p'--r · Garfield County Building & Sanitation Department 108 8th Street, Suite #401 Glenwood...

Garfield County

Building & Sanitation Department 108 8th Street, Suite #401 Glenwood Springs, Co. 81601 Office 945-8212 Inspection Line 384-5003

Job Address: 0067 River Bend Way, GWS

Locality: lronbridge Ph1 PUD, Lot166/ 2395-121-18-166

Describe Work structural foundation repair

Owner: Alexander, Judy

Contractor: Hansen Construction

Amount of Permit: $1,408.69 Date:

I

clerk: _jtmj""", =· ,v_.,\p'-"-r __ _

(}Aru'mlJ) COONlY Bi:m.l>lNG PEltMIT .AP.!'lJCi\TlON lOll sf' st1:ee1, Suite 401, Glemmod ~ Co 81601

Pltonel ~S4!2l2/l'llll: 970-384-3470 I hlspiic6nn Line! 970-384-5003 Wll'W~I!O!Il

Tbe foUowing items are regniJ!!1 by G!rfield COIIJlty for !! final Inspection:

1) A final Electrical Inspeaion :from the CoiOI'Ildo Stall: Electricallnspeator.

2) Permanent address assigned by Garlleld Comity Building Depanmeut and posted at 1he sti"Uccufe and where readily visible :from licces.s road .

. 3) A ti.nished roof; a lockable building; completed ~or siding; exterior dOOrS and windows inslalled; a ccimplete kitchen with cabil:lets, sink with hdt & oold running water, non-absorbent kitchen ·floor ~ COIIIller 1DpS and finished walls, mtdy for stOve and reft:lgerator; all necessazy plum.bmg.

4) All bathrooms must be complete, with washbowl, tllb or shower, toilet, hot and cold ming water, lwn-absotbent floors, walls finished, and privacy door. ·

S) Steps over 1hrec (3) risers, outside or inside must be mum: hilve haDdrai!s. Balconies and decb · over 30" high xirust be COIISinlllted. to all me and JRC requiremems including guardrails.

6). Outside grading Cllmpleted so that water slopes away from the building;

7) BWeptlons to the Olllside: steps. decb, .gmdiqg may be made upon the demoostndion of ~ ciromnsblllces., i.e;~- U.ttder such cirwmstances A Cet1ifk:ate of 0ceupanc:y may be lssaed oondidonally.

VALUATION FEE DETERMINATION

Applicant Address Date

Alexander Subdivision "'o,;;;0.;;;67==='R"'iv:.:e'"'rb_e_n..,.d"'W"'a_y _______ Lot/Block

12!10/2007 Contractor ~~~~--------------~

Finished (Livable Area): Main

Upper

Lower

Other Total

Basement: Unfinished

Square Feet

Valuation

Conversion of Unfinished to Finished

Total Valuation

Garage:

Valuation

Crawl Space

sf

sf

sf sf X $74.68

0 sf

sf X $41.00 sf X $33.68

sf X $18.00

sf X $9.00

Ironbridge 166 Hansen

0.00

0.00

0.00

GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING 970-945-8212

MINIMUMAPPLICATION REQUIREMENTS For

SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CONSTRUCTION Including

NEW CONSTRUCTION ADDITIONS

ALTERATIONS And

MOVED BUILDINGS

In order to understand the scope of the work intended under a permit application and expedite the - - (' - ~ . -'- ~- . - .. -- - '- . ,,_ - ' -

decks, balcony, steps, hand rails and guard rails, windows and doors, including the finish grade line and original grade. A section showing in detail, from the bottom of the footing to the top of the roof, including re-bar, anchor bolts, pressure treated plates, floor joists, wall studs and spacing. insulation, sheeting, house-rap, (which is required), siding or any approved building material. Engineered foundations may be required.

A window schedule. · A door schedule. A floor framing plan, a roof framing plan, roof must be designed to withstand a40 pound per square foot up to 7,000 feet in elevation, a 90 M.P.H. wind speed, wind exposure B or C, and a 36 inch frost depth.

All sheets to be identified by number and indexed. All of the above requirements must be met or your plans will be returned.

All plans submitted must be incompliance with the 2003 IRC.

1. Is a site plan included that identifies the location of the proposed structure or addition and distances to the property lines from each corner of the proposed structure( s) prepared by a licensed surveyor and has the surveyors sign!lture md professionill stamp on the drawing? Properties with slopes of30% or greater must be shown on the site plan. (NOTE Section: 106.2) Any site plan for the placement of anv nnrtinn nf o "'"""h•-·

Yes~;(/!1

5. Are you aware that prior to submittal of a building permit application you are required to show proof of a driveway access permit or obtain a statement from the Garfield County Road & Bridge Departtnent stating one is not necessary? You can contact the Road & Bridge Department at 625-862}1/l Yes fYfft ~

6. Do · plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all ing steel in accordance with the IRC or per stamped engineered design?

7. Do the plans indicate the location and size of ventilation openings for under floor crawl spaces and the clearances required between wood and earth? Yes . ;(/A

8. Do the plans indicate the size and location of ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist

i:~es and soffits? rl) A

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

make and model and Colorado Phase II certificat&'onsephase II EPA certification?

Dyes h 1 · 1 d No fi I · I d. lf! · · d' · d · . oes t e p an me u e a masonry 1rep ace me u 1 g a 1rep ace sectiOn m Icatmg es1gn to comply with the IRC? 1: Yes No ('lf/r Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that egress/rescue windows from sleeping rooms and/or basements comply with the requirements of the IRC?

Yes No (VJA Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural light and ventilation for all habitable rooms? " // Yes No ;v /A Do the plans indicate the location of glazing subject to human impact such as glass doors, glazing immediately adjacent to such doors; glazing adjacent to any surface normally used as a walking surface; sliding glass doors; fixed glass panels; shower doors and tub enclosures and specifY safety glazing for these areas? ·f Yes No f(//r Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas furnaces. boilers anrlwMPr hootoro

24. Do you understand that the minimum dimension a home can be on a lot is 20ft.wide and

25.

26.

27.

28.

20ft. long? ./ /, Yes No f"/(f

designed or had this plan designed while considering building a?d other constnhctilnn code requirements? Yes No. _____ _

Do your plans comply with all zoning rules and regulations in the County related to your

~~:"rties zone district? No /(ft

Does the plan accurately indicate what you intend to construct and what will receive a final inspection by the Garfield County Building De;;artment? ·

Yes · No N}A ')p,.ofi:JdY [rrc1r.fl.(; e_

Do y~u ·~·,, derstand that approval for design and/or construction changes are required prior to the a pl cation of these changes? ., 7 \ I · ., .,. ·

33. Are you aware that the Permit Application must be signed by the Owner or a written authority er g given for an Agent and that the party responsible for the project must comply with theIR ?

No _____ _

34. Do you understand that you will be required to hire a State of Colorado Licensed Electrician and Plumber to perform installations and hookups, unless you· as the homeowner are performing the work? The license number of the person performing the work will be required at time of applicable inspection. ,(fA Yes No __ ~---'---'-[V-' {(

35. Are you aware, that on the front of the Building Permit Application you will need to fill in the Parcel/Schedule Number for the lot you are applying for this permit on prior to submittal of a build. ing permit application? your attention in this is arrreciated. Yes No ·. · . fVJA

36. . Do you know that the local fire district may require you to submit plans for their review of fire safety issues? Yes No 9 (please check with the h1111Alncr flpn<;:~rfn-lpnf '.:!hn.llt·th1c rPnn;rPTY'lP-nt\ .Jr It

infonnation at the request of the Building OffiCial prior to begi1ming the plan review process. Delays in issuing the penni! are to be expected. Work may not proceed without the issuance of a penni!. If it is detennined by the Building Official that additional infonnation is necessary to review the application and plans to detennine minimum compliance with the adopted codes, the application may be placed behind more recent applications for building pennits in the review process and not reviewed until required infonnation has been provided and the application rotates again to first position for review, delay in issuance pf the penni! or delay in proceeding with construction.

Bpminreq November2006

PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST

Applicant ________ -:--

Building

__ .Engineered F onndation

dDriveway Permit (:y ~

0urveyed Site Plan

~Septic Permit and Setbacks

~Grade/Topography 30%

Attach Residential Plan Review List

__ Minimum Application Questionnaire

' /.' , ...

Date _________ __;.

Planning/Zoning

~roperty Line Setbacks

~Oft Stream Setbacks

~ Flood Plain --

__ Bvilding Height

l_../"zoning Sign-off

~oad Impact Fees 11 :Yz_ "! Z

_iL_HOAJDRC Approval

PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST

Applicant /tL'i:X M?GG/ Date _ _clu7'-'-·--_,_\ _::_o_, _CJ_JI---

fi\J 0 e-cp~v--Building

/Engineered Foundation

~Driveway Permit

-ll4t-Surveyed Site Plan

~Septic Permit and Setbacks

J4d-GradefTopography 30%

~Attach Residential Plan Review List

~Minimum Application Questionnaire

Planning/Zoning

__ Property Line Setbacks

__ 30ft Stream Setbacks

__ Flood Plai

..... ~ .. WORK

GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING DEPARTMENT 108 8TH STREET, SUITE 401

GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 970-945-8212

NOTICE THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND

{)l.GENERAL CONSTRUCTION Ll ELECTRICAL 0 HEAT 0 GAS FITTING 0 SEPTIC SYSTEM 0 PERMITS 0 OTHER---~--

IS NOT ACCEPTED PLEASE CORRECT AS NOTED BELOW BEFORE ANY

FURTHER WORK IS DONE.

-NOTE-

COUNTY OF GARFIELD - BUILDING DEPARTMENT

CORRECTION NOTICE 108 8th St., Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado

Phone (970) 945-8212 A

Job located at -=-t/_CJ?____::rb=::..__.L._7---'~'---'--I;_;;V /C___:;;__:_;L=--=&:..c~"""~~-'t?_Ui-_:_:_?<t_,_,7Y<--.

Permit No. /0 zg / I have this day inspected this structure and these

premises and found the following corrections needed:

($ ///SICK GiA.s.s s:l/t/tt),e.£ tsA>~Z &J C/(AcA:eo ~A/AI L.£cr.cL

.. A/CJ .//PY WA7£;e_ R -rA A ?<!: --'- <::"' n</ /1 ' • I ~ ,;:? -'7"7 / fir' _,.-.-, L) -"" ff / ..,...--,,.., 4 - .A • . ...

BUILDING P GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO

INSPECTION WILL NOT BE MADE UNLESS HilS CARD IS POSTED ON THE JOB

Date Issued \'1,· \1· 1.001 Permit No.__._\ """Q_1._,F,>~;o<.>-( ------AGREEMENT

In consideration of the issuance of the permit, the applicant hereby agrees to comply with all laws and regulations related to the zoning, location; construction and erection of the proposed structured for which this permit is

granted, and further agrees that if the above said regulations are not fully complied with in the zoning, location, erection and construction of the above described structure, the permit may then be revoked by notice from the

County Building department and IMMEDIATELY BECOME NULL AND VOID.

use S\ru.dural fa.trkdioo ~""'-'icL___-;;--_---:-AddressorLegalDescription ~\Q1 {Qver&rd Wa~WS o!'MPri~) Owner A\eJMd~,'Judy Contractor !men fulst'""'-'-'-• __ Building Permit Type Res> ( d£nfid.l

This Card Must Be Posted So It Is Plainly Visible From The Street Until Final Inspection

INSPECTION RECORD l:nn+inn Drivewav

Assessor's Parcel No. 2395·121-18-166

DatE! ___ 1_2.:._/1..:..7/--=2-=-00.::..7_

ERMITCARD ngs (lronbridge Ph1, Lot 166)

jress 1894 Hwy 50E. No4, B'mesa Phone # 945-4200

jress 410 lronbridge Dr, GWS Phone # 384-5081

~H, _____ LH _____ Zoning ____ _

CTIONS Weatherproofing ___________ _ Mechanical Electrical Rough (State) Electrical Final (State)

~!Jiof:inal 9-.:?6-<?K /Che. ckli~qqmpleted? Certificate Occupancy# ...~.I.S~~f..J-'-'---------

Date _______________ _ Septic System# ___________ _

Date ---------------Final, ____________ _

Other ______ ~--------------

ITES

(continue on back)

Dec. 12. 2007 10: 12AM iron bridge homes

410 Ironbridge Drive Glenwood Springs, CO

Fax Transmittal Form

To: jeff Kerr

Company: Garfield County Building Department Address: Phone: Fax: 970-384-3470

Urgent For Review Please Comment Please Reply

GOLF CLUB AND MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY

From: Jodi Thimsen

lronbridge Homes, LLC

Phone: 970-384-5032 E-mail: [email protected]

Date Sent: 12-12-2007 Time Sent: 8:35 Number of Pages: 2 ·

No. 8882 P 1

Please note that our fox number has changed to 970~928-8865 Jeff, I spoke with Steve from SK Peightal Engineers yesterday regarding Founda-. . - -- - ~ ~ ·~· . ~ ~ ..... - _.,_-. ~ . ~ . -• .

Dec. 12. 2007 10: 12AM 1 ron bridge homes No. 8882 P. 2 1Ullf2UU7 11:01 FAX 970 9~7 0597 SK P~IGRTAL ENGIN£ERS

s K PEIGHTAT. 'ENGINEERS I td ST.ltUCTURA.L CONSULTANTS

To: Tom Coyle Iranbridge Homes 410 Iro:nbridge Dr Glenwood Springs, CO 81601

~ from: . Stephen Peigh~ PE

Date: November 27, 2007

Re: Iionbrlci.ge Lots 147,148, &: 106

On 11-27·07, Jack Albright and I meet to review the foundation llit and stabilize pllins for the t~bove referenced projects. These plw are as submitted 11-20·07, by :Mike Woelke of ~onbridge Homes. Jack Albright is ths project engi.neet' of record. while with S K Pei.ghtal Engineers, and continues as a consultant while with A'lbrig!;lt &:: Assoctates. ·

I;!J002

S K PEIGHTAI. ENGINEERS I.td STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS

To: Tom Coyle Ironbridge Homes 410 Ironbridge Dr

MEMORANDUM

Glenwood Springs, CO 81601

From: Stephen Peightal, PE

Date: November 27,2007

Re: Ironbridge Lots 147, 148, & 166

On 11-27-07, Jack Albright and I meet to review the foundation lift and stabilize plans for the above referenced projects. These plans are as submitted 11-20-07, by Mike Woelke of Ironbridge Homes. Jack Albright is the project engineer of record while with S K Peightal Engineers, and continues as a consultant while with Albright & Associates.

07/07/2008 08:59 3034693581

HAYWARD BAKER Geotechnical Construction

HAYWARD BAKER DENVER PAGE 03/03

July7, 2008

RE: Ironbridge Lot 166

To Whom It May Concern:

The intent of this letter is to teflect the work performed by Hayward Baker Inc. on the above mentioned property. Hayward Baker properly perfonned the lifting operations at the locations specified by Ironbridge Homes LLC, and under the direction ofT om Coyle of CCS Enterprises, Inc. HBJ successfully lifted the distressed areas back to as near original elevation as possible.

Hayward Baker eojoyed working with all parties involved in this project, and we were glad we could be of assistance. If there are any further questions please contact us at (303)469-1136. Thank you.

S K PEIGHTAL ENGINEERS Ltd STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS

FIELD REPORT

To: Rob Morey Ironbridge Homes 410 Ironbridge Dr. Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 [email protected]

From: Stephen Peightal

Date: September 18, 2008

Re: Ironbridge Lot 166

page 1 of 3

At the request of Tom Coyle, CCS Enterprises, representatives of S K Peightal Engineers Ltd have been on site May 20th, 21st, 22nd, 23rd, and 28th, 2008, to observe lift and stabilize work in progress. Please refer to my 11-27-07 Memo and the Foundation Lift & Stabilize Plans submitted by Mike Woelke of Ironbridge Homes. Also refer to our 4-24-08 Field Report, addressing lift and stabilization work that was in progress while on site 12-18-07.

of 3

May21. 2008 On site in the morning. Lifting operations have been delayed to re-shoot elevations to assure accurate before and after elevation marks.

Spoke with Tom Coyle in the afternoon. Mr Coyle reports the low point had been raised approximately 2 1 I 2". Framing popping and creaking noises were heard during the lifting operation. Some construction gaps were closing, and it was noted that the bedroom door could now close, which it was unable to do prior. The lifting operation had to be halted to allow for removal of basement furring studs installed after foundation settlement. These studs were being engaged and found to be bending.

May22, 2008 On site with Tom Coyle and Hayward Baker crews. Sill plate in stair area was now sitting on the foundation wall. Bedroom door now operable. At numerous areas, small cracks appeared as essentially closed, and large cracks are visibly smaller.

Observed the jacking process. Observed approximately 2" gap between the bottom of existing footings and the top of soil. The hand pump hydraulically served multiple jack units. Steel shims are continuously inserted on top of the steel pedestals as the structure is being raised. Heard occasional popping and creaking of structure during the lifting process.

May23, 2008 On site with Tom Coyle and Hayward Baker crews. Many large cracks are observed to have significantly closed. Stair area appears more squared. Basement floor slab has '·~~ ' ~ "T •' 1_1 __ 1_ ______ £1:_ _____ _]_,! _______ 11 _____ , __

of 3

Conclusion By our site observations and discussions we have become generally familiar with the contractor's work (Hayward Baker Inc). It is our determination that this work has progressed in accordance with the reviewed Lift & Stabilize Plans indicated above.

We currently see no signs of concern for future structural building performance. In finishing this project, it is recommended that all water impact mitigation steps presented by the soils engineer be reviewed and implemented.

Mr Coyle reports that 1.3 million pounds of concrete has been injected below the foundation. This amount implies a sinkhole type subsurface void, and not just bearing soil subsidence.

~tech HEPWORTH· PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL

November 21, 2007

Ironbridge Homes, LLC Attn: Mike Woelke 410 Ironbridge Drive Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601

Hepworth~Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. 5020 County Road !54 Glenwood Springsf Colorado 81601 Phone' 970-945-7988

Fa" 970-945-8454 email: [email protected]

Job No.101 196-1

Subject: Interim Findings, Subsurface Exploration for Evaluation of Wetted Depth and Building Settlement, Lots 165 and 166, Ironbridge, River Bend Way, Garfield County, Colorado

Dear Mr. Woelke:

As requested, Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. performed subsurface exploration at

the subject site. The study was conducted as verbally authorized by Dave Ockers. The

data obtained and our fmdings based on the subsurface conditions encountered are

presented in this report.

-2-

166 overlying dense river gravel alluvium. Previous drilling on Lot 165 encountered river

gravel alluvium at a depth of about 60 feet. Results oflaboratory testing performed on

samples taken from the borings are presented on Figure 2 and summarized in Table 1.

No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. The depth of wetting

appeared to be on the order of35 to 40 feet at Boring 1, 15 to 20 feet at Boring 2 and

about 10 feet at Boring 3. The soils encountered at greater depth were slightly moist.

Preliminary Findings: The soils below the western part of the residence on Lot 166

appear to have been deep wetted resulting in the building settlement. The compaction

grouting of the subsoils could terminate at the bottom of current wetting with a risk of

future settlement if the subsurface wetting continues. The drainage swale needs to be

sloped at a minimumof5% or lined with an impervious membrane. Roofrunoffneeds to

be piped to the swale or into a separate drainage pipe sloped to daylight. Additional

investigation of the water problem needs to be made at Lot 165 to prevent leakage into

the crawlspace. This could require video taping and/or excavating the roof drain piping

to verifY it is water tight. We will provide additional subsurface information from Boring

4 when available.

- 3-

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for remedial design

purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our

information. As the 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

to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of

excavations and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer.

A:i11ACJIW (..-&MffCJG-\)\uN ~f If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know. ~ l

Respectfully Submitted,

HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.

z ') APPROXIMA -r:: SCALE:

1"=80 LOT BOUNDARY

/"--.._ - - (TYP)

/ /'~ ....... / / '-, ....

/ " / " / LOT 147 I

( I "- I

1 /'... "- . BUILDING I I "- "- "- ENVELOPE

I I "" ''" (TYP) I I "-"- "-"- I

( BORING 148 "- "- v

/\ \ 0 '7 ,; // \ \ LOT 148 I

"' / \\ ' \ I

\

( BORING 149 \ '\ _ __) \ 0 \ '\....-- /

\ LOT 149 .) .; '\ /

\ \ ------\ \../

\ \

COUNTY ROAD 109

GOLF COURSE

0

10

20

30

w (J) tL

BORING 1 SWCORNER

9/12

5/12 WC=14.8 DD=109 -200=61 3/12 WC=15.9 DD=105 -200=74 6/12

8/12 WC=14.3 DD=109 -200=59

4/12 WC=16.3 DD=100 -200=79

BORING2 NESIDE

10/12

3/12 WC=16.8 DD=103 -200=92

5/12

8/12 WC=6.6 DD=101 -200=72

23/12 WC=3.1 DD=115 -200=63

46/12

BORING3 NECORNER

2/12

9/12

35/12 WC=10.5 DD=127 -200=83 12/12 WC=2.6 DD=95 -200=70 12/12

BORING4 ELEV.=

0

10

20

30

w (J)

"

LEGEND:

m . .

9/12

T

Fill; sandy silt with gravel, typically firm and moist to very moist, mixed brown.

Sand and Silt (SM-ML); slightly sandy to very sandy, scattered gravel to gravelly zones, soft to medium stiff and moist to very moist to very stiff and slightly moist with depth, light brown. (Debris Fan Deposits)

Gravel, Cobbles and Boulders (GM-GP); dense, slightly moist, brown, rounded rock. (River Alluvium)

Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-inch I. D. California liner sample.

Drive sample blow count; indicates that 9 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California sampler 12 inches.

Caved depth following drilling.

Practical drilling refusal in dense gravel alluvium.

~ech 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970-945-7988 Fax: 970-945-8454

HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOT.£CHNICAL [email protected]

Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: lronbridge Homes, LLC Job No.: 101 196-1 Day: Tuesday

Attn: James Woelke Date: 06-17-08 410 lronbridge Drive Page: 1 of 1 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601

Project: Lot 166, 0067 River Bend Way,lronbridge Development, Garfield County, Colorado

Weath~r: Partly cloudy Temperature: so• at 10:30 am .

Earthwork Contractor: Iron bridge

Equipment Used: Double drum vibratory compactor

Description of Earthwork Tested:

Verbal Communication: Tom with lronbridge Homes

Placement and Compaction Procedure: Reported by Contactor

Lift Thickness: 6" Max. Rock Size: 6" Moisture

Hose Conditioning:

Compactor(s) Used: Double drum vibratory compactor Number of Passes: -

~ech 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970·945·7988 Fax: 970-945-9454

HEPWORTH·PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL [email protected]

Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: lronbridge Homes, LLC Job No.: 101196-1 Day: Tuesday


Project: Lot 166, 0067 River Bend Way, lronbridge Development, Garfield County, Colorado

Weather: Cool and cloudy Temperature: 7o•s at 4:00 pm

Description of Earthwork Gravel and silty clay Tested: Samples Obtained None


Placement and Compaction Procedure: Reported by Contractor

Lift Thickness: 6" Max. Rock Size: 6" Moisture hose Conditioning:

Compactor(s) Used: Double drum vibratory compactor Number of Passes:

Nuclear Gauge Moisture/Oensi~ Test Results

Location Field Dry Field Min.% Test Depth or Moisture Percent Proctor ··- r-•-·· Density ---4.--L ---- Comp. I _t.. 11.1-

~ech 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970-945·7988 Fax: 970-945·8454

HEPWORTH· PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL [email protected]

Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: lronbridge Homes, LLC Job No.: 101 196-1 Day: Wednesday


Project: Lot 166, 0067 River Bend Way,lronbridge Development, Garfield County, Colorado

Weather: Partly cloudy Temperature: 60°S at 4:00 pm





Compactor(s} Used: Double drum vibratory compactor Number of Passes:

Nuclear Gauge Moisture/Densib Test Results

Location Field Dry Field

Min.% Test Depth or Moisture Percent Proctor . . -· Densitv -- -•- -· - Como . . . .

~ech 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970·945·7988 Fax: 970-945·8454

HEPWORTH· PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL [email protected]

Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: lronbridge Homes, LLC Job No.: 101196-1 Day: Thursday


Project: Lot 166, 0067 River Bend Way, lronbridge Development, Garfield County, Colorado

Weather: Partly cloudy Temperature: 70•s at 4:30 pm





Compactor(s) Used: Double drum vibratory compactor,

Number of Passes: 0 jumping jack Nuclear Gauge Moisture/Densib Test Results

I Test I Location I Depth or I Field ~ry Field I I Min. % I Proctor Moisture Percent n.ont!!lhl t"nrnn

c:;t;t£tech HEPWORTH· PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL

SUBSOIL STUDY

Hepworth~ Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone' 970-945-7988

Fax' 970-945·8454 email: [email protected]

FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESIDENCE

LOT 166, IRONBRIDGE DEVELOPMENT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . 1

SITE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

GEOLOGY ............................................... 2

FIELD EXPLORATION ....................................... 3

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .................................. 3

FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS ........................... 4

DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ 5 FOUNDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS ..................... 6 FLOOR SLABS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY

This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residence to be located

on Lot 166, Ironbridge Development, Garfield County, Colorado. The project site is

shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the

foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for

geotechnical engineering services to L.B. Rose Ranch, LLC, dated July 24, 2003. We

previously conducted subsurface exploration to evaluate the collapse potential of the

non-irrigated debris fan areas within the development and presented the findings in a

report dated September 10, 1998, Job No. 197 327.

An exploratory boring was drilled near the center of the lot to obtain information on the

subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration

were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility potential

- 2 -

If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described

above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this

report.

SITE CONDITIONS

The lot is located in the uphill, southwestern part of the development and was vacant at

the time of our study. The lot location is shown on Figure 1. The roadway and

underground utility construction to the lot are complete. Minor overlot grading

consisting of shallow cuts and fills appears to have been made on the lot during the

subdivision development. The ground surface has a moderate slope down to the east

with about 8 feet of elevation difference across the building area. The native vegetation

had been stripped during the previous site grading.

- 3 -

FIELD EXPLORATION

The field exploration for the project was conducted on July 24, 2003. One exploratory

boring was drilled at the location shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface

conditions. The boring was advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers

powered by a truck mounted CME-45B drill rig. The boring was logged by a

representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc.

Samples of the subsoils were taken with 13/s 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. Depths at which the samples were taken

and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Log of Exploratory Boring,

- 4-

FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS

The collapse potential of the subsoils encountered at the site appears consistent with our

previous findings for the non-irrigated areas of the development. The subsurface

conditions and laboratory test results indicate that the debris fan soils generally have

low to moderate collapse potential. There is a risk of settlement and distress to the

building, driveway and utilities founded on the relatively dry debris fan deposits if the

subsoils were to become wetted. The magnitude of settlement will depend on the depth

and extent of wetting and the structure loading. Lightly loaded spread footings placed

on the natural soils should be suitable for support of the residence with a risk of

settlement and distress if the bearing soils become wetted. Precautions to prevent

wetting of the bearing soils need to be taken. These include: 1) proper placement and

compaction of backfill; 2) positive backfill slopes next to foundations; 3) restricted

landscape irrigation and/or use of xeriscape; and 4) gutters to prevent roof runoff near

-5-

DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

FOUNDATIONS

Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory boring and the nature

of the proposed construction, we believe the residence can be founded with spread

footings bearing on the natural soils with some risk of settlement and distress if the

bearing soils become wetted.

The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread

footing foundation system.

1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural soils should be designed for

an allowable bearing pressure of 1,000 psf. Based on experience, we

expect initial settlement of footings designed and constructed as

- 6 -

5) Any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing

level extended down to the natural soils. The exposed soils in footing

area should then be moistened to near optimum and compacted.

6) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing

excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions.

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 55 pcf for

backfill consisting of the on-site 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

- 7 -

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.

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 0.35. Passive pressure

of compacted backfill against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an

equivalent fluid unit weight of 300 pcf. 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 compacted to at least 95% of the maximum

- 8 -

All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95% of

maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill

can consist of the on-site soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock.

UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM

Although free·water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our

experience in the area that local perched groundwater can develop during times of

· heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create

a perched condition. We reco=end below-grade construction, such as basement

areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain

system. An underdrain should not be provided around shallow foundations such as for

crawlspace and garage areas.

....... -"---··. ._1 __ 1 '-· "-"L- '---.<-'--~- _;t:._L- ----111...--1-.C:11

- 9 -

drainage precautions should be observed.during construction and maintained at all times

.after the residence has been completed:

1) Uncontrolled wetting of the foundation excavations and underslab areas

· should be avoided during construction.

2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and

compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density in

pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard

Proctor density in landscape areas.

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.

Free-draining wall backfill should be capped with at least 2 feet of the

on-site soils to reduce surface water infiltration.

- 10-

conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions

encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report,

we should be notified so that 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 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 to 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.

\

\

z ") APPROXIMATE SCALE:

1"=80'

COUNTY ROAD 109

£ti0\S, : :.:.:-:LFioRING 166 , .... J··.

GOLF COURSE

BORING 166

0 0

38/12

5 5/12 5

WC=6.6 00=101

10 15/12 10

.c

LEGEND:

FILL; sandy silt and cloy with gravel, firm, slightly moist, brown.

SAND AND SILT (SM-ML); clayey, scattered gravel and cobbles, stratified, loose to medium dense/medium stiff to very stiff, slightly moist, mixed browns, slightly calcareous.

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-1586.

38; 12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 38 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12 inches.

NOTES:

1. The exploratory boring was drilled ori July 24, 2003 with a 4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger.

2. The exploratory boring location was measured approximately. by pacing from building corner stokes.

3. The exploratory boring elevation was not measured and the log of exploratory boring Is drawn to depth.

4. The exploratory boring location should be considered accurate only to the degree Implied by the method used.

5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring log represent the approximate boundaries

Moisture Content = 6.6 percent Dry Density = 101 pcf Sample of: Sandy Silt and Cloy with Gr ave! From: Boring 166 at 5 Feet

0

- Compression 1-- upon

!<! 2

c 0 ·;; "' 3 "'

wetting

~ ~ a. E 0

0 4 '\ \

5 \

6 """--·-- ~- -- -·-----'- . . -

JEOTECHNICAL, INC. s l TORY TEST RESULTS

A1!E-ltnERG !.1,\llTS UNCONfiNED

UQllW PLASTIC COMl'ltt-:SSIVE

Ui\IIT ll\'0£X STRENGTH

(')'.o) {%) {l'SFJ

JOB NO. 101 196-1

SOILOit

!IEDHOCK TV I•!-;

sandy silt and clay with gravel

clayey sand and silt

Parcel Detail Page 1 of 4

Garfield County Assessor/Treasurer

Parcel Detail Information

Assessor/Treasurer ProQerty Semch I Assessor Sl!bset Query I Assessor Sales Search Clerk_{l;; Recorder Rece12tion Search

Basic Building Characteristi~ I Tax InformatiQn

l:<rrcel.l2etflil I Yl'Jl!el2etflil S<JlesJ2et'lil I Re_~denti<!llCmnmer<;ialJmRLovernentD~t<Jil Land D_eJ:ail I PhotograJ2hli

I Tax Area II Account Number II Parcel Number 1/ Mill Levy I I 090 II R041482 II 239512118166 II 67.224 I

Owner Name and Mailing Address

!ALEXANDER, JUDY

11894 HIGHWAY 50 EASTN04 PMB 207

!CARSON CITY. NV 89701

Parcel Detail Page 2 of4

/RECPT:569197 BK:l206 PG:734 I /RECPT:569195 BK:l206 PG:662 I jRECPT:569194 BK:l206 PG:637 I jRECPT:569192 BK:1206 PG:629 I jRECPT:569191 BK:l206 PG:574 I jRECPT:569190 BK:1063 PG:0578 I jBK:1063 PG:0571 I

Location .

/ Physical Address: //67 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS/

I Subdivision: //IRONBRIDGE PUD I I Land Acres: / 0.361

I Land Sq Ft: / 15,724

I Section II Township II Range I I 12 /I 7 1/ 89 I

Property Tax Valuation Information

II Actual Value II Assessed Value II

Parcel Detail Page 3 of 4

I EXTERIOR wALL: IIWD SIDING I I EXTERIOR WALL: IILOG I I EXTERIOR WALL: II sTONE VEN I I ROOF COVER: IICOMP SHNGL I I ROOF STRUCTURE: IIGABLE I I INTERIOR WALL: IIDECORATIVE I I INTERIOR WALL: IIDRYWALL I I FLOOR: IIHARD TILE I I FLOOR: IICARPET I I FLOOR: IIHARDWOOD I I HEATING FUEL: IlGAS I I HEATING TYPE: IIFORCED AIR I I STORIES: II STORIES 2.0 I I BATHS: I 3.25 I ROOMS: Is I UNITS: II I BEDROOMS: 14 I YEAR BUILT: 112005 I

12/14/2007 10:35 FAX 970 927 0597 SK PEIGHTAL ENGINEERS

S K PFJGHTAI. ENGINEERS T.td STRUCTURAL. CONSULTANTS

To: Tom Coyle Ironbridge Homes 410 Ironbridge Dr

MEMORANDUM

Glenwood Springs, C081601

From: Stephen Peightal, PB

Date: November 27,2007 Revised- December 13, 2007

Re: Ironbridge Lots 147, 148, & 166

141002

On 11-27-07, Jack Albright and I met to review the foundation lift and stabilize plans for the above referenced projects. These plans are as submitted 11-20-07, by Mike Woelke of lronbridge Homes. For the original building design, Jack Albright is the project engineer of record while with S K Peightal Engineers, and continues as a

~- • • '1 .. ••-1~ A.11-.......!-'1-L 11- !\...,..,....,_;.,.+..,...,

HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL

December 13, 2007

Ironbridge Homes, LLC Attn: Dave Ockers 410 Ironbridge Drive Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601

Hepworth, Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 8!601 Phone: 970-945-7988

Fax: 970-945-8454 email: [email protected]

Job No.101 196-1

Subject: Review of Foundation Grouting Program for Mitigation of Building Settlement, Lot 166, Ironbridge, River Bend Way, Garfield County, Colorado

Dear Mr. Ocker:

As requested, we have reviewed the proposal by Denver Grouting/Hayward Baker dated

October 8, 2007 to perform compaction grouting at the subject site. Hepworth-Pawlak

Geotechnical, Inc. previously performed subsurface exploration at the subject site for

evaluation of the building settlement and presented our fmdings in a report dated

November 21, 2007, Job No. 101 196-1.

Hayward Baker Inc. 11575 .Wadsworth Boulevard Broomfield, CO 80020-2752

Tel: 303-469-1136 Fax: 303-469-3581

Iron bridge Homes LLC 410 Iron bridge Drive Glenwood Springs, Co 81601

Phone: (970] 384-3983 Fax: (970] 947-9495 Cell: (970] 404·7404

Attention: Subject:

Gentlemen:

Mr. David Ockers - Construction Manager Foundation Stabilization Lot 166

HAYWARD BAKER -=:.r ==:J ... --=-A Keller Company

October 8, 2007

Denver Grouting/Hayward Baker Inc. (DG/HBI) is pleased to present this proposal for compaction grouting on the above referenced project. This proposal is based upon the following:

On site visit by HBI personnel Information provided by lronbridge and Hepworth Pawlak u .. ~'"...t'~""""'"'o:. nf ~,,,...,..""'c:o:~Ft,l1u ronmnlPtPti nrn1Prt~ ~1mil!:tr in nohlrP ~nti etf"nnP

recommendation as to the treatment depth and location of the grout holes.

The primary intent of the grouting program is to strengthen and densey the soils in-situ to minimize future movement. Some minor positive lift may occur during the stabilization process. It is also possible that slab on grade will be adversely affected. Actual fmal elevation recovery will be a function of:

Structure Reaction Utility location Actual in-situ soil conditions.

If the grouting in itself does not adequately re-level the structure to an acceptable elevation, than hydraulic jacking of the structure may be warranted. Pads would need to be dug and placed on top of the grouted columns. Hydraulic Jacks would be placed in a jack stool such that simultaneous jacking and shimming could occur. A more detailed means and method statement along with separate pricing will be provided at a later time if needed.

Micro-piles or resistance piers are also an option for stabilization andre-leveling though both techniques are a bit more intrusive than grouting as they require significant excavation and structure attachment.

footing for contamment purposes. This will be a field call based on actual field conditions and structure reaction.

We anticipate the ultimate depths of the holes could be on the order of 60'. Due to the nature of the soils, small specialty drills will be needed to advance grout casing to the required depths.

Grouting of each stage will continue until one or more of the following cut-off criteria are attailled: (stage defmed as 1 linear foot)

• Pressure reading of 400 psi is recorded • Injection volume of 4.0 to 5.0 cubic feet • Detection of undesirable movement

We have included our schedule of prices and list of general terms and conditions herein. We trust this proposal is of interest to you and look forward to being of service. If we can be of any assistance in clarifying any points in this proposal please contact us at (303) 469-1136.

~tech HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL

November 21, 2007

Ironbridge Homes, LLC Attn: Mike Woelke 410 Ironbridge Drive Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601

Hepworth~ Pawlak Geotechnical, lnc. 5020 County Road !54 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 8160! Phone' 970-945-7988

F"" 970-945-8454 entail: hpgeo@hpget)Ledl.cutn

Job No.l01196-l

Subject: Interim Findings, Subsurface Exploration for Evaluation of Wetted Depth and Building Settlement, Lots 165 and 166, Ironbridge, River Bend Way, Garfield County, Colorado

Dear Mr. Woelke:

As requested, Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. perfonned subsurface exploration at

the subject site. The study was conducted as verbally authorized by Dave Ockers. The

data obtained and our fmdings based on the subsurface conditions encountered are

presented in this report.

- 2-

166 overlying dense river gravel alluvium. Previous drilling on Lot 165 encountered river

gravel alluvium at a depth of about 60 feet. Results oflaboratory testing performed on

samples taken from the borings are presented on Figure 2 and summarized in Table I.

No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. The depth of wetting

appeared to be on the order of 35 to 40 feet at Boring 1, 15 to 20 feet at Boring 2 and

about 10 feet at Boring 3. The soils encountered at greater depth were slightly moist.

Preliminary Findings: The soils below the western part of the residence on Lot 166

appear to have been deep wetted resulting in the building settlement. The compaction

grouting of the subsoils could terminate at the bottom of current wetting with a risk of

future settlement if the subsurface wetting continues. The drainage swale needs to be

sloped at a minimum of 5% or lined with an impervious membrane. Roof runoff needs to

be piped to the swale or into a separate drainage pipe sloped to daylight. Additional

investigation of the water problem needs to be made at Lot 165 to prevent leakage into

the crawlspace. This could require video taping and/or excavating the roof drain piping

to verify it is water tight. We will provide additional subsurface information from Boring

4 when available.

- 3 -

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for remedial design

purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our

information. As the 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

to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of

excavations and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer.

If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know.

Respectfully Submitted,

HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.

z ) APPROXIMA ~ SCALE:

1"=80

(

LOT BOUNDARY ~ (TYP)

/ '-.. ' / / '-.. '

/ '-..'-..

'-.. // LOT 14? I

" I 1 !"-_ "'- "'- BUILDING I 1 "'- "'- "'- ENVELOPE/

I JeeR'" .:~~~~~:)/ I

\ 0 '7 _, \ LOT 148 1

"' // \\ '\ I

\

( BORING 149 \ '- \ _)

\ 0 \ \...-- / \ LOT 149 ) ,.,

\ / / \ \ /

\ \/

\ \

COUNTY ROAD 109

GOLF COURSE

0

10

20

30

1i)

·"'

BORING 1 SWCORNER

9/12

5/12 WC=14.8 DD=109 -200=61 3/12 WC=15.9 DD=105 -200=74 6/12

8/12 WC=14.3 DD=109 -200=59

4/12 WC=16.3 DD=100 -200=79

BORING 2 NESIDE

10/12

3/12 WC=16.8 DD=103 -200=92

5/12

8/12 WC=6.6 DD=101 -200=72

23/12 WC=3.1 DD=115 -200=63

46/12

BORING3 NECORNER

2/12

9/12

35/12 WC=10.5 DD=127 -200=83 12/12 WC=2.6 DD=95 -200=70 12/12

BORING4 ELEV.=

0

10

20

30

¥.

LEGEND:

~ . . . .

9/12

T

Fill; sandy silt with gravel, typically firm and moist to very moist, mixed brown.

Sand and Silt (SM-ML); slightly sandy to very sandy, scattered gravel to gravelly zones, soft to medium stiff and moist to very moist to very stiff and slightly moist with depth, light brown. (Debris Fan Deposits)

Gravel, Cobbles and Boulders (GM-GP); dense, slightly moist, brown, rounded rock. (River Alluvium)

Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-inch I. D. California liner sample.

Drive sample blow count; indicates that 9 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California sampler 12 inches.

Caved depth following drilling.

Practical drilling refusal in dense gravel alluvium.

OTECHNICAL, INC. Job No. 101196-1

)RY TEST RESULTS Lots 165 & 166

ATIERBERG llMITS UNCONFINED

llQUID PlASTIC COMPRESSIVE SOIL OR 11M IT INDEX STRENGTH BEDROCK 1YPE

(%) (%) (PSF)

Sandy silt with gravel


Very sandy silt with gravel

Sandy silt

Very sandy silt

Slightly sandy silt



Sandy silt fill


j

-·-·

~ ·'

·'

"~

" ~

1 I ! ;

I

I

·APPROVED S(Jl!JECf TO NOTED

EXCEl'TIONS & INSPECUONF GARFIELD coUNTY

BUILDING DEPARTMEN'l

DatelZFiEi~ "':I~Y(, NO INSPECTION WITHOliT

TIIESE PLANS ON sm page of

·~ !I 1 .I ,I

JL

LIFT or STIIBILIZE POINT LIFT POINT G STABILIZE POINT

.... J. -+-+-_f_=-1 ~j

;--+-+--L-') ~/

() 8 ()

p'--r · Garfield County Building & Sanitation Department 108 8th Street, Suite #401 Glenwood...

Documents

Transcript of p'--r · Garfield County Building & Sanitation Department 108 8th Street, Suite #401 Glenwood...