Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
pitkin.eh.246527301001 (2005)(Main House)
Document Layout (From Most Recent to Oldest Permit) Permit Application Log Sheet/Notes & Photos Communications As -built Design Engineer Design Soil Information Water Permit & Information Second System on property Third System.etc. Floor Plans Please See Building and Land Use Approvals Files for additional information. 0 • Pitkin County Environmental Health Department Permit for an Individual Sewage Disposal System 0405 Castle Creek Road, Suite 10, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone 970-920-5070 / FAX 970-920-5077 Replaces permit #05066 Permit # 05095 Parcel ID # 2465-273-01-001 Type of permit New( X ) Repair( ) Addition/Remodel to House( ) Name of Owner Mark & Constance Nagle Street Address 0630 Spring Creek Road Property legal description Lot 1 Size of lot 36.95 acres Water source Private Well Mountain Ranch Total square footage of the house 7813 # of bedrooms in house 5 # of offices, lofts & similar sized rooms in house Caretaker unit Total square footage of the caretaker unit # of bedrooms in caretaker unit # of offices, lofts & similar sized rooms in caretaker unit Designed for what # rooms (list) ,111. ',j(Vtic�Q.r.Q� 3-zY—ob cu�+)„�� (a P�2 1�-� ��/ zB2 caw -• /�'" u Permit information~ Designed by Mailing Address Perc rate 19 4501 Wadsworth Blvd.. Wheat Ridae, CO 80033 Profile hole depth 8 ft Depth to groundwater or bedrock Minimum Septic tank capacity 2844 gallons Minimum Absorption area >8ft 1983sf/50%red uc=992 sf Septic permit approved per compliance with the engineer design and specifications dated . Any changes must be approved by this department and the design engineer 2rl0r to them being made. Minimum horizontal distances between components of the system and physical features shall conform to the Pitkin County ISDS regulations. Design is for one 2500 gallon two-compartment concrete septic tank with an effluent filter on the outlet, followed by a 1000 gallon one -compartment concrete tank with an effluent pump. A concrete distribution box with baffle distribute to three trench and serial overflow lines distributed to three additional trenches, for a total of 6S trenches of Quick4 chambers each trench 17 chambers long for a total of 102 chambers. Trenches must be installed no deeper than 3 feet deep. This department does not endorse any brand of products. This permit must be kept on-site during installation. The engineer must do a final inspection of the installation and submit an as -built letter to this department. This department must also be called for an inspection with a minimum of 48 hours advanced notice. "Revegetation over the area of the field is very important for the functioning of the system. Pitkin County has guidelines that must be followed to assure the plants that are introduced are appropriate for the conditions of the area. The use of native plants is strongly l Permit approved by: Date: S 0� SPlans and specifications of theo osed indi idual age disposal system ve b en reviewed and are considered satisfactory. Permission is hereb ranted to the owner or the agent to perform the work indicated in accordance with the Pitkin County ISDS Regulation in effect at the time of issue. This permit becomes invalid 6 months from the date that the permit was issued unless system construction has commenced or an extension has been approved in writing by the Department. As -built drawings st be included with this permit before the final approval will be issued. stpller: �( U1 Final approval: %I�t..f' n ,t� A I„ Date: O D k.h-- Aug 23 05 08:47a Pitkin Co Env. Health (9701920-5077 PITKIN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM 0405 Phone (970) 920-5070 Suitee Creek Road, Fax 970) 920-5077spen 81611 Name of OWNER t owners Mailing Address 2 /L E-mail Primary Contact Person (all communication Cell Parcel ID # (available from assessors omc at 920-5160 or at www pltkinassessor ora ) Street address of property V li Legal Description: Lot ,Block Size of lot: acres. 2 -. this permit will go through this no ,Filing Subdivision Type of proposed structure: Total square feet of house :1 j& IS_ # of bedrooms (potential) in house Caretaker Unit: Attached ( ) Detached ( ) Total areas . ft. of caretaker unit # of bedrooms otential) in caretaker unit Permit is for. New Home (x) Repair due to failure ( ) Remodel/Addition ( ) Emergency use ( ) Water: Private well ( ) Spring ( ) Stream ( ) Community/Public Water System( ) 61 of p.4 The fee for a ISDS application is $600 for a permit that takes 6 hours or less for the department to approve. If approval takes longer than 6 hours, a rate of $100 per hour will be charged. The maximum fee is $1000. The basic fee of $600 Is due at the time of application. The remainder, if any, will be due in two stages: first, at the time of issuance of the [SOS permit; second, before final approval of the ISDS permit. Application for an individual sewage disposal system is hereby submitted. I hereby certify that the above information is true and accurate and that I have provided true and accurate Information on locations of all existing and proposed wells, contour Intervals, buildings, property lines, ditches, slopes, waterlines, springs, suction or irrigation lines, drinking water cisterns, drain tiles, irrigation ditches, lakes, water courses, streams, fioodplains, dry gulches, and existing septic systems. I hereby certify that any such features not shown on attached site map are not present. Issuance of the permit does not imply the approval of any other permit required for construction pursuant to Pitkin County codes. No construction may be undertaken until all approvals and permits have been obtained. The Pitkin County Environmental Health Deps should the individual sewage disposal system the applicant or his/her representatives. The ( Signature of applicant Received by G:Usdsysds appllc\isdsapp Rev050100.doc County and employees of these agencies will be held harmless :tlon. The permit to construct is issued on information submitted by s full responsibility In case of failure of the system. Date K Receipt 4 0 ` s Date ri Pitkin County Environmental Health Department Permit for an Individual Sewage Disposal System 0405 Castle Creek Road, Suite 10, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone 970-920-5070 / FAX 970-920-5077 Permit# 05066 Parcel I D # 2465-273-01-001 Type of permit New( X ) Repair( ) Addition/Remodel to House( ) Name of Owner Mark & Constance Nagle Street Address 0630 Spring Creek Road Property legal description Size of lot 36.95 acres Water source Private Well # of bedrooms in house F Caretaker unit # of bedrooms in caretaker unit Designed for what # rooms (list) Designed by Mailing Address Perc rate 100' Lot 1 Sopris Mountain Ranch Total square # of offices, lofts & similar sized rooms Total square footage of the caretak unit # of offices, lofts & simila ized rooms i FIVE Bedrooms, not sized for exemis oom to� Permit information Church & Associates 4501 Wadsworth Blvd. Profile hole depth 9 ft Minimum Septic tank capacity 2844 th to groundwater or Minimum Absorption Septic permit approved per compliance ith the ngi eer design and specificat changes must be approved by this depart nt an th design engineer prior to horizontal distances between components o e s ste and physical features ISDS regulations. Design is based on an application rate of 0.24 g/d/sq .' Th is one 2000 gall septic tank followed by a 1250 gallon two-compartment oncrete.,tank with an drain field is low-pressure drip irrigation with twelve 8 foo y 100 do or This department does not endorse any brand of products. The engineer must do a final inspection of the installation department must also be called for ai ' ction with a m 'Revegetation over the area of the field is very important forihe followed to assure the plants that are introduced are appropriate Permit approved by: caretaker unit e used as a bedroom ! ) rock > 9 ft V- r ' a 9600 SF drip irrigation dated August 17, 2005. Any n being made. Minimum conform to the Pitkin County Vn one -compartment concrete uent pumpingtfilter system. The a total of 9,600 sq ft. permit must be kept on-site during installation. ibmit an as -built letter to this department. This ty of 48 hours advanced notice. system. Pitkin County has guidelines that must be of the area. The use of native plants is strongly Date: 2115 v5 Plans and specifications of the proposed individual sewage disposal system have been reviewed and are considered satisfactory. Permission is hereby granted to the owner or the agent to perform the work indicated in accordance with the Pitkin County ISDS Regulation in effect at the time of issue. This permit becomes invalid 6 months from the date that the permit was issued unless system construction has commenced or an extension has been approved in writing by the Department. As -built drawings must be included with this permit before the final approval will be issued. Installer: 1 J Final approval: Date: Pitkin County Environmental Health Department Contact Log Sheet Name: Parcel I D#: I Date I Person SDoken To I Comments / Action to be Taken I Initials ITime I CL 49 0 s Mountain • • • 0 n LJ ISDS DESIGN CALCULATIONS - for Pitkin Owner's Name Parcel ID # = House Size (sq. ft.) (75 gpd, 100 gpd, or 130 gpd) Number of Bedrooms in Main House Number of Offices, Libraries, Studies, Similar -sized Rooms in Main House Number of Bedrooms in Detached Caretaker unit Number of Offices, Studies, Similar -sized Rooms in Caretaker Unit (If the caretaker unit is ATTACHED, treat as if part of main house.) Average Daily Waste Flow 1560 State Review Required? no Perc Rate �(T) Design Flow (Q) = # potential bedrooms X 2 people/bedroom X gpd X 1.75 Q= 2730 Minimum tank capacity3412.5 gallons Absorption Area (=Q/5 X SQRT 0 A = 2379.9588 sq. ft. of absorption area required 154 gravelless chamber units without reduction # of Perc Holes Required: 3 1 in every soil type? Spaced uniformly over proposed area? QUICK s _ A = 118 4 sqA with 50% reductionT CHES 121 gravelless chamber units 'fl reduction STANDARD A = 1189.9794 sqA with 50% reductionTRENCHES 77 gravelless chamber units with reduction EO 36 75 EQ36 units in TRENCHES SETBACK FROM WELL # of feet = 238.4 SETBACK FROM POND, STREAM OR IRRIGATION DITCH # of feet = 188.4 SETBACK FROM DRY GULCH # of feet = 163.4 Ell QUICK 4 9.2 1665.9712 sq h 30% reduction BED 181 chamber units with reduc. 1665.9712 sq k 30% reduction BED 107 chamber units with reduc. 133 EQ36 units in a BED Z • ISDS DESIGN CALCULATIONS - for Pitkin Owner's Name Parcel ID # M House Size (sq. ft.) ® (75 gpd, 100 gpd, or 130 gpd) Number of Bedrooms in Main House Number of Offices, Libraries, Studies, Similar -sized Rooms in Main House Number of Bedrooms in Detached Caretaker unit Number of Offices, Studies, Similar -sized Rooms in Caretaker Unit (If the caretaker unit is ATTACHED, treat as if part of main house.) Average Daily Waste Flow -16 State Review Required? no Perc Rate -V) Design Flow (Q) = # potential bedrooms X 2 people/ bedroom X gpd X 1.75 Q= 849 Minimum tank capacity 1061.25 gallons Absorption Area (=Q/5 X SQRT perc rate) i A = 740.14104 sq. ft. of absorption area required 48 gravelless chamber units without reduction # of Perc Holes Required: 3 1 in every soil type? Spaced uniformly over proposed area? DICK 4 9_8 A = 70.07052 sq.ft. with 5o% reductimTREN 38 graveness chamber units with reduc ' n STANDARD A= 370.07052 sq.ft with 50% reductionTRENCHES EO 36 24 graveness chamber units with reduction 23 EQ36 units in TRENCHES SETBACK FROM WELL # of feet = 100 SETBACK FROM POND, STREAM OR IRRIGATION DITCH # of feet = 50 SETBACK FROM DRY GULCH # of feet = 25 I QUICK 4 9.2 518.09873 sq k 30% reduction BED 56 chamber units with reduc. 518.09873 sq ft 30% reduction BED 33 chamber units with reduc. 41 EQ36 units in a BED CA� CA— 0 all mneo� June 20, 2006 Wodehouse Builders, LLC Attn: Rick Koehler 307, Unit L, Aspen Airport Business Center Aspen, Colorado 81611 Installation Observation, Proposed Residence Parcel 1, Sopris Mountain Ranches Pitkin County, Colorado Mr. Koehler, 0 Project No. 1136 ALL SERVICE septic, LLC performed installation observations on May 10 and May 15"'2006, for the subject property. The installation included one 2000 -gallon, single -compartment precast concrete septic tank and one 2000 -gallon, three -compartment precast concrete septic tank with an effluent filter and pump. An alarm was placed in the second compartment of the second tank. Ten gravelless-chambers trenches have been installed for a total of 1580 SF. A distribution box and serial distribution will be used to distribute effluent. An as -built drawing is included. The drain field has been sized and installed to accommodate a proposed barnllti ewe tank for ft f Um bas not been installed. r J U.r,TS* t): 6 �) /f The supervisor of the Nagle Residence may activate pumping system as his/her discretion. The pump and alarm are present although not wired to electrical panel. The OWS was installed according to specifications. This observation is not a guarantee of workmanship and/or parts and materials. ALL SERVICE septic, LLC should be notified if changes are made to the OWS. LIMITS: The design is based on information submitted. If soil conditions encountered are different from conditions described in report, ALL SERVICE septic, LLC should be notified. All OWS construction must be according to the county regulations. Requirements not specified in this report must follow county regulations. The installer should have documented and demonstrated knowledge of the requirements and regulations of the county in which they are working. 9 Onsite Wastewater Systems rage t This evaluation is not a guarantee of future drain field performance. ALL SERVICE septic. LLC should be notified if chanties are made to the OWS or the residence. Sincerely, ALL SERVICE septic, LLC r-� Timothy R. Petz, P.G. NAWT Certification No. 1060041C 2 copies sent Iu OWS'AS-BUILT DRAWING • • �o 1580 SF OF INFILTRATIVE AREA IN 10 OR,4VELLESS TRENCHES. EACH TRENCH HAS 18'QUICKd' CHAMBERS. A DISTRIBUTION BOX AND SERIAL OVERFLOW LINES ARE 4...R'V.0N� USED TO DISTRIBUTE EFFLUENT. PIPES P.) 180 TOTAL'OUICKd' CHAMBERS. 4" PVC SERIAL OVERFLOW LIP rA 2000 -GALLON, (FLXX) SINGLE -COMPARTMENT ' PRECAST CONCRETE SEPTIC TANK, FOLLOWED BY 2000 -GALLON, THREE COMPARTMENT PRECAST CONCRETE SEPTIC TANK WITH A FILTER AND A PUMP. AN ALARM HAS BEEN PLACED IN THE SECOND COMPARTMENT. AS PER MARK MEYER, THE SEWER LINE WILL BE PLACED DEEPER THAN 4 FEET IN THE DRIVE FOR FROST PROTECTION. NAGLE RESIDENCE ALL PRO NO. 1136 PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO SERVICE SEPTIC, LLC 97018-5033 FIGURE 1 �\d �' b° 47 c�,`979.73 \4( .NiNc.vu� e.out 13 a r� u CoA) Chu tis r�oo m�� To Ns s Zs C Z r- r_1 JV ra I a j 11, May -18. 2006 3:47PM Wodehouse • LPo tin 2M SE tIC Gkawood SPPIW CO 81602 SEfl E aXM z1 a-276 March 24, 2006 Builders -Aspen Wodehouse Builders, LLC, Atm: Rick Koehler 307, Unit L, Aspen Airport Business Center Aspen, Colorado 81611 y'2z— 33 3 No, 1350 P, 1 Project No. 1136 Subsurface Investigation and Revised Onsite Wastewater System Design, Proposed Nagle Residence Parcel 1, Sopris Mountain Ranch Pitkin County, Colorado Rick, ALL SERVICE septic, LLC prepared a revised onsite wastewater system (OWS) design for the subject residence. The property is located in Sopris Mountain Ranch, in an area where OWS and wells are necessary. The original letter and OWS design dated November 21, 2205 should be discarded to avoid confusion. This letter is to be used in conjunction with plans provided. SITE CONDITIONS A 5 -bedroom residence with guest suite, and a barn with a 2 -bedroom C.D.U. are proposed as indicated on the plans provided. The slope at the proposed drain field area is 10% to the southeast. Vegetation consists of native grasses and sagebrush. SUBSURFACE The subsurface was investigated by excavating an 8 -foot test pit near the proposed drain field location as shown on attached plans. Three percolation holes were dug. The test pit indicated the site has an 18 - inch sandy silty root zone, underlain by silty sandy clay to 4.0 feet, underlain by sandy clay to the maximum depth explored of 8 feet. Groundwater or bedrock was not encountered Percolation rates ranged from 12 to 30 minutes per inch (MPI). A 19 MPI rate will be used to design the OWS. DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS The OWS design is based on individual structures. The OWS design includes a 6 -bedroom residence, a 2 -bedroom C.D.U., and a barn having 3 stall�/a sink, and a bathroom. The average sewage load is 2045 GPD. The installationmust include a 2000 -gallon, single -compartment, precast concrete septic tank, followed by a 2006 -gallon, two-compartment precast concrete septic tank with a BiotubeTm pump vault for the main residence. A 1500 -gallon, two-compartment precast concrete septic tank with a Biotube pump vault in the second compartment must be installed at the barn. Tank and pump alternatives will be considered. Ten gravelless chamber trenches must be installed as indicated on May.16. 2006 3:47PM Wodehouse Builders—Aspen No.1350 P. 2 • • Revised OWS Des p Project No. 1136 3/24/06 P e2 plans provided. Ten rows of 16 `Quick 4' chambers, for a total of 160 chambers, and 1580 square feet (SF) of infiltrative area, is required. A distribution box and serial overflow lines should be used to distribute effluent. The drain field must not be installed deeper than 3 feet. Construction must be according to the county ISIS regulations, the septic permit provided by Pitkin County Environmental Health Department, and this design A previous OWS design was prepared, and was based on higher percolation rates. ALL SERVICE septic, LLC moved northwest and up gradient of the previous test, and performed the percolation test at a depth of 2 to 3 feet. The drain field was designed accordingly. GEOLOGY ALL SERVICE septic, LLC reviewed the local soil conditions and geology at the subject site. The soils consisted of an 18 -inch silty, sandy root zone, underlain by silty sandy clay to 4 feet, underlain by sandy clay to the maximum depth explored of 8 feet. Due to the silty, sandy matrix of the soils proper treatment of effluent will happen within 4 feet of soil and effluent interface. The soils will provide adequate treatment of effluent, hence a very low risk of onsite well contamination. Based on geological conditions and evaluation of risk of contamination of surface water and ground water, it is not necessary to add 8 feet additional distance for tach 100 gallons of wastewater flow over 1000 gallons per day as specified in the table to prevent contamination. A 130 -foot separation between the absorption area and the onsite well, and an 80 -foot separation between the septic tanks and well, is appropriate to prevent contamination OPERATION INFORMATION AND MAINTENANCE The surface of the drain field should be seeded upon completion. vegetation is an important factor in drain field performance. Geo -fabrics or plastics should not be used over the drain field. Livestock should not graze on the drain field. Plumbing fixtures should be checked to ensure that no additional water is being discharged to OWS. For Example, a running toilet or leaky faucet can discharge hundreds of gallons of water a day and harm a drain field. The homeowner should pump the septic tank every two years and clean the effluent filter as needed. Garbage disposal use should be minimized, and non -biodegradable materials should not be placed into the OWS. Grease should not be placed in household drains. Loading from a water softener should not be discharged into the OWS. No hazardous wastes should be directed into the OWS. Mechanical room drains should not discharge into the OWS. The OWS is engineered for domestic waste only. ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES If design includes a pump, air release valves and weep holes should be installed to allow pump lines to drain to minimize risk of freezing. Excavation equipment must not drive in excavation of drain field due to the potential to compact soil. Extensions should be placed on all septic tank components to allow access to them from existing grade. Precast concrete tanks and distribution boxes should be used, unless plastic or fiberglass is required Septic tank risers should extend to grade. Access to all tank compartments and distribution devices is optimal. May.18. 2006 3:47PM Wodehouse Builders—Aspen • • INSTALLATION OBSERVATIONS xN r,. 13') C P. 3 Revised OWS Design Project No. 1136 3/24/06 Page ALL SERVICE, septic, LLC, and the county must view the OWS during construction, The OWS observation should be performed before backfill, after placement of chambers and distribution pipes. Septic tanks, distribution devices, pumps, dosing siphons, and other plumbing, as applicable, must also be observed. ALL SERVICE septic, LLC should be notified 48 hours in advance to observe the installation. LIMITS: The design is based on information submitted. If soil conditions encountered are different from conditions described in report, ALL SERVICE septic, LLC should be notified. All OWS construction must be according to the county regulations. Requirements not specified in this report must follow county regulations. The installer should have documented and demonstrated knowledge of the requirements and regulations of the county in which they are working. Please call with questions. Sincerely, ALL SERVICE septic, LLC Timothy R. Pett, P. 3 copies May.18. 2006 3:47PM Wodehouse Builders -Aspen No. 1350 P. 4 0 PITKIN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT Percolation Test and Soils Data Form - TABLE 1 - PROJECT 1136 PROFILE PIT Date of Test: 11-9-05 0 -1.5' Root Zone, Sandy 1.5'-4' Clay, Sandy, Silty, Med. Stiff, Moist, White/Grey 4'- 8' Ciay, Sandy, Very Stiff, Moist. White/Grey No Groundwater or Bedrock was Encountered Hot Hob Interval Measurement at Measurement at Change (in.) Pen olation Rate No. Depth (in.) (min.) Start of Interval End of Interval (min./n.) MPI (in.) (in.) 1 32 15 4.25 6.00 1.75 15 6.00 7.75 1.75 fill 15 3.25 4.75 1.50 15 4.75 5.75 1.00 15 5.75 7.00 1.25 15 7.00 8.00 1.00 15 2 26 15 13.00 14.25 125 15 14.25 16.25 2 vs 15 16.25 18.00 1.75 15 18.00 19.75 1.75 fill 15 11.50 13.00 1.50 15 13.00 14.25 1.25 12 3 28 15 12.25 14.00 1.75 15 14.00 15.25 1.25 15 15.25 16.00 0.75 15 16.00 16.50 0.50 30 15 16.50 17.25 0.75 15 17.25 18.00 0.75 AVERAGE a 19 MPI May. 18. »# 148w CLS wARa.E26s4ee ! � !� �| •_ - o$ § § | i ■ § ! 2 k | � � 0 ;0. 1350 P. § � ) CLS !� �| •_ 0 �|!/k \ i � x�� � . PR INOL) PWH OjWWAG JVJO! I.w.J CLS !� �| •_ 0 �|!/k \ � x�� � t� ] . [ 0 � z May.18. 2006 3:48PM Wodehouse Builders—Aspen E • IN a � a a } Y � i W U m W r C z z Q Z a f R No. 1350 P. 6 0 n N ♦ tb n N N 081 `(HU) PWH OIWBUAa letai 3 N W C OP b 0 n1 a a o n N ♦ tb n N N 081 `(HU) PWH OIWBUAa letai 3 0 flLL,' POSo2644 SfflYll 0� C08'�2 November 21, 2005 REEliIED NOV 2 ° 2005 1Nrr ENVlr,U!+, _NTIL HEALni Wodehouse Builders, LLC, Attn: Rick Koehler 307, Unit L, Aspen Airport Business Center Aspen, Colorado 81611 0 Project No. 1136 Subsurface Investigation and Onsite Wastewater System Design, Proposed Nagle Residence Parcel 1, Sopris Mountain Ranch Pitkin County, Colorado Rick, ALL SERVICE septic, LLC performed a percolation test and an onsite wastewater system (OWS) design far the subject residence. The property is located in Sopris Mountain Ranch, in an area where OWS and wells are necessary. This letter is to be used in conjunction with plans provided. SITE CONDITIONS A 5 -bedroom residence is proposed as indicated on the plans provided. The slope at the proposed drain field area is 10% to the southeast. Vegetation consists of native grasses and sagebrush. SUBSURFACE The subsurface was investigated by excavating an 8 -foot test pit near the proposed drain field location as shown on attached plans. Three percolation holes were dug. The test pit indicated the site has an IS - inch sandy root zone, underlain by silty sandy clay to 4.0 feet, underlain by sandy clay to the maximum depth explored of 8 feet. Groundwater or bedrock was not encountered. Percolation rates ranged from 12 to 30 minutes per inch (MPI). A 19 MPI rate will be used to design the OWS. DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS The OWS design iVbased on 5 -bedrooms and an average sewage load of 1300 GPD. The installation must include a 2500 -gallon, two-compartment, preca concrete septic tank, with the addition of an effluent filter in the second compartment, and a 1000 -gallon, single -compartment precast concrete septic tank with a pump. Tank alternatives may be considered. Six gravelless chamber trenches must be installed as indicated on plans provided. Six rows of 17 `Quick 4' chambers, for a total of 102 chambers, equaling and 1007 square feet (SF) of infiltrative area, is required. A distribution box and serial overflow lines should be used to distribute effluent. The drain field must not be installed deeper than 3 feet. Construction must be according to the county ISDS regulations, the septic permit provided by Pitkin County Environmental Health Department, and this design. A previous OWS design was prepared, and was based on higher percolation rates. ALL SERVICE septic, LLC moved northwest and up gradient of the previous test, and performed the percolation test at a depth of 2 to 3 feet. The drain field was designed accordingly. gLt • • OWS Design Project No. 1136 11/21/05 Page 2 [012 31 M- 1 [size 10_all']7uG1now 1►`i715/`1►1f"MUS0l The surface of the drain field should be seeded upon completion. Vegetation is an important factor in drain field performance. Geo -fabrics or plastics should not be used over the drain field. Livestock should not graze on the drain field. Plumbing fixtures should be checked to ensure that no additional water is being discharged to OWS. For Example, a running toilet or leaky faucet can discharge hundreds of gallons of water a day and harm a drain field. The homeowner should pump the septic tank every two years and clean the effluent filter as needed. Garbage disposal use should be minimized, and non -biodegradable materials should not be placed into the OWS. Grease should not be placed in household drains. Loading from a water softener should not be discharged into the OWS. No hazardous wastes should be directed into the OWS. Mechanical room drains should not discharge into the OWS. The OWS is engineered for domestic waste on]y. ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES If design includes a pump, air release valves and weep holes should be installed to allow pump lines to drain to minimize risk of freezing. Excavation equipment must not drive in excavation of drain field due to the potential to compact soil. Extensions should be placed on all septic tank components to allow access to them from existing grade. Precast concrete tanks and distribution boxes should be used, unless plastic or fiberglass is required. Septic tank risers should extend to grade. Access to all tank compartments and distribution devices is optimal. INSTALLATION OBSERVATIONS ALL SERVICE septic, LLC, and the county must view the OWS during construction. The OWS observation should be performed before backfill, after placement of chambers and distribution pipes. Septic tanks, distribution devices, pumps, dosing siphons, and other plumbing, as applicable, must also be observed. ALL SERVICE septic, LLC should be notified 48 hours in advance to observe the installation. LIMITS: The design is based on information submitted. If soil conditions encountered are different from conditions described in report, ALL SERVICE septic, LLC should be notified. All OWS construction must he according to the county regulations. Requirements not specified in this report must follow county regulations. The installer should have documented and demonstrated knowledge of the requirements and regulations of the county in which they are working. Please call with questions. Sincerely, ALL SERVICE septic, LLC Timothy R. Petz 3 copies R � V B � B z / § � � E a k2 3z z is § ) § 0. |\ B k § d WNIHa)a Nolw _Aa ! E R f! ® :•C4 ,2 ©% | cc (a co a oCO flk m 77$/f�2 2 °0 § � 7 as a 22 %e :N■:; 000� OF � C%l !4!!C4 or ©z ■!� wo !|f-| 11 $� �^ LL IE !;` ! w�(PIK WNIHa)a Nolw _Aa ! E R f! ® :•C4 ,2 ©% | cc (a co a oCO flk m 77$/f�2 2 °0 § � 7 as a 22 %e :N■:; 22 C%l !4!!C4 or ©z ■!� wo !|f-| , $� �^ LL IE ! E co B LM zz 0 0 PITKIN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT Percolation Test and Soils Data Form - TABLE 1 - PROJECT 1136 PROFILE PIT Date of Test: 11-9-05 0 - 1.5' Root Zone, Sandy 15- 4' Clay, Sandy, Silty, Med. Stiff, Moist, White/Grey 4'- 8' Clay, Sandy, Very Stiff, Moist, White/Grey Qq No Groundwater or Bedrock was Encountered Hole Hole Interval Measurement at Measurement at Change (in.) Percolation Rate No. Depth (in.) (min.) Start of Interval End of Interval (min./in.) MPI (in.) (in.) 1 32 15 4.25 6.00 1.75 15 6.00 7.75 1.75 fill 15 3.25 4.75 1.50 15 4.75 5.75 1.00 13 5.7 5 7.00 1.25 15 7.00 8.00 1.00 15 2 26 15 13.00 14.25 1.25 15 14.25 16.25 2.00 15 16.25 18.00 1.75 15 18.00 19.75 1.75 fill 15 11.50 13.00 1.50 15 13.00 14.25 1.25 12 3 28 15 12.25 14.00 1.75 15 14.00 15.25 1.25 15 15.25 16.00 0.75 15 16.00 16.50 0.50 30 15 16.50 17.25 0.75 15 17.25 18.00 0.75 AVERAGE =19 MPI Qq 2005 10:05AM G A M B A A ASSOCIATES CONBULTING ENGINEERS B LAND SURVEYORS ............, PHONE: 870!945-4850 PAX:97W945-11410 119 NINTH STREET, SUITE 214 P.O. Sox 1459 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602-1458 GAMBA 0 & ASSOCIATES 9709451410 • MULTIPLE FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 TIME: 11;00 A.M. FROM: T. Carter Page, P.E. TO: Tot Rs: 05579; Nagle Perc. Tests NUMBER OF PAGES. INCLUDING COVER SHEET: THREE (3) ❑ URGENT ❑ FOR REVIEW X FOR YOUR USE ❑ PLEASE REPLY ❑ PON INFORMATION Greg, Ed: P. 1 Attached are the percolation test results for the tests conducted at Lot 1, Sopris Mountain Ranch, on the Nagle property, Hole #1 is the hole closest to the road (southernmost hole). Hole #2 was right beside the profile hole. Hole #3 is the furthest from the road (northernmost hole). I understand Ed has already seen the site, and the test and profile hale. If this is not the case, we have photographs of the holes that could be emailed. I did not make any inspection of the profile hole, other than to note that it did not encounter any rock or water. I noted, while digging the actual test holes in the bottom of the backhoe pits, that Holes #2 & #3 were in a very different soil horizon (color, texture, density) than was hole #1. Please call d you have any questions. N'O56]91Carntt«i7Eon<4 rc TeR NW{L Ln0 NfnVy MMiA%Ox Rug 09 2005 10:05RM ly &l9 GRMHR & RSSOCIRTES • 9709451410 • p.2 Rue 09 2005 10:05RM GRMBR 6 RSSOCIRTES 9709451410 p,3 M x 7 ID N C7 'O y o a o_ m_ C13 3CD0 I S ro N CO I C o m CD G 0 �7 S o� I �O I r, a' I I 0 I T y 0 0 " I �ry Cb N CO n O I 2 O v 3 s I o c� CD _ v o I I I I I I I t Standard Percolation Test Hole Dimensions for Record �7- G A MBA SCALE "%.. DA -,t : A,.M,IM DNAMbY: kp I.MT:1Jt 1waea: atw Nv: et GAMBA 8, ASSOCIATES, INC. CONLULTI ND ENOINEERL�taHD LUN VEVDNL DNAWING: /Lr NJdiY11q Y7dLIL.]L[O WWW.OMM]/,LMDIN[[LINO.COM DIRXCOP.I: C:ACA"WW%s I,5y 1 e u - e & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS -w ..me[[x¢�rv[[.ix¢.cOM PHONE: 970/945-2550 FAX: 970/945-1410 113 NINTH STREET, SUITE 214 P.O. BOX 1458 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602-1458 7 0 Friday, August 12, 2005 Edward O. Church, P.E. InTEC 4501 Wadsworth Boulevard Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Original by mail, copy by FAX to (303) 463-9317 RE: Nagle property, Lot 1, Sopris Mountain Ranch — Soil Profile Dear Ed: Sorry for the confusion on the soil profile, I thought that you had seen the holes, so I just took some photos for our files. The following is a description of the soils that I saw in the profile hole yesterday. It should be noted that the profile hole was apparently excavated some time ago, perhaps before, or during last winter. The holes (percolation test and profile) had been covered by boards and concrete blankets, but the soils appeared to have been dried considerably. From the top down, this is what I observed: 0 to about 10 -inches — apparent root zone, dark grayish. brown soils, very dry. 10 -inches to about 24 -inches — dark brown or grayish brown soils, very dry, appeared somewhat prismatic. Moistened sample would consolidate, but not foam "rope" when rolled — more silty than clayey. 24 -inches to about 60 -inches — tan soils, with small rocks (<l -inch) throughout, dry, flecks of light -gray to white material interspersed evenly. Moistened sample would consolidate, but not form a good "rope" when rolled. Numerous small pebbles were apparent in the moistened sample. Smearing of the soil surface by the backhoe bucket teeth was evident on the sides and face of the excavation in this zone. Below 60 -inches to the bottom (about 108 -inches) — slightly darker tan soils r/o g more moisture evident at this depth, more smearing of the surfaceof the soil by the backhoe teeth, "pockets" of tan -streaked, gray clays present. Some larger rocks (4 -inches to 6 -inches) were present. Moistened sample formed good "rope" — very clayey material. Relative to the percolation test holes, it appeared to me that hole #1, though deeper than the other two test holes, was still in a darker soil horizon, more like the upper layers observed in the profile hole. Percolation test holes #2 and #3 were both in the tan soils, at the 24 -inch to 60 -inch zone. 4SDS— Profile Hole V, August 12, 2005 1 of I E E I hope that this gives you the information that you need. Please call if you have any questions. I will bill for my time inspecting the profile hole, and writing the report, but not my drive time to or from the site. Sincerely, Gamba & Associates,Inc. _T�taKge' �� cc: MJG, File 05579 6\05579\Commurucetioiu\Profile Hole Sail Log do Nagle ISDS — Profile Hole Friday, August 12, 2005 3') Page 2 of 2 0 0 b �\ }) § § � 3f % \ � �\ \0ul \ \ E Q . 6 ®\ f / § §7 , LO ) \\\ \\\( {})) }})\ / ;q / ' z(f.f a>�if9\\\&- ) : - !k 5+ I 2/ §gg �\� y :aaa aRaa a@ae -:- >``` m- :neem neer: w__2^ �HIM 0 O p 0 n CID 01 20-00 _ 0 3 s c6 v 1 Standard Percolation Test Hole Dimensions for Record SCALE: No I4Sml. DATE: A.Run 9th, 205 DRAWN BY: 19 SHEET: 1.11 PROJECT: CHKDBY: IBI GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS d LAND SURVEYORS DRAWING: P..W.RmAdn G A M B A 970/9452550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM DIRECTORY: 6:\1CAMBD106\S.*SyI N Au4CIATCs aiCxwoe. vurros. Co...o. r, • � Opv O_ m CO �m 0 \�C 3 O p 0 n CID 01 20-00 _ 0 3 s c6 v 1 Standard Percolation Test Hole Dimensions for Record SCALE: No I4Sml. DATE: A.Run 9th, 205 DRAWN BY: 19 SHEET: 1.11 PROJECT: CHKDBY: IBI GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS d LAND SURVEYORS DRAWING: P..W.RmAdn G A M B A 970/9452550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM DIRECTORY: 6:\1CAMBD106\S.*SyI N Au4CIATCs aiCxwoe. vurros. Co...o. O_ m CO �m 0 3 p S V1 m m p (D a I 3 a a 0 o� �x • Q N.� I O p 0 n CID 01 20-00 _ 0 3 s c6 v 1 Standard Percolation Test Hole Dimensions for Record SCALE: No I4Sml. DATE: A.Run 9th, 205 DRAWN BY: 19 SHEET: 1.11 PROJECT: CHKDBY: IBI GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS d LAND SURVEYORS DRAWING: P..W.RmAdn G A M B A 970/9452550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM DIRECTORY: 6:\1CAMBD106\S.*SyI N Au4CIATCs aiCxwoe. vurros. Co...o. H ,) F* `ech HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL Hepw&awlak Geotechnical, Inc. 5020 Comry Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970.945-7988 Fax: 970.945.8454 email: hpgeo®hpgeotech.com SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESIDENCE LOT 1, SOPRIS MOUNTAIN RANCH PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO. 105 177 MAY 20, 2005 PREPARED FOR: MARK & CONNIE NAGEL C/O STEVE CONGER ARCHITECTS ATTN: GREG WATTS 417 MAIN STREET, SUITE A CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 ?)5_ Parker 303-841-7119 • Colorado Springs 719-633-5562 • Silverthome 970-468-1989 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY .................. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION .............................. SITE CONDITIONS 0 ........................................... 1 - ........................................... 1 - ....- 2 - FIELD EXPLORATION.................................................................................................- 2 - SUBSURFACE -SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS......................................................................................- 3 - FOUNDATION -FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS.................................................................... 4 - DESIGN - DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................- 4 - FOUNDATIONS.......................................................................................................... 4 - FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS............................................................- 6 - FLOORSLABS........................................................................................................... 7 - UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM..........................................................................................- 9 - SITEGRADING.........................:...............................................................................- 9 - SURFACEDRAINAGE............................................................................................ 10- DRIVEWAY 0- DRIVEWAY.................................................................................................................- 11- LIMITATIONS 1- LIMITATIONS.............................................................................................................. 11 - FIGURE 1 - FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PITS FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS - RESIDENCE FIGURE 3 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS - DRIVEWAY FIGURE 4 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 5 TO 7 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 8 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 3(fi 13 --� PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residence and driveway to be located on Lot 1, Sopris Mountain Ranch, Pitkin County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for driveway grading and foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Mark and Connie Nagel, dated February 15, 2005. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory pits in the driveway and exploratory borings in the building area was conducted to obtain information on the subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils and bedrock obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or swell and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for the driveway grading and foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The residence will be a 2 story wood frame structure over a crawlspace. The total living area will be about 7500 square feet and the building footprint will be about 5500 square feet. There is about 8 feet of elevation difference across the residence footprilrt. We assume excavation for the building will have a maximum cut depth of about 8 to 10 feet below the existing ground surface. For the purpose of our analysis, foundation loadings for the structure were assumed to be relatively light and typical of the proposed type of construction. Job No. 105 177 If building loadings, location or grading plans are significantly different from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report. SnE CONDITIONS The building site is in a vacant meadow on the west side of a small knoll with thick oak brush to the east. The upper part of the building area slopes down to the west at grades of 10 to 15%. The main building area is relatively flat to gently sloping down to the north and south. The driveway crosses the lot from west to east. The natural slopes in the driveway area vary from about 29% down off the existing road to 10 to 25% crossing down through the meadow to about 10% up to the house. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the residence was conducted on April 21, 2005. Four exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4 inch diameter continuous flight auger powered by a truck -mounted CUE -45B drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with 1% inch and 2 inch I.D. spoon samplers. The samplers were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils and hardness of the bedrock. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. 3 b Job No. 105 177 G( B&ech 592 The driveway pits were observed on February 17, 2005. Six exploratory pits were excavated at the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate driveway subgrade conditions. A large excavation had also been made in the residence area The pits were dug prior to our site visit. The pits were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken from the pits with relatively undisturbed and disturbed sampling methods. Depths at which the samples were taken are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Pits, Figure 3. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface profiles encountered at the site are shown on Figures 2 and 3. Below about ''/z to 2 feet of organic topsoil, the subsoils consist of 1 to 5 feet of stiff sandy clay with rock fragments overlying weathered claystone bedrock. About 8 feet of medium dense to dense, silty sandy gravel containing cobbles and boulders was encountered overlying the bedrock on the west side of the residence: The soils and bedrock encountered in the borings and pits are similar to those encountered at other nearby lots. The clay portions of these soils and the weathered bedrock can possess an expansion potential when wetted. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained during the field exploration included natural moisture content and density, grain size analyses and liquid and plastic limits. Swell -consolidation testing was performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples of the clay subsoils and weathered bedrock. The swell -consolidation test results, presented on Figures 5 to 7, indicate low compressibility under relatively light surcharge loading. The clay soils showed a low to no expansion potential when wetted under a constant light surcharge. The weathered claystone showed a moderate expansion potential when wetted under a constant light surcharge. Results of gradation analyses performed on the minus 1% -inch fraction of the granular subsoils are presented on Figure 8. Atterberg limits testing results indicate the clay soils and weathered claystone bedrock have medium plasticity. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1. Job No. 105 177 -4 - No free water was encountered in the borings and pits at time of observation. The subsoils were slightly moist to moist. FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS The clay subsoils and bedrock materials encountered at the site possess low to moderate expansion potential when wetted. The gravel soils would not be expected to have an expansion potential. The expansion potential can probably be mitigated by load concentration to reduce or prevent swelling in the event of wetting below the foundation bearing level. Surface runoff, landscape irrigation, and utility leakage are possible sources of water which could cause wetting. If the bearing soils become wet there is a risk of heaving the foundation. Designing the foundations for a minimum dead load as described below will help to mitigate distress due to footing movement but will not eliminate the risk of distress. A drilled pier foundation would have less risk of foundation movement. We can provide recommendations for drilled piers if desired. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the residence be founded with spread footings placed on undisturbed natural soils or bedrock. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural soils or bedrock can be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 4,000 psf. The footings should also be designed for a minimum dead load pressure of 1,000 psf. Footings placed entirely on weathered bedrock should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 5,000 psf and minimum dead load of 1,000 1 J / \ Job No. 105 177 r� -5- psf. In order to satisfy the minimum dead load pressure under lightly loaded areas, it may be necessary to concentrate loads by using a grade beam and pad system. Wall -on -grade construction is not recommended at this site to achieve the minimum dead load. 2) Based on experience, we expect settlement or heave of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be up to about 1 inch. There could be additional differential movement on the order of 1 inch if the bearing materials were to become wet. 3) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous footings and 24 inches for isolated pads. 4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies and limit the risk of differential movement. One method of analysis is to design the foundation wall to span an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls" section of this report. 5) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of foundations at least 42 inches below the exterior grade is typically used in this area. 6) Prior to the footing construction, any existing fill, topsoil and loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the natural soils or bedrock. If water seepage is encountered in the excavation, the footing areas should be dewatered before concrete placement. 7) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions. `A I Job No. 105 177 lya or -IM FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS Foundation walls and retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 50 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site granular soils. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the residence and can be expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 45 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site granular soils. All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain should be provided to prevent hydrostatic. pressure buildup behind walls. Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Backfill in pavement areas should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density. Care should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment near the wall since this could cause excessive lateral pressure on the wall. Some settlement of deep foundation wall backfill should be expected even if the material is placed correctly and could result in distress to facilities constructed on the backfill. We recommend granular soils for backfilling foundation walls and retaining structures because their use results in lower lateral earth pressures and improves the subsurface drainage. Subsurface drainage recommendations are discussed in more detail in the Job No. 105 177 0 -7- "Underdrain System" section of this report. Granular materials should be placed within 2 feet of the ground surface and to a minimum of 3 feet beyond the walls. The granular backfill behind foundation and retaining walls should extend to an envelope defined as a line sloped up from the base of the wall at an angle of at least 30 degrees from the vertical. The upper 2 feet of the wall backfill should be a relatively impervious on-site clayey soil or. a pavement structure should be provided to prevent surface water infiltration into the backfill. The lateral resistance of foundation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of the sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure against the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.30 for footings on clay, 0.50 for footings on gravel and 0.40 for footings on weathered claystone. Passive pressure of compacted backfill against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 350 pcf for the on-site gravel soils as backfill. The coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be a nonexpansive material granular material compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. FLOOR SLABS The on-site soils possess an expansion potential and slab heave could occur if the subgrade soils or bedrock were to become wet. Slab -on -grade construction may be used in garage areas provided precautions are taken to limit potential movement and the risk of distress to the building is accepted by the owner. A positive way to reduce the risk of . slab movement, which is commonly used in the area, is to construct structurally supported floors over crawlspace. �� Job No. 105 177 Gig 0 -8- To reduce the effects of some differential movement, nonstructural floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Interior non-bearing partitions resting on floor slabs should be provided with a slip joint at the bottom of the wall so that, if the slab moves, the movement cannot be transmitted to the upper structure. This detail is also important for wallboards, stairways and door frames. Slip joints which will allow at least 1 %Z inches of vertical movement are recommended. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. Slab reinforcement and control joints should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4 inch layer of free -draining gravel should be placed immediately beneath basement level slabs -on -grade. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve. The free -draining gravel will aid in drainage below the slabs and should be connected to the perimeter underdrain system. Required fill beneath slabs can consist of the on-site gravelly soils or a suitable imported granular material, excluding topsoil and oversized rocks. The on-site clay and claystone materials will be expansive when compacted and should not be used as fill below slabs - on -grade. The fill should be spread in thin horizontal lifts, adjusted to at or above optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density_ All vegetation, topsoil and loose or disturbed soil should be removed prior to fill placement. The above recommendations will not prevent slab heave if the expansive materials underlying slabs -on -grade become wet. However, the recommendations will reduce the effects if slab heave occurs. All plumbing lines should be pressure tested before backfilling to help reduce the potential for wetting. (.1 1 Job No. 105 177 1 G<~Etecch • 0 -9- 18WIDIORMT51". 131M.105 5 Although groundwater was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in mountainous areas and where clay soils are present and bedrock is shallow that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. Therefore, we recommend below -grade construction, such as deep crawlspace and basement areas, be protected from wetting by an underdrain system. The drain should also act to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures behind foundation walls. The underdrain system should consist of a drainpipe surrounded by free -draining granular material placed at the bottom of the wall backfill. The drain lines should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade, and sloped at a minimum 1% grade to a suitable gravity outlet. Free -draining granular material used in the drain system should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve. The drain gravel should be at least 1 `/z feet deep. Void form below the foundation can act as a conduit for water flow. An impervious liner such as 20 mil PVC should be placed below the drain gravel in a trough shape and attached to the foundation wall above the void form with mastic to keep drain water from flowing beneath the wall and to other areas of the building. SITE GRADING The risk of construction -induced slope instability at the site appears low provided the building is located as planned, and cut and fill depths are limited. We assume the cut depth for the lower level will not exceed one level, about 8 to 10 feet. Fills should be limited to about 8 to 10 feet deep. Embankment fills should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density near optimum moisture content. Prior to fill placement, the subgrade should be carefully prepared by removing all vegetation and topsoil and compacting to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density. The fill should be benched into the portions of the hillside exceeding 20% grade. 1 -1:s -Job No. 105 177 h • • -10- Permanent unretained cut and fill slopes should be graded at 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter and protected against erosion by revegetation or other means. The risk of slope instability will be increased if seepage is encountered in cuts and flatter slopes may be necessary. If seepage is encountered in permanent cuts, an investigation should be conducted to determine if the seepage will adversely affect the cut stability. This office should review site grading plans for the project prior to construction. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed: 1) Excessive wetting or drying of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. Drying could increase the expansion potential of the clay soils and claystone. 2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. Free -draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 feet of the on-site soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in paved areas. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. 5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least 10 feet from foundation walls. Consideration should be given to use of xeriscape to reduce the potential for wetting of soils below the building caused by irrigation. q co lob No. 105 177 -11- U9 VA AIA11:1'1 The driveway subgrade consists mostly of medium stiff sandy clay which typically provides poor support for vehicular traffic. We understand that it is proposed to not provide a pavement topping at this time. The driveway is proposed to be constructed by cut and fill grading. Based on the soil conditions observed in the pits and expected construction traffic, we recommend that the driveway section consist of 6 inches of road base (CDOT Class 6) over 1 foot of "pit run" gravel placed on the natural subsoils, bedrock or well -broken bedrock fill. We recommended this section to the contractor, Jason Metcalf, during a site visit on March 1, 2005. We observed driveway construction during March and April, 2005 as described in our daily reports which were provided separately. LIMITATIONS This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled and pits excavated at the locations indicated on Figure 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area Our services do not include determining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If the client is concerned about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings and pits and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear to be different from those described in this report, we should be notified at once so re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the Job No. 105 177 GggtaCh 9 -12- 0 project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications of the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. Respectfully Submitted, HEPWORTH-.PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. DEH/ksw cc: Kaup Engineering — Attn: Dale Kaup LI Q, lob No. 105 177 105 1771 GEOWEORTH—PAW AK I LOCATION OF ANOLORASTORY BORINGS I Figure 1 109 BORING 1 A 15 6o/4 4m uo=122 go BORING 2 xm=au ou=127 /4=52 —2no~17 oo/6 u=44 p|=u7 n0/2 BORING 3 ELEV.= 995' BORING 4 ELEV.= 989' ce 5 15 20 Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 4. 105 177 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 2 1 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. RESIDENCE I 16/12 5 52/12 � —zoo=/n u' | | 1O � 32/6,20/2 15 6o/4 4m uo=122 go BORING 2 xm=au ou=127 /4=52 —2no~17 oo/6 u=44 p|=u7 n0/2 BORING 3 ELEV.= 995' BORING 4 ELEV.= 989' ce 5 15 20 Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 4. 105 177 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 2 1 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. RESIDENCE I (RESIDENCE) Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 4. 105 177 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS — DRIVEWAY Figure 3 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 15 1 PIT 5 PIT 6 PIT 1 PIT 2 PIT 3 PIT 4 ELEV.= 996' ELEV.= 998' ELEV.= 991' 0 ELEV.= 975' ELEV.= 979' ELEV.= 986' ELEV.= 992' WC -18.5 0 77 -200-82 LL -39 0 5 PI=16 '.R• - - WC --12-9 .A v y wC=19.1 _ - -200-87 v y _ -200=55 o°• LL -46 10 LL=44 PI -22 55 I 5 PI=22 WC -11.0 DD -98 -200-86 10 10 (RESIDENCE) Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 4. 105 177 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS — DRIVEWAY Figure 3 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 15 1 PIT 5 PIT 6 LARGE PIT ELEV.= 996' ELEV.= 998' ELEV.= 991' 0 0 WC -18.5 -200-82 LL -39 5 5 PI=16 '.R• .A ami I °• I y o°• 10 (RESIDENCE) Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 4. 105 177 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS — DRIVEWAY Figure 3 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 15 1 LEGEND: ® TOPSOIL; silty clay, organic with roots, medium stiff, moist, dark brown. © CLAY (CL); silty, sandy, with rock fragments, medium plastic, stiff to very stiff, moist, brown. GRAVEL (GM); sandy, silty, with cobbles and boulders, medium dense to dense, slightly moist, light brown, subangular rock fragments. CLAYSTONE BEDROCK; highly weathered to less weathered and hard with depth, gray. Mancos Formation. Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2—inch I.D. California liner sample. ■ Drive sample; standard penetration test (SPT), 1 3/8 inch I.D. split spoon sample, ASTM D-1586. r Drive sample blow count; indicates that 16 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were /12 required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12 inches. 2" Diameter hand driven liner sample. Disturbed bulk sample. _J Practical drilling refusal. Where shown above bottom of log, indicates that multiple attempts were made to advance the boring. NOTES: 1. Exploratory pits were observed on February 17, 2005. Exploratory borings were drilled on April 21, 2005 with 4—inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 2. Locations of exploratory pits and borings were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided: - 3. Elevations of exploratory pits and borings were obtained by interpolation between contours shown on the site plan provided. Logs are drawn to depth. 4 The exploratory pit and boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit and boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6 No free water was encountered in the pits and borings at the time of excavating/drilling. Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content ( %) —200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve DD = Dry Density ( pcf ) LL = Liquid Limit ( % ) +4 = Percent retained on the No. 4 sieve PI = Plasticity Index ( % ) 105 177 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK LEGEND AND NOTES Figure 4 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. sa R1 K A Moisture Content = 8.8 percent Dry Density = 122 pcf Sample of: Weathered Claystone From: Boring 1 at 15 Feet Expansion upon 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf Expansion upon wetting Moisture Content = 23.9 percent Dry Density = 102 pcf Sample of: Sandy Clay From: Boring 3 at 2 Feet 01 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 105 177 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK SWELL—CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 5 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 53 S Moisture Contnt = 16.0 percent Dry Density = g 1115 pcf Sample of: Weathered Claystone From: Boring 4 at 1.5 Feet Expansion upon wetting 3 2 E: c 0 'm 1 C O a x w i 0 c 0 m a� 1 o_ E 0 U 2 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 105 177 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK SWELL—CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 6 GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Moisture Contnt = 16.0 percent Dry Density = g 1115 pcf Sample of: Weathered Claystone From: Boring 4 at 1.5 Feet Expansion upon wetting 55 Moisture Content = 11.0 percent Dry Density = 98 pcf Sample of: Sandy Clay From: Pit 3 at 7 Feet 0 c 2 No movement upon wetting a E 0 0 3 4 01 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 105 177 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SWELL—CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 7 55 Z J qJ � LLIV � 2��uu wUw I- F - O O Y '~ m 00 CL a F- u. = O O :3: z CL F- LU � b w p 0 pp U m U U b cd N U U cd U 03 U U y 3 3 3 UD In on W ZNE Owz a� a wf 20 U U C N N � In p o N 3z m ON a �7 Ln n N ii n m W Q Z N Z D a a c� M o " a J LD w 00 Z 0.p 0.-0r 00 ON N -0-� 00 2 fo.Mp bNOU O'n0C WARREN L. PALMER,QCHITECT BOX 767 20 April 05 Greg Watts Steven Conger Architects RE: the Nagel Residence, Lot One, Sopris Mtn. Ranch Dear Greg: • BASALT, CO. 81621 In response to your status of the Schematic Design Review documents, the Sopris Mtn. Design Committee has the following input. Building Location Steven dropped off a revised house location site plan on Tuesday evening. As per our phone conversation on Tuesday, I was under the impression that the house location was not moving. If this is not the case and the house location will be different from the location of the story poles reviewed in the field, please let me know. As discussed, if the location were to move we would need to review the story poles at the new location. The following comments are based on the review of the house at the original location and as defined by the story poles in the field. 2. Site and Road The road location, as constructed, has been reviewed and approved. Please submit the amended site plat showing the road relocation on the 1041 map that was approved by Pitkin County, for the Ranch file. 3. Architecture The concept of the house and garage appear to be generally consistent with the Ranch Guidelines and appropriate to the Ranch aesthetics. There are two areas of concern with the design as presented. The fust is the concern about the sun reflection off the south glass of the living room and the master bedroom. The Committee would like to see the overhangs deepened and the glass set back in the facade of the south wall, to protect against reflection from the large amount of glass and the southern exposure. The second concern is that the south elevation does not meet the Ranch Guideline, as outlined in section B.2 on "building form and massing". This section states that only 30% of wall on each building elevation may exceed 10 ft. in height. The guest bedroom wing, which projects into the pasture and is most visible from adjacent properties and the Ranch, appears to violate this section. Please provide calculations to justify the design as proposed or a revision to bring the south elevation into compliance. The Committee would like to see 6 large evergreens, in addition to the cottonwoods, to help screen the south elevation from the neighbors. - After reviewing the story poles, it appeared that one ridge may violate the RidgeLine Review. Please supply documentation from Pitkin County that RidgeLine Review has been approved for the location as presented. 5. TDR Receiver Site Please supply documentation from Pitkin County on the approval of the TDR for the Ranch file. 6. Caretaker Dwelling Unit It appears that there is a CDU over the garage. Please supply documentation from Pitkin County on the approval for the Ranch file. 5S 0 0 The Nagel Residence Schematic Design Review page two 7. Ditches The new access road intersects both the upper and lower ditches running along the pasture. Please coordinate the culverts and the continuation of these ditches with the Ranch manager. 8. Temporary Fencing Temporary fencing shall be installed immediately, at a location approved by the Ranch manager, to contain livestock in the Ranch pasture and away from the construction. 9. Permanent Fencing The issue of the permanent fencing location is being reviewed by the Ranch Board and will be addressed as a separate issue. 10. Additional Information Additional information for the Schematic Design package, such as utility lines, revegetation plans, entry gates, signage and final materials and colors may be submitted with the Final Review Documents. This review represents the information required for the Committee to make a final acceptance of the Schematic Design. The Board and Committee plan on meeting at the Ranch on May 2°d. Receipt of complete information, before that time, will expedite the approval process. Please give a call if you have questions. Sincerely, Warren Palmer, Architect for the Ranch Sq Ea i 8�EVEN CONGER ARCWTECTS NAGLE RE&DENCE SO REI MOUNTAIN RANCH i110.IM1bFf.�OlYFIT�YC s w°�s�sFbF�mMroiw� a &MI FM1fiFI�FYq •IiFN W1.iAWIF.eI� f MFIM.w'11R1M.�.� F.IIFF�'eYMbl�1 FILE DATE 527-M DRAWN BY CHECKED BY ISSUE FOR: PERMIT REVISIONS: h MK LEVEL FLOOR LAN SCALE: 3113'°1'-W e 6 E C/ 11 I o bio M ga I I M"�Mllmml I � I II 1. I U LOT 01 SOME MOUNTAIN RANCH RK \ � 1 -------- --- —---—— NOW It I t o © ----- - -1i •-------- --------I — \— — - 1 � FILE ® © J DATE 647-M v DRAWN BY e ` CHECKED BY 1 I ISSUE FOR PERMlT «, I I REVISIONS: 1 i 1 I0 I I I 1 1 I 1 1 O SCALE: 9H6'«P-0' I J Form No. 'OFFICE OF THOTATE ENGINEER GWS -25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCE:. 818 Centennial Bldg., 1313 Sherman St., Denver, Colorado 80203 (303) 866-3581 APPLICANT MARK & CONNIE NAGLE 1010 SPRING LANE LAKE FOREST. IL 60045 - (847) 295-9293 1095 WELL PERMIT NUMBER 262514 _ DIV. 5 WD 38 DES. BASIN MD Lot i MOCK: ruing: SUMIT JVYKIS MUUN IAIN KANGH APPROVED WELL LOCATION PITKIN COUNTY NW 1/4 SW 1/4 Section 27 Township 8 S Range 87 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 2070 Ft. from South Section Line 910 Ft. from West Section Line UTM COORDINATES (Meters Zone: 13, NAD83) Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(II)(A) as the only well on a tract of land of 36.95 acres described as lot 1, Sopris Mountain Ranch division of land, Pitkin County. 4) The use of ground water from this well is limited to fire protection, ordinary household purposes inside not more than three (3) single family dwellings, the irrigation of not more than one (1) acre of home gardens and lawns, and the watering of domestic animals. 5) The pumping rate of this well shall not exceed 15 GPM. 6) The return flow from the use of this well must be through an individual waste water disposal system of the non -evaporative type where the water is returned to the same stream system in which the well is located. 7) This well shall be constructed not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE: Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 49-2465-273-01-001 NOTE: Assessor Tax Schedule Number: R006956 APPROVED DMW State V 03/29�o�s a2-A, . 2 -- TION DATE 03-29-2007 Aug 24 05 08:30a Wayne Shelton 970-927-3801 WELL CONSTRUCTION AND TEST REPORT OR OFFICE USE ONLY r STATE OF COLORADO, OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER All": C 4c c I. WELL PERMIT NUMBER 262514 Owner Name(s): Nagle, Mark & Connie 2 Mailing Address: 1010 Spring Lane City, State, Zip : Lake Forest, IL 60045 Phone # APPROVAL ti GWS31-91-03 WFLL LOCATION AS DRILLEDMV 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec: 27 Twp: 8 S Range: 87 W 3. DISTANCES FROM SEC. LINES line 1100 ft. from West Sec. line OR Northing Easting: 2075 ft. from South Sec. and SUBDIVISION: Sopris Mountain Ranch LOT: 1 BLOCK: FILING (UNIT): STREET ADDRESS AT LOCATION GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION ft. DRILLING METHOD Air Rotary DATE COMPLETED: 7.14,2005 TOTAL DEPTH: 300 DEPTH COMPLETION: 300 15.GEOLOGIC HOLE DIAMEFER (in) FROM (R) TO (a) LOG6. 0 40 t T e of Mazer a] (Size, Color, and T e) 9.0 300 000-012 Dirt 6.5 40 012-300 Mancos Shale 7. PLAIN CASING OD (in) fund Wet[ Sitz From (ft) To (ft) 7,0 Steel 0.240 I 40 5.5 PVC 0.250 30 60 5.5 PVC 0.250 200 300 PERF. CASING : Screen Slot Size 5.5 PVC 0.250 60 200 8. Filter Pack 9. Packer Placement Water Located: 60-200 Material Type SizeDepth Remarks : Interval 10. GROUTING RECORD Material Amount Drnsity 1"mvat P"'t Cement 5 sks 6 al/sk 1040 poured 11. DISINFECTION Type HTH Amt. Used: I I oz. 12. WELL TEST DATA () Check Box If Test Data Is Submitted On Supplemental TESTING METHOD: Air Compressor Static Level: 32 ft. Date(rimeMeasured 7/14/2005 Production Rate 12 gpm Pumping Level: Total It. Date/time Measured 7;14!2005 Test Length: 2 hours Test Remarks: base and tlw srnt. d= nude herein and know the canlenls t im l us that - We"O to my kno Sc rsuan o «, r �.,n., .,�... ,,........,e...._.._ ...__...--- 13. oonstima m the scoond degree and u pmisheMe as a class t misdeawnor.) Phone: (970) 927-4182 CONTRA [C OR Shelton Drilling Corp. Lic. No. 1095 Mailing Address : P.O. Box 1059 Basalt, o. 81621 Name / Title (Please Type or Print) Sign 11 Date 7/20/2005 Wayne Shelton I President �l, — LOS PUMPMCfALLATION AND -TESTREPORT FOM NO. OWI STATE OF COLARAM OFFICE OF THE STATE BIOEE�t For Orks � tl 1313 Stamen SL, !foam 81d, Detntr: Ca am Fa, (30D�t1BB.� hlpYAsare�wMrerMaxw tiYELLPfo1:W1 NIIL ---A6 MIA W51GUI8tN1011r1U'ION ) NAMOFOWMER NA c , MARk GONfV16- MALNG ADDRESS 1010 S RIND tiA*IZ C" ZA, e FUAGam"j $rare St^ CODE 3. MQkUXWMA&pMjM NU1Ur Ai W Mr 27. Trp. 13NajoS amp OEmjMW DI6MWMFROMSEC.Lffi _20'15 LtionQNor,®$scYonaneend 1100 fLflan OECrAWsemenIM. SLODWISM LOT_ t j=. FLNGIUMn_,. GM LacI GPS Unit Laud v JT& —n mkg a dkW Famtet mat be UM Unb Esse' must be au I OM" must be RACK Unit moat be ad to UM K 17 zone 12 or O hM 13 PPSErACCRIMATWELL LOCATMK PUMP (]ATA: Type= S U M tI4>g LE Des Maborea ! zo 05 ' dk �! Pure MNVADD W. 5'T'A ^ R-tl Puny Madel Na t=V Demnopbt-UL ataFM 3450 NP 1412 vow 230 RILWAF" 9-6 Pump-tsrteDeph fFook Dwoo6wpipe Sme-.L- - Kkdcto"poe 5'CHVID - MXMgp&Tubb+e Drhix TyP` O Bpem O Beim (] 091— DamillmNMI Oast Naneferd maw b's p m*w tmwmw Q Yee jm taw anrce oapel h twmo<T-6e kw%m k d 0 Yoe Zr4a. Danes t . FbwMMwk fp. ke.wsdm114M tam Tto,...rt Ase IL TEST DArA C] deck bac FTeet oar r mtmM@d m 3Wpb mwW farm Dam: Tart WesDOI 300 L Tbm 3taec tai.aL 33,_R' _e. Re"(wmk 13 CAM, PWqftLGwd(ft! " LROMMOM Tom Chloro, OWCUmd 117C0111 � eweaeie: Yec No lymn, sen* w0 ft nValt DL Rwmwkr i. t hrm area the etwntente nude Irasi�- tanratla aanrtee lwrsd. ad baY ao ttab my b�oseea0` doolnettt i aipad ens vMRutenwwfrlwarWs9*wwedanAWm2Cca4?.(rmSmotodoCu tthd=*wf * mgladkwmp$nc atsanwes ie a ebMon daedbn 3/ et.100(1J(N CRS Nt0 fel pmidrer Mies ep bo>15000 eralbtsaoealbn dlbe oDnarattD inrui New Samedsoa Pump comp y im. 9'70 945- 63M Licaroe Hortiber Ma"AdiftmP Hox 297 Gkawood CO 81602 raft rams ata Tae 06 xam E 9.meataoa P>eeidwt zo �s(i 2009-04-08 09:30 9709479448 Page 2