Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
B11-0049
i���������� ����� �� �������� ���a� ���������� �-����e ii�na Id �C3�4c�ci_'�stiwn �_ _�, ��.t� �� I l�e���A�tieq Irih��it+ibl��`j 1Q � �LI�G Fp�'�IN� ._ �Y�� r� �, � � A� N�� .�^i _� � _ _ ..�. __ G_-_ . i�Q____ ����F.����`o�ri���E�tra,�t��vi___._..__.._� �Vt�� �� , �� � �� N� _,� _� « t 190 .. _��I.��`��r�vt��___ j Y��._ � � � o�P�� .:����.�._.,... �- - . _. _..Y.__ �,�R,_,..._. _� �__p ; 9�t?�__ �1.��=#'����i�.__ _ _r n .� __?:���_ �_ .�__�.Aw �� Fd� � + �9Q u_V F�l,PU1�-tlnt�c��t��aut��r��_,,..,..-_..,___'Y�'r.�.._�.,._ � �. �� �v ��.�... :---- __-_�. �..�__ �__ __..�.... ,_� ,..___..___.�.�.._.�. �20 PI.AflE3-K�c�u�{htC3 W 1�,__�.,,.�._.��1���, i� Rp ,�_,.. ���.. N� � ' 23�� PLNi�-Y��u h%ifv�t�e �t�6 � �� �p Na ' ��U �_ �I.M�r�a�����!�w��,_._.� v.�� Y�� R 1 �� ^ N�� __. �w_ __ _ ' �10 MiE�tia�i�atln�.__...__-. � 1'�� � �.. �A No .� .��_.�..m� _ __ .�..______._. ` � �1��� PLAiV-IG�_Feiunel�tion�l�rf_ Y�� � � � AP Nr� _ "� 3Q t3�.�t��m�F�n�in���__�_�_.�,_.._.� Ye�_ N2.� _1..�.m_ _A� �N� �_ � _._, �_ ��... _ _ ...,.. . _ ,d___.__e.._ ' SO � �i�C��-1��ui�tian ,, . ,1��� �t� i �Ak� Nd ._ _ �__.�.�,� " 60 �Lt�(��h��tr��k�I�ii� 'Y�� R � 9 A� Na �__ t, ��� _w�! �LI�C_R�+�� _.�._.. Y�� _�,..,. � ..._,��__, �Q �" 22�.�_�_��_�i,�ta.ft_�F�AM1hi�.__ � �`Y�� ��t__ :9 R Ap Na �,..__. _w _�._ � . � 1�U $�L�G�H n�i �V�s� i3 1� A� N� _ — -- - — � .�M � ��� �9n ___ 1����t�o-R �n�� _� � � 4�� � � __ �� !�� . � ��„� ._.. � _ _ _ r .. _. ��a ����ii F�r��i �_ ,��� �_�� i; _�� �,� , , .,_ _ _ � � _ i�m. � r�� , e�Y" !�fs�F' �;t� ,, �'r�� } 6� �. ��' � �� __ �{' i` � �36� � f���v`�i�i�n�.Gr� _... � �'�� i �t_�_ � .,�� �� t� -i ,� � �ao � i�i,�r�l���k���,�t;i�1�� _ ���� � � � �,. 4�� �� � _n �.�,� ._ { �`�"� ' �t����� . �L�3�a-��'�r<�! _� � ��� --���_ � � �.�.�.T. �.�._ n.�� �,._ .. ,__�___ w_,_ �,, #�� . _..,�.,:,_ � `�...��_ � �vi���i•��u����._,_,.�.�._,_._.��.,..�.,._L.�'!��,J��....�,..,��....�,�.:��.�...._��_........u..J "��lG!�q�a�i�s� ���� � '„a�;�� a May 17, 201 1 Mr. Bill Gibson Town of Vail Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657 RE: JAFFE DUPLEX, LOT 3, 1456 WESTHAVEN, VAIL, CO Dear Bill: In response to your May 17, 2011 e -mail regarding the building height of the duplex, we will be revising all 8:12 roof pitches to 7 1/2:12. This revision will keep all effected ridge heights below the 33 feet height limit. We will adjust our drawings and copy you on the revisions. Also included is the May 5, 2011 report prepared by HP Geotech addressing the debris flow conditions. Please let me know if you have any further questions. We look forward to getting started with construction. Sincerely, SEGERBERG, MAYHEW & ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS Kurt A. Segerberg, A.I.A. President KAS /Irt enc. fi MAY 18 2011 TOWN OF VAIL Segerberg, Mayhew & Associates Architects, P.C., A.I.A. Mail: P.O. Box 4700 Vail, CO 81658 e-mail: info @smarchs.com http: / /www.smarchs.com Main Office: Eagle -Vail • 101 Eagle Road, Bldg 6 • Avon, CO 81620 • phone: 970 476 4433 • fax: 970 476 4608 Denver Office: 12600 West Colfax Avenue, Suite A -140 Lakewood, CO 80215 phone: 303 623 3355 fax: 303 623 2262 DRQII D1y7 . : l JJFPl1.0RTH- PAVvLAK GEOTECHNIC-i May 5, 2011 I I Tom Jaffe MAY 18 2 011 U IS 15 West Gore Creek Drive, #E Vail, Colorado 81657 TOWN OF VAIL lob No. 110 364A Subject: Evaluation of Potential Debris Flow Impacts to Proposed Duplex Residence, Lot 3, Glen Lyon Subdivision, Westhaven Circle and Greenhill Court, Vail, Colorado Dear Mr. Jaffe: As requested by Kurt Segerberg with Segerberg Mayhew Architects, we have evaluated the debris flow conditions at the subject site with respect to the proposed Site Plan dated April 22, 2011 and more recent rough grading plan provided by Glenn Palmer of Alpine Engineering on May 3, 2011. We previously conducted a subsoil study for design of foundations at the site and presented our findings in a report dated November 29, 2010, Job No. 110 364A. The proposed building footprint is similar to that shown in our previous report but has shifted slightly to the west and rotated slightly counterclockwise. The shift and rotation provides a little more room along the east side to work with grade changes and surface drainage. The grade change between the uphill Lot 2 and the subject site is proposed to be handled by a combination of retaining walls and fairly deep swales. We suggested to Glenn Palmer to revise the upper retaining wall of the spa area to be 1 foot above the drainage swale for freeboard. The driveway entrance for the uphill, primary unit has been shifted downhill to the west and the ground floor level has been raised somewhat which will provide at least one foot of fall from the building to the drainage pan of Westhaven Circle. Because potential debris flow impact to the lot will be from uphill across Westhaven Circle, we recommended that a civil engineer design the grading for the project. We understand that Alpine Engineering has been retained and is working to complete the grading plan started by the architect. The subject site is located in a moderate debris flow hazard area according to Town of Vail (2000). The potential flood impact to the property is from the drainage basin above the Glen Lyon Subdivision and flow across the alluvial fan upon which the property is located. Considering the property location in the lower part of the moderate hazard area, and that considerable development has occurred uphill in the subdivision, it appears that the potential impact to the property would be mainly from mud flood rather than debris flow. Mitigation of this type of flow can usually consist of on -site drainage features to route the mud flood flows down Westhaven Circle and around the east side of the lot by Tom Jaffe May 5, 2011 Page 2 earth berms, well defined swales and retaining structures. We recommend these features have a minimum depth or height of at least 2 feet and be designed to deflect flows downhill rather than intercept flows that could cause flow material to backup on the property. Based on these conditions and the rough grading plan provided by Glenn Palmer, in our opinion, the grading plan and building layout for the project can be designed such that the development will not increase the hazard to adjacent public or private properties including buildings, structures and road and utility right -of -ways. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GE CHNICAL, INC. P c 3 Steven L. Pawlak, P. 3 22 Rev. by: DEH ©N a e SLP /ksw cc: Segerberg Mayhew .Architects - Kurt Segerberg (_kse erberg smarchs.com Reference: Town of Vail, 2000, Official Debris Flow Hazard Map, Town of Vail, prepared by Town of Vail, Vail, Colorado (adopted by Town Council on October 17, 2000). Alpine Engineering - Glenn Pahner, PE patmer coal �u�e� May 9, 2011 Mr. Martin Haeberle Chief Building Official Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657 RE: JAFFE DUPLEX, LOT 3, 1456 WESTHAVEN, GLEN LYON SUBDIVISION, RESPONSE TO BUILDING DEPARTMENT COMMENTS DATED APRIL 14, 201 1. Dear Martin: Per your request, enclosed are four sets of revised construction documents. The most notable changes to the duplex have been the modifications to the site and grading plan and some slight adjustments to the primary and secondary floor elevations. We raised the entry level and upper level of the primary unit by 1' -6 ". The primary entry drive was moved to the west to provide better drainage for this unit. The secondary unit was raised 6" and a site retention wall system is being designed for the east side of the secondary unit. The building footprint locations on the site remain the same. The revisions and responses to your April 14, 2011 letter are as follows: Architectural Comments: 1. Heat tape will be used on all gutters and downspouts. See note on Sheet A1.0 snow fence retention devices will not be used. 2. Attic ventilation will be provided though gable roof at secondary unit. See Sheet A5.1. Five hundred (500) square feet will be ventilated with a minimum vent size of 1.6 square feet per 1203.2 IBC. 3. Attic access will be provided as shown on Sheet A3.4. Sheet Survey Attached are four stamped surveys as revised by Eagle Valley Engineering per Public Works request dated April 5, 2011. Sheet A2.0 The grading plan has been reviewed by Alpine Engineering and HP Geotechnical Inc. The plan has addressed the moderate debris hazard flow. Segerberg, Mayhew & Associates Architects, P.C., A.I.A. Mail: P.O. Box 4700 Vail, CO 81658 e-mail: info @smarchs.com http: / /www.smarchs.com Main Office: Eagle -Vail • 101 Eagle Road, Bldg. 6 • Avon, CO 81620 • phone: 970 476 4433 fax: 970 476 4608 Denver Office: 12600 West Colfax Avenue, Suite A -140 Lakewood, CO 80215 phone: 303 623 3355 fax 303 623 2262 Mr. Martin Haeberle May 9, 2011 Page Two 2. Retaining walls will be reviewed by structural engineer and geotechnical engineer. Design is being coordinated. Sheet A7.0 1. Party wall has been extended to under side of roof sheathing. See Detail 4/A7.0. 2. Gable separation requires 5/8" Type "X" Gyp. Bd. at ceiling and wall separations. See Detail 1 /A6.0. 3. Regarding spa cover, see Detail 5/A7.0. Also see attached Specification. Spa to be provided by "Hot Springs Company ". Sheet A8.0 1. All windows and glazed doors to have .30 U.factor. See Window Schedule note Sheet A8.0. 2. See stone veneer attachment clarification note on masonry addendum Detail 1 W.O. 3. See note for weep location in stone veneer. Detail 1 /A7.0. Sheet A8.1 1. See clarification for corner insulation detail 14/A8.1 and 15/ A8.1. Sheet A9.0 thru 9.4 1. See notes on Sheet A9.0 and A9.3 of Electrical Plans for locating permanent certificate per ResCheck requirement. 2. See located carbon monoxide detectors on Electrical Plans. Typical shown outside all bedrooms. Sheets 19.0, A9.2, A9.3 and A9.4. Structural Comments 1. See attached response dated April 18, 2011 from S.A. Miro Structural Engineers. Mr. Martin Haeberle May 9, 2011 Page Three 2. Foundation drainage will be reviewed during the excavation and foundation work. Generally, drainage will be installed at all perimeter footings. Plumbing Comments 1. Please refer to civil engineering drawings and notes. Mechanical Comments 1. See Mechanical Sheet A3.0. Electrical Comments 1. See notes on Sheet A9.0 by New Electrical. 2. See notes on Sheet A9.0 by New Electrical. 3. See notes on Sheet A9.0 by New Electrical. Load Calculations 1. See attached load calculations per 220-80 for heat tape. Please let me know if you need any further clarifications. We look forward to getting started with construction. Sincerely, SEGERBERG, MAYHEW & ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS Kurt A. Segerberg, A.I.A. President KAS /Irt enc. cc: Bill Gibson LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL P.O. Box 4700 VAIL, COLORADO 81658 (970) 476 -4433 Fax (970) 476 -4608 TO Martin Haeberle Chief Building Official Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657 WE ARE SENDING YOU ® Attached ❑ Shop drawings ® Prints ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order DATE 05-09-11 JOB NO. 33006.00 ATTENTION Martin RE: Jaffe Duplex — Lot 3 Permit Set ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Transparencies COPIES DATE I NO. I DESCRIPTION 4 05 -03 -11 1 1 Jaffe Duplex — Lot 3 Permit Set 05 -03 -11 ❑ For approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ® For your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO File SIGNED: hurt If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notes us at once IQ� MAY 10 2011 Ul TOWN OF VAIL G( H ortech HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL May 5, 2011 Hepworth- Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. 5020 County R(Qd 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 816LII Phone: 970.945 -7988 Fax: 970. 945.8454 email; hPgrr> "ipgeoteeik "fim Tom Jane 1815 West Gore Creek Drive, #E Vail Colorado 81657 Job No. 110 364A Subject: Evaluation of Potential Debris Flow Impacts to Proposed Duplex Residence, Lot 3, Glen Lyon Subdivision, Westhaven Circle and Greenhill Court, Vail, Colorado Dear Mr. Jaffe: As requested by Kurt Segerberg with Segerberg Mayhew Architects, we have evaluated the debris flow conditions at the subject site with respect to the proposed Site Plan dated April 22, 2011 and more recent rough grading plan provided by Glenn Palmer of Alpine Engineering on May 3, 2011. We previously conducted a subsoil study for design of foundations at the site and presented our findings in a report dated November 29, 2010, Job No. 110 364A. The proposed building footprint is similar to that shown in our previous report but has shifted slightly to the west and rotated slightly counterclockwise. The shift and rotation provides a little more room along the east side to work with grade changes and surface drainage. The grade change between the uphill Lot 2 and the subject site is proposed to be handled by a combination of retaining walls and fairly deep swales. We suggested to Glenn Palmer to revise the upper retaining wall of the spa area to be i foot above the drainage Swale for freeboard. The driveway entrance for the uphill, primary unit has been shifted downhill to the west and the ground floor level has been raised somewhat which will provide at least one foot of fall from the building to the drainage pan of Westhaven Circle. Because potential debris flow impact to the lot will be from uphill across Westhaven Circle, we recommended that a civil engineer design the grading for the project. We understand that Alpine Engineering has been retained and is working to complete the grading plan started by the architect. The subject site is located in a moderate debris flow hazard area according to Town of Vail (2000). The potential flood impact to the property is from the drainage basin above the Glen Lyon Subdivision and flow across the alluvial fan upon which the property is located. Considering the property location in the lower part of the moderate hazard area, and that considerable development has occurred uphill in the subdivision, it appears that the potential impact to the property would be mainly from mud flood rather than debris flow. Mitigation of this type of flow can usually consist of on -site drainage features to route the mud flood flows down Westhaven Circle and around the east side of the lot by Parker 303 -841 -7119 • Colorado Springs 719- 633 -5562) 0 Silverthorne 970 -465 -1999 Tom Jaffe May 5, 2011 Page 2 earth berms, well defined swales and retaining structures. We recommend these features have a minimum depth or height of at least 2 feet and be designed to deflect flows downhill rather than intercept flows that could cause flow material to backup on the property. Based on these conditions and the rough grading plan provided by Glenn Palmer, in our opinion, the grading plan and building layout for the project can be designed such that the development will not increase the hazard to adjacent public or private properties including buildings, structures and road and utility right -of -ways. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GECHNICAL, INC. Steven L. Pawlak, P.p 15222 , Rev. by: DEH �Jll 0o ryA1 ; . SLP/ksw cc: Segerberg Mayhew Architects — Kurt Segerberg ( Reference: Town of Vail, 2000, Official Debris Flow Hazard Map, Toti n or Vail, prepared by Town of Vail, Vail, Colorado (adopted by Town Council on October 17, 2000). Alpine Engineering — Glenn Palmer, PE ( palmer(cr�alpviecivil.com ) Job No. 110 364A Ge9tech April 18, 2011 Kurt Segerberg Segerberg Mayhew Architects 101 Eagle Road, Bldg. 6 Avon, CO 81620 Denver RE: Jaffe Duplex — Lot 3 Glen Lyon TOV Building Department Review Comment Responses Abu Dhabi S. A. Miro Project No. 10 -146 Summit County Dear Kurt: Architecture Engineering Following are my responses to the Town of Vail building department review comments dated April Project Management 14, 2011 related to the structural drawings. Sheet S1.0 1. Both continuous and periodic special inspections of the soils are included in the schedule of special inspections. These are listed in Table 1704.7 near the bottom of the sheet. We have reviewed the soils report and it appears that the inspections listed in this table satisfy the requirements of the soils report. 2. Additional information pertaining to the reporting of discrepancies has been added to the statement of special inspections. 3. Owner /Contractor to address. 4. Concrete general note "A" has been revised to indicate ACI 318 -08. 1. Architect to address. Soils Report 1. The requirement for inspection of the bearing soils is shown in Table 1704.7 on sheet S1.0. 2. Architect to address. 3. Architect to address. If you have any questions please call. Sincerely, S. A. Miro, Inc. J . 4, M Steven J. Marshall, P.E. S.E. Associate S. A. MIRO, INC. www.samiro.com 610 plain St. Suite 11, Frisco, CO 970 - 668 -0747 CNJ( REScheck Software Version 4.4.0 Compliance Certificate Project Title: Jaffe Duplex Energy Code: 2009 IECC Location: Vail, Colorado Construction Type: Single Family Building Orientation: Bldg. orientation unspecified Glazing Area Percentage: 26% Heating Degree Days: 9248 Climate Zone: 6 Construction Site: Owner /Agent: Designer /Contractor: Lot 3 Tom Jaffe Kurt Segerberg Glen Lyon Division Segerberg Mayhew & Associates Vail, CO 81658 P.O. Box 4700 Vail, CO 81658 Ceiling 1: Cathedral Ceiling (no attic) 4538 49.0 0.0 100 Wall 1: Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 7425 21.0 0.0 306 Orientation: Unspecified Window 2: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low -E 1692 0.300 508 SHGC: 0.26 Orientation: Unspecified Door 1: Solid 135 0.500 68 Orientation: Unspecified Door 2: Glass 222 0.300 67 SHGC: 0.21 Orientation: Unspecified Basement Wall 1: Solid Concrete or Masonry 695 15.0 0.0 33 Orientation: Unspecified Wall height: 10.0' Depth below grade: 10.0' Insulation depth: 10.0' Floor 1: All -Wood Joist/Truss:Over Unconditioned Space 1180 38.0 0.0 31 Floor 2: All -Wood Joist/Truss:Over Outside Air 125 38.0 0.0 3 Floor 3: Slab- On- Grade:Unheated 210 5.0 156 Insulation depth: 4.0' Floor 4: Slab -On- Grade: Heated 212 5.0 158 Insulation depth: 4.0' Compliance Statement: The proposed building design described here is consistent with the building plans, specifications, and other calculations submitted with the permit application. The proposed buildin has been designed to meet the 2009 IECC requirements in REScheck Version 4.4.0 and to comply with the mandatory requireme s ' ed in the ES079ck Inspe tion Checklist. Name - Title ignature Dat Project Title: Jaffe Duplex Report date: 02/15/11 Data filename: F: \prj \jaffe2- Lot3FromSarah\ Archive \Progress12- 16- 10 \ResCheck \Jaffe- Lot3.rck Page 1 of 4 • . trade-off Compliance: 4.8% Better Than Code Maximum UA: 1502 Your UA: 1430 The % Better or Worse Than Code index reflects how close to compliance the house is based on code trade -off rules. It DOES NOT provide an estimate of energy use or cost relative to a minimum -code home. LJ REScheck Software Version 4.4.0 Inspection Checklist Ceilings: ❑ Ceiling 1: Cathedral Ceiling (no attic), R -49.0 cavity insulation Comments: Above -Grade Walls: ❑ Wall 1: Wood Frame, 16" o.c., R -21.0 cavity insulation Comments: Basement Walls: ❑ Basement Wall 1: Solid Concrete or Masonry, 10.0' ht / 10.0' bg / 10.0' insul, R -15.0 cavity insulation Comments: Windows: ❑ Window 2: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low -E, U- factor: 0.300 For windows without labeled U- factors, describe features: #Panes Frame Type Thermal Break? Yes No Comments: Doors: ❑ Door 1: Solid, U- factor: 0.500 Comments: Up to 40 sq.ft. of this door is exempt from the U- factor requirement. ❑ Door 2: Glass, U- factor: 0.300 Comments: Floors: ❑ Floor 1: All -Wood Joist/Truss:Over Unconditioned Space, R -38.0 cavity insulation Comments: Floor insulation is installed in permanent contact with the underside of the subfloor decking. ❑ Floor 2: All -Wood Joist/Truss:Over Outside Air, R -38.0 cavity insulation Comments: Floor insulation is installed in permanent contact with the underside of the subfloor decking. ❑ Floor 3: Slab -On- Grade: Unheated, 4.0' insulation depth, R -5.0 continuous insulation Comments: Slab insulation extends down from the top of the slab to at least 4.0 ft. OR down to at least the bottom of the slab then horizontally for a total distance of 4.0 ft. ❑ Floor 4: Slab -On- Grade: Heated, 4.0' insulation depth. R -5.0 continuous insulation Comments: Slab insulation extends down from the top of the slab to at least 4.0 ft. OR down to at least the bottom of the slab then horizontally for a total distance of 4.0 ft. Air Leakage: ❑ Joints (including rim joist junctions), attic access openings, penetrations, and all other such openings in the building envelope that are sources of air leakage are sealed with caulk, gasketed, weatherstripped or otherwise sealed with an air barrier material, suitable film or solid material. ❑ Air barrier and sealing exists on common walls between dwelling units, on exterior walls behind tubs /showers, and in openings between window /door jambs and framing. ❑ Recessed lights in the building thermal envelope are 1) type IC rated and ASTM E283 labeled and 2) sealed with a gasket or caulk between the housing and the interior wall or ceiling covering. Project Title: Jaffe Duplex Data filename: F: \prj \jaffe2- Lot3FromSarah\A rchive \Progress12- 16- 10 \ResCheck \Jaffe- Lot3.rck Report date: 02/15/11 Page 2 of 4 Ll Access doors separating conditioned from unconditioned space are weather- stripped and insulated (without insulation compression or damage) to at least the level of insulation on the surrounding surfaces. Where loose fill insulation exists, a baffle or retainer is installed to maintain insulation application. ❑ Wood - burning fireplaces have gasketed doors and outdoor combustion air. Air Sealing and Insulation: ❑ Building envelope airtightness and insulation installation complies by either 1) a post rough -in blower door test result of less than 7 ACH at 33.5 psf OR 2) the following items have been satisfied: (a) Air barriers and thermal barrier: Installed on outside of air - permeable insulation and breaks or joints in the air barrier are filled or repaired. (b) Ceiling /attic: Air barrier in any dropped ceiling /soffit is substantially aligned with insulation and any gaps are sealed. (c) Above -grade walls: Insulation is installed in substantial contact and continuous alignment with the building envelope air barrier. (d) Floors: Air barrier is installed at any exposed edge of insulation. (e) Plumbing and wiring: Insulation is placed between outside and pipes. Batt insulation is cut to fit around wiring and plumbing, or sprayed/blown insulation extends behind piping and wiring. (f) Comers, headers, narrow framing cavities, and rim joists are insulated. (9) Shower /tub on exterior wall: Insulation exists between showers /tubs and exterior wall. Sunrooms: ❑ Sunrooms that are thermally isolated from the building envelope have a maximum fenestration U- factor of 0.50 and the maximum skylight U- factor of 0.75. New windows and doors separating the sunroom from conditioned space meet the building thermal envelope requirements. Materials Identification and Installation: ❑ Materials and equipment are installed in accordance with the manufacturer's installation instructions. Insulation is installed in substantial contact with the surface being insulated and in a manner that achieves the rated R- value. Materials and equipment are identified so that compliance can be determined. r - 1 Manufacturer manuals for all installed heating and cooling equipment and service water heating equipment have been provided. ❑ Insulation R- values and glazing U- factors are clearly marked on the building plans or specifications. Duct Insulation: Lj Supply ducts in attics are insulated to a minimum of R -8. All other ducts in unconditioned spaces or outside the building envelope are insulated to at least R -6. Duct Construction and Testing: Lj Building framing cavities are not used as supply ducts. All joints and seams of air ducts, air handlers, filter boxes, and building cavities used as return ducts are substantially airtight by means of tapes, mastics, liquid sealants, gasketing or other approved closure systems. Tapes, mastics, and fasteners are rated UL 181A or UL 181 B and are labeled according to the duct construction. Metal duct connections with equipment and /or fittings are mechanically fastened. Crimp joints for round metal ducts have a contact lap of at least 1 1/2 inches and are fastened with a minimum of three equally spaced sheet -metal screws. Exceptions: Joint and seams covered with spray polyurethane foam. Where a partially inaccessible duct connection exists, mechanical fasteners can be equally spaced on the exposed portion of the joint so as to prevent a hinge effect. Continuously welded and locking -type longitudinal joints and seams on ducts operating at less than 2 in. w.g. (500 Pa). F Duct tightness test has been performed and meets one of the following test criteria: (1) Postconstruction leakage to outdoors test: Less than or equal to 673.9 cfm (8 cfm per 100 ft2 of conditioned floor area). (2) Postconstruction total leakage test (including air handler enclosure): Less than or equal to 1010.9 cfm (12 cfm per 100 ft2 of conditioned floor area) pressure differential of 0.1 inches w.g. (3) Rough -in total leakage test with air handler installed: Less than or equal to 505.4 cfm (6 cfm per 100 ft2 of conditioned floor area) when tested at a pressure differential of 0.1 inches w.g. (4) Rough -in total leakage test without air handler installed: Less than or equal to 337.0 cfm (4 cfm per 100 ft2 of conditioned floor area). Heating and Cooling Equipment Sizing: F - 1 Additional requirements for equipment sizing are included by an inspection for compliance with the International Residential Code. For systems serving multiple dwelling units documentation has been submitted demonstrating compliance with 2009 IECC Commercial Building Mechanical and /or Service Water Heating (Sections 503 and 504). Circulating Service Hot Water Systems: Project Title: Jaffe Duplex Report date: 02/15/11 Data filename: F: \prj \jaffe2- Lot3FromSarah\ Archive \Progress12- 16- 10 \ResCheck \Jaffe- Lot3.rck Page 3 of 4 ' • o Circulating service hot water pipes are insulated to R -2. ❑ Circulating service hot water systems include an automatic or accessible manual switch to turn off the circulating pump when the system is not in use. Heating and Cooling Piping Insulation: Lj HVAC piping conveying fluids above 105 degrees F or chilled fluids below 55 degrees F are insulated to R -3. Swimming Pools: ❑ Heated swimming pools have an on /off heater switch. F1 Pool heaters operating on natural gas or LPG have an electronic pilot light. ❑ Timer switches on pool heaters and pumps are present. Exceptions: Where public health standards require continuous pump operation. Where pumps operate within solar- and /or waste - heat - recovery systems. Heated swimming pools have a cover on or at the water surface. For pools heated over 90 degrees F (32 degrees C) the cover has a minimum insulation value of R -12. Exceptions: Covers are not required when 60% of the heating energy is from site - recovered energy or solar energy source. Lighting Requirements: ❑ A minimum of 50 percent of the lamps in permanently installed lighting fixtures can be categorized as one of the following: (a) Compact fluorescent (b) T -8 or smaller diameter linear fluorescent (c) 40 lumens per watt for lamp wattage <= 15 (d) 50 lumens per watt for lamp wattage > 15 and <= 40 (e) 60 lumens per watt for lamp wattage > 40 Other Requirements: Snow- and ice - melting systems with energy supplied from the service to a building shall include automatic controls capable of shutting off the system when a) the pavement temperature is above 50 degrees F, b) no precipitation is falling, and c) the outdoor temperature is above 40 degrees F (a manual shutoff control is also permitted to satisfy requirement V). Certificate: ❑ A permanent certificate is provided on or in the electrical distribution panel listing the predominant insulation R- values; window U- factors; type and efficiency of space- conditioning and water heating equipment. The certificate does not cover or obstruct the visibility of the circuit directory label, service disconnect label or other required labels. b ' NOTES TO FIELD: (Building Department Use Only) \ �V - 31 Project Title: Jaffe Duplex Report date: 02115111 Data filename: F: \prj\jaffe Lot3FromSarah\ Archive \Progressl2- 16- 10 \ResCheck \Jaffe- Lot3.rck Page 4 of 4 f 2009 IECC Energy Efficiency Certificate Insulati . Ceiling / Roof 49.00 Wall 21.00 Floor / Foundation 38.00 Ductwork (unconditioned spaces): Glass & D.. . Window 0.30 0.26 Door 0.30 0.21 ; Heating & Cooling Heating System: Cooling System: Water Heater: Name: Date: Comments: v / v� 6-2 c � r H G( tech HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970-945-7988 Fax: 970-945-8454 email: lipgeo@hpgeotech.com SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED DUPLEX LOT 3, GLEN LYON SUBDIVISION VAIL, COLORADO JOB NO. 110 364A NOVEMBER 29, 2010 PREPARED FOR: TOM JAFFE 1815 W. GORE CREEK DRIVE, #E VAIL, COLORADO 81657 Parker 303 -841 -7119 • Colorado Springs 719- 633 -5562 • Silverthorne 970 -468 -1989 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ......................................... ............................... - 1 - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION .................................................. ............................... - I - SITECONDITIONS .................................................................... ............................... - 2- GEOLOGICCONDITIONS ........................................................ ............................... - 2- FIELDEXPLORATION ............................................................. ............................... - 2- SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................................... ............................... - 3 - DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................. ............................... - 3 - FOUNDATIONS ..................................................................... ............................... - 3 - FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS .......................... ............................... - 4- FLOOR SLABS ....................................................................... ............................... - 6- LTNDERDRAIN SYSTEM ....................................................... ............................... - 6- SITE GRADING ..................................................................... ............................... - 7- SURFACE DRAINAGE .......................................................... ............................... - 7- LIMITATIONS ........................................................................... ............................... - 8- FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 4 - SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residential duplex to be located at Lot 3, Glen Lyon Subdivision, Vail, 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 proposal for geotechnical engineering services to Tom Jaffe dated December 14, 2009. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted 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 or swell and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed duplex will be a three story wood frame structure stepped into the hillside with a garage on the first level of the secondary unit and the main level of the primary unit. Garage floors will be slab -on- grade. Grading for the duplex is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 4 to 12 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction. 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. Job No. 110 364A C-(�S&GCh -2- SITE CONDITIONS The site was vacant of structures and snow cover was about one foot at the time of our exploration. Vegetation consists of sage brush, grass and weeds. The site is located on a north facing hillside and the ground surface slopes down at a grade of about 20 percent in the building area. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The site is located on a large alluvial fan that is shown to hav moderate hazard debris flow according to the official Town of Vail maps of geologic hazards adopted October 17, 2000. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on November 12, 2010. Two 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 augers powered by a track - mounted CME 45 drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 2 inch I. D. spoon sampler. The sampler was 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 Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. Job No. 110 364A WE R_ -3- SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. The subsoils consist of about one foot of topsoil overlying medium dense, silty sand and gravel with cobbles and probable small boulders. Drilling in the granular soils with auger equipment was occasionally difficult due to the cobbles and boulders. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content, density and percent finer than sand size gradation analyses. Results of swell - consolidation testing performed on a relatively undisturbed drive sample, presented on Figure 4, indicate low to moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were slightly moist to moist. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural granular soils below topsoil. The soils could tend to compress when wetted and precautions should be taken to prevent wetting below the building. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soils should be !� designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Based on experience, we expect initial settlement of footings designed and Job No. 110 364A G8 tech Fi constructed as discussed in this section will be about 1 inch or less. There could be on the order of 1 inch of additional settlement if the bearing soils are wetted. �) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. 3) 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 exterior grade is typically used in this area. 4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 14 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist lateral earth pressures as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls" section of this report. &e7 5) The topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the relatively dense natural granular soils. The exposed soils in footing area should then be moistened and compacted. If water seepage is encountered in footing areas should be contact for additional evaluation. 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 at least 50 pcf for backfill consisting of the on -site granular soils. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the duplex and can be expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure Job No. 110 364A Go Cgt@Ch - 5 - 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 and walkway 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. 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 0.45. Passive pressure of compacted backfill against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 375 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 be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Job No. 110364A G( Cgtech FLOOR SLABS The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab - on- grade construction. There could be some potential for settlement if the bearing soils are wetted. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement 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 beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with at least 50% retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve. 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 granular 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 mountainous areas 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 recommend below -grade construction, such as retaining walls and crawlspace areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free - draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1 % to a suitable gravity outlet. Free - draining granular Job No. 110 364A G(59tech -7- material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 1 % feet deep. An impervious membrane such as 30 mil PVC liner could be placed below the drain to help prevent wetting below the building. SITE GRADING The risk of construction - induced slope instability at the site appears low provided cut and fill depths are limited. We assume that cut and fill depths for the lower levels will not exceed about 10 to 12 feet. 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 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density. The fill should be benched into the portions of the hillside exceeding 20% grade. 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. Potential debris now impact will be from across Westhaven Circle and on -site grading should direct potential flow down Westhaven Circle and around the proposed building on Lot 3. The grading should be designed by a civil engineer. 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 duplex has been completed: 1) Inundation 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 Job No. 116364A G4~9tech WE 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. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. 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 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 variations in the subsurface 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 Job No. 110364A G89tech 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. Respectfully Submitted, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. J Louis E. Eller Reviewed by: Steven L. PawTak, P. LEE/ksw cc: Segerberg 15222 Kurt Segerberg Job No. 110364A G(59tech BORING 1 ELEV.= 8074' :1: BORING 2 ELEV.= 8084' :1: PROPOSED FLOOR LEVEL = 8081' :1.1 8075 8070 Q) LL 0 w 8065 PROPOSED FLOOR LEVEL = 8C 30/5,10/0 WC =7.2 DD =103 - 200 =40 50/4 35/6,15/2 8080 WC =3.2 DD =112 - 200 =18 40/6,10/1 8075 8070 50/5 Z WC =4.0 Li DD =128 c : - 200 =23 g M D w 50/3 8065 8060 Ck 50/5 r:�a 50/12 8060 8055 35/6,20/2 8055 WC =5.9 DD =137 - 200 =24 8050 8050 Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 3. H 110 364A LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 2 He worth— Pcwlck Geotechnical LEGEND: ® TOPSOIL; organic sandy clayey silt, moist, dark brown. SAND AND GRAVEL (SM -GM); silty, cobbles and possible boulder size rock fragments, medium dense, • °� slightly moist to moist, brown. Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2 -inch I.D. California liner sample. 50/12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 50 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California sampler 12 inches. — D Depth at which boring had caved after drilling. NOTES: 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on November 12, 2010 with 4 -inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided. 3. Elevations of exploratory borings were obtained by interpolation between contours shown on the site plan provided. 4. The exploratory 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 boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content ( %) DD = Dry Density (pcf) -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve 110 364A LEGEND AND NOTES I Figure 3 o Compression % W M Ui A W N 1 O D f 0 I f 0 7c G7 0 m n o_ 0 D v v C/D r M 0 M r f C) � m cn 0 O D5 o_ o �. m O � o O D _i C) �� o � � II O z (D M to W W o Z5 � a 7J m cn C m r � a Cn n m m CC) C C o ° (D r HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Job No. 110 364A SAMPLE LOCATION NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT % NATURAL DRY DENSITY GRADATION PERCENT PASSING N0. 200 SIEVE ATTERBERG LIMITS UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH PSF SOIL OR BEDROCK TYPE BORING DEPTH ft GRAV( %) EL SAND ( %) LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTIC INDEX % 1 4 7.2 103 40 Silty Sandy Clay and Gravel 19 5.9 137 24 Silty Clayey Sand and Gravel 2 4 3.2 112 18 Silty Clayey Sand and Gravel 14 4.0 128 23 Silty Clayey Sand and Gravel State of Colorado Asbestos Testing & Abatement Requirements Asbestos testing and abatement protects workers, homeowners, neighbors and emergency services responders from ex- posure to harmful asbestos. It is your responsibility to be in compliance with the State. Please contact the State directly for their requirements at the contact info listed below. When is asbestos testing required? ANY building projects disturbing more than these threshold levels of building materials require asbestos testing: One- and Two - Family Dwellings: 32 square feet All Others (commercial spaces, hotel rooms, etc): 160 square feet Definition of a single - family dwelling: any dwelling unit that is used primarily for a single family, including multi - family /condominium units, and fractional fee units. Asbestos testing results must be provided with your application for a building permit. Tests which identify POSITIVE results at more than 1% require abatement by a State - certified abatement contractor. The air clearance letter or form must be submitted to the Town of Vail before the building permit will be issued. Project Checklist My proje falls into the category checked below: Will not disturb more than the threshold limits identified above. ❑ Tested negative, or at 1% or below (1 copies of test results included) Tested positive at more than 1 %, requires abatement (1 copies of test results included) Tips & Facts: • Even recent construction projects may include asbestos - containing materials, so buildings of @ny age require testing. • The "1989 Ban" on asbestos - containing materials is commonly misunderstood. "In fact, in 1991 the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated much of the so- called "Asbestos Ban and Phaseout" rule and remanded it to the EPA. Thus, much of the original 1989 EPA ban on the U.S. manufacturing, importation, processing, or distribution in commerce of many asbestos - containing product categories was set aside and did not take effect." - CDPHE Asbestos test results should be submitted to: Town of Vail, Community Development, 75 S Frontage Rd, Vail, CO, 81657. Town of Vail Contact: Fire Prevention Bureau Vail Fire Department 75 S Frontage Rd Fire_ inspectors @vailgov.com 970 - 479 -2252 www.vailgov.com State of Colorado Contact: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Asbestos Compliance Assistance Group 303 - 692 -3158 asbestos@state.co.us www.cdphe.state.co.us 01 -Jan- I I * -7 S Sv_uth Vail;:--t fi t. ` �t �l''' •F.� s' � �� a �< �Y � asp" ' :- } �� " � � K ` £ �. end - k TRANSMITTAL FORM Revision Submittals: 1. "Field Set' of approved plans MUST accompany revisions. 2. No further inspections will be performed until the revisions are approved & the permit is re- issued. 3. Fees for reviewing revisions are $55.00 per hour (2 hour minimum), and are due upon issuance. Permit #(s) information applies to: Attention: Project Street Address: n �2_ (c)E -STN f� UE n( r (Number) (Street) Building /Complex Name: ( ) R ions I ( esponse to Correction Letter _attached copy of correction letter () Deferred Submittal () Other Description / List of Changes: � 4eCT fit. ©, l�a. Contact Information: Company: �1,J(�E2. I(,j C . �oL-L See S� Company Address: P � Qp �4 39 3 g City: Go up F1rR,0 S State: CC-) Zip: I o ou z J F�"m PE[) SLu2y EyS C Contact Name: �� �, ` �(,(u pF(Z L►� n�t7 �9 I Contact Phone: 1 Q �[� ' 3 9 1 C) — 1 ( 2' 95 '95 I i t E -Mail '�ot9 5 l.t.flnIPr . 1 ne. CID AA ; I Revised ADDITIONAL Valuations (Labor & Materials) (DO NOT include original valuation) Building: Plumbing: Electrical: Mechanical: Total: (Suite #) e� (use additional sheet if necessary) Date Received: D C APR 1 12011 Iry TOWN OF VAIL April 11, 2011 Mr. Leonard Sandoval Town of Vail Public Works Department 1309 Elk Horn Drive Vail, CO 81657 RE: JAFFE DUPLEX, LOT 3, GLEN LYON SUBDIVISION Dear Leonard: Regarding your comments on the Jaffe Duplex - Lot 3 Project, items have been addressed as follows: 1. Attached are (4) stamped updated surveys as prepared by Eagle Valley Engineering, dated April 5, 2011. 2. Revised site and grading plan - see Sheet A2.0 dated April 11, 2011. Revisions include: a. Revised grading b. 18" culvert at secondary drive C. Driveway spot elevations d. Maintain 3' -0" concrete pan at primary residence Delete culvert at primary residence driveway. e. Relocate site disturbance fence away from Westhaven Circle. f. All site boulder retainage walls are less than or equal to 4' -0" as shown on site and grading plan sheet A2.0 dated April 11, 2011. 3. Provide erosion control plan. See Sheet A2.1. Please let me know if you have any further comments. Sincerely, SEGERBERG, MAYHEW & ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS Kurt A. Segerberg, A.I.A. President enc. Segerberg, Mayhew & Associates Architects, P.C., A.I.A. Mail: P.O. Box 4700 Vail, CO 81658 e-mail: info @smarchs.com http: / /www.smarchs.com Main Office: Eagle -Vail • 101 Eagle Road, Bldg. 6 • Avon, CO 81620 phone: 970 476 4433 fax: 970 476 4608 Denver Office: 12600 West Colfax Avenue, Suite A -140 Lakewood, CO 80215 phone: 303 623 3355 fax: 303 623 2262 1 Project Street Address: 'Number) (Street) (Suite #) 3uilding /Complex Name: Contractor Information Business Name: JV AYX 0- II l hJL Department, of Community Development: Project #: QRS I C) (�a ) s g DRB #: _046 10_ 0 3 Building Permit #: B k - QQq 4 Lot #: 3 Block # Subdivision: Work Class: New (0' Addition( loo X (13 ��u ADS Lz► 816 z Business Address: Type of Building: City �Lzos State: &o Zip: 1bJG3 -7-- Single - Family ( ) Duplex (Multi- Family 0 sl��/�I� Commercial( )Other( ) Contact Name: Contact Phone: ` (� - 10 3qa ( ( a 13'5 Work Type: Contact E -Mail: J P5; )^)OV— 1L • &)C7F Contractor RegL'9EatLQn Number: c^ " X Owner /Owner'ssent6tive Signature (Required) Project Information I-0/1A 1 A Owner Name: V Parcel #: 2-.1 31 Z402_00(p (For Parcel #, contact Eagle County Assessors Office at (970- 328 -8640 or visit www.eaglecounty.us/patie) Electrical Mechanical Plumbing Building Alteration ( Interior ( ) Exterior ( ) Both (,) -- Value of all work being performed: $ 1), r) (value based on IBC Section 109.3 & IRC Section 108.3) Electrical Square Footage � y�o P ads Detailed Scope and Location of Work: ('00s794, �1,J C)'- Ajkc,J f ot/qW�g E LlN / n( Fort UALUArlou �DiSPLerc- (use additional sheet if necessary) For Office Use Only: Fee Paid: � q 1 19 Received From: 145(o VA L UC 1S.P. Su.50r Cash Check # 1 I g 3 CC: Visa / MC Last 4 CC # exp date: Auth # Date Received � IECIEaeIFD. MAR 2 9 2011 TOWN OF VAIL BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION (Separate applications are required for alarm & sprinkler) Valuation of Work Included Plans Included Work ( 'Yes ( )No ( es ( )No d 0 00 (L4 es ( )No ( )'Yes ( )N Vo O (:�s ( )No (`fifes ( G )Nf} 7 c� (L-)'�es ( )No "es ( )No COO Value of all work being performed: $ 1), r) (value based on IBC Section 109.3 & IRC Section 108.3) Electrical Square Footage � y�o P ads Detailed Scope and Location of Work: ('00s794, �1,J C)'- Ajkc,J f ot/qW�g E LlN / n( Fort UALUArlou �DiSPLerc- (use additional sheet if necessary) For Office Use Only: Fee Paid: � q 1 19 Received From: 145(o VA L UC 1S.P. Su.50r Cash Check # 1 I g 3 CC: Visa / MC Last 4 CC # exp date: Auth # Date Received � IECIEaeIFD. MAR 2 9 2011 TOWN OF VAIL BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION (Separate applications are required for alarm & sprinkler) BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION (Separate applications are required for alarm & sprinkler) Project Street Address: t,k3l eyir (Number) (Street) (Suite #) Building /Complex Name: Project #: IrNJ 1U DRB #: cg-& to -- ems' 13 Building Permit #: `- cz� Lot #: 3 Block # Subdivision Contractor Information Business Name: �1 - �i i , Work Class: New (%- -J Addition ( ) Alteration ( ) Business Address: 13C- 13 3 City gOtk�5 State: 6 0 Zip: V Contact Name: '-- Type of Building: Single- Family ( ) Duplex (v Multi- Family ( ) Commercial( ) Other( ) [ work Type: Interior ( ) Exterior( ) Both (t, r Contact Phone: Ono r �o � Contact E -Mail: �P S `- �- ' Contractor g+ _ "on Number: `J X - - -- Valuation of Work Included Plans Included Work Electrical (Yes ( )No (•.)a`es ( )No 0 0 0 gMechanical ( tKes ( )No ( %'(es ( )No q � � "1f� i (vies ( )No (�es ( )No - W ;Building ( es ( )No (✓jes ( )No 1 « ' I Value of all work being performed: $ D . E (value based on IBC Section 109.3 & IRC Section 108.3) l - ° Electrical Square Footage Owner /0 Represe Ive Si nature (Required) er's Project Info Owner Name: L`T ( Parcel #: �� ®� 12 1 V� C (For Parcel #, contact Eagle County Assessors Office at (970- 328 -8640 or visit i www.eaglecounty.us /patie) k �p n Detailed Scope and Location of Work: cn�( L-o A) 0k)PLIY, (use additional sheet if necessary) For Office Use O"V7 Fee Paid: i �� �' i • 3'� Received From: Cash Check # CC: Visa / MC Last 4 CC # exp date: Auth # Date Receive l 1 - C/ 91A811- n% �Du.P� Sp-Fr-Bu t L r L Plan Submittal Requirement Paper, Format & Scale ` Drawings must be submitted on minimum 11 "x17" or larger size paper. 24 "x36" is recommended for most projects � All sheets in a drawing set must be the same size and sequentially labeled and dated. i�l' orth arrow and the scale [standard architectural or engineering scales (1/4 " =1', etc)]. &r Title block with project name, project address and legal description. Professional Seal(s) o� Drawings and calculations prepared by a professional engineer /architect licensed to practice in the state of Colorado must be signed and sealed (original stamp /signature not required) All structural plans, details and calculations to be prepared by a professional engineer licensed in the state of Colorado. Surrey /Site Plan (see DRB application for detailed list of site plan requirements): e Include the DRB approved site plan, if no site plan was provided with the DRB application the following minimum infor- mation is required on a site plan: e� North arrow and scale. i!5� Property information:, legal description, square footage and acres of lot, owner's name and mailing address. e' Adjacent property information: legal description, owner's name and mailing address. e-" Property lines, easements, right -of- way(s) d Property and setback lines, and existing and proposed easements. ry- Existing and proposed grades. e/ Existing and proposed layout of building and other structures including decks, patios, fences and walls. a°' Locations of all utilities o' Names of all adjacent roadways. Floor Plans er" Floor plans shall be drawn to scale and must be dimensioned. ❑ Differentiate existing from proposed construction. �K Floor and room uses labeled. �K Door and Window Schedule (locations, sizes, types and U values clearly identified). Stairs and handrails identified. Provide a detail on the riser height and tread depth for stairs, and height for guards and handrails t� Identify locations and types of all fireplaces (wood burning, gas logs, etc). Roof Plan a' Roof plans shall be drawn to scale and must be dimensioned. W" Roof pitch noted of Roofing material identified (must be Class A, and asphalt shingles must be minimum 300 Ibs per square). Elevations vf' Elevations shall be drawn to scale and must be dimensioned. e North, East, South and West elevations. o Show all proposed exterior finish materials, guardrails, windows, doors and finish grades. Cross Sections and Details Y"'Sections shall be drawn to scale and must be dimensioned. t< Provide building cross sections showing roof, wall and floor assemblies and all building materials. e weather resistive barriers at roof and exterior walls tK Insulation R values shown for roofs, walls, floors, slab edge per International Energy Conservation Code d' Show roof and crawl space ventilation where applicable Ceiling heights in rooms and crawl space /basement areas. Mechanical Plans * Full size Floor plans showing mechanical equipment for each level of the house to scale (for remodel work, show only � /additional" work) e' Complete mechanical room equipment layout. Indicate boiler, furnace, hot water tank W`� Indicate boiler or furnace size and efficiency (min. 92% efficiency per TOV ordinance) V Show location of any kitchen, bath or laundry exhaust ductwork ra'� Show all flue or vents terminations through roof, or side wall d Sil"ow fireplace size, types and fireplace venting Electrical Plans ff" Note for 50% of new lighting to comply with International Energy Conservation Code (high efficacy) W Minimum lighting requirements must be met: cK Complete exterior lighting plan � t r >-P• T� a � �.- , �;_ �� _ � �� �.a �� n g''Residential electrical load calculations per National Electric Code for new construction, or if any new electrical loads are being added. e' Show location and size of electrical service and panel boards Gas Piping Plans Full size gas piping plans for scope of gas piping work for each level of the house to scale or isometric Nr' Gas piping plan must show meter location, existing /new gas piping, gas piping total developed length and each branch length, piping material (black iron, or CSST), pipe size and BTU's or CFH for each existing or new appliance served Special Inspection Program ❑ Complete the TOV special inspection forms with all required signatures, and applicable information for your project Foundation Plan (plan shall be stamped by a Colorado State Licensed Engineer, or Architect) B St ructural design criteria, specifications listed and design codes listed e' Sizes of all footings and foundation walls. Footing /foundation wall elevations noted Footing /foundation cross sections with reinforcement clearly shown for each area of the foundation (cross section referenced on plan view) car' Soils report or assumed soil bearing capacity referenced tee e A 4mO7' Framing Plan (plans shall be stamped by a Colorado State Licensed Engineer, or Architect) P/ Provide framing plans for floors, decks and roofs. a' Structural design criteria, specifications listed and design codes listed e`' Locations and sizes of all framing components (joists, beams and columns) b Identify material types, grades and species. e -11, Framing details where applicable C:\cdev\ forms\permits\buildingVesidential — buildiiig_permit_OloI I I If State of Colorado Asbestos Testing & Abatement Requirements Asbestos testing and abatement protects workers, homeowners, neighbors and emergency services responders from ex- posure to harmful asbestos. It is your responsibility to be in compliance with the State. Please contact the State directly for their requirements at the contact info listed below. When is asbestos testing required? ANY building projects disturbing more than these threshold levels of building materials require asbestos testing: One- and Two - Family Dwellings: 32 square feet All Others (commercial spaces, hotel rooms, etc): 160 square feet Definition of a single - family dwelling: any dwelling unit that is used primarily for a single family, including multi - family /condominium units, and fractional fee units. Asbestos testing results must be provided with your application for a building permit. Tests which identify POSITIVE results at more than 1% require abatement by a State - certified abatement contractor. The air clearance letter or form must be submitted to the Town of Vail before the building permit will be issued. Project Checklist My proje falls into the category checked below: Will not disturb more than the threshold limits identified above. ❑ Tested negative, or at 1% or below (1 copies of test results included) F1 Tested positive at more than 1 %, requires abatement (1 copies of test results included) Tips & Facts: • Even recent construction projects may include asbestos - containing materials, so buildings of gny age require testing. • The "1989 Ban" on asbestos - containing materials is commonly misunderstood. "In fact, in 1991 the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated much of the so- called "Asbestos Ban and Phaseout" rule and remanded it to the EPA. Thus, much of the original 1989 EPA ban on the U.S. manufacturing, importation, processing, or distribution in commerce of many asbestos - containing product categories was set aside and did not take effect." - CDPHE Asbestos test results should be submitted to: Town of Vail, Community Development, 75 S Frontage Rd, Vail, CO, 81657. Town of Vail Contact: Fire Prevention Bureau Vail Fire Department 75 S Frontage Rd Fire_inspectors @vailgov.com 970 - 479 -2252 www.vailgov.com State of Colorado Contact: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Asbestos Compliance Assistance Group 303 - 692 -3158 asbestos @state.co.us www.cdphe.state.co.us 01- Jan -II SEGERBERG, MAYHEW & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS • P.C. • A.I.A. MAILING: SHIPPING: P.O. Box 4700 101 Eagle Road - Bldg. 6 Vail, CO 81658 Avon, CO 81620 (970) 476 -4433 FAX (970) 476 -4608 TO ) T WE ARE SENDING YOU XAttached E] Under separate cover via �<Shop drawings Prints 11 Copy of letter El Change order El Plans FE] ❑ Samples the following items: Specifications COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION / / -4 7 j rf• cl��c � z1 �/ /1 THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: El For approval For your use El As requested REMARKS ❑ For review and comment ❑ El FORBIDS DUE ❑ Approved as submitted El Approved as noted El Returned for corrections El Resubmit copies for approval ❑ Submit copies for distribution El Return corrected prints DATE � `� JOB ATTENTI � RE: / 'fc ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US COPY TO SIGNED: ff enclosures are not as noted, kindly noti us at once. REScheck Software Version 4.4.0 Compliance Certificate Project Title: Jaffe Duplex Energy Code: 2009 IECC 49.0 Location: Vail, Colorado Wall 1: Wood Frame, 16" o.c. Construction Type: Single Family 0.0 Building Orientation: Bldg. orientation unspecified Glazing Area Percentage: 26% Heating Degree Days: 9248 Climate Zone: 6 SHGC: 0.26 Construction Site: Owner /Agent: Designer /Contractor: Lot 3 Tom Jaffe Kurt Segerberg Glen Lyon Division Segerberg Mayhew & Associates Vail, CO 81658 135 P.O. Box 4700 0.500 68 Vail, CO 81658 Ceiling 1: Cathedral Ceiling (no attic) 4538 49.0 0.0 100 Wall 1: Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 7425 21.0 0.0 306 Orientation: Unspecified Window 2: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low -E 1692 0.300 508 SHGC: 0.26 Orientation: Unspecified Door 1: Solid 135 0.500 68 Orientation: Unspecified Door 2: Glass 222 0.300 67 SHGC: 0.21 Orientation: Unspecified Basement Wall 1: Solid Concrete or Masonry 695 15.0 0.0 33 Orientation: Unspecified Wall height: 10.0' Depth below grade: 10.0' Insulation depth: 10.0' Floor 1: All -Wood JoistTruss:Over Unconditioned Space 1180 38.0 0.0 31 Floor 2: All -Wood Joist/Truss:Over Outside Air 125 38.0 0.0 3 Floor 3: Slab- On- Grade:Unheated 210 5.0 156 Insulation depth: 4.0' Floor 4: Slab -On- Grade: Heated 212 5.0 158 Insulation depth: 4.0' Compliance Statement: The proposed building design described here is consistent with the building plans, specifications, and other calculations submitted with the permit application. The proposed buildin has been designed to meet the 2009 IECC requirements in REScheck Version 4.4.0 and to comply with the mandatory requireme i ed in the ES k Insp tion Checklist. A 2 // Name - Title gnature Dat Project Title: Jaffe Duplex Report date: 02/15111 Data filename: F: \prj \jaffe2- Lot3FromSarah\ Archive \Progressl2- 16- 10 \ResCheck \Jaffe- Lot3.rck Page 1 of 4 Compliance: 4.8% Better Than Code Maximum UA: 1502 Your UA: 1430 The % Better or Worse Than Code index reflects how close to compliance the house is based on code trade -off rules. It DOES NOT provide an estimate of energy use or cost relative to a minimum -code home. CNJ( REScheck Software Version 4.4.0 Inspection Checklist Ceilings: ❑ Ceiling 1: Cathedral Ceiling (no attic), R-49.0 cavity insulation Comments: Above -Grade Walls: ❑ Wall 1: Wood Frame, 16" o.c., R -21.0 cavity insulation Comments: Basement Walls: ❑ Basement Wall 1: Solid Concrete or Masonry, 10.0' ht / 10.0' bg / 10.0' insul, R -15.0 cavity insulation Comments: Windows: ❑ Window 2: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low -E, U- factor: 0.300 For windows without labeled U- factors, describe features: #Panes Frame Type Thermal Break? Yes No Comments: Doors: ❑ Door 1: Solid, U- factor: 0.500 Comments: Up to 40 sq.ft. of this door is exempt from the U- factor requirement. ❑ Door 2: Glass, U- factor: 0.300 Comments: Floors: ❑ Floor 1: All -Wood Joist/Truss:Over Unconditioned Space, R -38.0 cavity insulation Comments: Floor insulation is installed in permanent contact with the underside of the subfloor decking. ❑ Floor 2: All -Wood Joist/Truss:Over Outside Air, R -38.0 cavity insulation Comments: Floor insulation is installed in permanent contact with the underside of the subfloor decking. ❑ Floor 3: Slab -On- Grade: Unheated, 4.0' insulation depth, R -5.0 continuous insulation Comments: Slab insulation extends down from the top of the slab to at least 4.0 ft. OR down to at least the bottom of the slab then horizontally for a total distance of 4.0 ft. ❑ Floor 4: Slab-On-Grade: Heated, 4.0' insulation depth, R -5.0 continuous insulation Comments: Slab insulation extends down from the top of the slab to at least 4.0 ft. OR down to at least the bottom of the slab then horizontally for a total distance of 4.0 ft. Air Leakage: ❑ Joints (including rim joist junctions), attic access openings, penetrations, and all other such openings in the building envelope that are sources of air leakage are sealed with caulk, gasketed, weatherstripped or otherwise sealed with an air barrier material, suitable film or solid material. ❑ Air barrier and sealing exists on common walls between dwelling units, on exterior walls behind tubs /showers, and in openings between window /door jambs and framing. ❑ Recessed lights in the building thermal envelope are 1) type IC rated and ASTM E283 labeled and 2) sealed with a gasket or caulk between the housing and the interior wall or ceiling covering. Project Title: Jaffe Duplex Report date: 02/15/11 Data filename: F:\ prj\ jaffe2- Lot3FromSarahWrchive \Progress12- 16- 10 \ResCheck \Jaffe- Lot3.rck Page 2 of 4 Access doors separating conditioned from unconditioned space are weather - stripped and insulated (without insulation compression or damage) to at least the level of insulation on the surrounding surfaces. Where loose fill insulation exists, a baffle or retainer is installed to maintain insulation application. ❑ Wood - burning fireplaces have gasketed doors and outdoor combustion air. Air Sealing and Insulation: ❑ Building envelope air tightness and insulation installation complies by either 1) a post rough -in blower door test result of less than 7 ACH at 33.5 psf OR 2) the following items have been satisfied: (a) Air barriers and thermal barrier: Installed on outside of air - permeable insulation and breaks or joints in the air barrier are filled or repaired. (b) Ceiling /attic: Air barrier in any dropped ceiling /soffit is substantially aligned with insulation and any gaps are sealed. (c) Above -grade walls: Insulation is installed in substantial contact and continuous alignment with the building envelope air barrier. (d) Floors: Air barrier is installed at any exposed edge of insulation. (e) Plumbing and wiring: Insulation is placed between outside and pipes. Batt insulation is cut to fit around wiring and plumbing, or sprayed /blown insulation extends behind piping and wiring. (f) Comers, headers, narrow framing cavities, and rim joists are insulated. (9) Shower /tub on exterior wall: Insulation exists between showers /tubs and exterior wall. Sunrooms: Ej Sunrooms that are thermally isolated from the building envelope have a maximum fenestration U- factor of 0.50 and the maximum skylight U- factor of 0.75. New windows and doors separating the sunroom from conditioned space meet the building thermal envelope requirements. Materials Identification and Installation: Materials and equipment are installed in accordance with the manufacturer's installation instructions. Insulation is installed in substantial contact with the surface being insulated and in a manner that achieves the rated R- value. F Materials and equipment are identified so that compliance can be determined. ❑ Manufacturer manuals for all installed heating and cooling equipment and service water heating equipment have been provided. ❑ Insulation R- values and glazing U- factors are clearly marked on the building plans or specifications. Duct Insulation: Lj Supply ducts in attics are insulated to a minimum of R -8. All other ducts in unconditioned spaces or outside the building envelope are insulated to at least R -6. Duct Construction and Testing: Ej Building framing cavities are not used as supply ducts. F All joints and seams of air ducts, air handlers, filter boxes, and building cavities used as return ducts are substantially airtight by means of tapes, mastics, liquid sealants, gasketing or other approved closure systems. Tapes, mastics, and fasteners are rated UL 181A or UL 181 B and are labeled according to the duct construction. Metal duct connections with equipment and /or fittings are mechanically fastened. Crimp joints for round metal ducts have a contact lap of at least 1 1/2 inches and are fastened with a minimum of three equally spaced sheet -metal screws. Exceptions: Joint and seams covered with spray polyurethane foam. Where a partially inaccessible duct connection exists, mechanical fasteners can be equally spaced on the exposed portion of the joint so as to prevent a hinge effect. Continuously welded and locking -type longitudinal joints and seams on ducts operating at less than 2 in. w.g. (500 Pa). Lj Duct tightness test has been performed and meets one of the following test criteria: (1) Postconstruction leakage to outdoors test: Less than or equal to 673.9 cfm (8 cfm per 100 ft2 of conditioned floor area). (2) Postconstruction total leakage test (including air handler enclosure): Less than or equal to 1010.9 cfm (12 cfm per 100 ft2 of conditioned floor area) pressure differential of 0.1 inches w.g. (3) Rough -in total leakage test with air handler installed: Less than or equal to 505.4 cfm (6 cfm per 100 ft2 of conditioned floor area) when tested at a pressure differential of 0.1 inches w.g. (4) Rough -in total leakage test without air handler installed: Less than or equal to 337.0 cfm (4 cfm per 100 ft2 of conditioned floor area). Heating and Cooling Equipment Sizing: Lj Additional requirements for equipment sizing are included by an inspection for compliance with the International Residential Code. n For systems serving multiple dwelling units documentation has been submitted demonstrating compliance with 2009 IECC Commercial Building Mechanical and /or Service Water Heating (Sections 503 and 504). Circulating Service Hot Water Systems: Project Title: Jaffe Duplex Report date: 02/15/11 Data filename: F: \prj \jaffe2- Lot3FromSarah\Archive \Progress12- 16- 10 \ResCheck \Jaffe- Lot3.rck Page 3 of 4 ❑ Circulating service hot water pipes are insulated to R -2. ❑ Circulating service hot water systems include an automatic or accessible manual switch to turn off the circulating pump when the system is not in use. Heating and Cooling Piping Insulation: HVAC piping conveying fluids above 105 degrees F or chilled fluids below 55 degrees F are insulated to R -3. Swimming Pools: ❑ Heated swimming pools have an on /off heater switch. Pool heaters operating on natural gas or LPG have an electronic pilot light. Timer switches on pool heaters and pumps are present. Exceptions: Where public health standards require continuous pump operation. Where pumps operate within solar- and /or waste - heat - recovery systems. Heated swimming pools have a cover on or at the water surface. For pools heated over 90 degrees F (32 degrees C) the cover has a minimum insulation value of R -12. Exceptions: Covers are not required when 60% of the heating energy is from site - recovered energy or solar energy source. Lighting Requirements: Lj A minimum of 50 percent of the lamps in permanently installed lighting fixtures can be categorized as one of the following: (a) Compact fluorescent (b) T -8 or smaller diameter linear fluorescent (c) 40 lumens per watt for lamp wattage <= 15 (d) 50 lumens per watt for lamp wattage > 15 and — 40 (e) 60 lumens per watt for lamp wattage > 40 Other Requirements: Cj Snow- and ice - melting systems with energy supplied from the service to a building shall include automatic controls capable of shutting off the system when a) the pavement temperature is above 50 degrees F, b) no precipitation is falling, and c) the outdoor temperature is above 40 degrees F (a manual shutoff control is also permitted to satisfy requirement's'). Certificate: F1 A permanent certificate is provided on or in the electrical distribution panel listing the predominant insulation R- values; window U- factors; type and efficiency of space- conditioning and water heating equipment. The certificate does not cover or obstruct the visibility of the circuit directory label, service disconnect label or other required labels. NOTES TO FIELD: (Building Department Use Only) Project Title: Jaffe Duplex Report date: 02115/11 Data filename: F:\prj \jaffe Lot3FromSarah\ Archive \Progress12- 16- 10 \ResCheck \Jaffe- Lot3.rck Page 4 of 4 C 0 2009 IECC Energy � Efficiency Certificate Insulati . Ceiling / Roof 49.00 Wall 21.00 Floor/ Foundation 38.00 Ductwork (unconditioned spaces): Glass & D.. . Window 0.30 0.26 Door Heating Cooling 0.30 0.21 Heating System: Cooling System: Water Heater: Name Date: Comments: G( H tech HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL Hepworth- Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970-945-7988 Fax: 970-945-8454 email: hpgeo @hpgeotech.com SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED DUPLEX LOT 3, GLEN LYON SUBDIVISION VAIL, COLORADO JOB NO. 110 364A NOVEMBER 29, 2010 PREPARED FOR: TOM JAFFE 1815 W. GORE CREEK DRIVE, #E VAIL, COLORADO 81657 Parker 303 -841 -7119 • Colorado Springs 719 - 633 -5562 • Silverthorne 970- 468 -1989 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ......................................... ............................... - 1 - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION .................................................. ............................... - 1 - SITECONDITIONS .................................................................... ............................... - 2- GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ........................................................ ............................... - 2 - FIELDEXPLORATION ............................................................. ............................... - 2- SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................................... ............................... - 3- DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................. ............................... - 3 - FOUNDATIONS ..................................................................... ............................... - 3- FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS .......................... ............................... - 4- FLOOR SLABS ....................................................................... ............................... - 6 - UNDERDRAINSYSTEM ....................................................... ............................... - 6- SITE GRADING ................................................ ............................... - - SURFACE DRAINAGE ....................................... ............................... - - LIMITATIONS ........................................................................... ............................... - 8 - FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 4 - SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residential duplex to be located at Lot 3, Glen Lyon Subdivision, Vail, 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 proposal for geotechnical engineering services to Tom Jaffe dated December 14, 2009. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted 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 or swell and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed duplex will be a three story wood frame structure stepped into the hillside with a garage on the first level of the secondary unit and the main level of the primary unit. Garage floors will be slab -on- grade. Grading for the duplex is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 4 to 12 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction. 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. Job No. 110 364A G� Ptech -2- SITE CONDITIONS The site was vacant of structures and snow cover was about one foot at the time of our exploration. Vegetation consists of sage brush, grass and weeds. The site is located on a north facing hillside and the ground surface slopes down at a grade of about 20 percent in the building area. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The site is located on a large alluvial fan that is shown to have moderate hazard debris flow according to the official Town of Vail maps of geologic hazards adopted October 17, 2000. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on November 12, 2010. Two 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 augers powered by a track - mounted CME 45 drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 2 inch I.D. spoon sampler. The sampler was 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 Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. Job No. 110 364A �Cr)tech -3- SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. The subsoils consist of about one foot of topsoil overlying medium dense, silty sand and gravel with cobbles and probable small boulders. Drilling in the granular soils with auger equipment was occasionally difficult due to the cobbles and boulders. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content, density and percent finer than sand size gradation analyses. Results of swell - consolidation testing performed on a relatively undisturbed drive sample, presented on Figure 4, indicate low to moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were slightly moist to moist. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural granular soils below topsoil. The soils could tend to compress when wetted and precautions should be taken to prevent wetting below the building. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soils should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Based on experience, we expect initial settlement of footings designed and Job No. 110 364A Gegtect-h constructed as discussed in this section will be about 1 inch or less. There could be on the order of 1 inch of additional settlement if the bearing soils are wetted. 2) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous .walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. 3) 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 exterior grade is typically used in this area. 4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 14 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist lateral earth pressures as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls" section of this report. 5) The topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the relatively dense natural granular soils. The exposed soils in footing area should then be moistened and compacted. If water seepage is encountered in footing areas, we should be contacted for additional evaluation. 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 at least 50 pcf for backfill consisting of the on -site granular soils. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the duplex and can be expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure Job No. 110 364A Hgtech -5- 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 and walkway 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. 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 0.45. Passive pressure of compacted backfill against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 375 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 be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Job No. 110 364A GO CgteCh M FLOOR SLABS The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab - on- grade construction. There could be some potential for settlement if the bearing soils are wetted. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement 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 beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with at least 50% retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve. 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 granular 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 mountainous areas 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 recommend below -grade construction, such as retaining walls and crawlspace areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free - draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1 % to a suitable gravity outlet. Free - draining granular Job No. 110 364A C-IgEtech -7- material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 1 % feet deep. An impervious membrane such as 30 mil PVC liner could be placed below the drain to help prevent wetting below the building. SITE GRADING The risk of construction - induced slope instability at the site appears low provided cut and fill depths are limited. We assume that cut and fill depths for the lower levels will not exceed about 10 to 12 feet. 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 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density. The fill should be benched into the portions of the hillside exceeding 20% grade. 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. Potential debris flow impact will be from across Westhaven Circle and on -site grading should direct potential flow down Westhaven Circle and around the proposed building on Lot 3. The grading should be designed by a civil engineer. 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 duplex has been completed: 1) Inundation 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 Job No. 116 364A Cc5oft@Ch 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. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. 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 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 variations in the subsurface 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 Job No. 110 364A H Ptech M 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. Respectfully Submitted, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Louis E. Eller Reviewed by: .1 Steven L. Paw ak( P. 15222 LEE/ksw � '�t+O cc: Segerberg Meyhew �ttn: Kurt Segerberg Job No. 110364A G(�gtech BORING 1 ELEV.= 8074' 8085 :1:1 WE PROPOSED FLOOR LEVEL = 8081' 35/6,15/2 8080 WC =3.2 DD =112 - 200 =18 8075 8070 Lj- a� 0 Q) W 8065 8055 8050 PROPOSED FLOOR LEVEL = 8( 30/5,10/0 WC =7.2 DD =103 - 200 =40 50/4 50/5 35/6,20/2 WC =5.9 DD =137 - 200 =24 40/6,10/1 50/5 WC =4.0 DD =128 - 200 =23 50/3 -MM 8075 8070 LL c 0 M a.> w 8065 :1.1 8055 8050 Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 3. H 110 364A LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 2 He worth — Powlak Geotechnical BORING 2 ELEV.= 8084' LEGEND: TOPSOIL; organic sandy clayey silt, moist, dark brown. SAND AND GRAVEL (SM -GM); silty, cobbles and possible boulder size rock fragments, medium dense, slightly moist to moist, brown. Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2 -inch I.D. California liner sample. 50/12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 50 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California sampler 12 inches. Depth at which boring had caved after drilling. NOTES: 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on November 12, 2010 with 4 -inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided. 3. Elevations of exploratory borings were obtained by interpolation between contours shown on the site plan provided. 4. The exploratory 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 boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content ( %) DD = Dry Density (pcf) -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve 110364A I ��1eCh I LEGEND AND NOTES I Figure 3 HeaWOfth— Pawlak Geotechnicei Moisture Content = 7.2 percent Dry Density = 103 pcf Sample of: Silty Sandy Clay and Gravel From: Boring 1 at 4 Feet 0 1 0 2 Compression upon wetting 0 U) U 0 3 a E 0 U 4 5 01 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf 110 364A H He worth— Pawlak Geotechniccl SWELL - CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 4 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Job No. 110 364A SAMPLE BORING LOCATION DEPTH ft NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT % NATURAL DRY DENSITY GRADATION PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE ATTERBERG LIMITS UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH PSF SOIL OR BEDROCK TYPE GRAVEL SAND LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTIC INDEX % 1 4 7.2 103 40 Silty Sandy Clay and Gravel 19 5.9 137 24 Silty Clayey Sand and Gravel 2 4 3.2 112 18 Silty Clayey Sand and Gravel 14 4.0 128 23 Silty Clayey Sand and Gravel RadiantWorks Professional Mechanical Summary Report 3/21/2011 Project Information Contact Information Project Assumptions Project Number Designed By Brent Hettinger Outdoor Temp -21 °F Project Quote Company Name George T. Sanders Elevation 9000 ft Project Name Jaffe Duplex Primary Res Phone Number Wind Speed 10 mph Designed For Job Type Residential VAIL, CO (Colorado) Pump Specs Zone Name Flow Head Delta T Supp Fl T Zone 1 1.1 GPM 1 ft 20 120 °F Zone 2 0.5 GPM 0.7 ft 20 140 °F Zone 3 0.4 GPM 0.2 ft 20 140 °F Zone 4 0.6 GPM 1 ft 20 140 °F Zone 5 1.3 GPM 1.9 ft 20 100 °F Zone 6 0.6 GPM 1 ft 20 120 °F Zone 7 0.6 GPM 0.9 ft 20 120 °F Zone 8 2.3 GPM 1.5 ft 20 150 °F Zone 9 0.8 GPM 1.4 ft 20 150 °F Zone 10 0.9 GPM 0.8 ft 20 140 °F Zone 11 0.4 GPM 1.9 ft 20 120 °F Heated Area Descriptions Application Construction Heated Area Product Totals Zone 1 — Room List (Rec Room, Stairs, Hall, Laundry,Powder) Radiant Heating Slab 783 ft (4) 225' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 2 — Room List (Bedroom #2, Bathroom #2) Radiant Heating Slab 309 ft (2) 175' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 3 — Room List (Bedroom # 3, Bathroom #3) Radiant Heating Slab 240 ft (2) 150' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 4 — Room List (Bedroom #4, Bathroom #4) Radiant Heating Slab 257 ft (2) 200' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 5 — Room List (Garage) Radiant Heating Slab 550 ft (3) 200' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 6 — Room List (Entry,Hall,Powder,Ski,Stairs) Radiant Heating ThinSlab 370 ft (2) 200' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 7 — Room List (Kicthen,Sitting Room) Radiant Heating ThinSlab 375 ft (2) 200' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 8 — Room List (Great Room) Jaffe Duplex Primary Res.rad Copyright(c) Watts Radiant 2008 Page 1 of 3 RadiantWorks Professional Mec Summary Report 3/21/2011 Radiant Heating ThinSlab 802 ft (6) 225' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 9 <> Room List (Bedroom #5, Bath #5) Radiant Heating ThinSlab 265 ft' (2) 200' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 10 <> Room List (Master Bedroom & Hall, Master Closet) Radiant Heating ThinSlab 372 ft' (3) 200' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 11 <> Room List (Master Bath) Radiant Heating ThinSlab 200 ftz (1) 225' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Heating Load Summary Tube Back/Edge Total Total Spacing Intensity Losses Required Provided Supp. (in) (BTU /h ftz) (BTU /h) (BTU /h) (BTU /h) Needed Zone 8555 12238 Rec Room,Stairs,Hall 12 11.16 3.47 8058 11087 Laundry,Powder 12 8.14 3.15 497 1151 Zone 2 4091 7047 Bedroom #2 12 16 4.33 3521 4611 Bathroom #2 12 6.41 3.31 570 2436 Zone 3 3081 4927 Bedroom # 3 12 12.92 4.16 2584 3826 Bathroom #3 12 12.41 3.78 497 1101 Zone 4 5328 7075 Bedroom #4 8 19.52 4.30 4138 5736 Bathroom #4 12 26.45 4.64 1190 1339 Zone 5 10295 16234 Garage 12 18.72 5.05 10295 16234 Zone 6 5558 8378 Entry, Hall, Powder, Ski, Stairs 12 15.02 1.20 5558 8378 Zone 7 5149 7189 Kicthen,Siffing Room 12 13.73 1.19 5149 7189 Zone 8 21251 27358 Great Room 8 26.5 2.24 21251 27358 Zone 9 7157 11613 Bedroom #5 8 25.96 2.28 5814 7487 Bath #5 12 32.76 1.84 1343 4126 Zone 10 7819 10315 Master Bedroom & Hall 8 24.07 2.00 7173 8730 Master Closet 12 8.73 1.30 646 1585 Jaffe Duplex Primary Res.rad Copyright(c) Wafts Radiant 2008 Page 2 of 3 RadiantWorks Professional Mechanical Summary Report 3/21/2011 Zone 11 3874 5068 Master Bath 12 19.37 1.31 3874 SnrR Project Summary Total Flow: 9.5 GPM Total System Head: 1.9 ft Boiler Load: 95212 BTU /h Total System Volume: 56 Gallons Total Heated Area: 4523 ftZ Please verify all project information for accuracy Signature Date: Jaffe Duplex Primary Res.rad Copyright(c) Watts Radiant 2008 Page 3 of 3 SNOWMELT ARE AS CALCULATION SHEET a I UIVIEx ALPINE MECH B NAME JAFFE DUPEX LOT #13 PRIMARY RESIDENCE TE 03/21/11 SQ FT AREA 1 470 AREA 2 1526 AREA 3 0 AREA 4 0 AREA 5 0 BTUH 54050 175490 0 0 0 BOILER INPUT BTUH 79485 258074 0 0 0 FEET OF TUBE 690 2250 0 0 0 LOOP LENGTH 230 250 0 0 0 # OF LOOPS 3 9 0 0 0 TOTAL GPM 3.6 11.7 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 GPM PER LOOP 1.2 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 PD (FT) LOOP 7 8 0 0 0 PD (FT) SMS & SMR 6 4 0 0 TOTAL PD (FT) 13 12 0 0 0 0 COPPER S &R PIPE SIZE (IN.) 1.00 1.25 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 HEPEX S &R PIPE SIZE (IN.) 1.00 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 DISTANCE TO MANIFOLD 100 40 0 0 0 AREA TUBE SPACING (IN.) 9 9 0.625 0 0.625 0.625 9 9 9 9 TUBING PIPE SIZE (IN.) 0.625 0.625 0.625 0.625 0.625 LISTED PIPE SI . 500 =1/2" 0.6 25 =5/8" 0.750 =3/4 1.000 =1" 1.250= 1 -1/4" 1.500 ALL PRESSURE DROP CALCULATIONS ARE BASED ON WIRSBO HEPEX PLUS SNOWMELT AREA TUBING AND WIRSBO LARGE DIAMETER HEPEX TUBING FOR DISTRIBUTION TO MANIFOLDS. BOILER INPUT CALCULATIONS ARE BASED ON BOILER EFFICIENCY, ALTITUDE DERATION FACTOR AND JOBSITE ELEVATION ENTERED ON THE "INFORMATION" SHEET. DISTANCES TO MANIFOLDS ARE LISTED AS ONE WAY. SUPPLY PIPE & RETURN PIPE ARE INCLUDED IN PRESSURE DROP CALCULATIONS. APPROXIMATELY 20' OF TUBING PER LOOP HAS BEEN ADDED FOR TAG ENS TO REACH THE SUPPLY AND RETURN MANIFOLDS. .REA 1 SPA & UPPER PATIO DESIGN BASED ON: .REA 2 DRIVEWAY & ENTRY REA 3 XXXX BTU /H /SQ. FT. REA 4 XXXX SUPPLY & RETURN AT (° REA 5 XXXX BOILER EFFICIENCY ( %) REA 6 XXXX ELEV OR NAT GAS DERATE (% REA 7 XXXX REA 8 XXXX R EA 9 XXXX AREA 6 0 AREA 7 0 AREA 8 AREA 9 AREA 10 TOTALS 0 0 0 1996 0 0 0 0 0 229540 0 0 0 0 0 337559 0 0 0 0 1 0 2940 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 0 9 9 0.625 0.625 0.625 0.625 0.625 -1/2" 2.000 =2" 3SITE ELEVATION (FT) 115 30 85 2.5 8000 RadiantWorks Professional Mechanical Summary Report 3/22/2011 Project Information Contact Information Project Assumptions Project Number Designed By Brent Hettinger Outdoor Temp -21 °F Project Quote Company Name George T. sANDERS cOMP Elevation 9000 ft Project Name Jaffe Duplex Secondary Residence Phone Number Wind Speed 10 mph Designed For Job Type Residential VAIL, CO (Colorado) Pump Specs Zone Name Flow Head Delta T S upply Fluid Temp Zone 1 1.5 GPM 2.2 ft 20 120 T Zone 2 0.5 GPM 0.6 ft 20 120 T Zone 3 0.6 GPM 1 ft 20 130 T Zone 4 0.5 GPM 0.3 ft 20 120 T Zone 5 0.4 GPM 0.2 ft 20 120 T Zone 6 0.6 GPM 0.8 ft 20 130 T Zone 7 0.6 GPM 0.8 ft 20 130 °F Zone 8 0.6 GPM 0.1 ft 20 130 T Zone 9 1.7 GPM 1.5 ft 20 130 T Heated Area Descriptions Application Construction Heated Area Product Totals Zone 1 <> Room List (Garage) Radiant Heating Slab 547 ft (3) 200' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 2 <> Room List (Entry,Laundry,Patio Hall) Radiant Heating Slab 256 ft (2) 150' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 3 <> Room List (Bedroom #2, Bathroom #2) Radiant Heating Slab 233 ft (2) 200' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 4 <> Room List (Bedroom #3, Bathroom #3) Radiant Heating Slab 233 ft (2) 175' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 5 <> Room List (Bedroom #4, Bath #4) Radiant Heating Slab 238 ft (2) 150' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 6 <> Room List (Master Bedroom,Hall Entry) Radiant Heating ThinSlab 297 ft (2) 175' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 7 <> Room List (Master Bath, Dressing) Radiant Heating ThinSlab 260 ft (2) 175' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Zone 8 <> Room List (Kitchen, Sitting) Radiant Heating ThinSlab 340 ft (3) 125' Lengths of 1/2" RadiantPEX+ Jaffe Duplex Secondary Res..rad Copyright(c) Wafts Radiant 2008 Page 1 of 3 RadiantWorks Professional Mechanical Summary Report Total System Head: 3/22/2011 Zone 9 — Room List (Great Room) 69436 BTU /h Total System Volume: 41 Gallons Total Heated Area: 3152 ft Radiant Heating ThinSlab 748 ft' (5) 250' Lengths of 112" RadiantPEX+ Heating Load Summary Tube Back/Edge Total Total Spacing Intensity Losses Required Provided Supp. (in) (BTU /h•ft (BTU /h) (BTU /h) (BTU /h) Needed Zone 12769 28592 Garage 12 23.34 3.28 12769 28592 Zone 2 4334 5417 Entry, Laundry, Patio Hall 12 16.93 3.62 4334 5417 Zone 3 5088 6106 Bedroom #2 8 17.39 4.03 2799 3504 Bathroom #2 8 31.79 6.72 2289 2602 Zone 4 4061 4776 Bedroom #3 8 18.11 2.57 2916 3233 Bathroom #3 12 15.9 1.87 1145 1543 Zone 5 3556 4579 Bedroom #4 12 15.53 3.69 3059 3512 Bath #4 8 12.11 3.22 497 1067 Zone 6 4698 6417 Master Bedroom,Hall Entry 12 15.82 4.11 4698 6417 Zone 7 5286 7146 Master Bath 12 19.95 1.51 3251 4841 Dressing 8 20.98 1.77 2035 2305 Zone 8 4791 7030 Kitchen 12 18.23 1.67 2333 2828 Sitting 12 11.6 2.34 2458 4202 Zone 9 13520 19832 Great Room 8 18.08 4.97 13520 19832 Project Summary Total Flow: 6.9 GPM Total System Head: 2.2 ft Boiler Load: 69436 BTU /h Total System Volume: 41 Gallons Total Heated Area: 3152 ft Jaffe Duplex Secondary Res..rad Copyright(c) Watts Radiant 2008 Page 2 of 3 RadiantWorks Professional Mechanical Summary Rennrt Please verify all project information for accuracy. Signature: Date: .idiie uupiex aeconaary Kes..raci Gopyright(c) Wafts Radiant 2008 Page 3 of 3 SNOWMELT CUSTOMER ALPINE MECH JOB NAME JAFFE DUPLEX LOT #13 SECONDARY RESIDENCE DATE 03/21/11 CALCULATION SHEET SQ FT AREA 1 346 AREA 2 1526 AREA 3 0 AREA 4 0 AREA 5 0 AREA 6 0 BTUH 39790 175490 0 0 0 0 BOILER INPUT BTUH 58515 258074 0 0 0 0 FEET OF TUBE 500 2250 0 0 0 0 LOOP LENGTH 250 250 0 0 0 0 # OF LOOPS 2 9 0 0 0 0 TOTAL GPM 4.0 17.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 GPM PER LOOP 2.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PD (FT) LOOP 18 17 0 0 0 0 PD (FT) SMS & SMR 3 3 0 0 0 TOTAL PD (FT) 21 20 0 0 0 0 0 COPPER S &R PIPE SIZE (IN.) 1.00 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HEPEX S &R PIPE SIZE (IN.) 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DISTANCE TO MANIFOLD 40 40 0 0 0 0 AREA TUBE SPACING (IN.) 9 9 9 9 9 TUBING PIPE SIZE (IN.) 0.625 0.625 0.625 0.625 0.625 9 0.625 ED 1/2" 0.625 =5/8' 1" 1.2 50= 1 -1/4" 1.500= 1 -1/2" 2.0 AREA 7 0 AREA 8 0 AREA 9 AREA 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 XXXX 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 0.625 0.625 0.625 0.625 TOTALS 1872 215280 316588 2750 11 21.5 1. ALL PRESSURE DROP CALCULATIONS ARE BASED ON WIRSBO HEPEX PLUS SNOWMELT AREA TUBING AND WIRSBO LARGE DIAMETER HEPEX TUBING FOR DISTRIBUTION TO MANIFOLDS. 2. BOILER INPUT CALCULATIONS ARE BASED ON BOILER EFFICIENCY, ALTITUDE DERATION FACTOR AND JOBSITE ELEVATION ENTERED ON THE "INFORMATION" SHEET. 3. DISTANCES TO MANIFOLDS ARE LISTED AS ONE WAY. SUPPLY PIPE & RETURN PIPE ARE INCLUDED IN PRESSURE DROP CALCULATIONS. 1 4. APPROXIMATELY 20' OF TUBING PER LOOP HAS BEEN ADDED FOR TAG ENS TO REACH THE SUPPLY AND RETURN MANIFOLDS. AREA l SPA PATIO & WALKWAY AREA 2 DRIVEWAY & ENTRY DESIGN BASED ON: AREA 3 XXXX BTU /H /SQ. FT. 115 AREA 4 XXXX SUPPLY & RETURN AT ( °F) 20 AREA 5 XXXX BOILER EFFICIENCY ( %) 85 AREA 6 XXXX ELEV OR NAT GAS DERATE ( %) 2.5 AREA XXXX JOBSITE ELEVATION (FT) 8000 AREA8 XXXX AREA9 XXXX WESTERN FIREPLACE SUPPLY Mailing Address: PO Box 9232, Avon, CO 81620 Avon Showroom 910 Nottingham Road, Avon, CO Phone: 970 - 827 -9623 FAX: 970 - 827 -9222 Frisco Showroom 743 Ten Mile Drive, Frisco, CO Phone: 970 - 668 -3760 FAX: 970- 6680ek Date 02124111 Proposal Job Site Name Job Name SUNDER, INC. JAFFE Address Job Location P.O. BOX 1393 P.O. BOX 1393 EDWARDS, CO City State Zip Job Phone EDWARDS CO 1 81632 (970) 390 -1885 We hereby submit specifications and estimates for: Bid 1: Primary Residence Great Room Fireplace Provide and install: 1 Heat & Glo Exclaim 50 Interior: Herringbone Gas Logs: Golden Blount Texas Split Bonfire 36" with ember burner Ignition: Low Voltage Spark to Pilot Control: Remote and wall switch Heat Management: Flue Sentinel electronic damper Includes: Air - cooled flue to vertical termination; gas log set; ignition valve with pilot extension; electronic damper; installation; fire -up; tax and permit. Bid 1 Total $7,179.51 3 Bid 3: Primary Residence Upper patio BBQ Provide and install: 1 Fire Magic Echelon 1060i (48" wide x 22" deep; 115k BTU cooking surface) Includes: 9v Spark to Pilot ignition; sheavy gauge stainless construction; stainless burners; digital thermometer w. meat probe; installation and tax. Bid 3 Total $7,077.84 Bid 2: Primary Residence Master Bedroom Gas Fireplace Provide and install: 1 Heat & Glo SL- 750- TR -IPI (36" Slim Line Direct -Vent gas Fireplace) Front: Aero Inside fit firescreen in Black Interior: Black Control: On /off switch Includes: Direct -vent flue system to horizontal termination; installation; fire -up; tax and permit. Bid 2 Total $2,331.49 PAWBOBB06100 3/24/20119:57 AM 1 of 3 WESTERN FIREPLACE SUPPLY Mailing Address: PO Box 9232, Avon, CO 81620 Avon Showroom 910 Nottingham Road, Avon, CO Phone: 970 - 827 -9623 FAX: 970 - 827 -9222 Frisco Showroom 743 Ten Mile Drive, Frisco, CO Phone: 970 - 668 -3760 FAX: 970 - 6680.x Date 02124111 Proposal Job Site Name Job Name SUNDER, INC. JAFFE Address Job Location P.O. BOX 1393 P.O. BOX 1393 EDWARDS, CO City State Zip Job Phone EDWARDS CO 1 81632 (970) 390 -1885 vve nereoy suoma speciTications and estimates tor: Bid 4: Primary Residence Upper Patio Fire -Pit (Provide and install: 1 Hearth Products Controls 36 FSS HWI HC Fire -Pit (36" OD pan; high capacity hub) Logs: Golden Blount Grand Fire -Pit Includes: 36" stainless pan; high capacity ignition valve with 3/4" inlet and outlet; volcanic stone; lava rock; 30" stainless high capacity burner ring; installation; fire -up; tax and permit. Bid 4 Total 357.74 (Bid 5: Secondary Residence Great Room Fireplace Provide and install: 1 Heat & Glo Exclaim 50 Interior: Herringbone Gas Logs: Golden Blount Texas Split Bonfire 36" with ember burner Ignition: Low Voltage Spark to Pilot Control: Remote and wall switch Heat Management: Flue Sentinel electronic damper Includes: Air - cooled flue to vertical termination; gas log set; ignition valve with pilot extension; electronic damper; installation; fire -up; tax and permit. Bid 5 Total 6: Secondary Residence Great Room Fireplace on 2 Provide and install: 1 Golden Blount El Grande 5030 (50" B -Vent; Open Hearth Gas Fireplace) Interior: Choice of Grey, Buff, Antique Red, or Charcoal in Herringbone or Linear Logs: Choice of Bonfire, Texas Stack or Texas Hickory Ignition: Spark to Pilot Control: On /off switch Heat Management: Manual safety damper Includes: B -vent flue to vertical termination; installation; fire -up; tax and permit. RVATBUBB06100 3/24/20119:57 AM 2of3 Jaffe duplex primary side OPTIONAL LOAD CALC. PER NEC 220 -80 DESCRIPTION OF LOAD QUAN LOAD (VA) TOTAL LOAD (VA) LIGHTING AND RECEPT. (4440 SQ.FT. X 3VA) 4440 3 13320 SMALL APPLIANCE CIRCUIT 3 1500 4500 LAUNDRY CIRCUIT 1 1500 1500 GAS RANGE AND HOOD 1 1500 1500 DISPOSAL 2 1200 2400 REFRIGERATOR 2 950 1900 TRASH COMPACTOR 950 0 GAS FIREPLACE 1 450 450 DISHWASHER 1 950 950 RANGE 1 8000 8000 STEAMER 20200 0 CIRCULATION PUMP 460 0 HUMIDIFIER 0 HOT TUB 1 5000 5000 WHIRLPOOL TUB WO/ HEATER 1500 0 BOILERS / GAS FURNACE 1 1800 1800 FAN COIL 0 AC CONDENSOR 1 3000 3000 POND AIRRATOR 0 DRYER 1 5000 5000 1800 0 GARAGE DOOR 2 800 1600 TOTAL 50920 MOTORS: PUMPS 450 0 HEATING /COOLING (LARGEST LOAD @ 100 %) 2 0 TOTAL @ 100% 0 LARGEST 100% OF 10kVA 10000 40% OF REAMAINDER 16368 100 % of line 32 0 0 TOTAL CALCULATED LOAD: 26368 25% FUTURE FACTOR 6592 TOTAL KW 32960 VOLTAGE 240 SINGLE PHASE: TOTAL CALCULATED VAl240V= 137.3333333 AMPS Jaffe Duplex secondary side OPTIONAL LOAD CALC. PER NEC 220 -80 DESCRIPTION OF LOAD QUAN LOAD (VA) TOTAL LOAD (VA) LIGHTING AND RECEPT. (2820 SQ.FT. X 3VA) 2820 3 8460 SMALL APPLIANCE CIRCUIT 2 1500 3000 LAUNDRY CIRCUIT 1 1500 1500 GAS RANGE AND HOOD 1 1500 1500 DISPOSAL 2 1200 2400 REFRIGERATOR 1 950 950 TRASH COMPACTOR 950 0 GAS FIREPLACE 1 450 450 DISHWASHER 1 950 950 RANGE 1 8000 8000 STEAMER 20200 0 CIRCULATION PUMP 460 0 HUMIDIFIER 0 HOT TUB 1 8000 8000 WHIRLPOOL TUB WO/ HEATER 1500 0 BOILERS / GAS FURNACE 1 1800 1800 FAN COIL 0 AC CONDENSOR 1 3000 3000 POND AIRRATOR 0 DRYER 1 5000 5000 1800 0 GARAGE DOOR 2 800 1600 TOTAL MOTORS: PUMPS HEATING /COOLING (LARGEST LOAD @ 100 %) TOTAL @ 100% LARGEST 100% OF 10kVA 40% OF REAMAINDER 100 % of line 32 TOTAL CALCULATED LOAD: TOTAL KW VOLTAGE SINGLE PHASE: TOTAL CALCULATED VAl240V- 2 450 25% FUTURE FACTOR 46610 0 0 0 10000 14644 0 0 24644 6161 30805 240 128.3541667 AMPS M 14 -10 -7 3 2. Height Limits For Light Fixtures: Outdoor lights affixed to a structure shall not exceed the height of the roof eaves. The maximum mounting height for light sources on a pole shall not exceed twenty feet (20'). 3. Full Cutoff: All outdoor lights shall be fully cut off to not emit light above the horizontal plane of the light source. Outdoor lights must be Illumi- nating Engineering Society (IES) "full cutoff" class, International Dark -Sky Association (IDA) approved, or have similarly recognized verification of being full cutoff. Lights must be in- stalled and maintained in such a man- ner that the full cutoff is effective. Exceptions: The following outdoor lights may be nonfull cutoff: a. Uplighting fully contained by an overhanging building element that prevents the light from emitting up- ward to the sky, when the light source is shielded from the sides. b. Uplighting for flags when the light source is shielded from the sides. c. Lights with a gas flame as the sole light source. d. Lights specifically recommended by the Vail comprehensive plan. 4. Lighting Direction: All outdoor light- ing shall be directed at the object intended to be illuminated and away from adjacent properties and public ways. Outdoor lights shall be directed downward, unless contained by over- hanging building or landscape ele- ments with the light source shielded from the sides. Uplighting is allowed August 2010 E Town. of Vail 14 -10 -7 for flags when the light source is shielded from the sides. 5. Energy Efficiency: All outdoor light- ing shall comply with the town's adopted energy conservation code. Lighting Guidelines: 1. Compatibility: All outdoor lighting fixtures, fixture locations, and the color and intensity on the lighting should be aesthetically compatible with the site and structures on which they are located, the character of the surroundings, and with Vail's environ- ment. Outdoor lighting must also be consistent with any applicable design guidelines outlined in the Vail compre- hensive plan. 2. Light Pollution: All outdoor lights should be designed, installed, and maintained to minimize the contribu- tion of outdoor lighting to nighttime light pollution. Examples of low light pollution fixtures are available from lighting manufacturers and organiza- tions such as the International Dark - Sky Association (IDA). 3. Energy Efficiency: Outdoor lighting should use the least number of light sources necessary to achieve the safety and aesthetic purposes for the lighting. Outdoor lighting should utilize energy efficient light sources of the lowest wattage feasible, and utilize energy efficient technologies. Outdoor lighting should also be operated and maintained to eliminate any unneces- sary daytime use and to reduce night- time use during nonbusiness hours and periods of limited residential ac- tivity. Hinkley Lighting 59009BZ Line Voltage 9W CFL Outdoor Brick Light Page 1 of 2 b Web Images Videos Maps News Shopping Gmail more ♦ My Shopoina List C,0 :t le produCis step lights outdoor Search Products Hinkley Lighting 59009BZ Line Voltage 9W CFL Outdoor Brick Light overview- Compare prices - Related Items Wiring: 6" of usable 200° C, 18 AWG vdre leads along with ground lead. Housing 5.25 "W, Add to Shopping List Compare prices +AAAi Show only: r ._.Ogle CheckoiR r Free shipping F New items Tax and shipping for Denver, CO 80012 - Change AAAAr _w *AAA. f` kAAA AA*A AAkAr AAAAr t? AAAA/ View all 23 sellers Related items Sellers 1 - 10 of 23 Next) http : / / «N , W.google.com /products /catalog ?riz= 1T4GGIC_enUS321 US321 &d= step +lights +... 6/14/2010 dar� sky ligliting 110Y m (2) FDtry1fgygr (30) f alvy (42) -Wr49e (1) Gard n (6) !L4voy (15) 1,1018 Of bons ... .. ....... .. Height O To 12 (143) 12 To 24 Inches (417) 24 To 36 Inches (90) 36 To 48 Inches (6) Width 9L1g_U K!&5 (544) 12 10 24 In 1c tes (100) _. ......... —.._ ... Cnorinl F1. In R fPV_gY_`liit (120) 13 i-fh2l,"d ( P rk -ky Complian t (426) Pncls l d€ 3.1191 t LLil (i) Blade Span . 1 19 60 Inches (1) Blade Pi tch 13 To 15 Deare (1) Number of Bulbs p To 3 Llahts (686) s74 Ll lght (6) Collection /berdeen (6) — N tcess0rie s (2) Ltdalr r s (6) Pflclan0_0 (3) lltris (1) MAS (5) V More Options F LotllDate F ujai Date F t'c:nD!rt AL r Lmnuate r tg9lpat£ llttp:/hvww.liglitingd irect.conl/i ndex.efln ?page= searcii:browse&tenii=... h lchler 3119 Craftsman / Mission 1 Ught Outdoor Wall : 6 Sconce from the Dark Skies Ught Collection Our Price: Specifications $107.80 • Bulb Type: Fluorescent Dark Skies Lights Cotection • Height: 12 Ava able In Archtectural Bronze • Number of Bulbs: 1 • Width: 6.125 Dew, $ichler 3 IM Contemporary / Modem 1 Light Outdoor Wall Sconce from the Dark Skies Ught Collection Our Price: $107.80 Dark Skies Lights Corxtion Avaabc in Arch'tectural Bronze v it Specifications • Bulb Type: Fluorescent • Height: 12 • Number or Bulbs: 1 • Width: 7 H o DDelarls ]Yorid lmoorls WI9001 Traditional / Classic Dark Sky One Ught Post Ught from the Dark Sky Collection Our Price: $142.20 Dark Sky collection Avalable In Bronze l. 16 Specifications • Bulb Type: incandescent • Height: 7.87 • Number of Bulbs: 1 • Width: 14.2 Hore Details 1 M ro Id lrnuor[s W19098 Traditional / Classic Dark Sky Single Light Outdoor Pendant from the Dark Sky Collection Our Price: $124.20 Dark Sky Colection AVAUbie in 7 Finishes i �. to Specifications r Bulb Type: Incandescent • Configuration: Pendant • Height: 11, 13.75 • Number of Bulbs: 1 • Width: 12, 13.75 Non Dataib PLC Liahtino PLC 1816 Functional 1 Ught Outdoor Wall Sconce from the Dark Sky Collection Our Price: $70.20 YDJ Save: 10ti�, Dark Sky Cokctbn Avaaabke In 3 Finishes i ,. , :b Specifications • Bulb Type: Incandescent • Height: 6 • Number of Bulbs: 1 • Width: 8 2 of 11 3/21/2011 1:53 PM 07-24-2012 Inspection Request Reporting X Page 1 4:28 pm _ Vail, CO - City_O _ Requested Inspect Date: Wednesday,July 25, 2012 Site Address: 1456 WESTHAVEN CR VAIL A/P/D Information Activity B11-0049 Type: COMBO Sub Type: ADUP Status: ISSUED Const Type Occupancy: Use: R-3 Insp Area: Owner 1456 VAIL LLC Contractor: SUNDER INC Phone: (970)926-2777 Description: PRIMARY SIDE/NORTH SIDE Requested Inspection(s) Item 534 PLAN-FINAL CIO Requested Time: 08:30 AM Requestor Phone: Comments 390-1885 Assigned To BGIBSON Entered By: MHAEBERLE K Action Time Exp: ilpr ) /3G 1/2S/iz- Inspection History Item: 501 PW-Access/StaginD/Erosion Item: 10 BLDG-FOOTING * Approved** 06/16/11 Inspector: JRM Action: PA PARTIAL APPROVAL Comment: PRIMARY FOOTER PARTIAL DETAIL K/S20 ON PAGE S.3.0 NOT DONE AS WELL AS S/W TRIANGLE FOOTER. 07/11/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: PI PARTIAL INSPECTION Comment: see highlighted plans for progress 08/30/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: AP APPROVED Comment: thickened slab Item: 20 BLDG-Foundation/Steel **Approved** 06/29/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: PI PARTIAL INSPECTION Comment: see highlighted plans for progress 07/11/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: PI PARTIAL INSPECTION Comment: see highlighted plans for progress 07/25/11 Inspector: JRM Action: AP APPROVED Comment: SPA AAND GARAGE WALL ONLY 08/10/11 Inspector: mdenney Action: AP APPROVED Comment: footings and pilasters, 2 at entry and 1 in garage. Monolithic pour. Item: 110 ELEC-Service **Approved** 02/02/12 Inspector: sgremmer Action: AP APPROVED Comment: Item: 120 ELEC-Rough **Approved** 02/01/12 Inspector: sgremmer Action: DN DENIED Comment: no electrical boxes or wire in pleneums 02/02/12 Inspector: sgremmer Action: AP APPROVED Comment: Item: 210 PLMB-Underground **Approved ** 08/24/11 inspector: sgremmer Action: AP APPROVED Comment: Item: 220 PLMB-Rough/D.W.V. **Approved** 02/07/12 Inspector: JRM Action: AP APPROVED Comment: Item: 230 PLMB-Rough/Water **Approved** 02/07/12 Inspector: JRM Action: AP APPROVED Comment: Item: 240 PLMB-Gas Piping **Approved** 02/07/12 Inspector: JRM Action: AP APPROVED Comment: 60#AND 10#AIR TEST Item: 260 PLMB-Misc. REPT131 Run Id: 14657 t 1 f 08-08-2012 Inspection Request Reporting Page 3 4:18 pm Vail, CO - City Of Requested Inspect Date: Thursday,August 09 2012 Site Address: 1456 WEStTHAVEN CR VAIL A/P/D Information Activity B11-0049 Type: COMBO Sub Type: ADUP Status: ISSUED 1 Const Type Occupancy: Use: R-3 Insp Area: Owner 1456 VAIL LLC r Contractor: SUNDER INC Phone: (970)926-2777 I Description: PRIMARY SIDE/NORTH SIDE t 1 Requested Inspection(s) Item: 190 ELEC-Final Requested Time: 08:00 AM Requestor: SUNDER INC Phone: (970)926-2777 -or- cell- 390-1885 Comments 376-616 Assigned To + */i Entered By: JMONDRAGON K Action Time Exp: vii.11 1 I Inspection History Item: 501 PW-Access/Staging/Erosion Item: 10 BLDG-FOOTING Approved** 06/16/11 Inspector: JRM Action: PA PARTIAL APPROVAL Comment: PRIMARY FOOTER PARTIAL DETAIL K/S20 ON PAGE S.3.0 NOT DONE AS WELL AS S/W TRIANGLE FOOTER. 07/11/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: PI PARTIAL INSPECTION Comment: see highlighted plans for progress 08/30/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: AP APPROVED Comment: thickened slab Item: 20 BLDG-Foundation/Steel **Approved** 06/29/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: PI PARTIAL INSPECTION Comment: see highlighted plans for progress 07/11/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: PI PARTIAL INSPECTION ; Comment: see highlighted plans for progress 07/25/11 Inspe or: JRM Action: AP APPROVED Comment: SPA AAND GARAGE WALL ONLY 08/10/11 Inspector: mdenney Action: AP APPROVED Comment: footings and pilasters,2 at entry and 1 in garage. Monolithic pour. Item: 110 ELEC-Service **Approved** 02/02/12 Inspector: sgremmer Action: AP APPROVED Comment: Item: 120 ELEC-Rough **Approved** 02/01/12 Inspector: sgremmer Action: DN DENIED Comment: no electrical boxes or wire in pleneums 02/02/12 Inspector: sgremmer Action: AP APPROVED Comment: Item: 210 PLMB-Underground **Approved** 08/24/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: AP APPROVED Comment: Item: 220 PLMB-Rough/D.W.V. **Approved** 02/07/12 Inspector: JRM Action: AP APPROVED Comment: Item: 230 PLMB-Rough/Water **Approved** 02/07/12 Inspector: JRM Action: AP APPROVED Comment: Item: 240 PLMB-Gas Piping **Approved** 02/07/12 Inspector: JRM Action: AP APPROVED Comment: 60#AND 10#AIR TEST REPT131 Run Id: 14769 08-20-2012 Inspection Request Reporting Page 1 4:03 pm Vail, CO - City Of Requested Inspect Date: Tuesday,August 21 2012 Site Address: 1456 WESTI{AVEN CR VAIL PRIMARY SIDE/SOUTH SIDE g' A/P/D Information Activity B11-0049 Type: COMBO Sub Type: ADUP Status: ISSUED Const Type Occupancy: Use: R-3 Insp Area: Owner 1456 VAIL LLC Contractor: SUNDER INC Phone: (970)926-2777 Description: PRIMARY SIDE/SOUTH SIDE Requested Inspection(s) Item: 290 PLMB-Final Requested Time: 03:30 PM Requestor: SUNDER INC Phone: (970)926-2777 -or- cell- 90-1885 Comments 390-9998 Assigned To JMO 1 .,'1.GON Entered By: JMONDRAGON K Action •i 0a Time Exp: Item: 390 MECH-Final Requested Time: 04:00 PM Requestor: SUNDER INC Phone: (970)926-2777 -or- cell- 390-1885 Comments 390-9998 Assigned To JM•>>,'AGON Entered By: JMONDRAGON K Action / :LL Time Exp: Inspection History Item: 501 PW-Access/Staging/Erosion Item: 10 BLDG-FOOTING * Approved** 06/16/11 Inspector: JRM Action: PA PARTIAL APPROVAL Comment: PRIMARY FOOTER PARTIAL DETAIL K/S20 ON PAGE S.3.0 NOT DONE AS WELL AS S/W TRIANGLE FOOTER. 07/11/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: PI PARTIAL INSPECTION Comment: see highlighted plans for progress 08/30/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: AP APPROVED Comment: thickened slab Item: 20 BLDG-Foundation/Steel **Approved** 06/29/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: PI PARTIAL INSPECTION Comment: see highlighted plans for progress 07/11/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: PI PARTIAL INSPECTION Comment: see highlighted plans for progress 07/25/11 Inspector: JRM Action: AP APPROVED Comment: SPA AAND GARAGE WALL ONLY 08/10/11 Inspector: mdenney Action: AP APPROVED Comment: footings and pilasters,2 at entry and 1 in garage. Monolithic pour. Item: 110 ELEC-Service **Approved** 02/02/12 Inspector: sgremmer Action: AP APPROVED Comment: Item: 120 ELEC-Rough **Approved** 02/01/12 Inspector: sgremmer Action: DN DENIED Comment: no electrical boxes or wire in pleneums 02/02/12 Inspector: sgremmer Action: AP APPROVED Comment: Item: 210 PLMB-Underground **Approved** 08/24/11 Inspector: sgremmer Action: AP APPROVED REPT131 Run Id: 14812