.s. of Priority No. 2 which is decreed for diversion at the Rifle Creek Canyon Ditch). Rifle agrees that Emmer is the owner of said 2.0 c.f.s. of Priority No. 2. The parties agree that Emmer has historically irrigated a total of 60 acres with the 1.2 c.f.s. Grand Tunnel Ditch Priority No. 2 water right. B. Upon approval of this Stipulation and Agreement by the Court and the inclusion of its terms and conditions in the decrees in the above_ captioned cases, the Statements of Opposition filed by Rifle in said cases shall be deemed to be withdrawn. C. Emmer agrees to pay all ditch assessments levied on Emmer's 1.2 c.f.s. by the Grand Tunnel Ditch Company (herein- after the "Company") pursuant to the By -Laws of the Company regardless of whether any or all of said water is actually diverted into or carried by said ditch. D. Emmer agrees that the Emmer Well No. 1 (Case No. W-3876) and the Emmer Well No. 2 (Case No. W-3877) shall be administered by the State of Colorado as surface rights on Rifle Creek with and pursuant to the priorities awarded in the above -captioned cases. E. The Plan of Augmentation in Case No. W-3879 shall be subject to and include the following terms, conditions, and limitations: 1. A maximum of one hundred (100) single family dwelling units shall be served from the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 and be covered by the Plan of Augmentation. 2. In-house uses for said one hundred (100) units shall not result in gross diversions from the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 in excess of 40.0 acre feet per year. 3. To augment diversions from the Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 which are used for in-house, domestic purposes, Emmer shall during times of valid senior call on Rifle Creek: a. During the non -irrigation season when said wells are out of priority, release to Rifle Creek from the Emmer Reservoir No. 1 (Case No. W-3878) that quantity of water which equals twenty-five percent (25%) of the quantity of water being delivered to the potable water distribution system. b. buring the irrigation season when said wells are out of priority, Emmer shall permanently remove from irrigation up to five (5) acres of land historically irrigated with Priority No. 2 from the Grand Tunnel Ditch and curtail his diversions from Rifle Creek into the Grand Tunnel Ditch under Priority No. 2 by up to 0.10 c.f.s. as necessary to defray the consumptive use attributable to Emmer Wells No. 1 and 2. 4. The potable water supply system will not be used for irrigation. 5. In the event Emmer desires to irrigate land in Rifle Creek Estates from the Grand Tunnel Ditch in lieu of using Emmer Wells Nos. 1 and 2 pursuant to this paragraph, Emmer agrees to remove from irrigation one acre of land historically 9 • irrigated with Priority No. 2 from the Grand Tunnel Ditch for each acre irrigated in Rifle Creek Estates. F. Emmer acknowledges and agrees that Rifle does not act for or represent the Company nor its users and that Rifle has not been authorized to enter into this Stipulation and Agreement for or on behalf of the Company or its users; provided, however, that Rifle agrees to support this Stipulation and Agreement to the extent of its interest in the Company. G. Emmer states and represents, with the intent that Rifle rely, that the waste water disposal/treatment systems to be used by all dwelling units within Rifle Creek Estates shall be septic tank leach field waste water treatment systems. Emmer agrees that, in the event total consumptive use from the Emmer Wells No. 1 and No. 2 exceeds 10 acre feet per annum, he will amend the Plan for Augmentation in Case No. W-3879 and provide additional augmentation water to compensate for the increased consumptive use which results. H. Emmer shall not store in the Emmer Reservoir No. 1 that quantity of irrigation return flow flowing into said reservoir at all times said reservoir water right is not in priority. I. Rifle shall have the right to enforce the terms and conditions of this Stipulation and Agreement by an action in a court of competent jurisdiction. J. Emmer agrees to install, at his sole expense, any and all measuring devices necessary to monitor the terms of this Stipulation and Agreement that may hereafter be requested by the State Engineer or his representative. K. Upon the approval of the Court of this Stipulation and Agreement, the parties consent to the re-referral of these pro- ceedings to the Referee and for further proceedings as provided for by statute. L. This Stipulation and Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties. As a result of the Stipulation, on March 8, 1979, the application was again referred to the Water Referee by the Water Judge for Water Division No. 5. 10. Applicants Plan for Augmentation is as follows: A. The applicant owns approximately 280 acres of land located on Rifle Creek about three miles north of Rifle, Colorado. It is proposed to develop 100 single family dwelling units which will be supplied in-house water from Emmer Well No. 1 and Emmer Well No. 2, described above. B. The applicant in general proposes to fill Emmer Reservoir No. 1 with water previously awarded to the Grand Tunnel Ditch under Priority No. 2, and to make releases from Emmer Reservoir No. 2 as required to augment Emmer Well No.1 and Emmer Well No. . 2. Adequate measuring devices, as acceptable by the State Engineer or his representative shall be installed and maintained. Releases will be made at the order of the Water Commissioner as authorized by the Division Engineer. C. The augmentation plan will include the drying up of 5.0 acres of land which has previously been irrigated by the Grand Tunnel Ditch under Priority No. 2. The annual consume use of the in-house water system will be approximately 10 acre feet based upon 3.5 persons per unit, per capita use of 100 gallons per day, and 25% consumptive use as estimated in the Engineer's Report. D. Also, during the irrigation season when the wells are out of priority, the applicant will curtail diversion from Rifle Creek into the Grand Tunnel Ditch, 0.10 cubic foot of water per second of time to compensate fore consumptive use of water from Emmer Wells No. 1 and No. 2. Nt79 11. The applicant further requests that the use of the water previously awarded to the•Grand Tunnel Ditch for irrigation use be changed to include the following: all beneficial uses, including recreational uses, municipal uses, domestic use, irrigation use, mechanical use, manufacturing use, fire protection use and use for sewage treatment. 12. The Plan for Augmentation as set forth herein is one contemplated by law, and if implemented and administered in accord- ance with this decree, will cause no injurious effect to vested water rights or decreed conditional water rights. The Referee does therefcre conclude that the above entitled application for Plan for Augmentation should be approved insofar as it is consistent with the terms and conditions of the Stipulation and Agreement as set forth in paragraph 9 above, and in accordance with the Plan for Augmentation as set forth in paragraph 10 above. The application for change of use of the water previously awarded to the Grand Tunnel Ditch is hereby granted only in the amount and for the purposes necessary to fulfill the requirements of this Plan for Augmentation. It is accordingly ORDERED that this ruling shall be filed with the Water Clerk and shall become effective upon such filing, subject to Judicial review pursuant to Section 37-92-304 CRS 1973. It is further ORDERED that a copy of this ruling shall be filed with the appropriate Division Engineer and the State Engineer. Done at the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, this day of /1.-y* , 1980. BY THE REFEREE: W r Referee 1% ter Division No. 5 State of Colorado No protest was filed in this matter, and accordingly the fore- going ruling is confirmed and approved, and is made the Judgement and Decree of this court; provided however, that the approval of this change of water right shall be subject to reconsideration by the Water Judge on the question of injury to the vested rights of others during any hearing commencing in the _2_ calendar years succeeding the year in which this decision is rendered. Dated � v L 1 1; It RE BEI j� 911P101981 a/Argiu 86. P ANNE13 September 8, 1981 Mr. Hal D. Simpson Division of Water Resources Denver, Colorado Dear Mr. Simpson: I read your letter of August 10, 1981 to the Garfield County Planner, Davis Farrar, and it appears that you did not receive the correct information on the existing system. The RO system has been operating for about a year and it is deliver- ing high quality water (60-80 parts /million of dissolved solids). The system has three RO tubes and each tube supplies 8 gpm of treated water. That is a total of 24 gpm or 34,560 gal./day. The 42 resi- dences using 300 gal./day would use 12,600 gal./day or about one third of the capacity of the system. Because each residence has separate irrigation water, the actual domestic use this summer has been about 6,000 gal./month or 200 gal./day. Present water rates are $4.00/ 1,000 gal. for domestic water and 400/1,000 gal. for irrigation water. Water rates are set by the Homeowner's Association. Irrigation water is supplied by a pump delivering 80 gpm or 4800 gal./hour. Both the irrigation and domestic water systems have 22,000 gal. storage tanks. The domestic water tank level is kept above 9,000 gal. for fire protection. Each tube in the RO system is 50% efficient- i.e. for every gallon of water delivered by the tube, there is a gallon of waste water. However, the waste water from two tubes is the input for the third tubeso the system is 75% efficient. That means the well must supply 32 gpm input for 24 gpm of output. At the present time the RO system is being operated with only one tube delivering 8 gpm and since there are only 7 houses using water, the system is only running hours per week. When all three tubes are operating it is possible that the well may not supply sufficient water. Rough initial tests indicated an initial flow of 38 gpm and a const ant flow after 20 hours of 23 gpm. This test was done under rather primitive conditions and I am not sure the tests were valid. We have used the well for irrigation water and pumped for prolonged periods at 35 gpm. In any event, we plan to have a second well operating when the RO unit is operating at full capacity. We are only selling 4 to 5 lots a year so it will probably be 10 years before a full capacity RO system is required. We ap- plied for a second well permit and it was rejected until the water 2. • • augmentation was completed. This augmentation was approved and we are ap- plying for a second well permit. The following documents are recorded and also on file at Rifle Realty. Every prospective buyer is required to read those documents before purchasing a lot. 1. Articles of Incorporation of Rifle Creek Estates Homeowner's Association. 2. Protective Covenants for Rifle Creek Estates Subdivision. 3. Bylaws of Rifle Creek Estates Homeowner's Association. 4. Maintenance Agreement (covers cost and operation of water systems). 5. Deed to water system easements. 6. Bill of sale to water equipment. 7. Deed to water rights, wells #1 and #2, and Reservoir #1. 8. Deed to Park Land. The water system is set up on the basis of 100 lots. The Home- owner's Association was conveyed ownership of 27/100 th of the sys- tem by the above documents for the 27 lots in Phase I. A similar set of documents will convey an additional 15/100 the ownership for the 15 lots in Phase II. All costs for expansion of the system will be borne by the developer. Very, truly yours, Thomas L. Emmer cc. Davis Farrar, Garfield County Planner Marty Oldford, P. E., KKBNA i • Western Slope Gas Company August 4, 1981 One Park Central — 1515 Arapahoe Street P. 0. Box 840 Denver Colorado 80201 (303) 534-1261 Mr. Davis Farrar, Planner Garfield County Planning Department 2014 Blake Ave. Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 RE: Rifle Creek Estates No. 2 Dear Davis: Please be advised that the above referenced subdivision does not conflict with Western's facilities north of Rifle. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review these plans. Very truly yours, hn W. Steck Right -of -Way Agent JWS:amt I Jr-Pri 12., C7570 AUG 0 g 9$j �°"r' LLD n� _ is/ PLAt4„. ti1i‘ GARFIELD COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 2014 BLAKE AVENUE PHONE 945-8212 1 July 31, 1981 TO: All Review Agencies FROM: Davis Farrar, Planner Enclosed is a copy of the preliminary plat for Rifle Creek Estates Filing #2. I would like you to review the infor- mation and return your comments by August 3, 1981, so that they can be presented to the County Commissioners and the Planning Commission. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Dear Mr. Farrar: We received the corespondence and maps, yesterday, sorry for being late, but due to the mailing procedure we were delayed. Please address all future correspondence to Planning and Impact Committee Rifle Fire Protection District, P.O. Box 1133, Rifle, CO 81650. The committee has Rifle Creek Estates Filing #2 and detect no problem as far as fire plugs or supply, a physical inspection of the fasilities and we feel comfortable with the plan as presented. Rifle Fire Protection District Planning and Impact Committee Gary Swallow djw AUG 071981 ,1 GARFIELD CO. PLi .R RICHARD D. LAMM Governor DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street - Room 818 Deriver, Colorado 80203 Administration (303) 866-3581 Ground Water (303) 866-3587 August 10, 1981 Mr. Davis Farrar Garfield County Planning Department 2014 Blake Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Mr. Farrar: • J. A. DANIELSON State Engineer Re: Rifle Creek Estates, Filing 2 We have received information concerning the above referenced subdivision. This filing would consist of 15 single family dwelling units on 40.68 acres. Water is to be supplied by two wells which have been adjudicated and have a plan for augmentation in case numbers W-3876, W-3877, W-3878, and W-3879. The water system also serves 27 lots in filing 1. No information is presented concerning the actual yield of the wells, however, they are decreed for a total of 0.418 cfs. Well water is to be used for inhouse use only and irrigation water will be supplied by a separate system diverting untreated ditch water. The well water analysis provided indi- cates the supply is too high in dissolved solids to be considered acceptable drinking water. Water is to be treated by a reverse osmosis (R.0.) unit which is apparently in use serving phase 1. This unit has a stated capacity of 9800 gallons per day with a 50% water use efficiency. That is, 19,600 gallons of input water are required to supply the 9800 gallons of de-salinized water. As a result, the wells would have to produce twice the amount of water which would actually be delivered. Our review of the above information indicates some discrepancies. The water system design criteria report dated July 20, 1981 indicates a water use of 100 gallons per resident per day with 3.0 residents per dwelling. This calculates to an average daily demand of 12,600 gallons per day for the 42 units. This is considerably greater than calculated and is also greater than the stated capacity of the R.O. units. No information is given concerning actual well yield. We are somewhat confused by the institutional aspects. The information presented indicates the association will issue shares, but makes no reference as to how the shares will be issued. It should be made clear as to how these shares are to be issued and if they are included in the purchase price of a lot. 11c( AUG 1 3 1981 171_0 CO. PLANNER Mr. Davis Farrar August 10, 1981 Page 2 This office could recommend approval of this proposal provided the developer can demonstrate adequate physical supply and provided the above mentioned problem regarding treatment capacity can be resolved. We would ask the county to determine if the institutional arrangement is adequate. We would be happy to review further information concerning the well yield. We would ask the county to consult with the Colorado Department of Health concerning the adequacy of the treatment facility for the additional 15 units. Very truly yours, a 13 Hal D. Simpson, P.E. Assistant State Engineer HDS/KCK:mvf cc: Lee Enewold, Div. Eng. Ralph Stallman Land Use Commission TO: ITEM: Public Service Company • RIFLE CREEK ESTATES FTT,TNG ##9 Preliminary plat LOCATION: Rifle • DEVELOPER OR PETITIONER: ADDRESS: PHONE: The attached plat has been sent to your office for your for your review and comments. Failure to object or comment by , shall constitute approval by your office. COMMENTS: Gas: Plat 4645-428 Designate all access roads as utility easements. KF 8-17-81 Electric: Request 10' utility easement adjacent to all lot lines. HB 8-18-81 Reviewing Office Public Service Company Date 8-21-81 15 D.U. GARF1:'1_11 CO. PI ANM`_R KKBNA Scarrow/Walker Incorporated Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors 1001 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs Colorado 81601 303 945 8664 X51D,, AUG?, 5 1981 l c • • LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To Garfield County Planner Date August 21, 1981 2014 Blake Avenue Job No. Rifle Creek Estates No. 2 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Attention Davis Farrar, Assistant Job Title Gentlemen, We are sending you the following items: ❑ attached ❑ under separate cover via ❑ originals ❑ samples ❑ shop drawings ❑ copy of letter copies description reproductions ❑ change order ❑ specifications date no. 1 Subsurface Soils and Geology Investigation Rifle Crcck Estates No. 2, Rifle Colorado 8/21/81 Prepared by Lincoln DeVore Testing Lab These are transmitted ❑ for approval X?as requested ❑ reviewed ❑ for your use ❑ for review and comment ❑ for your record ❑ after loan to us Remarks Copy to Signed H. West RICHARD D. LAMM GOVERNOR August 31, 1981 • — - . COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 715 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING — 1313 SHERMAN STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80203 PHONE (303) 839)QX1 866-2611 Mr. Davis Farrar Garfield Co. Planning Dept. 2014 Blake Ave. Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Mr. Farrar: RE: RIFLE CREEK ESTATES, FILING 2 JOHN W. ROLD Di rector We have reviewed the data submitted on this proposal and the general and engineering geology of the vicinity. The Lincoln-DeVore soils and geology report does an adequate job describing the geology of the area and they mention problems associated with steep slopes, rock - fall, erosion and slow percolation rates on some lots. Our analysis of the data and our familiarity with the area indicate to us that all three of these problems exist and that they negatively reinforce each other on essentially all of lot 14, most of lot 13 and about half of lot 15. Due to the steepness, erodibility and dip of the Wasatch on this slope we do not feel that mounded, or evapotranspiration systems would not be acceptable. We recommend that you consider striking lots 13 & 14 from the plat and restricting building to the portion of lot 15 which is on the terrace deposit. Yours Truly, Jeffrey L. Hynes Engineering Geologist It cc: LUC SEP 02 1981 GARFIE O CO. PL�� IWILA GEOLOGY STORY OF THE PAST ... KEY TO THE FUTURE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Richard D. Lamm Frank A. Traylor, M.D.. Governor 18 7 6 Executive Director DATE: September H, , 1981 SUBJECT: NON -STATE ASSISTANCE REVIEW AND COMMENTS TO: Garfield County Planning Dept. 2014 Blake Avenue Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 PROJECT TITLE: Rifle Creek Estates F i l i ng #2 STATE IDENTIFIER: COMMENTS DUE: September 3, 1981 COMMENTS: Radiation & Hazardous Wastes Control: All solid wastes from land clearing, construction, and/or occupancy of facilities or structures should be disposed of in legally designated solid waste disposal sites. SOC -3 Jun 80 ame, Ti le Thomas P. Looby Environmental Programs Administrator /1S 4210 EAST 11TH AVENUE DENVER,COLORADO 80220 PHONE (303) 320-333: RICHARD D. LAMM Governor OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 1313 Sherman Street -Room 818 Denver, Colorado 80203 (303) 866-3581 September 30, 1981 Mr. Davis Farrar Garfield County Planning Department 2014 Blake Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Mr. Farrar: JERIS A. DANIELSON State Engineer Re: Rifle Creek Estates Filing 2 In accordance with your request, we are responding to additional information provided by Thomas L. Emmer and Marty Oldford concerning the proposed Rifle Creek Estates, Filing 2. This information would indicate that a sufficient supply of water would exist for the development. In particular, the existing well would appear to be adequate for filings 1 and 2 at existing levels of water use. If, however, an additional well should become necessary, it would apparently be allowed in accordance with the plan for augmentation in Case No. W-3879. Additional information was also submitted concerning the treatment system and institutional arrange- ments. Based on the information now available, it appears that the water supply will be adequate for the subdivision. We, therefore, recommend approval. Very truly yours, Hal D. Simpson, P.E. Assistant State Engineer HDS/KCK:mvf cc: Lee Enewold, Div. Eng. Ralph Stallman Land Use Commission 10 0 L.A1/ FOREST SERVILE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY COLORADO STATE FOREST SERVICE • Petroleum Building 1129 Colorado Avenue, Rooms 217 & 218 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 Telephone 303 / 242-7518 August 13, 1981 Garfield County Planning Dept. 2014 Blake Ave. Glenwood Springs, Colo. 81601 Re: 1041 review, Rifle Creek Estates, Filing #2 Dears Sirs, Rifle Creek Estates, Filing #1 was reviewed for fire hazards in November 1978. In a letter to your department it was pointed out the_less than standard roadbed width, as well as the lack of separate, r6071 1 -51-e ingress egress routes, were a signs scant hazard in the event of fire in e area. In reviewing the same area this week, for the second filing, it was obvious neither previously identified hazard was addressed in the construction of the first filing. In fact the hazard is significantly compounded by the applicants proposing to actually lengthen the single cul-de-sac road to serve the second filing as well. As you will find in your copy of Wildfire Hazards: Guidelines For Their Prevention In Subdivisions and Developments: the maximum length for a cul-de-sac road should be 750 ft; The total leng of the cul-de-sac in this subdivision will now approach three times this recommended length. cc: Colo. Dept. of Local Affairs Sincerely, John Denison District Forester tuna° ca eumigit •ter 4 Mr. Davis Farrar Garfield County Planning Director 2014 Blake Avenue Glenwood Srpings, CO 81601 August 4, 1981 RE: Preliminary Plat of Rifle Creek Estates Dear Mr. Farrar: This property is located within the hilled areas west of State Highway 325. There is very little likelihood that the city would be able to urbanize within this area, but the valley areas to the east of State Highway 325 are developable at urban densities within the foreseeable future. Page one of the applicants report indicates that this property is within four miles of Rifle. This statement is in error. The property is just less than one mile from the annexed portion of Rimrock. The staff is still concerned with the length of Mesa Drive which is an extremely long dead end cul-de-sac. A secondary access should be developed to the northern end of the cul-de-sac for emergency vehicular use. The strret name Mesa Drive conflicts with an existing city street name of Mesa Avenue. This name should be changed if possible. Because of the location of this property, the city is not opposed to this request; subject to the comments made above. If you have any further questions in this matter, please feel free to call at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, lw 337 East Avenue P.O. Box 1908 �`�� o�4:::=1oHOM �oDo oC Brent H. Bean Director of Planning tD.T71' 77-1/7477c71 AUGO 5 1981 GHrrh►tLU co. PLANNER Phone 625 - 2121 Rifle, Colorado 81650 E OF "OIL SHALE" or »�c U•S.A.,'� Lincoln DeVore 1000 West Fillmore St. Colorado Springs, Colorado 80907 (303) 632-3593 Horne Office Martin S. Oldford KKBNA 1001 Grand. Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 May 21, 1981 Re: SUBSURFACE SOILS AND GEOLOGY INVESTIGATION Gentlemen: Transmitted and geology Subdivision RIFLE CREEK ESTATES FILING NO. 2 RIFLE, COLORADO herewith are the results of a subsurface soils investigation for the proposed Rifle Creek Estates to be located in Rifle, Colorado Respectfully submitted, LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY, INC. By: By: 602 East 8th Street Pueblo, Colo 81001 (30:3) 546-1150 a y, Gran Mi hae ZA Lr snik, Y.E. cti+n 0fficja 1 eav Professional101ogi- .to Ai\ Reviewed by: GMK/ j b t o ora P.O. Box 1427 Glenwood Springs, Colo 81601 (303) 945-6020 86 Rosemont Plaza Montrose, Colo 81401 (303) 249-7838 1882 Grand Junction, Colo 81501 (303) 242-8968 P.O. Box 1643 Rock Springs, Wyo 82901 (307) 382-2649 ABSTRACT: The contents of this report are a subsurface soils and geology investigation for the proposed filing two of the Rifle Creek Estates Subdivision near Rifle, Colorado. This report is to be used as a study of geologic hazards on the subject site, together with a preliminary and general overview of the soil conditions on the site. This information has been gathered to meet the state requirements for such reports. This report is intended for this use and should not be used for site specific design. Topographically, the site is a moderate to steep hillside area. Slopes varied from 5 to over 20 percent in various areas of the subdivision, with steeper slopes in the western side of the property. In these steepest areas, stability of slopes and of steep cuts could present some difficulties and review of such is recommended. Due to the slopes, existing surface drainage is generally very good. Subsurface drainage in the often fine-grained dense soils is only fair to poor. The foundation soils encountered during drilling were noted to consist of hard silty clays and gravel terrace deposits overlying bedrock of the Wasatch Formation. A shallow foundation system would be most appropriate for use on this site. Shallow foundations designed on the basis of a maximum bearing capacity of 4500 psf would be appropriate. Because of the moderate swell pressures typical of some of the silty clays and shales, a minimum pressure to resist the swell potential of the soils under load of 1200 psf. Because of the expansive nature of the foundation materials, we would recommend that the foundation system be well balanced and heavily reinforced. All floor slabs on grade must be constructed to act independently of other structural portions of the buildings. Adequate drainage must be provided at all times. Water must never be allowed to pond above the foundation soils. A Type II Cement would be recom- mended in all concrete in contact with the soil on this site. More detailed recommendations can be found within the body of this report. All recommendations will be subject to the limitations set forth herein. INTRODUCTION: The contents of this report are general and engineering geology and soils engineering investigation for the proposed Rifle Creek Estates Subdivision Filing II. It is proposed to develop 15 -two acre lots on 40 acres. The subdivision is located in the East half of the Northeast quarter of Section 25, and the Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 24, Township 5 South, Range 93 West, of the 6th Principal Meridan, site lies on an old alluvial Garfield County, Colorado. The terrace about 2.5 miles north of the town of Rifle, Colorado, and is bounded on the east by State Highway 325 and Rifle Creek, and by State Highway 13 and Government Creek on the West. Part of this site was the previous location of an old gravel pit and quarry operation, from which a considerable amount of the on-site sand and gravel resource was removed. The topography of the construction area is relatively flat and sloping to the south. The easter_rl side of the site has moderately steep slopes on the alluvial gravels, but very steep slopes predominate along the western side. Surface drainage is fair, subsurface drainage is good. Vegetation consists of sagebrush and bunch grasses with some cedar and pinyon trees along the steeper slopes. The climate is semi -arid and some dry -land farming has taken place on the upper terrace level. GENERAL GEOLOGY: The stratigraphic section in this area consists entirely of the Wasatch Formation (Tw) of Tertiary Age. This formation consists of a very thick (4,900-5,000 feet) sequence of purple, red, brown and green thick bedded claystone and shales with lenticular, thick to thin, tan to buff, moderately cemented, highly fractured sandstone layers. These layers dip toward the southwest at low to moderate angles which mea- sured from 25 to 35, from south to north. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 This increasing; dip is due to the sites proximity to the Grand Hogback, a large structural monocline associated with the White River Uplift. The White River Uplift began synchronous with the Larimide Orogeny (a mountain -building episode which started in Colorado before the close of the Cretaceous Period) and resulted locally in lower Paleozoic rocks being uplifted to the high structural relief today known as the Flat Tops. This process tilted the sandstone layers of the Mesa Verde Formation on the end, later to be exposed by erosion of the softer clays of the Wasatch and Mancos Formations. This erosion created the Grand Hogback which extends some 40 miles to the south and 30 miles to the north. The dips of the sandstones along the hogback are very steep to vertical and in places overturned. The dip of the beds decreases abruptly as one comes away from the Grand Hogback, measuring from 250 on the north to 150 on the south end of the site, which is only one mile south of the hogback. Quaternary (approximately one million years and younger) stream erosion, which exposed the Grand Hogback and created Rifle Gap, also truncated the claystones and sandstone beds of the Wasatch Formation under the east side of the site. A considerable thickness of well-rounded sand and gravel (Qt) was then deposited on the Wasatch Formation. Following the deposition of the terrace gravels, torrential sheetwash and eolian (wind blown) activity covered the gravels and Wasatch Formation with a variable thickness of fine silty clay (Qtf). This clay is -4- mainly the product of weathering and erosion of the Wasatch and Mesa Verde Formations. Further erosion by Rifle and Government Creeks has isolated the peninsula -like site and left it approx- imately 150 to 200 feet above the level of the creeks. ENGINEERING GEOLOGY: From the standpoint of engineering geology, there are a few specific areas of concern in addition to the steep slopes along the western boundary of the site, Since the soils underlying the portion of the subdivision in which development is planned consist almost exclusively of alluvial and terrace deposits, the engineering features of these materials will be discussed in general terms. The materials on thesite are quite variable consisting of everything from colloidal clays to gravel and cobbles and are often cemented to varying degrees by a secondary calcareous material known as caliche. Caliche deposits are usually of pleistocene to recent origin a few inches to several feet thick derived locally from the evaporation of moisture in the soil resulting in the deposition of calcium carbonates through a leaching process. Slope stability is of concern only in the immediate vicinity of the steeper slopes and gullies. Slopes on the western edge of the property, however, are very susceptible to erosion; and in fact, are so easily eroded that soil development is impeded, resulting in complete lack of -5- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 vegetation with the exception of the isolated Cedar and Pinyon Pine trees. This intense erosion has created a minor rockfall hazard on these slopes by weathering, out blocks of sandstone which then fall, roll, or slide down hill. The remaining slopes on the site appear to be stable presently. However, care should be taken to maintain this stability by avoiding detrimental construction practices such as removal of vegetation which would expose the slopes to further erosion. Also, cuts in the toe of these slopes should be avoided wherever possible. There appears to be very little other mass wasting hazards present on the site. That is, there is no evidence of landslide, mudflow, debris flow or soil creep. Further recommendations regarding slope stability will be covered later in the soil engineering section of this report. Soils on the site were found to be quite dense, except for the areas mapped as fill, and therefore, will not be susceptible to consolidation or hydrocompaction. Clays and claystones encountered have a moderate to high swell potential and all soils will contain corrosive minerals in significant amounts. The areas mapped as fill consist of mounds of over- burden piled up prior to extraction of the gravel and numerous piles of sieved, screened, and oversized material. All of this material must be considered in a low density state and as such will be unsuitable for foundations or other construction, without first being removed and recompacted by mechanical means. 1 1 Cuts and fills may be necessary in the vicinity of the old gravel quarry in order to achieve a suitable building site. All fill placed beneath footings or floor slabs should be compacted at optimum moisture in lifts not to exceed 12 inches in depth, to at least 95% maximum Proctor density, ASTM D-698. No hazard appears to exist from subsidence, because no soluble rocks outcrop south of the Grand Hogback, and the nearest underground mining activity took place more than a quarter mile to the north of the property. This mine was a small operation and has been inactive for many years. The possibility of the mining activity extending under the site is highly unlikely. No ground water was encountered in any of the borings nor were any springs, seeps or bogs noted, therefore, free water can be assumed to lie fairly deep, even during the seasonal variation. As mentioned before, the site lies 150 to 200 feet above the levels of Rifle and Government Creeks, therefore, no hazard from flooding; exists. The general location of the Rifle Creek Estates is such that the potential seismic risk must be considered. Rifle lies in an area (as does much of west central Colorado) where earthquakes of Eodified I:ercalli intensity VII or Richter magnitude 5.0 may be encountered, and where significant shocks may be expected at the rate of four per decade, per square degree of surface area. The Eodified J:ercalli (or MSK) intensity -7- and Richter magnitude given here are generally considered to be the threshold values at which earthquakes become potentially damaging. The City of Glenwood Springs itself experienced a shock of MSK intensity V in 1839. In the year 1967, when research• was done on the problem, some 20 shocks of Richter magnitude 2.0 to 4.0 were epicentered in the vicinity of Baxter Mountain (5 miles north of the Glenwood Springs area), and another such shock was epicentered at the Harvey Gap Reservoir (6 miles east of the site). This last shock was believed to have been artificially induced by the presence of the reservoir. Other tremors have been recorded in the Aspen vicinity. While the data does not, by any means, support the conclusion that this part of Colorado is an area of serious earthquake danger, a certain risk does exist in the area which must be taken into consideration in the design of structures, embankments and cuts. Generally speaking, a slight degree of "overdesigning" is called for, together with the avoidance of certain types of structural systems which are inherently unstable in the face of horizontal accelerations. As noted above, this entire section of Colorado is subject to very much the same type of seismic risk, and there is no reason to believe that Rifle Creek Estates occupies an area of exceptional risk. The possibility of a slight radiation hazard does exist on the site within the gravels and cobbles in the terrace deposits. These deposits are derived upstream from the site, where Rifle Creek has cut through and exposed the Chinle, Entrade, Navajo, and Morrison formations in which are found concentrations of Vanadium and Uranium Ore. The Vanadium Ore was discovered in 1909 and mined on and off until 1954, during which 750,000 tons of ore, containing about 25 million pounds of V205 and several hundredths percent U308. The Vanadium -Uranium Ore would be the only source of radioactive minerals on the proposed subdivision and would have had to been eroded out and deposited on the site by alluvial action. This mixing of the ore -bearing rocks with other rocks in the terrace gravels has effectively reduced the concentration of radioactive minerals to less than several hundred -thousandths of a percent. A gamma radiation survey was conducted on the site which included scanning the auger samples from all the borings, gravel pit exposures, and recent road cuts. No significant readings higher than background radiation were recorded. There is, therefore, no reason to believe that any unusual degree of risk from radiation hazard exists on this site. While there will be a heavy demand for aggregate in the Upper Colorado Valley through the remainder of this century, it is not believed that withdrawal of the remainder of the deposit such as this will significantly affect the regional aggregate supply. furthermore, given the existing housing shortage in the Rifle area, it is believed that the value of the Rifle Creek Estates, as a residential district far outweighs its potential value as an aggregate resource, and that its development will tend to decrease development pressures on other, higher grade deposits in the bottom of the Colorado River Valley. Some of this sand and gravel may be useful as an economical low-grade material within the development itself, being employed as an embankment and basecourse material. It is our understanding that water rights and supply is being investigated by another engineering firm. Individual septic disposal systems have been proposed for this subdivision. Six percolation tests have been performed on the site. These tests were performed in the torrential fan deposits and resulted in a satisfactory percolation rate, between 20 and 50 minutes per inch. Details of the test results are not included in this report as they are not intended for design use. The Laboratory feels that good percolation rates can be expected wherever torrential fan and terrace gravels are encountered. However, on the west side of the subdivision where stiff clays are present, percolation rates will probably be slow to very slow. In these areas a combination of absorption and evapo- transpiration fields or elevated fields constructed with more permeable materials may be used. Evapo-transpiration beds and combination beds will need to be overdesigned to provide storage during colder months and snow cover periods to make up for the reduced evapo-transpiration capability. All leaching and -10- absorption fields should contain at least a six inch sand filter which contains sufficient fines to filter and retain the bacterial and viral portions of the effluent. In conclusion, the Rifle Creek Estates should be an excellent site for a housing development. It is conveniently located near a municipality which is currently experiencing a housing shortage, and occupies one of the more favorable development sites in the area. The engineering problems to be found on the site are not extensive and can all be overcome through sound design and construction. BORINGS, LABORATORY TESTS AND RESULTS: Six test borings were placed on the site, at locations indicated on the attached Test Boring Location Diagram. These test borings were placed in such a manner as to obtain a reasonably good profile of the proposed construction site subsurface soils. Some variations were noted in the soil profile, but in general, the profile was found to be fairly uniform, so that further test borings were not deemed necessary at this time. All test borings were advanced with a power -driven, continuous auger drill and samples were taken with the standard split -spoon sampler and by bulk methods. The precise gradational and plasticity characteristics associated with the soils encountered during drilling can be found on the attached summary sheets. The representative numbar for each soil group is indicated in a small circle immediately below the sampling point on the Drilling Logs. The following discussion of the soil groups will be general in nature. The soils profile found on this site can be broadly describes as a three layer system. The upper 7 to 13 feet of the profile was found to be stiff to hard silty clay. Beneath this surface layer, the soils were found to consist of a sand-gravel-cobble river terrace material (at some areas) underlain by bedrock of the Wasatch Formation. Soil Type No. 1 classified as a silty clay of generally fine grain size. Soil Type No. 1 is • relatively dry in place and of moderate to high density. These soils have a tendency to expand upon the addition of moisture with swell pressures on the order of 1130 psf being considered typical. While this magnitude of expansion should not be sufficient to affect the heavy structural members, of the building, it can cause some movement beneath light structural members and floor slabs on grade. These soils will have a slight tendency to long-term consolidate under applied foundation pressures. However, if the allowable bearing values given are not exceeded, we feel that differential movement would be tolerable. This soil group was found to have an allowable bearing value on the order of 4500 psf maximum. Due to its expansion potential, a minimum foundation contact pressure of 1200 psf would be required. This would provide sufficient structural load to resist the typical swell of this soil that would be likely if saturation of the soil occurred after construction was completed. Soil Type No. 2 also classified as silty clay, like Soil Type No. 1 previously described. However, this material is actually the weathered shale bedrock of the Wasatch Formation. The expansion and settlement characteristics of this soil group will be nearly identical to those previously described for Soil Type No. 1. Please note that the typical swell pressures of this material are likely to be half, or less, in magnitude of those found for Soil Type No. 1. Allowable bearing values on the order of those provided for Type 1 Soil also would be associated with this soil group. The same minimum pressure is used pending site specific information to the contrary. Soil Type No. 3 classified as a sand -gravel river terrace deposit of coarse grain size. Soil Type No. 3 is non -plastic and of very high density. In them- selves, these soils will have virtually no tendency to expand upon the addition of moisture nor to long-term consolidate under applied foundation stresses. Granular materials, such as these, do have a tendency to rapidly settle under the initial application of static foundation pressures. However, these settlements are characteristically fairly rapid in nature and should be virtually complete by the end of construction. At this site, because of the very high density of these terrace deposits,no significant settle- ment is likely for most light to moderate structures. In any event, if the allowable bearing values given in this report are not exceeded, and if recommendations pertaining to inspection, reinforcing, balancing,and drainage are followed, it is felt that differential movement can be held to a tolerable magnitude. -15- At shallow foundation depths across the s:Lte, these soils were found to have an average allowable bearing capacity on the order of 4500 psf. No free water was encountered during drilling on this site. True free water should be fairly deep in this area, and hence, should not affect construction assuming that surface drainage is properly controlled. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOII'ENDATIONS: Since the exact magnitude and nature of the foundation loads are not precisely known at the present time, the following recommendations must be somewhat general in nature. Any special loads or unusual design conditions should be reported to Lincoln-DeVore so that changes in these recommendations may be made, if necessary. However, based upon our analysis of the soil conditions and project characteristics previously outlined, the following recommendations are made. Due to the large size of the site and the relatively limited scope of the field exploration program, a report such as this must, of necessity, be quite general and preliminary in nature. Therefore, it is recommended that more detailed investigations be performed prior to construction. For small, light -weight structures, this investigation could con- sist simply of inspection of the open foundation excavation prior to the construction of forms or placement of concrete. For large major structures, however, more detailed soil investi- gations, consisting of several borings placed beneath each structure are recommended. Foundations must be designed with the expansive potential of the subsurface soils in mind. The foundation configuration which can be used on the expansive clays will depend upon the magnitude of foundation loads exerted by the residential units as well as the exact degree of expansion anticipated from the soils. Several foundation types are accept- able for use on these clays. These foundation configurations would include, but are not limited to: 1. The first option would consist of the engineered no footing design, with the stemwall resting directly on the ground surface. The judicious use of voids would be employed to balance the structure and to increase the contact stresses beneath any very light walls. For most moderately loaded foundation systems, this voided stemwall design would probably prove satisfactory considering the magnitude of expansion pressures encountered across the sub- division, and the anticipated foundation loads for these single family dwelling units. We would anticipate that the majority of the foundation systems used on the clays across the subdivision will fall into this category. 2. A balanced pad and grade beam type of foundation system would form the second general foundation option. This alternative would involve the use of small bearing pads beneath a reinforced concrete grade beam. The grade beam would be continually voided between pads with the foundation loads being transferred by the pads only, and not the grade beam between pads. This foundation alternative will probably be suitable for very light structures on clays of high expansion potential. This configuration generally allows the designer to maintain a fairly high minimum dead load pressure. 3. The third foundation configuration would essentially be a combination of one of the preceding alternatives in conjunction with an overexcavated, compacted, granular pad. The depth of over -excavation would be related to the expansion potential of the clays as well as the nature of the residential units. Typical depths of overexcavation should range from about 3 to 10 feet. After overexcavation, a compacted granular pad using non -expansive, non -free draining soils could be constructed, maintaining a minimum of 90% of the soil's modified maximum Proctor dry density, ASTM -1557. The purpose of this compacted pad is not to entirely overcome the expansive potential of the clays, but rather to provide a "buffer" zone between the clays and the foundations. A designed foundation system, similar to one of the preceding alternatives, would then be constructed on top of the granular pad. Frequent density tests would be required during pad construction to ensure that an adequate density level is being maintained. This option would also be used if any areas of uncontrolled fill are encountered during the excavation process. Some existing fill areas have been identified as part of our investigation and are approximately delineated on the accompanying Boring, Topography and Geology Diagram. No borings were Performed on these fills. Nor do we have any records indicating the use of controlled fill in such areas. In general, we do not anticipate a need for any deep foundation configuration (drilled piers or piles) on this site. If future development of any portion of the subdivision entails such high loads that a "deep" configuration is needed,.i.e., to utilize the much higher pressures available at some depth into formational rock, site specific investigation must be done. In general, in such cases, bearing pressures in excess of 10,000 psf could be feasible. Regardless of the foundation type used, it is recommended that the foundation components be balanced to lower the possibility of differential movement. This balancing will help the buildings move more or less as single units, rather than in a differential manner. The foundation system should be proportioned such that the pressure on the soil is approximately the same throughout the building. The judicious -16- use of voids beneath very light walls will help balance the structure, as well as to develop the minimum design pressures dictated by the expansive clays. Using the criterion of dead load plus approximately one-half the live load, the contact pressures should be balanced to within +300 psf beneath all load bearing walls throughout the residential units. Isolated pads should be designed for pressures of slightly more than the exterior wall average by at least 150 psf. Stemwalls for a shallow foundation system should be designed as a grade beam capable of spanning at least 15 feet. These "grade beams" should be horizontally rein- forced both near the top and near the bottom. Major reinforcing should be near the top. The horizontal reinforcement required should be placed continuously around the structure with no gaps or breaks unless specially designed. Additional slant rein- forcing (at 45") should be placed at any step in the foundation walls. Vertical reinforcing will not be required to resist lateral pressures unless the loaded wall exceeds 5 feet in height. Regardless of the foundation type used, the stemwalls should be carried across the building so that the foundation will resemble a series of boxes. This will aid in preventing damage from lateral movement or downhill creep if either should occur. Isolated interior pads may be used on the site, but exterior walls should be still tied together with the box support. Reinforcing in the tie beams would be the same as that in the stemwalls and this reinforcing would be designed basically for tension. -17- The bottom of all foundation com- ponents should rest a minimum of 4 feet below finished grade or as required by the local building codes. Foundation components must not be placed on frozen soils. Where floor slabs are used, they may be placed directly on grade or over a compacted gravel blanket of 4 to 6 inches in thickness. Under no circumstances should this gravel pad be allowed to act as a water trap beneath the floor slab. A vapor barrier is recommended beneath any and all floor slabs on grade which will lie below the finished exterior ground surface. All fill placed beneath the interior floor slabs must be compacted to at least 90% of its maximum Proctor dry density ASTM D-698. All floor slabs on grade must be constructed to act independently of the other structural portions of the building. These floor slabs should contain deep construction or contraction joints to facilitate even breakage and to help minimize any unsightly cracking which could result from differential movement. Floor slabs on grade should be placed in sections no greater than 25 feet on a side. Prior to constructing slabs on grade, all existing topsoil and organics must be removed from the building interior. Likewise, all foundations must penetrate the topsoil layer. The recommendations pertaining to slabs on grade would apply whether a deep or shallow foundation system is selected. -18- The existing drainage in the area must either, be maintained or improved. Water should be drained away from the structures as rapidly as possible and should not be allowed to stand or pond in the area of the buildings. The surface drainage across the entire subdivision must be carefully controlled to prevent infiltration and saturation of the foundation soils. The overall grading plan must be designed such that water'removed from one building is not directed into the backfilled areas of an adjacent structure. To give the building extra lateral stability and to aid in the rapidity of runoff, all backfill around the building and in utility trenches in the vicinity of the structure should be compacted to at least 90% of its maximum Proctor dry density, ASTI1 D-698. The native materials encoun- tered on this site may be used for backfilling purposes, if so desired. All backfill must be compacted to the required density by mechanical means. No water flooding techniques of any type should be used in the placement of fill on this site. A subsurface peripheral drain, including an adequate gravel collector, sand filter and per- forated drain pipe, should be constructed around the outside of the building at foundation level. Dry wells should not be used anywhere on this site. The discharge pipe should be given a free gravity outlet to the ground surface. If "daylight" is not available, a sealed sump and pump should be used. At higher altitudes, such as this area, difficulty with freezing of drainage lines at the discharge point is probable. This can be overcome by discharging into a protected, coarse rock and cobble fill or possibly a shallow sump with pump. Both should be placed well away from any building. As an alternative, heat tapes could be used on the pipe at the discharge point. The drain ,must be placed with due consideration given to the proposed pattern of snow removal. It is recommended that the amount of cut and fill be kept to a minimum on this site. Specifically, any cut or fill which would tend to reduce the stability of native slopes should be avoided. This would include cuts which are located at the lower portion of slopes or fills located near the top of slopes. Any cuts or fills over 10 feet in height should be individually investigated and the stability calculated prior to placing. Site and situation specific review of such higher cuts to determine the required retention feature is strongly recommended for temporary as well as permanent cuts. Allowable slope angle for cuts in native material will be dependent upon soil conditions, slope geometry and other factors. Should sizable cuts be desired on this site, it is recommended that a slope stability analysis be performed once location and approximate depth of intended cuts are determined in order to obtain this information. Walls on the uphill sides of build- ings should be designed to extend deeper into the soil and must be designed as a semi -retaining wall capable of restraining soil on the upper sides of the building. Without knowing the exact -20- cuts and slopes, it is not possible to precisely define the required lateral earth pressure for such walls. In general, an equivalent fluid pressure of 40 pcf could be used for design where backslopes are approximately level. ;;here backslopes are steep, or other structures exist on the backslope, equivalent fluid pressures of 70 pcf or higher could be necessary. Site specific evaluation would be imperative in. such cases. Where retaining walls are used, adequate drainage measures should be taken to ensure that the soil being retained does not become saturated. Two methods which could be used to control drainage behind walls are a system of "French drains" behind walls or the use of a gravel collector behind the wall with "weep holes" through the wall. There are, of course, other methods which will perform satisfactorily. The drainage pattern should be designed so that water removed from behind a wall is not allowed to collect or pond at the toe of the wall or behind an adjacent wall. Excavation in the site soils should generally present no major difficulty. In some cases, ripping - type procedures may be needed for formational rock or very dense river terrace deposits. Soils similar to types 1, 2, or 3, or suitable borrow, could be used as fill at this site. Use of on-site typical soils as fill would depend on appropriate moisture conditioninP; and placement and compaction procedures. The soils on this site were found to contain sulfates in detrimental quantities. Therefore, a Type II Cement would be recommended in all concrete in contact with the -21 - soil. Under no circumstances should calcium chloride ever be added to a Type II Cement. In the event that Type II Cement is difficult to obtain, a Type I Cement may be used, but only if it is protected from the soils by an impermeable membrane. The open foundation excavation must be inspected prior to the placing of forms and pouring of concrete to establish that adequate design bearing materials have been reached and that no debris, soft spots or areas of unusually low density are located within the foundation region. All fill placed below the foundations must be full- controlled,and tested to ensure that adequate densification has occurred. It is extremely important,due to the nature of data obtained by the random sampling of such a heterogeneous material as soil,that we be informed of any changes in the subsurface conditions observed during construction from those outlined in the body of this report. Construction person- nel should be made familiar with the contents of this report and instructed to relate any differences immediately if encountered. It is believed that all pertinent points concerning the subsurface soils on this site have been covered in this report. If questions arise or further information is required, please feel free to contact Lincoln-DeVore at any time. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SOILS DESCRIPTIONS: ROCK DESCRIPTIONS: DESCRIPT/ON SYMBOLS 8r NOTES. SYMBOL DESCR/PT/ON SYMBOL USCS DESCR/PT/ON SYMBOL Q•• 44; SEDIMENTARY ROCKS Topsoil :i :i;•2::4',.CONGLOMERATE o, �3:. 9/12 Standard penetration drive Man-made Fil I• SANDSTONE Numbers indicate 9 blows to drive the spoon 12" into ground. :o.o.o :o:o:oo o. o 'o°•°o:o`. GW Well -graded Gravel _ - _ = -_= — — SILTSTONE ST 2-1/2" Shelby thin wall sample 0000— o°o°oo0 0000 GP Poorly -graded Gravel =_-= SHALE ° � GM Silty Gravel x x x CLAYSTONE Wo Natural Moisture Content o °° oo GC Clayey Gravel COAL Free Wx Weathered Material I i v water Free water table SW Well graded Sand I I LIMESTONE iiii density 1 1 SP Poorly -graded Sandi DOLOMITE Ya Natural dry , 11 �� SM Silty Sand MARLSTONE T.B.-Disturbed Bulk Sample ,ji�� SC Clayey Sand /1!! GYPSUM Q Soil type related to samples 1 11 ML Low plasticity Silt rt_ Other Sedimentary Rocks in report /..A, l/t IGNEOUS ROCKS 15' Wx Top of formation CL Low -plasticity Clay �\,- �' GRANITIC ROCKS Form. 1 ROCKS Test Boring Location OL Low -plasticity Organic ++++ DIORITIC Silt Clay and MH High -plasticity Silt\(i.� GABBRO Test Pit Location CH High plasticity Clay __^ RHYOLITE Resistivity Station. �, I + Seismic or _¢_ 7 OH High-plasticity_A„....4,,,_,..,,,, Organic Clay "�' "�`� Lineation indicates approx. ANDESITE length a orientation of spread .L, „ _ (S= Seismic , R= Resistivity ) ..-'-,-�., Pt Peat BASALT GW/GM Well- graded Gravel, Silty °�° ro0 4A Standard Penetration Drives are made TUFF & ASH FLOWS by driving a standard i.4" split spoon ° ° ° o o GW/GC Well -graded Gravel, o Clayey . o®' ::.`:o' .o..:°" BRECCIA & Other Volcanics sampler into the ground by dropping a I4olb. weight 30". ASTM test des. D-1586. Too 00 GP/GM Poorly- graded Gravel, Silty c ,- 4 ^ Other Igneous Rocks Samples may be bulk, standard split disturbed) 2- %2" I.D. 0.,0 0 i� \/ METAMORPHIC ROCKS spoon (both Ior 0 GP/GC Poorly -graded Gravel, Clayey = I �� GNEISS thin wall ("undisturbed") Shelby tube samples. See log for type. I GM/GC Silty Gravel, Clayey �� / SCHIST The boring logs shownc dates locations shown itis GC/GM Clayey Gravel, Silty �• PHYLLITE 1 at the and ,and not warranted that they are representative of subsurface conditions at other locations SW/SM Well - graded Sand, Silty• �r� 4i�� SLATE and times. SW/SC Cleallegraded Sand, :�,j,' METAQUARTZITE , yyo 0 o� NM SP/SM Poorly -graded Sand, 00o MARBLE Silty r, SP/SC Poorly - graded Sand, Clayey yiJ v �� HORNFELS I SM/SC Silty Sand, Clayey A�15 $ SERPENTINE SC/SM Clayey Sand, Silty Other Metamorphic 0 Rocks f� ITESTING I CL/ML SiltyL7 Clay LINCOLN DeVOREEXPLANATION COLORADO, Colorado Springs, Pueblo, Glenwood Springs, Montrose, Gunnison. Grand Junction.— WYO.— Rock Springs OF BOREHOLE LOGS AND LOCATION DIAGRAMS LABORATORY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TEST TOP HOLE No. / Z 3 ELEVATION • �-- —10 r _ -- 15 20 1-25 —30 1— w w U_ —35 —40 1-- n. -- w ca -t'or.$o • L. �-- _ 4•/ _ /. TOP c L ?G "X wo (p {5O/( wow 10/z w0� 3•I'f. S"t'/4 'S,0 `� 7 0 ,�, - ,,. rt iO P6 0 •- ?o 4411 7 w -not m 5�'�O 5— _ .i/t2 spa 4.3•. (� 10 60/4 ,,,,.i.e,.,q C4Ja � 15 ,- 20 25—, 0-- 30— 5— 35— 40— GL, 51 Lry CLAY, SANDY LT. BRN FIRM t� NALD ... --/5U -77 7 I / l 30/1z50/t„% w -7 .5.1. CD /,1 O /B wo. L•E/ 50/6 6. ®aa.� C.L,STy GLAY « A..t 51.. SD LT. , BRN, 1-lAPO w ''''/3,.. L PA rtr aTl2.u4ARS _ • _ —L ..- _ _ _ - - . • . CL, 61Lry Gt.AYT 6L. t.....,-.).15, l .T. Sao, 5rlFG SAME .. cR�r. To GINQ w/p,Nw G4♦vet, 5. vc + 54n1D STONt, _ CiV r TO V, F.NG, wN,rr To burr Hoo, G[M6/JTT r,o• 6NA LQ -.. : - _ SANID6TON . GiMQNrAReu - cw7 • • - G L 1 sN A LF kiupy S i cT'�{ CL4YJ, LT'. Gee c,,,, Cu 62AY TO B¢N, V, NA RA -- — --- — — — - _- --- - - - — - - - CL a l�. 6, (SA..1bY 6,t.TY 6 LA Y, , LP: �-- G. R g/tu16N LA2 AY` To IdN V. Na2D _. --- — -- _ — — — — - -' _ Y-_--'- — �= -il - - = = _ J - = - _ _ GP GM, (6 L -D, ,A�/0A V. SAta DY, 6.LTV, u1 co O31 -C 5, WnL-ROuu D6D, DtTUSd gHFu;,AL d 17 DY Ge $ 66,.5 — - — — — Y — — — _ �A. *,/. !��A t wMM .ammoos D r!LUNG LOGS LINCOLN DeVORE ENGIN EERS• GEOLOGISTS COLORADO: COLORADO PUEBLO , 0LENWOOD SPRINGS GRAND JUNCTION , MONTROSE WYOMING: ROCK SPRINGS SPRINGS, , , D 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TEST TOP HOLE NO, 4 5 67 5.L6V, 7,� m 5 _ 5o/4 a3 2'. ®15-- "'1 ---III 2_ 25- 30- - - - 35- 40 - - CL s rLTY Gv Y SL. SAND TR G2AV6L ELEVATION _ 5 -IO _ --15 _.20 25 -30 - 1- `- 1/1 W - LL -35 2 -40 a w 001 ii. �� 1:1 ,aor��� OC /x21 21,,1 ;21,'.411.5/ v� 'A.S 1, �' 32/Iz °E4� v o.�x _ CL+oh2. 16 31 ...-re GLAY01,20... bAuD, L'.'.Ye $RN, STIP+= SUMMARY SHEET Soil Sample CL Test No. 3g034. GS Location F�1, 2- RIF -1-z' CretrEe E-sra s- PIP4-e., CC) Date S-6.8/ SBoring p De th ample No 1 Test by s,p Natural Water Content (w) Specific Gravity (Gs) 9/0 In Place Density (To) pcf SIEVE ANALYSIS: Sieve No. % Passing 1 1/2" 1° 3/4" 1/ 2" 4 1Q.. _ -100.0 20 /00.0 40 99.5_ 100 9,z.5 200 79. / HYDROMETER ANALYSIS: Grain size (mm) °/O o, o z 45.8 p.00f„:" 3/-B Plastic Limit P Lo /5.g % Liquid Limit L. L. 30.5 % Plasticity Index P.I. i(.,(, % Shrinkage Limit % Flow Index Shrinkage Ratio % Volumetric Change % Lineal Shrinkage % MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTM METHOD Optimum Moisture Content - w° Jo Maximum Dry Density -Td pcf California Bearing Ratio (av) Swell. f)ays 0/0 Swell against ii30 psf Wo gain°o BEARING: House) Penetrometer (av) psf Unconfined Compression (qu) psf Plate Bearing• psf Inches Settlement Consolidation % under psf PERMEABILITY: K (at 20°C) Void Ratio Sulfates ppm. SOIL ANALYSIS LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO LDV -09 SUMMARY SHEET 3 9 0 3 4 Gr S Soil Sample CL (5,,44 6) Test No. Location PIFLs ,RiFL. CO Date Boring No. Depth Sample No. z Test by s•6. -Br Natural Water Content (w) Specific Gravity (Gs) In Place Density (To) pcf SIEVE ANALYSIS: Sieve No. 1 1/2" 1" Passing 3" /00.d 1Q 93.1 20 g&•/ 40 g4/7 100 7s'L 200 sa.6, HYDROMETER ANALYSIS: Grain size (mm) o. oz 0.00S 0/0 2. 8.� 18.7 SOIL ANALYSIS Plastic Limit P L. /4.B % Liquid Limit L. L. 26,.`E' % Plasticity Index P.I. 11•60 % Shrinkage Limit % Flow Index Shrinkage Ratio 0/0 Volumetric Change % Lineal Shrinkage % MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTM METHOD Optimum Moisture Content - w° Maximum Dry Density -Td pcf California Bearing Ratio (av) Swe I I • Days % Swell against 475 psf Wo gain B -g 0/0 BEARING: Housel Penetrometer (av) psf Unconfined Compression (qu) psf Plate Bearing• psf Inches Settlement Consolidation % under psf PERMEABILITY: K (at 20°C) Void Ratio Sulfates ppm• LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO LDV -09 4•10 .81M1MRPV 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 H W Soil Sample GP CSM Project F=r► 2- 2ir-LE Ozer l=srR s Sample Location �,F�ECO 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0100 I I Ill' 0 11/2" '4" Test No. 39034, GS Date S--23-EY Test by S1 #4 D amet.er- (d►i) 10 #1.0 #20 #40 #100 #200 - Sieve No. Sample No. Specific Gravity Moisture Content Effective Size . o9z 3 Cu_ 20o+ Cc 3.0 Fineness Modulus L.L. BEARING psf GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS MEM Sieve Size % Passing z„ 1 1/2" 79.C. 1" GS�i 3/4" s�,z 1/2" 4-7. 3 3/8" 424 4 34.6 10 20 40 100 200 7 7- 2 3,7 3 /2,S 8.8 0200 4.6 , OGS So 2. 3 Sulfates ppm LINCOLN--DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO GRAVEL SAND SILT TO CLAY Coarse Fine Co, Medium Fine Nonplastic to Plastic I 111111:1 intlq"imor. - iirall .. #4 D amet.er- (d►i) 10 #1.0 #20 #40 #100 #200 - Sieve No. Sample No. Specific Gravity Moisture Content Effective Size . o9z 3 Cu_ 20o+ Cc 3.0 Fineness Modulus L.L. BEARING psf GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS MEM Sieve Size % Passing z„ 1 1/2" 79.C. 1" GS�i 3/4" s�,z 1/2" 4-7. 3 3/8" 424 4 34.6 10 20 40 100 200 7 7- 2 3,7 3 /2,S 8.8 0200 4.6 , OGS So 2. 3 Sulfates ppm LINCOLN--DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO Lincoln DeVore 1441 Motor Grand Junction, Colo 81501 (303) 242-8968 Thomas L. Emmer 1046 State Highway 325 Rifle, CO 81650 RE: Gentlemen: January 13, 1981 SITE SPECIFIC SUBSURFACE SOILS INVESTIGATION LOTS 13, 14, 15; FILING 2 RIFLE CREEK ESTATES SUBDIVISION RIFLE, COLORADO Transmitted herewith, are the results of a Subsurface Soils Investigation, Foundation Recommendations and Erosion and Slope Stability Mitigation Recommendations for the above referenced sites. Respectfully submitted, LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY, INC. By: Walter E. Vanderpo Civil Enqi-er Grand 7 0•'�ion Offi �/' , Reviewed by: WEV/jb LDTL Job No. 42170GS Colorado Springs, Colorado OF Pueblo Colorado Grand Junction, Colorado Glenwood Springs, Colorado Evanston, Wyominc ABSTRACT: After consideration of the investiga- tion and.testing program described herein, we feel that a large portion of each site must be excluded from development for residential structures. For those portions of each site which were found suitable for single family structures it is our recommendation that a shallow foundation system, con- sisting of continuous foundations beneath bearing walls, with opposing walls cross -connected for additional stiffness, be used to carry the weight of the proposed structures. Maximum allowable bearing pressures and minimum required design pressures for each lot are provided within this report. It is recommended that the proposed structure be well balanced and heavily reinforced. The contact stresses beneath exterior load bearing walls should be balanced to within about + 300 psf around the entire structure. Exterior walls should be cross - tied at regular intervals, with all reinforcing continuous. The cross - ties should also be balanced. The criterion for balancing will depend upon the nature of the structure. Single story, slab on grade portions of the structures should be balanced on the basis of dead load only. Multi -story portions of the structure or those with basements should be balanced on the basis of dead load plus approximately one-half the live load. All stem walls and cross -tied walls for continuous foundations should be designed as grade beams capable of spanning at least l5 feet. All floor slabs on grade must be con- structed to act independently of other structural portions of the build- ings. -1- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Adequate drainage must be provided at all times. Water must never be allowed to pond above the foundation soils. Drainage must be carefully controlled to minimize erosion and slope movement. Water should not be allowed to stand or pond any where on the site. A subsurface peripheral drain is re- commended around the living area of each structure. The outlet of all drains and all drainage ways must be designed to dissipate energy and con- trol erosion on each site. A Type II Cement would be recommended in all concrete in contact with the soil on this site. More detailed recommendations for each specific lot can be found within the body of this report. All recommend- ations will be subject to the limitations set forth herein. This laboratory has been informed that the soils information developed in this report is to be used to design the foundations for one or two story single family residential structures. The information may, or may not be valid for other purposes. If the proposed use is changed or types of construction proposed other than noted herein, the laboratory must be contacted to determine if the information in this report can be used for the new construction without further investigation being required. -2- GENERAL: The purpose of this investigation was to identify areas of slope instability, and geologic hazard and to deter- mine the general suitability of Lots Number 13, 14, 15, Filing number 2, Rifle Creek Estates Subdivision for the construction of three single family residential structures. Characteristics of the individual soils found with- in the test borings were examined for use in designing foundations for this site. Although Lincoln-DeVore has not seen a set of construction drawings for any of the residential units proposed, we believe that they will be basically frame structures of more or less con- ventional design. Foundation loads for structures of this nature are nor- mally light to medium weight in magnitude. Topographically, there are many steep slopes on these sites. In general, the direction of fall of the steep slopes is toward the west. However, the exact direction of drainage is highly variable on each lot. In general, surface drainage is toward the west and south. Erosion will be a significant pro- blem if drainage and vegetation are not carefully maintained. Many of the steep slopes are actively eroding. Top soil and vegetation have been un- able to develop on some of the very steep slopes. Vegetation must be maintained in the immediate area around the building sites. Runoff from the very steep, unvegetated slopes should be carefully controlled to pre- vent excessive erosion of these slopes. -3- The soil encountered on the three lots was found to consist of an intermittent surface layer of colluvially de- posited,.medium to stiff lean clay. At many locations this surface veneer has been eroded away exposing formational material of the Wasatch Formation which serves as bedrock at this site. The Wasatch Formation, of tertiary age, consists of a very thick (4000-5000 feet) sequence of purple, red, brown, and green interbedded claystone and shales with lenticular, thick to thin, tan to buff, moderately cemented, highly fractured sandstone layers. The claystone and shale members are moderately to highly succeptable to erosion, the sandstone members are much more resistant. The bedding of the bedrock dips toward the southwest at 15 to 25 degrees. The present ground surface of Lot number 14 generally parallels the dip. A thick sandstone member of the Wasatch Formation is exposed over much of the upper portion of Lot number 14. The remaining slopes on the site appear to be stable presently. However, care should be taken to maintain this stability by avoiding detrimental construction practices such as removing vegetation and/or channeling surface runoff across exposed or freshly cut slopes. Also, cuts into the toe of these slopes should be avoided where possible. There is evidence of a minor rock fall hazard on the steep slopes where the softer claystone and shale have been eroded and weathered away from beneath blocks of sandstone which then topple, roll or slide down- hill. Further recommendations on a site specific basis regarding slope stability will be covered later in this report. -4- BORINGS, LABORATORY TESTS AND RESULTS: Four test borings were drilled across Lot #13 and Lot #15 and are located approximately as shown on the attached Test Boring Location Diagram. Lot #14 was inaccessable to the drill rig, therefore, the subsurface soils could not be sampled or tested. The four test borings were placed in such a manner as to obtain a reasonably good profile of the subsurface soils. All test borings were drilled with a power -driven continuous auger drill. Samples were taken with a standard split -spoon sampler, city characteristics and by bulk methods. The precise gradational and plasti- associated with the soils encountered during drilling can be found on the attached summary sheets. The representative number for each soil group is indicated in a small circle immediately below the sampl- ing point on the Drilling Logs. The following discussion of the soil groups will be general in nature. The soils profile found on this site can be broadly described as an intermittent 2 layer system. The upper 0 to 8 feet of the profile was found to be colluvially deposited lean clay. Beneath this surface layer, the soils were found to consist of weathered formational material of the Wasatch Formation. Soil Type No. 1 classified as a Lean Clay (CL) of fine grain size. Soil Type No. 1 is Low plastic of low per- mability and of medium density. These soils have a slight tendency to expand upon the addition of moisture with swell pressures on the order of 700 psf being considered typical. While this magnitude of expansion should -5- not be sufficient to affect the heavy structural members of the structures it can cause some movement beneath light structural members and floor slabs on grade. These soils will have a slight tendency to long-term consolidate under applied foundation pressures. However, if the allowable bearing values given are not exceeded, we feel that differential movement would be tolerable. This soil group was found to have an allowable bearing value on the order of 2600 psf maximum. Soil Type No. 1 was found to contain Sulfates in detrimental quantities. Soil Type No. 2 classified as a Sandy Silt (NIL) of medium grain size. Soil Type No. 2 is typical of the coarser grained members of the Wasatch Formation which underlie the site and serves as bedrock in this area. Soil Type No. 2 is non elastic of very low perme- ability and of high to very high density. In its initial high density con- dition, these soils would have virtually no tendency to settle or consoli- date. Shallow foundations resting on Soil Type No. 2 may be designed for an allowable bearing capacity of 8000 psf. Soil Type No. 3 classified as Lean Clay (CL) of fine grain size. Soil Type No. 3 is typical of the formation- al shale which underlies the site and serves as bedrock in the area. Soil Type No. 3 is plastic, of very low permeability and of high to very high density. The shales are expansive in nature with swell pressures on the order of 1300 psf being measured. Should drilled piers be used for the building, the expansive nature of the fine grained bedrock must be given consideration. Owing to its initial high density condition, these soils would have virtually no tendency to long-term consolidate. At a penetra- tion of 4 feet into the shale layer, tip bearing capacities on the order of 25,000 psf could be achieved. Soil Type No. 3 was found to contain sul- fates in detrimental quantities. -6- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Shallow foundations placed on undisturbed material of Soil Type No. 3 may be designed on the basis of an allowable bearing capacity of 8000 psf with a minimum pressure of 1400 psf being maintained at all times. No free water was encountered during drilling on this site. True free water should be fairly deep in this area, and hence, should not affect construction assuming that surface drainage is properly controlled. Areas of active and severe erosion occur on Lots #13, #14, and #15. The active erosion will present a threat to structures at this site and will require a minimum set back from exist- ing scarps and additional mitigation techniques. Such mitigation could in- clude retaining walls, placement of Riprap or Gabions, construction of sealed runoff channels such as culverts or other slope stabilization measures. -7- CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Since the exact magnitude and nature of the foundation loads are not precisely known at the present time, the following recommedations must be somewhat general in nature. Any special loads or unusual design conditions should be reported to Lincoln-DeVore so that changes in these recommendations may be made, if necessary. However, based upon our analysis of the soil conditions and project characteristics previously outlined, the following recommendations are made. The proposed residence sites are sub- ject to several engineering geology problems which are mostly related to the steep slopes found on and around the property. Nevertheless, use of proper building design and construction techniques will permit the safe development of these sites. Portions of each Lot are severly eroded and must be excluded from consideration as building sites. A minimum set back of 25 feet should be maintained from all eroding and unvegetated slopes. It is recommended that all structures be designed as relatively small, com- pact units with rigidly reinforced foundation systems. Following are recommendations for each specific Lot: Lot No. 13: Approximately 80% of Lot No. 13 is covered by very steep and actively eroding slopes. Due to the steep slopes and active erosion, we must recommend that all con- struction on this Lot be restricted to a small area in the southeast- ern portion of the Lot. The shaded portion of figure No. 1 is the only portion of Lot No. 13 which we believe to be suitable for a single family residence in its present condition. -8- For structures located within the Safe Building Envelope indicated on Figure No. 1 a shallow found- ation system would be most appropriate. Such a shallow founda- tion system may be designed on the basis of a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 2600 psf. A minimum pressure of 1200 psf will be required. The subsurface materials encount- ered on this site are somewhat unstable and subject to movement, both vertically and laterally. Lateral movement is felt to con- sist primarily of a gradual downslope creep. Rapid mass move- ments are not likely if proper drainage of the site is achieved and cuts and fills restricted. The possibility of rapid move- ment must be recognized, however remote it may be. This gradual downslope movement,however, will create a strong potential for differential movement throughout the structure. Therefore, oppos- ing exterior load bearing walls should be cross -connected to pro- vide additional rigidity. Construction should not be per- mitted within 25 feet of the actively eroding slopes. Cuts should not be permitted in the eroding slopes. The erosion problem is of such a magnitude on this site that it is considered largely impractical or economically unfeasible to totally eliminate all movement. The most reasonable approach would appear to be the utilization of procedures which would allow one to live with the problem and minimize the damaging effects of the erosion. When possible, it -9- is extremely desirable to avoid any major earth work in the area. Large cuts and/or fills on the site may aggravate and intensify the.erosion problems. It is recommended that the amount of cut and fill be kept to an absolute minimum on this site. Specifically, any cut or fill which would tend to reduce the sta- bility of native slopes should be avoided. This would include cuts which are located at the lower portion of slopes or fills located near the top of slopes. Any cuts or fills over 6 feet in height should be individually investigated and the stability calculated prior to placing. Again, it is stressed that there is a high potential for erosion on this site. The recommenda- tions contained in this report will not eliminate or completely protect against potential slope movements. They will, however, reduce the potential for damage to structures resulting from minor slope movements. The owner should recognize the potential for slope movement on this site, if construction of buildings is attempted. Additional recommendations per- taining to foundations to be constructed on this Lot are in- cluded in the remainder of this report. Lot No. 14: The Safe Building Envelope or area most suitable for development on Lot No. 14 is the approximate north and northeast 1/3 of the Lot. Access to drill Lot No. 14 was not possible at the time of our field exploration. However, a -10- Sandstone member of the Wasatch Formation is exposed over much of the northern portion of this site. This Sandstone Cap has been eroded away in some locations. Where this has occured the softer underlying claystone and shale have been rapidly eroded leaving steep slopes. At the present time, it is diffi- cult to establish the exact maximum and minimum allowable bear- ing capacities for this Lot. It is anticipated that shallow foundations would rest upon the formational sandstone. Where footings rest in direct contact with the formational soils,found- ations may be designed on the preliminary basis of a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 8000 psf a minimum soil pressure of 1300 psf would be recommended. An inspection of the open excava- tion would be required prior to the placement of forms to estab- lish the appropriate design parameters for the specific site. At the time of inspection or further investigation, the maximum and minimum bearing values can be verified and recommendations made as to the suitable foundation type for this particular Lot. Also, this inspection will ensure that no debris, soft spots, or areas of unusually low density are located within the foundation region. Any changes in the recommendations included in this report can easily be made at the time of such inspections. All foundations should be set back a minimum of 25 feet from the steep, actively eroding -11- slopes and located within the Safe Building Envelope indicated on Figure No. 2. Additional recommendations pertain- ing to drainage and foundations to be constructed on this Lot are included in the remainder of this report. Lot No. 15: In general,Lot No. 15 slopes moderately down toward the north and east. A deep eroded wash cuts the site from near the middle of the Lot toward the north. The sides of this actively eroding wash are relatively steep at some locations. Therefore, a minimum set back of 25 feet is recommended from any of the steep slopes. The most suitable portion of Lot No. 15 for construction of a single family residence is the approx- imate south east 1/3 of the lot, as shown in Figure No. 3. Where shallow footings rest on the colluvially deposited lean clay foundation soils, a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 3800 psf would be appropriate. A minimum soil pressure of 1400 psf should be maintained at all times. The recommendations provided in the remainder of this report would apply to each of the three lots investigated. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS - ALL SITES: Regardless of the foundation type used, it is recommended that opposing foundation walls be cross -connected for additional stiffness. It is recommended that all foundation components be balanced to lower the possibility of differential move- -12- ment. This balancing will help the buildings to move more or less as a single unit rather than in a differential manner. The foundation system should be proportioned such that the soil pressure is approximately the same throughout the building. The judicious use of voids beneath very light walls will help balance the structure, as well as develop the minimum design pressures dictated by the expansive clays. Using the criterion of dead load plus approximately 1/2 the live load, the contact pressures should be balanced to within + 300 psf beneath all load bearing walls throughout the structures. This would include the previously mentioned cross -connecting walls. Isolated interior column pads, if used, should be balanced at a soil pressure approx- imately 200 psf greater than the average selected for the exterior walls. Due to the possibility for soil creep and other minor slope movements, it is recommended that all foundation components be interconnected with rigidly reinforced grade beams in such a manner that the foundation system acts as a unit. These grade beams should be reinforced in such a manner that they are capable of carrying their loads over a clear span of at least 15 feet. Opposing walls should be cross -connected where possible, to provide additional rigidity. Horizontal reinforcement should be place continuously in grade beams and stem walls, with no gaps or breaks in the reinforcing steel unless specially designed. Beams should be reinforced at both top and bottom with the reinforce- ment being approximately balanced between these two locations. Additionally, it is recommended that vertical reinforcement be provided in exterior foundation walls, based on an equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pcf, acting on the portions of foundation walls which are below grade. -13- The bottom of all foundation components should rest a minimum of 3 feet below finished grade or as required by the local building codes. Foundation components must not be placed on frozen soils. Regardless of the foundation type used, the stem walls should be carried across the building so that the foundation will resemble a series of boxes. This will aid in preventing damage from lateral movement or downhill creep if either should occur. Isolated interior pads may be used on the site, but exterior walls should be still tied together with the box support. Reinforcing in the tie beams would be the same as that in the stem walls and this reinforcing would be designed basically for tension. A compacted gravel layer of 4 to 6 inches in thickness would be recommended beneath all slabs on grade. This gravel layer would act as a capillary break. A vapor barrier is recommended beneath all slabs on grade. All floor slabs on grade must be constructed to act independently of the other structural portions of the building. These floor slabs should contain deep construction or contraction joints to facilitate even breakage and to help minimize any unsightly cracking which could result from differential movement. Floor slabs on grade should be placed in sections no greater than 20 feet on a side. Prior to constructing slabs on grade, all existing topsoil and organics must be removed from the building interior. Likewise, all foundations must penetrate the topsoil layer. All fill placed beneath the interior floor slabs must be compacted to at least 90% of its maximum proctor dry density ASTM (D-698). Moisture -14- content during fill placement should be maintained at the Proctor +3% optimum moisture content, -1%. Any interior, non -load bearing par- titions which will be constructed to rest on the floor slab should be constructed with a minimum space of 11 inches at either the top or bottom of the wall. The bottom of the wall would be the preferred location for this space. This space will allow for any future potential expansion of the subgrade soils and will prevent damage to the wall and/or roof section above which could be caused by this move- ment. Adequate drainage must be provided in the foundation area both during and after construction to prevent the ponding of water. The ground surface around the building should be graded so that surface water will be carried quickly away from the structure. The minimum gradient within 10 feet of the building will depend upon surface landscaping. Bare or paved areas should maintain a minimum gradient of 2%, while landscaped areas should maintain a minimum gradient of 5%. Roof drains must be carried across all back- filled areas and discharged well away from the structure. If adequate surface drainage cannot be maintained or if any subsurface seepage is encountered during excava- tion for foundation construction, then a perimeter drain must be recommended for this building. This drain would consist of a perfora- ted drain pipe, gravel collector and sand filter (or acceptable filter fabric layer). If sufficient topographic fall does not exist on the site to allow daylighting of the drain pipe, then a sealed sump and pump arrange- ment would be required to remove the collected moisture. Ory wells should not be used on this site. -15- Where foundations are excavated into formational soils, a possibility exists for the formation of a closed depression. When foundations are "socketed" into these high density forma- tional materials, they have a tendency to form a water trap since no free drainage outlet is available. If this situation arises during construction, then a subsurface peripheral drain is recommended around the exterior of the structure. This drain will prevent the buildup of water around the build- ings as a result of normal surface rainfall or moisture as a result of lawn and garden irrigation. This subsurface peripheral drain is also recommended around the exterior of the structure when the expansive clays are encountered during foundation construction. The existing drainage in the area must either be maintained or improved. Water should be drained away from the structures as rapidly as possible and should not be allowed to stand or pond in the area of the buildings. The surface drainage across the entire subdivision must be carefully controlled to prevent infiltration and saturation of the foundation soils. All backfill around the buildings should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of its maximum Proctor dry density, ASTM D-698. Roof drains must be carried across all backfilled regions and discharged well away from the structure. Discharge of roof drains, peripheral drains, and surface drainageways must be carefully designed and maintained. There is evidence of severe and active erosion on each of the three lots investigated. Unless properly controlled, the continuing erosion could destroy these three lots as residential building sites. Construction of closed conduit drainageways may be necessary to control surface runoff and prevent excessive erosion on some of the steep, exposed slopes. -16- Fin61 grading after completion of the backfill operation should be such that natural drainage, existing prior to the construction be disturbed as little as possible. In particular, the drainage should not be such that water is channeled along the newly filled area which would result in accelerated erosion and damage in the backfill. A vegetative cover should be established as soon as possible in the back- filled area to minimize erosion in general. The slope stability of the site is adequate at this time, but stability is marginal. For this reason, no cuts or fills should be made on the site in excess of 6 feet without speci- fic examination of each proposed cut or fill base. The natural slope should be disturbed as little as possible and each cut or fill toe should be drained. Slow, hillside creep is the only movement anticipated in the upper 8 feet of the profile unless a deeper cut than recommended should trigger a slide. Considerable amounts of water will be present during snowmelt, and soil pressures and creep activity can be quite high in these seasons. All structures at these three lots should be constructed with a minimum set back of 25 feet from actively eroding slopes. Again, it is stressed that there is a high potential for slope movement on this site. The recommendations contained in this report will not eliminate or completely protect against potential slope movements. They will, however, reduce the potential for damage to structures resulting from minor slope movements. The owner should recognize the potential for slope movement on this site, if construction of buildings is attempted. The soils on this site were found to contain sulfates in detrimental quantities. Therefore, a Type II Cement would be recommended in all concrete in contact with the soil. -17- Under no circumstances should calcium chloride ever be added to a Type II Cement. In the event that Type II Cement is difficult to obtain, a Type I Cement may be used, but only if it is protected from the soils by an impermeable membrane. The open foundation excavation must be inspected prior to the placing of forms and pouring of concrete to esta- blish that adequate design bearing materials have been reached and that no debris, soft spots or areas of unusually low density are located within the foundation region. All fill placed below the foundations must be fully controlled and tested to ensure that adequate densification has occurred. It is extremely important due to the nature of data obtained by the random sampling of such a heterogeneous material as soil that we be informed of any changes in the subsurface conditions observed during construction from those outlined in the body of this report. Construction personnel should be made familiar with the contents of this report and instructed to relate any differences immediately if encountered. It is believed that all pertinent points concerning the subsurface soils on this site have been covered in this report. If soil types and conditions other than those outlined herein are noted during construction on the site, these should be reported to Lincoln- DeVore so that changes in recommendations can be made, if necessary. If questions arise or further information is required, please feel free to contact Lincoln-DeVore at any time. -18- SCALE,- 1!•.- 2000' 5'6,9 ;pal M,ne"..^ acer,}, i, Rifle Gap, ..1 S,•7 . (.ravel Pit .Siphon ; I s i re- 4.0c4770N DiA61?AM ors a) -i3"/1.1, a/5 , R, ZE CRFe. - 637-47-E-5 g;,4",46 -LINCOLN Co. z Psi;c. Creek n,munity Club • )LINc0LN DevoRE ENGINEERS• GEOLOGISTS H (..)0)z' AHt•1 Miek ke45on 6832 \\ 690 C z ri • COLORADO COLORADO SPRINGS PUEBLO, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, GRAND JUNCTION , MONTROSE, WYOMING: ROCK SPRINGS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 RA49 oC srrRp SLopP$ AND laser ERPos; oa /4'e..4 of srooP.SLopa:s 4Y SEVERE ERoS; gym/ OPEN 5 PA7cE A.oT'z/lL .SC,91g *sr c477oN D;AFR.4x L.4.75 °r/33 494,'/5 , / L: wG d2 11 COLORADO: COLORADO SPRINGS, L)L'Nc°LN DeVORE PUEBLO, GLENWO0D SPRINGS ENGINEERS GRAND JUNCTION MONTROSE , TEST HOLE No. TOP ELEVATION T'73 7- LOAN C4,9 r. (CL) ✓ERys,L*Y — BRowN N� GN sv,�f+T S -10 --10 15 20 —25 —30 w re- IL —35 z '-40 x —l— a_ —w L.o✓ Ho,s7;;RE Wx l.ASArefi a h.6AN C,CAy'(C4_ X X chnY STONE - .T,•ff To O x X X %� XRR SuL, i7 s — - - s: LT SroNE (N4L0 S.7N®r SR," wN DENSE LESs4.4.IEATNER6o� - - CLNySroN6 x x_x EAN CL A Y •'x P&RRCL IC IZ T Rel, + x RN --- 504 410-+3% 50/6 T T d DRILLING LOGS LEAN Chit Y (C.L) VERY s;LTY 7 -AN ST,pF "✓X I✓ASA7'c S;L7-57;,ve (ML) SAN PJB L:GNrBR,.,-)N ENS6 LaAN G'LAY (CO fig o PvRPLE� (3Ro w N t/ERY DENSE Reft...TA 4 oN SANDSr°NE LINCOLN DeVORE ENGINEERS• GEOLOGISTS 3o/a_° 4)°= 5.- 4' O 50/6 4°_¢6% 50/4. u;/o COLORADO: COLORADO SPRINGS, PUEBLO , GLENWOOD SPRINGS , GRAND JUNCTION , MONTROSE , WYOMING: ROCK SPRINGS TEST HOLE No. TOP ELEVATION �oT¢iS.F, c;NG�.2 , R,F✓E C'/CEEK Erri —10 I5 —20 1-25 —30 W w 635 —40 W T -r T ONO LEA/v C4✓9 Y (ca) L; 6 -NT" 577 6F i✓ W m # ASilTc�1 cLoaYsroNe- <Ei9�v C AY ROSCZ P,RPLE HARP Pelt( e5 5: LTJroNE YGRY MP Low /1o;j7 t S541 - L4= b.o% U ♦ 45/,z, x AgiP)•=8.8% DRILLING LOGS 50/o c✓o 3.5 '1° D 7W '44 Lo 'J WK WASA)`Gf1 CLAYSToNG .ERN CLAY (CL) 1`fora EC) etWo VERY WAR.0 5.'LrS7 ,v5 SANP S )o Ace- r ET G RA To 8RD 4.,7N PEASE VERY ///9 RC, LINCOLN DeVORE ENGINEERS• GEOLOGISTS X X X A 5o/3 COLORADO: COLORADO SPRINGS, PUEBLO , GLENWOOD SPRINGS , GRAND JUNCTION , MONTROSE , WYOMING: ROCK SPRINGS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SUMMARY SHEET Soil Sample /.EAN C.4../9r (C L) Test No. 42/70 - OS s:z.rY r�s Date /2 -23-8/ Location 1.07-4,-3,1--;'1.w6-1°..2,,.R:PLF- CRECX Eq- Boring No. / // `r / Depth 4-' 4:7,0(7 ).--,7; ) Test by 5.D. Sample No. -.5o;.4. 71 -Pe No. / Natural Water Content Specific Gravity (Gs) (w) 6.8 In Place Density (To) pcf SIEVE ANALYSIS: Sieve No. 1 1/2" % Passing Plastic Limit P L /6.8 % Liquid Limit L. L. 25.5 % Plasticity Index P.I. $.7 % 1" Shrinkage Limit % 3/4" Flow Index 1/2" /oo Shrinkage Ratio ok 4 99.2 Volumetric Change °lo 10 99.0 Lineal Shrinkage ok 20 98.4 MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTM METHOD Optimum Moisture. Content 9_50 Maximum Dr/ Density -id_ pcf 40 97.6 100 89,9 200 7.¢.7 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS: Grain size (mm) % California Bearing Ratio (avl_°/0 Swell: / Days 2 % Swell against oo psf Wo gain% BEARING: Penetrometer (av�6p0 0,02 41.0 D.aoS 23 4Housel psf Unconfined Compression (qu) psf Plate Bearing• psf Inches Settlement Consolidation % under psf PERMEABILITY: K (at 20°C) Void Ratio Sulfates 2000'' ppm. SOIL ANALYSIS LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SUMMARY SHEET Soil Sample S;.LT MLO s.+4,oY Test No. ¢21761 -GS Location ,C oT 47./ pc L1 mG42 A';' aer,c,t Es -C.9) C7rP: c . Date /,2_ _•-s?, 2 - 51 Boring No. Th' / Depth /5 - ) Test by TO. hi. Sample No. So:,L. Triog No•2 Natural Water Content (w) ¢•3 % In Place Density (To) jacf Specific Gravity (Gs) SIEVE ANALYSIS: Sieve No. % Passing 1 1/2" Plastic Limit Pi- o/o Liquid Limit L. L. % Plasticity Index P.I. % 1" Shrinkage Limit ok 3/4" Flow Index 1/2" /ao Shrinkage Ratio ok 4_ 5 Volumetric Change e9T• 10 96 • / _____yo Lineal Shrinkage 20 94.4. MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTM METHOD Optimum Mv`rois ure Content -0______ % Maximum Dr, Density-T'cl—._—_.p cf California Bearing Ratio (av). % 40 92 . e 100 75. 200 54, 2• HYDROMETER ANALYSIS: Grain size (mm) % Swe f l • Days ok Swell against psf Wo gain BEARING: Houses Penetrometer (av) 8004_L n. ®2 3/•3 o. 00_5- 2o•3 psf Unconfined Compression (qu) psf Plate Bearing: psf Inches Settlement Consolidation % under psf PERMEABILITY: K (at 20°C) Void Ratio Sulfates zaoo' ppm. SOIL ANALYSIS LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Soil Sample LEA CLAY (CL) SUMMARY SHEET Test No. ¢2. / 70- 6•s Lax 1.495A 14 ,9 Location /.0T"/3/F,:L%nv'r2 CRE‘k �. ..?t Date /2 -23 -8/ ,R;FA,6 Boring No. T/> '"`. / Depth 9 - (TYP: c#l) Test by 5 p Sample No. So L TYPE IVo. 3 Natural Water Content (w) 3.7 % In Place Density (To) _acf Specific Gravity (Gs) SIEVE ANALYSIS: Sieve No. % Passing 1 1/2" Plastic Limit P.L. IR, 3 % Liquid Limit L. L. 30.8 % Plasticity Index P. I. 12,5____% 1" Shrinkage Limit % 3/4" Flow Index 1/2" Shrinkage Ratio % 4 /Do Volumetric Change °Io 10 99.9 Lineal Shrinkage % 20 98.3 MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTM METHOD Optimum Moisture Content 0% Maximum Dr - Density-ad.—___pcf California Bearing Ratio (av)_ 40 q4.9 100 77.S 60. 200 9 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS: Grain size (mm) % ____-1% SweIl• L Days .. / % Swell against /o psf Wo gain 9•¢ % his= 9.,/p% 4:-. //o. 6 Pc. BEARING: House' Penetrometer (av) 8°°a •sf o. o2 4/. 8 0.005 2.4.60 Unconfined Compression (qu) psf Plate Bearing• psf Inches Settlement Consolidation % under psf PERMEABILITY: K (at 20°C) Void Ratio Sulfates iz000'` ppm. SOIL ANALYSIS LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO SCALE --- J•�= 540° RG No / 407-4;r-/.. , F. -L ;Na. 2 ,e;'Avc4EC R00/C 657 v7 LINCOLN L') DeVORE ENGINEERS• GEOLOGISTS COLORADO: COLORADO SPRINGS, PUEBLO, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, GRAND JUNCTION , MONTROSE , WYOMING: ROCK SPRINGS vier -a cram Se,9J. E L. oT 4/4, �; �C.; n�G Er2 R;FLE CREE/r ESTATESLia) 11 LINCOLN COLORADO: COLORADO SPRINGS, D@VORE PUEBLO, GLENW00D SPRINGS, ,,,,.,,,,�-,, . r,RAND JUNCTION , MONTROSE , 1 ,.) "4-111 .„, 114 -1\4, SCALE- Fi )Vo;:3 1 /— 7 ;Ai R R k LINCOLN i, 1 I l Devo R E ,, rN(zINE.ERS. COLORADO: COLORADO SPRINGS, PUEBLO, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, GRAND JUNCTION , MONTROSE , Co M PACT A NAT, vE" G-A2TH BACKFILL /// //, L ENE FI AI - BEN 4r 1 orv7 l>A GTE -0 NAT/V6 EA21-H 6AC1cl=ILi_ -7 / // // /F/// P1002 ///// �/ //// /f/// /7 /////// /// SAND 1=l LTE2 c ZAVG`L COLLEcroz SAND FILTEE. GeAVEL CoLLECTO iG Ftooe M r N. 450 AwAV F E0W WALL. DEPTH ✓ARI A¢O,�NO ByltOrnlG M1N.j". N u r,4 v a `'nEeF Pr Pt. SPREAD Foorims VypE M/N. 45°Away F20H WALL . DEPTH VA2/E5 A2owNp BUI LDIN[i, MIN. 2". MrN. 43PAwAy 0 0 g 000 Oc,0 000000\: 0 0 p 00 F2oPi WA, -L. I45 D£PTN VA2/E5 jj '4eo VN0 EIVI1-01N6• 31' II 3�oK G"PE,QF M/N.V; PIPE G rMA D S B NAM 'TYPE 0 0 tLOOC OC 00. bb ' b 0 0 0 -.0 00.0.500 0 00 00 O F/LTE)e FREszic MAY erE ANY TYPE, S null -AIL Tb CECANESA CoeP, Mi2.4 1 /40. 0 0 .00 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 V d 0 0 0 0 FILrEbZ FAB21, 3,oR 4"P££F Q PIPE- G1ZA DE - T O puTLET. PnLYCTHY Lt NE FILM -AS,,,- BEL04, UNDER -SLAB, /NT AM IO2 TYPE NULES: .Size of perforated pipe most common. .Gravel size depends on size of pipe perforations: 85% .Sand filter must depend on native soil and must follow 1) 150 filter = 4+ 2) 15J filter 3) < 4 M /N. 4 S.A wAY F,20M £4) ,I . DEP7?i VAEICS ArooND SulLcrAly, M,N.2'r 5 0 11 II 3,4 024" P62e. PIPE FILTER FABIZIG ALr1zNAra- FlcrE-Z. FA gl�lC, /'2AVE CL oLLECrom. -r to sand filter varies with amount of seepage expected. 4" 150 base 50 base diameter is gravel> 2 x diameter of perforation. the Terzaghi-Vicksburg Criteria: 50% filter - 12 to 58 50% base This is required for stability and length of filter life. The sand filter may be replaced with an approved filter fabric. .All pipe to be perforated VCP, PVC or Orangeburg. .4" flexible pipe may be used to depth of 42 feet, but must be carefully graded. 3" flexible pipe may be used to a depth of 7 feet and should be carefully graded. .Rigid pipe only to be used below a depth of 7 feet below ground surface. .All pipe to be laid at a minimum grade of 1.4010 around building foundations. .Outfall to be free, gravity outfall if at all possible. Use sump and pump only if no gravity outfall exists. .Conditions can vary considerably, and each site may be variable as to quality of sand or gravel required. All sites should be inspected to determine the amount and quality of sand filter required, unless a filter fabric installation is used as shown. TYPICAL SECTIONS PERIMETER DRAIN & FRENCH DRAIN L') LINCOLN DeVORE ENGINEERS* GEOLOGISTS COLORADO:COLORADO SPRINGS,' PUEBLO, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, GRAND JUNCTION , MONTROSE , WYOMING: ROCK SPRINGS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Lincoln DeVore 1000 West Fillmore St. Colorado Springs, Colorado 80907 (303) 632-3593 Home Office Mr. Tom Emaer 1046 State Highway 325 Rifle, GO 31650 Gentlemen: ,lagust 11, 1978 GENERAL kg ENGINEERING GEOLuGY & SOILS RIFLE CAELK ESTATES SUBUIVISIUN RIFLE, COL0RA00 Transmitted herewith is a report concerning the general and engineering geology and soils of a proposed subdivision, &ifle E4:eek Estates, located in ..fle, Eolorado. This report has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of Colorado Senate Bill 35 (30-28-133 C.R.S. 1973 as amended) and the Garfield County tibdivision Regulations. Respectfully submitted, LINCCLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY 41(Ge, Mic.lel T. tiaver ineering Geologist .:0‘,-0(.74-4/C•414 Joseph R. Pro nfascel nal Geologic Robert L. Bass . Morrie, P. E. Civil Engineer /kale LjTL Job No. G6-764 2700 Highway 50 West Pueblo, Colo 81003 (303) 546-1150 P.O. Box 1427 Glenwood Springs, Colo 81601 (303) 945-6020 109 Rosemont Plaza Montrose, Colo 81401 (303) 249-7838 P.O. Box 1882 P.O. Box 1643 Grand Junction, Colo 81501 Rock Springs, Wyo 82901 (303) 242-8968 (307) 382-2649 3SV CT: This report contains the results of ;1 geologic and soils engineering investigation conducted on the propose.' 'Afle reek states Subdivision which is located approxLmateiy two miles north of ifle, ..olorado and one ;Ale south of Xifle (;ap. The site lies on aa old alluvial terrace d posit overlying the ,4atch formation, on tho south siat GA. the Grand ho6back. ppasatch formation is a thick saaiueacu of vial -colored ;Isystonts and lenticular sandstone*. ere ibis formation is evosmd, such ds dica4, the western te4e of tha subdivision. it is higaly swsoeptibfe to erosion, an results in a minor rockfell hazar. No other slope stability hazards exist on Luis site. t.w:.paitsivili clays and corrosive minerals art present, but the timepiece soils are ciaite 4anse Ana ao aot pose any other harards to construction. move and recompacted. ,Areas of ensettabie till shoulbe re - Ground water probably 'lies fairly ,Aep, and iue to the site's height above Rifle dreek, no hazard exists for flooding. The potential rot a sliOt radietion hazard exists on the site, but field investigation letermihed no unusual degree of hasard was present. Percolation rates are expected to be good in the terrace ravals and slow in the clays on thy west. side of -A• proposed subdivision, although no tests ..,ere performed bythis laboratory. It is our recommendation that shallow foundation systems consisting of continuoes lounoationa beneath bearing walls and isolated spread footings hotfoot:4 Q014MUS and other points o1 concentrated Joao be used to carry tee wei6nt of the proposed structures. bearing capacity vaiuus for L:Ae SOLJ.6 wars variable from point. to point, and thu exact confi6uration or any particular foundation systum wr-rl be -1- Dependent upon soil conditions. For an overall site average, however, the oexisrum ailowebia bearing capacity of 4000 psf, with a minimum required dsaa load pressure of AOO psf. The bottoms of foundations should be placed a minims of 2.5 feet below finished ,rade, or as dictated by local betiding codes, for frost protection. Foundation stresses should ba balanced to within „ :,>€0 psf, in order to minimt7,e di ferential movement. ;stew wails sauulu be placed continuously around the building, and should be designed as gra„. bk*ame capable of spanning at least l2 feet. ,uuequat* draineae must be pre►• vides, both during and :otter construction, to prevent the ponding of water a tt a area or structures. L ck1~ill around structures should be compacted to at leant 9Cir of tier standard Froetor dry uectsity, = :.1M a -b95. Mtn water flooding techniques should be used in the placement of fill on this site. Nor* complete recommendations can be found within the body of this report. 41 recommendations subject to limitations set forte: herein. The contents of this report are general and eneeneering geology and soils engineering investigation for the propose aifle :Creek estates Sebdiviaton. It is proposed to develop 30 -two acre lots on le0 acres. The subdivision is located in the East half of the Northeast quarter of Section 25, and the Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 24, Township 5 South, Range 93 aest, and part of the Northwest quarter of Section 30, Township eouth, Ranee 92 at of the 6th Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado. The site lies on an old alluvial terrace about 2.5 miles north of the town of Rifle, 'olo• rade, and is bound on the east by atate Htehway 325 and fle Creek, and by State Hiehway 13 and Government Creek on th st. Pert of this site was the previous location of an old gravel pit and qearry operation, from ihtch a considerable amount of the on-aite sand and gravel resource was removed, topography of the construction area Is relatively flat and sloping to the south. The masters side of the site has moderately steep slopes on the alluvial gravels, but very steep slopes predominate aloe; the western side. aurface drainage is fair, subsurface drainaae is eooa. Fetation consists cf sagebrush and buacb grasses with some cedar and pinyon trees alone the steeper slopes. The climate is semi -arid and some dry -land farming, has taken place on the upper terrace level, GENER4 OEOLCM: stretagraphic section in this area consists entirely of the ,eesatab Fermation (re) of Tertiary sta. This /armee tioa consists of a very thick (4,000-5,000 feet) sequenee of purple, red, brown and ere** thick beaded ciaystones and shales with lenticular, thick to -3. thin, tan to heft, moderately cemented, highly fractured sandstone layers. These layers dip toward the southwest at low to moderate angles which mea- sured from 150 to 25°, from south to north. This increasing dip is due to the sites proximity to the Grand Hogback, a lar;e structural =meeting associated with the ,s'hite River Uplift. me ,, pit• Aim Uplift began synchronous with the Larimide Orogeny (a u untain•building gsode which started in Colorado before the close of the Cretaceous Period) end resulted locally in lower Paleozoic: rocks being uplifted to the high structural relief today known as the Flat Tops. This process tilted the sandstone layers of the Mesa Verde Formation on the end, later to be exposed by tresion of the softer clays of the `•.asatch and Maccos Formation. This erosion created the Grand Hogback which extends some 40 miles to the south and 30 miles to the north. The dips of the sandstones along the hogback are very steep to vortical and in places overturned. The dip of the beds decreases abruptly as one camas away from the Grand Hogback, measuring from 25° en the forth Va 150 on the south end of the site, which is only one mile south of the hogback. Quaternary (approximately one million years said younger) strearl erosion, which exposed the Grand Hogback and created Rifle Gap, also trunested the claystone and sandstone beds of the +aasatch Formation under the east side of the site. A considerable thickness of well- ounasd sand and gravel (qt) was thorn deposited on the Aasatch Formation. following the deposition of the terrace gravels, torrential sieetwash and *alien (wind blown) activity covered the gravels and 6asatch Formation with a variable thickness of fine silty clay. This clay is mainly the product of weathering and erosion of the Wasatch ants Massa Verde Formations. Further erosion by Rifle end Coveraasnt Creeks bas isolated the peaLasula-lake site and left it approximately 150 to 200 feet above the level o tbs creeks. ARM:OAK- 1012.11: Fresm the standpoint of enginesrieg $NLegy. there are 4 few specific areas of concern iu eddition to the steep slopes lops the western boundary of the site. Since the soils uaderlying the portion of the subdivision in which development is plumed consist almost exclusively of alluvial and terrace deposits0 the aaimeerteg features of these materials will be discussed in general terns. The materials on the site are quite variable ..oasisting of everything from colloidal clays to gravel and cobbles and are often cemented to varying degrees by a secondary calcareous material known as caliche. Caliche deposits are usually of pleistocene to recast origin a am inches to several feet thick derived locally from the evaporation of moisture in the soil resulting in the deposition of calcium aarbNatos through a leactiog process. Slope stability is of concern only in the immediate vicinity of the steeper slopes and gullies. slopes on the western. edge of the property, however, are very susceptible to erosion; end in fact, are so easily eroded that soil development is impeded, resultlsg le complete lack of vegetation with the exception of the isolated cedar mad pL*yes pine trees. This intense erosion has created a minor rockfall hasasd oe these slopes by weathering out blocks of saadstonee which then fall, se11, er slide gown dill. The remaining slopes on the site appear to be stable presently, however, care should be taken to maintain this stability .a • ra • w a 8 • by avoiding detrimental • • 1 3 • expose the slopes to fur ere appears to be ✓ possible. at is, there g r • Ia 0. 1w a lj 1 to :0 or soil creep, O • • aN stability will be covered later in • engineering section of this repo found to be quits .0 3 .14i and therefore, .-4 ,+ a 11 ;bays and claystones encoun- • -4 r .4 • o 0. 3 e•.4 14 • 1.4 a 0 -t • W ,Qt •tl 4a +1 felC w u a O 0. 0 ce -4 a1. 4 a 1IR54M 0 .L3 44 50 10 a 0 0 `a 0 a • 44 a1 a --+ ,d -4 y 0 O a0 • .44 W J 0a. ♦a 4i m A • A w �1 L1 • s • • • 14 14 14 13 n piled up prior co extraction of the travel, 0 1 0 0 • 0 De �• 1°a .01 w e-4 0 --4 • '.1 A --4 V .13 IS 0 1+ 0 •4 • M dr 7 V 14 Y 3 • • 3 $ d 0 .4 14 O as 1 u 1 3 14 "0-4 • 0• ~ O }• .4.4 1+ • ' 0 •0 1 b a s 14 tsrial must be M 14 2 2 r •d 14 quarry in order to achieve • suitable building vicinity of the old tines or floe fill placid beneath f in depth, to at least 95Z timum moisture in lifts not to exceed 12 0 3 • 14 14 ..a 44 V y .44 a 4 • CV 14 O a► p. 14 '0 ID 4 ap i+ a C.7 • .11 & c OM 0 M z • EL 0. 2 V L 0 • been inactive for small operation This mine Was a *44 a e 0. .n 111 4.4 1A-+ 0 1,6 a • 14 D. r 14 al 0 ~ .8* O is highly unlikely. I OM MS E MN MI - -- N- -- NIB i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 No ground water vas encountered ire any of the borings nor were any springs, seeps or bogs noted, therefore, free water -an be assumes to lie fairly deep, even during the seasonal veriaties. •s mentioned before, the site lies 150 to 200 feet above the levels of Rifle maid Government Greeks, therefor*, no hazard from flooding exists. The general location of the Rifle ;.reek (:states is such that the potential seismic risk must be considered. R' fle lies le an area (as does much of west central Colorado) 4here earthquakes of Modified Hercalli intensity V1I or Richter magnitude 5.0 may be eacvwtswed, Fad where significant stocks may b2 expected at the rate of four per decade per square degree of surface area. The modified hercalli (or MSK) intensity aced Richter magnitude given here are generally considered to be the threshold values at which earthquakes become potentially damaging. The City of G lenwoa primes itself experienced a shock of ?1SK intensity V in 188,, 1 the yea:• 9&7, when research was none on the problem, some 20 shocks of Richter magnitude 2.0 to 4.0 were epicenter:4 in the vicinity of Baxter Mountain (8 miles north of the Glenwood aprin ,s area), and another such shock vas epicentered at the Rar ey Gap Reservoir (o miles east of the site). This last shock was believed to have been artificially induced by the presence of the reservoir. Other tremors have been recorded in the 'aspen vicinity. K.nile the data does aot, by any means, support Ltie con-elite/0U tisat train part of Colorado is an area of serious earthquake lan4er, a certain risk does exist in the area whisk mast be taken into consi . *ration is the desiga of structures, esbeehme is a*d ares. Generally speaking,, * slight degree o "o Lag" is called for, together with the avoidance of certain types of structural systems which are inherently unstable in the Pass of horizontal accelerations. a noted above, this entire sectio' of .7. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Colorado is subject to very much the saes type of asismte risk, and there is ao reason to believe that Rifle Creek ,estates occupies en area of excep- tional risk. The passibility of a slight radiation bazar.: does exist on the Site vithin the gravels and cobbles in the teneee deposits. These deposits are derived upstream from the site, where Ririe cewk bes eft through and exposed the Chiale, ritrade, Navajo, and Morrison formations in which arm fiend concentrations of Vanadium mead Uranium Cre. The Venadium Ore vas discovered in 1909 and seined on and off until 195►, during which 730,000 toms of ore, containing about 15 million pounds of V1Cis, was extracted. T Aye ors csssists of fins -Braine ea Literals which impregnate the sandstone host rock; it contains about 1 to 3 percent VO5 and several fundredtha percent U3G8. The Vanadium 4iranium Ore would be the only source of radioactive nerals on the proposed subdivision and would have had eo been erodes. out and deposited on the site by alluvial ection. This mixing of the ore -bearing rocks with other rocks is the terrace gravels has effectively reduced the concentration of radioactive minerals to less than several hundred -thousandths of a percent. ;;tame radiation survey woes conducted on the site vh ch included scanning the auger samples fres all the borings, gravel pit exposures, and recent road cuts. No significant readings higher than background radiation were recorded. There is, therefore, no reason to believe that any unusual degree of risk from radiation hazard exists on this site. :chile there will be a heavy demand for aggte- ate in the Upper Colorado Valley threegb the remainder of this century, it is not believed that withdrawal of the remainder of the deposit such as this will significantly affect the regional aggregate supply. Furthermore, given the -i• s+xistin; housing shortage in the Rifle area, it is believed that the value of the Rill*sit Estates es t restdeatial distriat far outweiess its potential value a$ an aggregate resource, aad that its development will tend to decrease development pressures on other, higher grade deposits it the bottom of tb, Colorado :aver V _ 11sy. Scsye of this rane and gravel say be useful as an economical low-grade material within the dcv.lopme t itself, being employed as an ewbankment and base course material. It is our understanding that a water rights and supply are beide investieatee by another aneinearine tires. Iedividual septic t.'ispasal systems have been proposed for this subdivision. he tins of this report, no percolation tests have been performed with the exception of one at the ownat"• see house. Tris test was perf©rwsd in the terrace ;;,ravels and resulted in e satisfactory percolation rate, according to the County leinitarian. The laboratory feels that good° percolation rates CAA be expected wherever terra r gravels are encountered. However, on the west side of the subdivision where stiff clays are present, percolation rates will probably be slow to very slow. In these areas a combination of absorption and erap-tratipiration fields or elevated fields constructed with more permeable materials may be :aced. evapo-transpiration beds and combination beds will need to be ever- eesi ned to provide storage lurinb colder months and snow cover periods to sus up for the rethaced evapo-transpiration capability. All leaching and abiliption fields should coetain at last a st . inch sand filter which contains sttffislsat fines to filter an retain the bacterial ane viral portiows of the ickest. Ie conclusion, the eine Creek ::states ?meld be as excellent sits .for a lousing d topmast. It is conveniently -9- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Located near a municipality which is currently eaperieaeing a housing Shortage, and occupies one of the more favorable development sites in the 4,1**• The engineering problems to be found on the site are not extensive and 04111 41 b4 0VOICOU0 through sound Jesign and construction,. LABO Ten test borings were placed on the site, 4e is indicated on the enclosed site map. Mese borings were placee is such 4 meaner as to obtain a reasonably -good profile of the subsurface soils. Alile substantial variations were noted from point to poiat, the information obtaine., ,as judsed adequate for purposes of this teport, and ao further borings were deemed necessary. borinas were aaii with a power -driven, coatinuous auger drill. Semple' were taken with the standard split -spoon sampler, and by bulk methods. Taa soil profile encountered 4441 aote4 to be extremely variable across the subdivision. This is tc he eApetted on a site of this size and with the varying geological ccittLess encountered. The soil profile can broadly be described as an overburdem *t alluvial genes and gravels or colluvial clays, overlyiag ,,:laystone and sandstone of the asatoh formation. Me various overburden materials, as well as the lormational sandstone and clayatone, were L' a generally high deusity eontatioa. The salvias obtained dwrine our field explore.. ties program have been divided into 3 soil types. "Asil Type No. 1 reprosests formational Wseatch claystone. Scil Type No. 2 represent* the upper leen clay materials. Soil Type IV. 3 represents the upper sand and gravel alluvium. GLein 0140 analysis .ad attetburg limits vers performed on all three soil types to determine classification an -t engineering characteristics. passioo tests wire performed on Types 1 and 2 to determine the swell poteetiel -10- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 of these fine trained soils. Additionally, standard penetration results are shown on tele enclosed drilling legs. Precise engineering characteristics rix the three soil types, iaeludina laboratory test results, are shown on the enclosed summary s1eests. The following difvuasiot will be general in nature. Soil Type No. 1, which was representative of formational sutch clayatonee, classified as a lean cloy (CO of fine twain size. This material is plastic, of low permeability, arced was ancousete; a:,: in a high denaity condition. It will rivet a tendency to expand upon the addition of moisture, but due to the high density condition in which it wau eaconntered, it will have no tendency co consolidate under load. Foundations placed in this material say be proporttorted on the basis of a maximum allow- «)1e bearing capacity of 5000 psf, with a minimum deaf load premiere of 800 psf being maintained at ell times. ;;oil Type Ne. 1 contains sulfates in detrimental quantities. :soil '.type No. 2 classified as a lean clay (CO of fine grain sLra. This material was encountered in the upper portion of the soil profile to several of the test borings. This material is plastic, of for permeability, and of moderate to high density. It will have a tendency to expand upon the addition of moisture, as well as a tendency to long -teres oosolLlation under load. Because of these factors, it is important that balancing and reinforcing recommendations be complied with. For shallow foundations, Soil Type No. 2 will have a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 4000 psf. A minims dead load pressure of SOO psf should be miaiateine J. at all times. Soil Type No 2 contains sulfates in detrimental quantities. Soil 1:ape Po. 3 classified as a silty sand (.M) of very coarse grain size. This soil uas noted to contain numerous -11- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 cobble and gravel sired particles which obviously cannot be representa.� ea the attached graxin size distribution curve. In general, this material is of low plasticity, of medium to high permeability. add of high density. In itself, this soil type baa virtually no tsadsacy to expand upon the addition of moisture acs to true long term consolidation under load. Granular materials such as these do have a slight tendency to settle upon initial •pplicetien of foundation loads. however, this settlem at should be fairly rapid to nature and be virtually complete by the and of construction. It the allowable bearing values given in this report are not exceeded and if the rscesdntioss pertaining to balancing and reinforcing are followed, diff• ersntial settlement can be held to a tolerable level. ,oil Type No. 3 was fused to have a maximum allowable bearing capacity on the order oc 5000 psf. NO minimum dead load pressulie will be required. This soil Was found to contain a 'moderate amount of sulfates. No true free water table was encountered in amy of the test borings to the depths ri1lea. Free water is believed to be ' tarty deep beneath the majority of the subdivision, and should not affect 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 foundation systems for the proposed residences. There is a potential for subserface seepage water, however, in many areas of the subdivision, . especially during wet sensori. The presence of seepage water could create diificultice in construction and performance of foundations in extreme instances. The seepage potential at each structure should bo analysized on an individual basis at the time the foundation excavation is made. Specific recommendations pertaining to sebsurface drainage can easily be nude at this time. fh l is l0� .k RE 7 lril , l 01, 13: Since tba exact type and loads of the proposed structure ars not precisely knows to the Laboratory at this time, -12- the following recommeedatioas must be selmewhat general in nature. aey special loads or unusual design conditions should be reported to the Laboratory so that changes in the rscommendatlo►s may be mad*, if *economy. Uowover, based upon our analysis of the soil conditions and project cbatacteer• istics previously outlined, the following recommendations are made. It is recommended that a conventional shall m system tonalities of continuoua foundations beneath load bearing malls, and isolated spread footings beneath columns and other points +uf concentrated load be used to carry the weight of the proposed structuiA:u. The maximum allowabie bearing capacity of the soils will be variable with location and sapth, and specific bearing capacity recommendations cannot easily be made in e► report of this nature. recommed that boating capacity values for each structure be deteraN.ned on an individual basis, by iaspoot oe of the open foundation excavation. For preliminary design purposes, however, the average maximus allowable bearing capacity for the site was on the order of 4000 psf, with a ainimuo dead load pressure of 504 pef being; require.:,. The bottoms of foundations should be placed a minimum of 2.5 feet below finished grade, or as dictated by local building codes, for frost protection. The hest type of shallow foundation system tor each individual lot spill be deepent:ent upon ,poi' conditions. However, it is believed that the required foundation system will fall into one of the three followies categories. 1) Continuous stemwalls with narrow strip footings, in conjunction with properly proportioned center pads. This type of foundation would be suitable for soil' with low expansion potential, and how to moderate bearing capactty. 2) Contimoussteemalls placed on grade, with uo footings, in oonjunction with properly proportioned center pads. This foundation type would be suitable for soils with a lou to moderate expeneioa potential, end a moderate to high bearing capt.etty. 3) :. balanced, engineered foundation Genetsa{ of stessealls placed on grade with no footings; with strategically placed voids to help maintain the required minimum dead load pressures and obtain a balanced condition. This type of foundation system would be required in moilsmoo a moderate to high expansion potential. Regardless of the foundation type required, and in an effort to limit possible differential movement, we would recommend that shallows feuadatias systems be balanced in such a adaaeer that the pres- sure on the soil is approsisatsly the mar throughout the building. Most structures are invariably more heavily leaded on some walls and colleens than on others. 'fl• aoommt of this variation in load can be quite high. By placing narrow footings bsrath very light walls and wider footings beneath heavier walls, approximately tbs same contact stress can be maintained. For single -story buildings without basements, the balancing may be accomplished on the basis of dead load °sly, for multistory or basement type structures balancing should be accomplished using dead load plus one-hatif the live load. Using whichever criteria is applicable, the contact stresses should be balanced to within about # glia psf beneath all exterior load beating `re110. Isolated interior column pads should be designed for pressures of approximately 300 pat las than the average selected les tbs exterior wells, if the feses4.tiars rest to Soil Type 3, and approximately 200 psf more than the average selected for exterior walla if the foundations test in Soil Types 1 0144 In order to sake the structure somewhat more rigid and to spread the loads sore evenly around the building, it is recom- m hied that ell sten wells of the structure be designed as grade beano capable -14- of sspannind at least 12 feet. Horizontal reinforcement should be place.: continuously around the structure with no gaps or break* in the teinforcin steel unless they are specially designed. Beams should be reinforced et both top and bottom with the location of the majority of the reinforcement being dependent oa foundation typo. «ith shallow foundation category 1, the major reinforcing should be et the bottom of the bean. ith foundation .ate ory 2, reinforcing should be balanced between top and bottom. ',ita tate ory 3, the major reinforcin6 shoalbe at the cep. Vortical reinforcement will not be required in the foundation alis if these walls are relatively shallow. However, if the walls will retain soil in excess of 4 feet in height, vertical reinforce- ment should be used to resist the pressure of the soil against the wall. For +ass in designing this reinforeia, , the equivalent fluid pressure may be taloa s 40 pcf for the soil in the active state. This value assumes the groun..i saar%ace behind the wall to be horizontal or sloping slightly sway from the a,'.1. Modification of this value will be required where walls will rcttii t d slope or surcharge. Y here building; floor slabs are to be use, y be placed directly on grader or over a compacted gravel blanket of to i- inches is thickness. However, if this gravel bed is choose, it must be provided with a tree 1>:aina ,e outlet to the surface. Under no circumstances should the gravel layer be allowed to act as A water trap beneath the floor Lab. A vapor barrier is recommended bemoeth any floor slab on „rade which will be constructed below the finished exterior ground surface. -Al floor slabs should be constructed so as to act independently of the interior columns and bearing walls. In addition, oncrete floor slabs on grade should be placed in sections no greater than s foot on a side. Peep construction or ontrsction joints could he placed 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 at these lines to facilitate even breakage. This will help minimize any unsightly crackine which could be caused by differential moveeent. etiu4te drainage must be provided in the foundation area both during. 5nd after construction to prevent the pondine of water. Tbe croute surface around the building should be eraece sc that surface water will be carried quickly away from the building. Minimum graeieat within 10 feet of the structure will depend upon the sure lanescapine. Aare or payee areas should have a miaimum gradient of 21., while lendsapee enema should have a misimem gradient of 67.. Roof drains must be carried across all backfilled areas and discharged well away from the structure. It positive surface drainaee cannot be waintainee in the vicinity of the structare, a subsurface peripheral drain inclu4ine a discharge pipe, oequate erevel collector end send filter should be consttuete, around the outside of the baileine at shallow foundation depth. - peripheral 'Juin say be requireon some lots, regardless of surface Lrading. Ile subsur- face drainage requirements can be determined at the time of the open foundation (cavation inspection. To sive the building extra lateral stability and to aid in the rapidity of runoff. All backfill around tie structure and in utility trenches leedine to the heildine should be compacted to at least 9O of the MaXiMQM Procter dry density, eel% e-693. ILI.* compaction could be eone usene the native soils on the site as the backfiil material. eil soil should be compactee at approximately the P o tor optimum moisture conteet, plus or minus 2%. 1.1 backfill should be compactee to the required density by mechanical means. No %Ater floodin4 techniques of any type should be used in the placement of fill on this site. AS has been mentioned in an earlier seetioa of this report, there are numerous, relatively steep slopes on this site, Particularly on the westere boundary. Caution should be exercistl with construction in slopeareas. would iolnerally recommend site specific ora6iasering atudiaxs in each instance where construction will take place in a slope area. =e would advise al;:ainst removins; material from the toe portion of any slope, either by excavation or by permitting erosion. Fills at the top of steeper slopes should be avoided, since they would tend to add an additional :force" to may potential failure ved,;es. irface drain ac ,e should be maintained or improved, to such a manner as to prevent saturation of slope materials, as well es erosion of slope surfaces. Mtnimem setback requirements from the top or bottom of steeper slopes can be determined by site specifi,_ eniiineering studies. ..:;.r;e amounts of fAnerally unconsoliiated, man-made fill exist on portions of the site, as shown on the attached map. This fill consists of overburden remove from gravel quarrying operation, said screenin3s and oversized material from the Euarry, as well as miscellaneous trash, rubble and ('.ebris from other sources. This fill material must be considered unsuitable as a foundation material. If construction is planned in fill Areas, we would recommend that any unconsolidated fill be removed from the construction region an replaaads if necessary, with a property controlled compacted fill. Some of the materiel present is the unconsolicaste.; fill may be suitable as material for sontrollec fill; however, any soil containing trash, ebris, rubble, vegetation, oversize particles, or ether deleterious the at aterial: should not be use4 for fill. fill should be compacted to at least 95% of Proctor maximum dry c+easity, ASTM 33698, et the Proctor optimum moisture content, rt. the material should be compacted in lifts not to exceed 3 inches loess thickness, and all particles Ln excess of -17- -hes Ammeter should be removed. Fill should be compacted to the requLred density by mechanical means, and no water flooding tochalomos should be used. Soils on the site more found to contain sulfates in detrimental quantities. Therefore. a Type I/ Cement is recom- mended ior use in all concrete vhich will be in contact with the foundation soils. Under no circumstances should calcium chloride ever be added to st Type LI Gemmet. La the event that Type II Cement Ls difficult to Obtain, a Type I Cement mmy be used, providing concrete is separeted from the soil by water resistant meMbranes. rae open lootinii a-zaavationa should be inspected prior to the pouring of concrete to establish the proper design bearing values for each structure and ensure that no debris, soft spots, or areas of unusually low density are located within the footing region. It is believed that all pertinent points concerning the subsurface soils on this site have been covered in this report. IZ soil types and conditions other than those outlined herein ire noted during construction on the site, these ehould be reported to the Laboratory so that changes in recommendations can be made, if these are necessary. If questions arise or further information is required, please feel fres to contact the Laboratory. -18- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SOILS DESCRIPTIONS: SYMBOL USCS DESCRIPTION ROCK DESCRIPTIONS: SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SYMBOLS a NOTES: SYMBOL DESCR/PT/ON Free • water 9/12 Standard penetration drive Numbers indicate 9 blows to drive the spoon 12" into ground. ST 2- I/2" Shelby thin wall sample W0 Natural Moisture Content Wx Weathered Material Free water table ;p;:p•oo SEDIMENTARY ROCKS Topsoil �:�': oo• :O: a:. CONGLOMERATE SANDSTONE Man-made Fill 000:0. 0•o°00: o:o oa GW Well -graded Gravel - -_ '--7-:-7-L-: =7 L. - SILTSTONE ---- ===- =___ SHALE 0000 o °o 000 0000 GP Poorly -graded Gravel x x x x x x CLAYSTONE COAL 0 o n 101 GM Silty Gravel ,c46,v o° GC Clayey Gravel SW Well -graded Sand 1 11 1 LIMESTONE 15� Wx Y°Natural dry density T.B.-Disturbed Bulk Sample Q2 Soil type related to samples in report Top of formation i 1 / 1 ; 1/ SP Poorly -graded Sar' �! / DOLOMITE I I I fIl SM Silty Sand `, 1 MARLSTONE 1 I ;y I % SC Clayey Sand ML Low -plasticity Silt //Hit/ GYPSUM Other Sedimentary Rocks IGNEOUS ROCKS /�\\/I/t1 / CL Low -plasticity Clay t1 /v �\ / 7,—i GRANITIC ROCKS Form. 1---A-1 Standard by driving sampler laolb. Samples spoon(both samples. The at the not warranted subsurface and times. Test Boring Location m Test Pit Location Seismic or Resistivity Station. Lineation indicatesprox. approx. length a orientation of spread = Seismic , R= Resistivity ) Penetration Drives are made a standard 1.4" split spoon into the ground by dropping a weight ao". ASTM test D-1586. may be bulk, standard split disturbed) or2-I/2"LD. ("undisturbed') Shelbytube See log for type. boring logs show subsurface conditions dates and locations shown,and itis that theyare representative p conditions at other locations +++ + +++ DIORITIC ROCKS OL Low -plasticity Organic Silt and Clay /1/CH / MH High plasticity Silt High plasticity Clay ii: •/i•:}: \i: �/ GABBRO RHYOLITE r ANDESITE —7-- OH High- plasticity Organic Clay iI BASALT ...AA...(S `"' •. F.. Pt Peat o O o ° GW/GM Well- graded Gravel, Silty 14.7.!1,`,;,.: 1;. a; •'.; TUFF & ASH FLOWS n:oo .::::.:9,5.., BRECCIA & Oter Volcanics po 0,°A GW/GC Well -graded Gravel, Clayeydes. �,,- r L -1- Other Igneous Rocks 00000 0o000 00000 GP/GM Poorly - graded Gravel, Silty „ „ �IGNEISSthinwall METAMORPHICROCKS a S0p o°o°o0 0 o GP/GC Poorly -graded Gravel, D Clayey /;_� /i �/ , / /-- SCHIST o . o 0 o • GM/GC Silty Gravel, Clayey �, PHYLLITE °, °, o GC/GM Clayey Gravel, Siltyof ,7� e 7 SLATE SW/SM Well - graded Sand, Silty • :�•j,•j.. METAQUARTZITE •.;• SW/SC Well-graSand, y y 0 0 0 i,1,i1 III 1 i 1 1 SP/SM Poorly -graded Sand, 1 1 Silty 004 MARBLE o ✓�V 7;•74 /�v� HORNFELS SP/SC Poorly- graded Sand, Clayey A l- ./%4.0 ERPENTINE I III 1 SM/SC Silty Sand, Clayey -T--,1 Other Metamorphic Rocks • SC/SM Clayey Sand, Silty 0 LINCOLN DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO, Colorado Springs, Pueblo, Glenwood Springs, Montrose, Gunnison, Grand Junction.— WYO.— Rock Springs EXPLANATION OF BOREHOLE LOGS AND LOCATION DIAGRAMS CL/ML Silty Clay Test Hole No Top Elevation ,5/0� usash C/ays!o.9e %Ud62 Deas -c, S /' CxP.9,2314,a . Sar dS"71o.r! L�Yt� C/may S ACP C Grey C. 4b _ 7.9 0 Jays ,v,'C X X x` X X x X X X X X X X X XxX X XX XXX X X X xXX xXr X X .( x X x X X Re-rus.al on .c=4/6 /✓a = 8.3 0 38,4'2 "'•'9./10 0 4 { t ReAA/sa/ opt So/Z 20 25 30 LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS -PUEBLO COLORADO Test Hole No Top Elevotton 10 15 C L Lean' C/' Oa�L 4/4',"›, S71rt 5u/AS/Cs Ex,oans/ve 4' zs/rs 44. a. 710 5M 25 30 35 40 so/z DRILLING LOGS SeAw e Ssre C/dyS�vwC, XXX XXX XXX xXXI .6s/rz w> z- 0 0 -4 calc alb ■�/s 15 0 20 '" 25 -r 30 - amO 35 40 " LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS -PUEBLO COLORADO Test Hole No Top Elevation i f 1 -7 8 9 CL L.,n C/ay, S, /ly, arE S.. /Arles' L_ eau, C/ay, `/moi -y .Sin�Oi' e/4Wv. Biow� St, so/B Wes0.7 S 10 5 Al s, ay Gravel/y, 15 1' 5 7./ees'A0.04••, /7-,i5l Sy /TOW 716.5- 10 6 Lo.Z O 15 20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 25 25 30 35 40 40 DRILLING LOGS LINCOLN- DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS -PUEBLO COLORADO 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Test Hole No Top Elevation 10 15 io II 0 • • • • • 41. • • • • • T • r LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS -PUEBLO COLORADO 35 y 40 Soil Sample Project AV/e- C.-ceb Es fa/es Sample Location_2t'-s 100 90 60 A7 60 50 4. 30 20 1(; Gib.AWJEL L :;AND Test No. GS -74-1 Date 7ft8/ 8 est by 6,E6 TO CLAY Fine Co.�Me u :� Citi jr;...— ,labtic to plastic lA: t. Tit t I - t ;{ tt -1-- ; r.r .._. 3 i . } -.. 4--___--1: fi_: # Y -. . iTi i1. - Li i _ --. -..Ju,,...: f 2 t D4ain4er - (4 ' 1 #20 'MU #1w+ -#,.!i.:; . - Sieve No, 100 .4 Sample No. Specific Gravity_____ M �_...:?o Moisture Content B• Effective Size 3 Cu Cc Fineness Modulus L.L. zo.S P.I 3.9 BEAF.ING .'01 1 1/_? 1" 905 90-5- 1/2" 51/2" 80.9 3/8" 77. <o 4 G4 / 10 Se -a 20. 40 100 200 % Passing /DO 6/- 7 35".8 241.5" .0200 /a./ 605 3.7 Sulfates 5 -Up PPI GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS LINCOLN •-I -. V0RE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO 2 - 3 Unconfined Compression (qu) psf Plate Bearing• psf Inches Settlement Consolidation % unde. psf PERMEABILITY: K (at 20°C) Void Ratio Sulfates aa -U' ppm. SOIL ANALYSIS LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO SUMMARY SHEET Soil Sample CL Test No. Location R,I'/e 4",-« Es/des- Dore Boring No. lv Depth /o ' Sample No. I 764e Test '.,y G�"G Natural Water Content (w) //-? Specific. Gravity (Gs) z.6a SIEVE ANALYSIS: Sieve No. Pissing 1 1/2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 4 /oo 10 996 20 99./ 40 99- / 100 9z. 200 d3-3 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS• Grain size (mm) Ok _ 0 63.4 . 00.5- 35: 7 In 'fact Density (To) pcf Plastic Limit P L. /6".9 % Liquid Limit L. L 'La % Plc.sticity Index P.I. a. 9 % Shrinkage Limit '3./ % Flow Index Shrinkage Ratio Volumetric Change °lo Lineal Shrinkage MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTM METHOD Optimum Moisture Content wo °lo Maximum Dry Density -Td pcf California Bearing Ratio (a' ) 0/0 Swell / Days 3. / °A) Swell againstpsf Wo gain/ -5___":.:J'0 BEARING: House! Penetrometer (av) load psf Unconfined Compression (qu) psf Plate Bearing• psf Inches Settlement Consolidation % unde. psf PERMEABILITY: K (at 20°C) Void Ratio Sulfates z000` ppm. SOIL ANALYSIS LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SUMMARY SHEET Soil Sample CL Test No. 6-5-7-Q Location Fl,/'/e C: ---e• Es a7le .`5 Dare /2879 Boring No. / Depth S ' Test .)y G"G Sample No i Natural '~"later Content Specific Gravity (Gs) (w) ? 9 % In 'lac( Jensity (To) pcf 2-5-/3 SIEVE ANALYSIS: Sieve No. 1 1/2" ' Passing Plastic Limit P.L /8-/ % Liquid Limit L. L.. e9"0 % Plasticity Index P.I. /o. 9 (3/0 1" Shrinkage Limit /4 o % 3/4" Flow Index 1/2" Shrinkage Ratio % 4 Volumetric Change % 10 /aO Lineal Shrinkage % 20 99.3 . MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTM METHOD Optimum Moisture Content wo 0/0 40 97.1 100 7i. ( 200 77,4( HYDROMETER ANALYSIS - Grain size (mm) 0/0 Maximum Dry Density -Td pcf California Bearing Ratio (a. ) Swell- / Days -5-e % Swell against f Wo gain /3 Zoo BEARING: Housel Penetrometer (av) 8000 _oz. 48-l0 - oos zs 3 psf Unconfined Compression (qu) psf Plate Bearing- psf Inches Settlement Consolidation % unde. psf PERMEABILITY: K (at 20°C) • Void Ratio Sulfates arc) ` ppm. SOIL ANALYSIS LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO