HomeMy WebLinkAboutB08-014509 -29 -2011 Inspection Request Reporting Page 1
AAA nm Vail_ CO - City_ O
Requested Inspect Date: Friday, September 30, 2011
Site Address: 333 BEAVER DAM RD VAIL
333 BEAVER DAM RD
A/P /D Information
Activity: B08 -0145 Type: B -BLD Sub Type: NSFR Status: ISSUED
Const Type: 101 Occupancy: Use: Insp Area:
Owner: PAUL G. SMITH O TRUST -
Contractor: DOLAN CONSTRUCTION, INC. Phone: (970) 926 -8054
Description: D OUM O CONCRETE F RESIDENCE- 2 STORY WOOD AND STEEL FRAMED BUILDING OVER A WALK-
Requested Inspection(s)
Item: 533 PLAN - TEMP. C/O
Requestor: DOLAN CONSTRUCTION, INC.
Requested Time: 08:00 AM
Phone: (970) 926 -8054 -or- 970 -
471 -3626, Charlie
Comments:
Assigned To:
471 -1737
BGIBSON
Entered B y
JMONDRAGON K
Action:
Comment:
Time Exp:
requir or inco plete exterior w
?i
l
Item
Requestor:
-Lj
W530 BLDG -Temp C/O
DOLAN CONSTRUCTION, INC.
Requested Time:
Phone:
08:45 AM
(970) 926 -8054 . -or- 970 -
471 -3626, Charlie
Comments:
Assigned To:
471 -1737
JMONDRAGON
Entered B y
JMONDRAGON K
Action:
Comment:
Time Exp
IT FINALS. PW AND PLANNING
DENIED... OK
GIVEN TO MOVE N FURNITURE
Item:
Requestor:
Comments:
Assigned To:
Action:
Comment:
532 PW -TEMP. C/O
DOLAN CONSTRUCTION, INC.
471 -1737
JMONDRAGON
Time Exp
Not ea y
Requested Time: 08:30 AM
Phone: 970) 926 -8054 -or- 970 -
471 -3626, Charlie
Entered By: JMONDRAGON K
Inspection Hi�
Inspe ry
Item: 501 PW- Access /Staging /Erosion
Item: 502 PW -Rough Driveway Grade
09/28711 Inspector: Is Action: DN DENIED o
Comment: Driveway exceeded approved grading shown on plans. Currently over 12% in a couple of
locations.
09/28/11 Inspector: Is Action: DN DENIED
Comment: Not ready
Item: 503 PW -Final Driveway Grade
Item: 10 BLDG - FOOTING — Approved -
11/05/08 Inspector: JGG Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: Minor corrections to matt done on site by Jesus. Ready to pour, OK
11/19/08 Inspector: JGG Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: Footings have some water to drain, done on -site during inspection.
Form mising from footing, added 2x8 while on -site.
REPT131 Run Id: 13557
NOTE: THIS PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOBSITE AT ALL TIMES
j �
MROF VAb
Town of Vail, Community Development, 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
p. 970.479.2139, f. 970.479.2452, inpsections 970.479.2149
NEW (SFR,P /S,DUP) PERMIT Permit #: B08 -0145
Project #:
Job Address: 333 BEAVER DAM RD VAIL
Location......: 333 BEAVER DAM RD
Parcel No....: 210107112006
OWNER PAUL G. SMITH REVOCABLE TRUS 05/13/2008
8101 E PRENTICE AVE STE 400
GREENWOOD VILLAGE
CO 80111
APPLICANT DOLAN CONSTRUCTION, INC. 05/13/2008 Phone: (970) 926 -8054
PO BOX 2721
EDWARDS
COLORADO 81632
License: 359 -A
CONTRACTOR DOLAN CONSTRUCTION, INC. 05/13/2008
PO BOX 2721
EDWARDS
COLORADO 81632
License: 359 -A
Phone: (970) 926 -8054
Description:
DEMO /REBUILD OF RESIDENCE- 2 STORY WOOD AND STEEL FRAMED
BUILDING OVER A WALK -OUT CONCRETE BASEMENT
Occupancy Type
Totals...
Number of Dwelling Units:
Factor Sq Feet Valuation
10,358 $2,257,500.00=
Occupancy:
Type Construction:
Building Permit Fee ------ > $10,200.45
Plan Check--------------- - - - - -> $6,630.29
Add'I Plan Check Hours -> $110.00
Investigation --------------- —> $0.00
Status .. :
Applied ..
Issued ...
Expires ...:
PRJ07 -0589
ISSUED
05/13/2008
11/19/2009
12/03/2008
Town of Vail Adjusted Valuation: $2,257,500.00
Total Sq Ft Added: 10358
•______ «_____ «_ « « «_______ «_ «« FEE SUMMARY
Will Call--------------------- - - - - -> $4.00 Total Calculated Fees ------------- > $63,448.44
Use Tax Fee --------------------- > $44,950.00 Additional Fees ------------- — -------- > $0.00
Restuarant Plan Review --- > $0.00 TOTAL PERMIT FEES--------- - - - - -> $63,448.44
Recreation Fee ---------------- > $1,553.70
Payments ------------------------------- > $63,448.44
Total Calculated Fees ------ > $63,448.44 BALANCE DUE ------------------------ > $0.00
DECLARATIONS
I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application, filled out in full the information required, completed an accurate plot plan, and state that all the information
as required is correct. I agree to comply with the information and plot plan, to comply with all Town ordinances and state laws, and to build this structure
according to the towns zoning and subdivision codes, design review approved, International Building and Residential Codes and other ordinances of the Town
applicable thereto.
R ESTS FOR INSPEC N ALL BE MADE TWENTY -FOUR HOURS IN ADVANCE BY TELEPHONE AT 970.479.2149 OR AT OUR OFFICE FROM
OA 4:00 PM
J -
Signature of Owner or % ontractor Date
L-. Sn(p_ �
Print Name
new_construction_pe rm it_041908
APPROVALS
Permit , #: B08 -0145 as of 11 -19 -2009 Status: ISSUED
Item: 05100 BUILDING DEPARTMENT
05/29/2008 jplano Action: CR
F:\cdev\CHRIS\PERMIT.COMMENTS\BO8-0145\BO8-0145. DOC
06/05/2008 jplano Action: AP
10/30/2008 JPLANO Action: AP FOOTING CHANGES
APPROVED, 2 HOURS OF PLAN REVIEW DUE.
Item: 05400 PLANNING DEPARTMENT
05/15/2008 bgibson Action: DN roof height issues
must be resolved prior to bldg. permit approval
06/05/2008 bgibson Action: COND revised ceiling
must be solid framed lid
11/16/2009 bgibson Action: AP revisions for
electrical panel enclosure approved by planning. plans
routed to martin haeberle.
Item: 05600 FIRE DEPARTMENT
05/28/2008 drhoades Action: AP Approved as
noted:
1. Distance around perimeter is approximately 636
feet. Per Internation Fire Code, Section 503.1.1, fire
sprinkler system is required. Landscaping and grade
changes also impede access around peritmeter.
2. Monitored Fire Alarm System required and shall comply
with NFPA 72 and Town of Vail Standards.
3. Fire Sprinkler System required and shall comply with
NFPA 13R and Town of Vail Standards.
Item: 05500 PUBLIC WORKS
06/05/2008 cdelles Action: DN Public Works needs
a copy of wetland mitigation report
06/05/2008 cdelles Action: COND Utility company
sign off is required for the water feature that is
partially in the west utility easement.
Item: 05101 BUILDING DEPT REVISION
11/19/2009 Martin Action: AP Electrical panel
enclosure
See the Conditions section of this Document for any that may apply.
new_constructio n_perm it_041908
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Permit #: B08 -0145 as of 11 -19 -2009 Status: ISSUED
Cond: 33
(PLAN) THIS PROJECT WILL REQUIRED A SITE IMPROVEMENT
SURVEY. SUCH SURVEY SHALL BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED PRIOR
TO REQUEST FOR A FRAME INSPECTION.
Cond: 12
(BLDG.): FIELD INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED TO CHECK FOR CODE
COMPLIANCE.
Cond: CON0010024
Monitored Fire Alarm System required and shall comply with
NFPA 72 and Town of Vail Standards.
Cond: CON0010025
Fire Sprinkler System required and shall comply with NFPA
13R and Town of Vail Standards.
Cond: CON0010056
WINDOW U VALUES TO BE .28
Cond: CON0010055
STRUCTURUAL GUNITE DETAILS REQUIRED FOR THE POOLS /HOTTUBS
PRIOR TO INSPECTION OF THESE AREAS
Cond: CON0010057
GEO- THERMAL SYSTEM REQUIRED, OR NEW RESCHECK REQUIRED
new struction_permit_041908
C fGlc� inn
�SMITT FORM
Revision Submittals: 1 \
-�1 ^ ? "Field Set" of approved plans MUST ac ny revision
2. No further inspections will be performe until the revisions are ap ro & the permit is re- issued.
3. Fees for reviewing revisions are $55.00 per hour (2 hour minimum), dr(d lire cl ve upon issuance.
Permit
applies to:
� I i
Project 3 Street ddres�� �O,J
(Num - ber) (Street)
Building /Complex Name:
entionl � Revisions
t () Response to Correction Letter
_attached copy of correction letter
() Deferred Submittal
( ) Other
(Suite #)
Contact In rmation:
Company: 61 _z c�M
Company Address: r
City: C "�F1lc� State: �~ Zip:
Contact Name:
Contact Phone: /c
E -Mail t .1`)�2�. a�.Sc1L' llo'i
Valuations (Labor & Material))
Building:
Plumbing:
Electrical:
Mechanical:
Total:
s _ - 75 - 00 '—"
� Nv- Si z�
es
C(( Ay
US of�9'
� f
Description List of .-
42 - to
�•_ .t. �. � ALL � _.
M — Eff — ME
Date
kc
�LA
q**
I- Sep -09 A-6
NOTE: THIS PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOBSITE AT ALL TIMES
6
TOWNOF VAII
Town of Vail, Community Development, 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
p. 970.479.2139, f. 970.479.2452, inpsections 970.479.2149
NEW (SFR,P /S,DUP) PERMIT Permit #: B08 -0145
Project #: PRJ07 -0589
Job Address: 333 BEAVER DAM RD VAIL
Location......: 333 BEAVER DAM RD
Parcel No....: 210107112006
OWNER PAUL G. SMITH REVOCABLE TRUS 05/13/2008
8101 E PRENTICE AVE STE 400
GREENWOOD VILLAGE
CO 80111
APPLICANT DOLAN CONSTRUCTION, INC. 05/13/2008 Phone: (970) 926 -8054
PO BOX 2721
EDWARDS
COLORADO 81632
License: 359 -A
CONTRACTOR DOLAN CONSTRUCTION, INC. 05/13/2008 Phone: (970) 926 -8054
PO BOX 2721
EDWARDS
COLORADO 81632
License: 359 -A
Description:
DEMO /REBUILD OF RESIDENCE- 2 STORY WOOD AND STEEL FRAMED
BUILDING OVER A WALK -OUT CONCRETE BASEMENT
Occupancy Type
Totals...
Number of Dwelling Units:
Occupancy:
Type Construction:
Factor Sq Feet Valuation
10,358 $2,250,000.00`
Status ..
ISSUED
Applied ..:
05/13/2008
Issued ...:
06/06/2008
Expires ...:
12/03/2008
Town of Vail Adjusted Valuation: $2,250,000.00
Total Sq Ft Added: 10358
...................................>...,.,, ,,..,.,.....,,................. FEE SUMMARY ,,,,,,.. .... ._,_....... .,,.,.. ........ ..,.,................... ,........... .....
Building Permit Fee ------ >
$10,171.25
Will Call--------------------- - - - - ->
$4.00 Total Calculated Fees ------------- > $63,250.26
Plan Check--------------- - - - - ->
$6,611.31
Use Tax Fee --------------------- >
$44,800.00 Additional Fees------------------ - - - - -> $0.00
Add'I Plan Check Hours ->
$110.00
Restuarant Plan Review --- >
$0.00 TOTAL PERMIT FEES--------- - - - - -> $63,250.26
Investigation------------ - - - - ->
$0.00
Recreation Fee ---------------- >
$1,553.70
Payments ------------------------------- > $63,250.26
Total Calculated Fees ------ > $63,250.26 BALANCE DUE ------------------------ > $0.00
DECLARATIONS
I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application, filled out in full the information required, completed an accurate plot plan, and state that all the information
as required is correct. I agree to comply with the information and plot plan, to comply with all Town ordinances and state laws, and to build this structure
according to the towns zoning and subdivision codes, design review approved, International Building and Residential Codes and other ordinances of the Town
applicable thereto.
REQUESTS FOR INSPECTION SHALL BE MADE TWENTY -FOUR HOURS IN ADVANCE BY TELEPHONE AT 970.479.2149 OR AT OUR OFFICE FROM
8:00 AM- 4:00PM
'A'(11 C�Lc 1d /3o fps
'Signature of Owner or Contractor Date
Print Name
new_construction_permit_041908
APPROVALS
Permit #: B08 -0145 as of 10 -30 -2008 Status: ISSUED
Item: 05100 BUILDING DEPARTMENT
05/29/2008 jplano Action: CR
F: \cdev\ CHRIS \PERMIT.COMMENTS \B08 - 0145 \B08 -0145. DOC
06/05/2008 jplano Action: AP
10/30/2008 JPLANO Action: AP FOOTING CHANGES
APPROVED, 2 HOURS OF PLAN REVIEW DUE.
Item: 05400 PLANNING DEPARTMENT
05/15/2008 bgibson Action: DN roof height issues
must be resolved prior to bldg. permit approval
06/05/2008 bgibson Action: COND revised ceiling
must be solid framed lid
Item: 05600 FIRE DEPARTMENT
05/28/2008 drhoades Action: AP Approved as
noted:
1. Distance around perimeter is approximately 636
feet. Per Internation Fire Code, Section 503.1.1, fire
sprinkler system is required. Landscaping and grade
changes also impede access around peritmeter.
2. Monitored Fire Alarm System required and shall comply
with NFPA 72 and Town of Vail Standards.
3. Fire Sprinkler System required and shall comply with
NFPA 13R and Town of Vail Standards.
Item: 05500 PUBLIC WORKS
06/05/2008 cdelles Action: DN Public Works needs
a copy of wetland mitigation report
06/05/2008 cdelles Action: COND Utility company
sign off is required for the water feature that is
partially in the west utility easement.
See the Conditions section of this Document for any that may apply.
new_construction_perm it_041908
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Permit #: B08 -0145 as of 10 -30 -2008 Status: ISSUED
Cond: 33
(PLAN) THIS PROJECT WILL REQUIRED A SITE IMPROVEMENT
SURVEY. SUCH SURVEY SHALL BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED PRIOR
TO REQUEST FOR A FRAME INSPECTION.
Cond: 12
(BLDG.): FIELD INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED TO CHECK FOR CODE
COMPLIANCE.
Cond: CON0010024
Monitored Fire Alarm System required and shall comply with
NFPA 72 and Town of Vail Standards.
Cond: CON0010025
Fire Sprinkler System required and shall comply with NFPA
13R and Town of Vail Standards.
Cond: CON0010056
WINDOW U VALUES TO BE .28
Cond: CON0010055
STRUCTURUAL GUNITE DETAILS REQUIRED FOR THE POOLS /HOTTUBS
PRIOR TO INSPECTION OF THESE AREAS
Cond: CON0010057
GEO- THERMAL SYSTEM REQUIRED, OR NEW RESCHECK REQUIRED
new_construction_permit_041908
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:
iI:I
Attention:
Revisions
() Response to Correction Letter
_attached copy of correction letter
() Deferred Submittal
() Other
Project Address: J_3_3 '34CAUFR pA/� RdALJ Description /List of Changes:
FOUND WN F607INC5 6 - NZ4R6c�0
Contact Information
Company: Q0L,0 Cfju57 JMC
Company Ph: ?D5y Fax:
Contact Name: ( fAWIE DoL .9
1 ,?6 - kds j/
Contact Ph: 1-0 Cell: `ITD- Y7r -76
E -Mail: i20AG49WWS7X&1!:, 'TlDNrgl YA
Town of Vail Contractor Registration No: 359
X
Signature (required)
Revised ADDITIONAL Valuations (Labor & Materials)
(DO NOT include original valuation)
Building $ 4' ;3 500
Plumbing $
Electrical $
Mechanical $
Fire Sprinkler /Alarm $
Total $ 35
z *cs
j Due -
AP410R WR4 -f- F'00TEA HFIG#7 eh( MG��
(Use additional sheet if necessary)
Date Receiv ' : E
2 8 2008
TOWN OF VAIL
NOTE: THIS PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOBSITE AT ALL TIMES
TOWN O VVM
Town of Vail, Community Development, 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
p. 970.479.2139, f. 970.479.2452, inpsections 970.479.2149
NEW (SFR,P /S,DUP) PERMIT Permit #: B08 -0145
Project #: PRJ07 -0589
Job Address: 333 BEAVER DAM RD VAIL
Location......: 333 BEAVER DAM RD
Parcel No....: 210107112006
OWNER PAUL G. SMITH REVOCABLE TRUS 05/13/2008
8101 E PRENTICE AVE STE 400
GREENWOOD VILLAGE
CO 80111
APPLICANT DOLAN CONSTRUCTION, INC. 05/13/2008 Phone: (970) 926 -8054
PO BOX 2721
EDWARDS
COLORADO 81632
License: 359 -A
CONTRACTOR DOLAN CONSTRUCTION, INC 05/13/2008 Phone: (970) 926 -8054
PO BOX 2721
EDWARDS
COLORADO 81632
License: 359 -A
Description:
DEMO /REBUILD OF RESIDENCE- 2 STORY WOOD AND STEEL FRAMED
BUILDING OVER A WALK -OUT CONCRETE BASEMENT
Occupancy Type
Totals...
Number of Dwelling Units:
Occupancy:
Type Construction:
Factor Sq Feet Valuation
10,358 $2,250,000.00'
Status .
ISSUED
Applied ..:
05/13/2008
Issued ...:
06/06/2008
Expires ...:
12/03/2008
Town of Vail Adjusted Valuation: $2,250,000.00
Total Sq Ft Added: 10358
.................................................. ............................... FEE SUMMARY ..._,.,....,...._........,.....,.._..,,..,...... ....,.,,.,..,,,,.,.......,.....
Building Permit Fee ------ >
$10,171.25
Will Call --------------------------- >
$4.00
Total Calculated Fees ------------- >
$63,140.26
Plan Check--------------- - - - - ->
$6,611.31
Use Tax Fee --------------------- >
$44,800.00
Additional Fees------------------ - - - - ->
$0.00
Add'I Plan Check Hours ->
$0.00
Restuarant Plan Review --- >
$0.00
TOTAL PERMIT FEES--------- - - - - ->
$63,140.26
Investigation------------ - - - - ->
$0.00
Recreation Fee ---------------- >
$1,553.70
Payments ------------------------------- >
$63,140.26
Total Calculated Fees ------ >
$63,140.26
BALANCE DUE .>
$0.00
DECLARATIONS
I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application, filled out in full the information required, completed an accurate plot plan, and state that all the information
as required is correct. I agree to comply with the information and plot plan, to comply with all Town ordinances and state laws, and to build this structure
according to the towns zoning and subdivision codes, design review approved, International Building and Residential Codes and other ordinances of the Town
applicable thereto.
REQUESTS FOR INSPECTION SHALL BE MADE TWENTY -FOUR HOURS IN ADVANCE BY TELEPHONE AT 970.479.2149 OR AT OUR OFFICE FROM
8:00 AM - 4:00 PM .
� zdk' , Z , t�_ — &/&
Signature of Owner or Contractor to
Print Name
new_construction_perm it_041908
APPROVALS
Permit #: B08 -0145 as of 06 -06 -2008 Status: ISSUED
Item: 05100 BUILDING DEPARTMENT
05/29/2008 jplano Action: CR
F: \cdev\ CHRIS \PERM IT. COMM ENTS \B08- 0145 \608 -0145. DOC
06/05/2008 jplano Action: AP
Item: 05400 PLANNING DEPARTMENT
05/15/2008 bgibson Action: DN roof height issues
must be resolved prior to bldg. permit approval
06/05/2008 bgibson Action: COND revised ceiling
must be solid framed lid
Item: 05600 FIRE DEPARTMENT
05/28/2008 drhoades Action: AP Approved as
noted:
1. Distance around perimeter is approximately 636
feet. Per Internation Fire Code, Section 503.1.1, fire
sprinkler system is required. Landscaping and grade
changes also impede access around peritmeter.
2. Monitored Fire Alarm System required and shall comply
with NFPA 72 and Town of Vail Standards.
3. Fire Sprinkler System required and shall comply with
NFPA 13R and Town of Vail Standards.
Item: 05500 PUBLIC WORKS
06/05/2008 cdelles Action: DN Public Works needs
a copy of wetland mitigation report
06/05/2008 cdelles Action: COND Utility company
sign off is required for the water feature that is
partially in the west utility easement.
See the Conditions section of this Document for any that may apply.
new_construction_perm it_041908
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Permit #. B08 -0145 as of 06 -06 -2008 Status: ISSUED
Cond: 33
(PLAN) THIS PROJECT WILL REQUIRED A SITE IMPROVEMENT
SURVEY. SUCH SURVEY SHALL BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED PRIOR
TO REQUEST FOR A FRAME INSPECTION.
Cond: 12
(BLDG.): FIELD INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED TO CHECK FOR CODE
COMPLIANCE.
Cond: CON0010024
Monitored Fire Alarm System required and shall comply with
NFPA 72 and Town of Vail Standards.
Cond: CON0010025
Fire Sprinkler System required and shall comply with NFPA
13R and Town of Vail Standards.
Cond: CON0010056
WINDOW U VALUES TO BE .28
Cond: CON0010055
STRUCTURUAL GUNITE DETAILS REQUIRED FOR THE POOLS /HOTTUBS
PRIOR TO INSPECTION OF THESE AREAS
Cond: CON0010057
GEO- THERMAL SYSTEM REQUIRED, OR NEW RESCHECK REQUIRED
new ion_perm it_041908
I
O VA ` TO WN
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail, Colorado 81657
APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF INCOMPLETE OR UNSIGNED
Project #: f QC '0-
Building Permit #: ( S`�
14 970- 479 -2149 (Inspections)
Town of Vail Mm 1 4%
TO OF VAIL BUILDING PERMI PL ATION W1_ if
Separate Permits are required for electrical, plumbing, mechan
CONTRACTOR INFORMATION
ter...
I F General Contractor: Town of Vail Reg. No.: Contact Person and Phone #'s:
�O�aN CD /1�T �NL BSI - �=) GH9R[. /� QO�AN `/ 9�m - 3es5!
Email address: - C OQLANCU/KSi7ZUG77�q/�U YtaHcln, CU�j — Fax #: y7G
I Contractor Signature: ���-, %^� ��t. �*►��'F <r V�1�2� �t � �c��' I
�G 1XJ�
COMPLETE VA LUATIO NS FOR RUII DING PFRMIT 11 ahor R Matprialcl
BUILDING: $ f. �7�',O0
ELECTRICAL: $ 1 J[ OTHER-$
S15j000
PLUMBING: $ j 75, err
MECHANICAL: $ I - I le, 0OO J
I TOTAL: $
For Parcel # Contact Eaale Countv Ass essors Office at 970 - 328 -864n or visit www PanlP cnrjnty rnm
Parcel #
Job Name: sM/TH h'L= S /Q��/��
Job Address: 333 66 0.01 ROM
Legal Description Lot: y j Block: Filing: j Subdivision: v -JlL
Owners Nam : A1gGr_ G. IS.MI S_ Address: Phone:
Architect/Designer: V�)a INC,
Address: p.. 0 OX" /734
VAIC CO 81&,58
Phone:
970-999-70
Engineer- ,�j�IV'CF 4 /vC-4V;9LL
Address: P 0. t3 A.6 - Phone:
/W - T768
Detailed description of work: STURy WCCO t�4NV 5TEEC F/?A OVER A WALK: j
c'ONCI�C �3;!}.SF,>tif t T
[ Work Class: New ( .) Addition ( ) Remodel ( ) Repair ( ) Demo ( ) Other ( )
Work Type: Interior ( ) Exterior ( ) Both ( /, -)
Does an EHU exist at this location: Yes( ) No( )
Type of Bldg.: Single family (y) Two ) Multi ) Commercial( ) Restaurant( ) Other ( )
No. of Existing Dwelling Units in this building:
No. of Accommodation Units in this building:
No/Type of Fireplaces Existing: Gas Appliances Gas Los Wood /Pellet Wood Burnin
No/Type of Fireplaces Proposed: Gas Appliances Gas Los Wood /Pellet Wood Burning NOT ALLOWED
Does a Fire Alarm Exist: Yes ( ') No( ) Does a Fire Sprinkler System Exist: Yes ( ) No( )
**** * * **'** *FOR OFFICE USE ONL
Date Received:
Received By:
F: \cdev \FORMS \Permits\ Building \building _ permit_4- 17- 2007.DOC
5 °
Page 1 of 7 04t,
TO0OF VAS,
BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST
SINGLE FAMILY /DUPLEX CHECKLIST
This checklist is to be used with any single family /duplex permit (new
construction , addition, or remodel application.)
Town of Vail Design Review Board approval must first be obtained (may not apply to interior
remodels)
-i Plan Check Fee must be paid at the time of application for projects over $100,000 valuation (see
attached schedule)
The following information must be shown on all 4 sets of plans:
Architectural Plans
-i Site Plans. Provide all site plan information as required for the Design Review Application for your
project. Refer to the DRB application checklist for complete details.
Construction staging plans. Provide construction staging and materials storage site plans.
7 Floor plans. Complete floor plans provided for each level. Complete dimensions, drawing scale
noted, use of each room shown on the plans. Location of mechanical equipment clearly shown
Building Elevations N,W,S,E elevations. Show all proposed exterior finish materials, guardrails,
windows, doors, and finish grades.
❑ Window sizes and operation types. Specified on the floor plans or elevations.
❑ Reflected ceiling and finish plan. Required if fire alarm or fire sprinkler work is required.
❑ Stairways, guards, and handrails Show all stairway details with rise /run, handrail and guard details
❑ Roof plan. Show all roof covering materials (Class A covering required) and underlayment, roof pitch
❑ Building cross sections. Show roof, wall, floor construction assemblies and insulation R values.
Show roof and crawl space ventilation. Show ceiling heights in rooms and crawl spaces.
❑ Rescheck compliance certificate and inspection checklist (new construction and additions
only). Provide a complete signed compliance certificate and inspection checklist. Verify all exterior
building is detailed on the building plans as required on the Rescheck compliance report.
❑ Fireplaces. All fireplace types shown on the floor plans. Specify gas log set, or gas appliance at each
fireplace.
Structural Plans
❑ Soils Report. Include 2 copies of the soils report for your lot.
❑ All sheets of the structural plans stamped and signed by a Colorado State Licensed Engineer.
❑ Design specifications sheet. Roof live load, Deck live load, Floor live load, Wind Speed /Exposure,
Soils report number and soil bearing capacity referenced per the soils report.
❑ Foundation plan. Provide a complete foundation plan with all footing /foundation section details
❑ Framing plans. Provide complete framing plans for floors, decks, roofs. All beams, joists, rafters or
trusses clearly shown. Include framing construction details and connection schedules.
Other items
Asbestos form completed. Asbestos test and report provided if any existing construction is
proposed to be disturbed. See Town of Vail asbestos testing requirement form.
Plan check fees. Plan check fees must be paid with your application. The building permit and
recreation fees will be paid upon issuance of a building permit.
I have read and understand the requirements of this checklist. If any required information is missing from the
application, I understand the application will not be accepted.
Applicant's Signature Date
F: \cdev \FORMS \Permits\ Building \TOVSingleFamiWhecklist_4 -16 -2007. DOC
I
TOW lOOF
BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST
COMMERCIAL TENANT FINISH /IMPROVEMENT
This checklist is to be used with any tenant finish /improvement permit application.
❑ Town of Vail Design Review Board approval must first be obtained for any exterior modifications proposed
❑ Plan Check Fee must be paid at the time of application for projects over $100,000 valuation (see attached
schedule)
The following information must be shown on all 4 sets of plans:
❑ Construction plans stamped and signed by a Colorado State Licensed Architect.
❑ Original building construction type per IBC chapter 6 ex. II -A, V -B
❑ Tenant suite or tenant space number.
❑ Tenant space location identification. Show location of the tenant space within the overall building.
❑ Floor plans with existing and proposed walls. Show all wall assembly construction and proposed interior
finishes with flamespread index. Proposed construction type must match existing building construction type.
Clearly show proposed use of each room or space on the plans.
❑ Reflected ceiling and finish plan. Type of materials must match the fire resistance /type of construction
requirements in the existing building. Show all interior ceiling finishes and flamespread index
❑ Door schedule. All doors shall be clearly identified with fire rating, size, hardware and swing.
❑ Means of egress plan. Show all occupant loads and number of exits from the tenant space
❑ Areas requiring two (2) exits: Exit doors shown to swing in the direction of exit travel, separation of exits
comply with code, illuminated exit signs are shown.
❑ Windows shall be labeled with size, operation, safety glass.
❑ All areas and rooms of the tenant space are accessible per ANSI 117.1 requirements.
❑ Accessible maneuvering clearances provided at all doors for accessibility per ANSI 117.1
❑ Service counter -tops and built -in work stations provided with accessible areas per ANSI 117.1
❑ Bathroom facilities. All accessible /adaptable features, clearances and turning spaces provided per ANSI 117.1
requirements must be shown.
❑ Separate sex bathroom facilities provided if the number of occupants or employees exceeds (15).
❑ Toilet room floors /walls finish schedule.
Floors have a smooth, hard, nonabsorbent surface such as concrete, ceramic tile or other approved
material, extending upward onto the walls at least 5 ".
Fl Walls within 2 feet of the front and sides of urinals and water closets must have a smooth, hard
nonabsorbent surface to a height of 4 feet.
❑ Occupancy separations for walls /ceilings between tenants clearly shown on the plans with fire resistive
construction details and listings specified.
i ii Fire- stopping. Fire - stopping penetration details for plumbing, mechanical and electrical components in all fire
rated walls and ceilings.
❑ Plumbing, Electrical and Mechanical Plans stamped by a Colorado State Licensed Engineer
Mechanical HVAC plans, plumbing plans, electrical plans /panel schedules /load calculations.
❑ Fire /smoke Dampers on mechanical plans at all duct penetrations into fire resistive walls and ceilings.
❑ Fire sprinkler plans. Show all proposed work per Vail Fire and Emergency Services requirements
❑ Fire alarm plans. Show all proposed work per Vail Fire and Emergency Services requirements
I have read and understand the requirements of this checklist. If any required information is missing from the
application, I understand the application will not be accepted.
Applicant's Signature Date
F: \cdev \FORMS \Permits\ Building \building _ permit_4- 17- 2007.DOC Page 3 of 7 04/17/2007
I
E
TOWN OF `
PLAN CHECK FEES TABLE
Plan check fees are required for projects with a valuation over $100,000, at the time of Building permit
submittal. Please use the table below to calculate your plan check fee total.
$100,000 - $150,000 multiply by .0055 of Valuation Total
$150,001 - $250,000 multiply by .005 of Valuation Total
$250,001 - $400,000 multiply by .0045 of Valuation Total
$401,000- $750,000 multiply by .004 of Valuation Total
$750,001 41,000,000 multiply by .0035 of Valuation Total
Valuations over $1,000,000 will be calculated by the Town of Vail Building Department.
If you have any further questions, please contact the Town of Vail Building Department at 970 - 479 -2128.
F: \cdev\ FORMS\ Permits\ Building \building _ permit_4- 17- 2007.DOC Page 4 of 7 04/17/2007
I
TMI OF *V
ASBESTOS TESTING REQUIREMENTS
THE TOWN OF VAIL AND STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH REQUIRE ASBESTOS
TESTING ANY TIME WHEN MORE THAN 160 S.F. OF MATERIAL WILL BE DISTURBED OR REMOVED.
AN ASBESTOS TEST AND REPORT IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED WITH YOUR BUILDING PERMIT
APPLICATION FOR ALL REMODEL, ADDITION OR OTHER PROJECTS INVOLVING ANY DEMOLITION OR
REMOVAL OF BUILDING MATERIALS THAT MAY CONTAIN ASBESTOS. BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED AFTER
OCTOBER 12, 1988 THAT HAVE NO ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIALS ARE EXEMPT.
A COPY OF THE REPORT MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH YOUR BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION
® I have included the asbestos test and report with my building permit application
applicant signature
�5 /� d g
date
® I certify my project will not disturb or remove more than 160 s.f. of building material. The construction
plans submitted with my application clearly indicate this information. (This will be verified during plan
review, and will delay your project if found to be inaccurate)
applicant signature
•'
date
e The building was constructed after October 12, 1988. The date of construction was
applicant signature
date
original construction date
F: \cdev\ FORMS \Permits\ Building \building _ permit_4- 17- 2007.DOC Page 5 of 7 04/17/2007
I
TOWN ONC
WHEN A "PUBLIC WAY PERMIT" IS REQUIRED
PLEASE READ AND CHECK OFF EACH OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS REGARDING THE NEED FOR A
"PUBLIC WAY PERMIT ":
• Is this a new residence? YES NO
• Does demolition work being performed require the use of the Right -of -Way, easements or
public property? YES t' NO
• Is any utility work needed? YES NO
• Are there any improvements being done to the driveway? YES NO
o Is a different access needed to the site other than the existing driveway. ? (9S )NO
o Is any drainage work being done that affects the Right -of -Way, easements, or public property?
YES NO l/
o Is a "Revocable Right -of -Way Permit" required? YES NO
o Is the Right -of -Way, easements or public property to be used for staging, parking or fencing?
YES NO 1/
If answer it NO, is a parking, staging or fencing plan required by Public Works?
YES NO
If you have answered YES to any of these questions, a "Public Way Permit" must be obtained.
"Public Way Permit" applications may be obtained at the Public Works office or at Community Development.
If you have any questions please call Leonard Sandoval in Public Works at 970 - 479 -2198.
I HAVE READ AND ANSWERED ALL THE ABOVE QUESTIONS.
6 " . ,
Contractor Signature
UDLAIY CON�
Company Name
Job or Project Name: S. 171 12FS /I YCF
Date Signed:
F: \cdev \FORMS\ Permits\ Building \building —permit_4- 17- 2007.DOC Page 6 of 7 04/17/2007
MWNO WAIL'
HOW DID WE RATE WITH YOU?
Please take the time to tell us how we performed during the development review process. We will use
this information to recognize our employees who serve you and we will also use it to improve our level of
service. Please know we do care and will react to your suggestions. Thank you for your comments.
George Ruther
Director of Community Development
1. What services did you use at Community Development today? Check all that apply
Admin Building Environment Fire Housing Planning P.W.
2. Was your visit today as a:
Homeowner Contractor Architect Other,
3. Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of the Community Development
Department. Use a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means "not at all satisfied" and 5 means "very satisfied" to
rate each of the following items. Please use DK (Don't Know /No Opinion) as appropriate. Please circle
your response.
Not
Satisfied
Very
Satisfied
Friendly and Courteous 1 2 3 4 5 DK
Knowledgeable 1 2 3 4 5 DK
Timely Response /Calls Returned 1 2 3 4 5 DK
Overall Experience 1 2 3 4 5 DK
4. Was the review process clearly explained to you? (i.e., how the Design Review Board and /or
Planning and Environmental Commission works, when they meet, what you need to have when you apply
for the planning and /or the building process, how long review times generally take, housing and /or
environmental health policy, etc.) YES NO
If NO, what additional information would have been helpful?
5. Did the planning process meet your expectations? YES NO
6. Did the building permit review process meet your expectations? YES NO
7. Did the inspection process meet your expectations? YES NO
8. Did you feel the process was fair and efficient? YES NO
Please explain your response(s).
9. If you were looking for information (i.e., legal address file, plat map, plans, etc.) was the
information in a format that was helpful / user friendly? YES NO
10. Are you aware of the Community Development Dept. information available at
http:lfwww.vailgov.com YES NO
Thank you for taking the time to complete this evaluation. If indicated below, we will personally contact
you on specific concerns. If it is your desire, you may contact the director by telephoning, 970 -479 -2145.
Please feel free to use the back for additional comments.
Name: Company:
Address: Telephone:
City: State: Zip Code: Date:
F: \cdev\ FORMS\ SURVEYS \comdev_survey_091907.doc
TOWN OF VAIL - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CONSTRUCTION FEE SCHEDULE
2003 (adopted March 1, 2003); updated March 1, 2005, updated March 13, 2006, updated Sept. 4, 2007
BUILDING PERMIT FEES
Total Valuation
$1.00 to $500.00
$501.00 to $2,000.00
$2,001.00 to $25,000.00
$25,001.00 to $50,000.00
$50,001.00 to $100,000.00
$100,001.00 to $500,000.00
$500,001 to $1,000,000.00
$1,000,001.00 and Up
Fees
$23.50
$23.50 for the first $500.00 plus $3.05.00 for each additional $100.00 or fraction thereof,
to and including $2,000.00
$69.25 for the first $2,000.00 plus $14.00 for each additional$ 1,000.00 or fraction
thereof, to and including $25,000.00
$391.25 for the first $25,000.00 plus $10.10 for each additional $1,000.00 or
fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00
$643.75 for the first $50,000.00 plus $7.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction
thereof, to and including $100,000.00
$993.75 for the first $100,000.00 plus $5.60 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction
t149 to an d including $500,000.00
$3233.i5 for the first $500,000.00 plus $4.75 for each additional $1,000.00 or
fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00
$5608.75 for the first $1,000,000 plus $3.65 for each additional $1,000.00 or
fraction thereof.
II. OTHER INSPECTION FEES
1. Inspections outside normal business hours minimum charge two hours. $47.00 per hour
2. Reinspection fee assessed under provision of section 305 (g) of the UBC. $47.00 per hour
3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated including special inspections,
special work orders & zoning. $47.00 per hour
4. Will Call Inspection Fee - applies to all permits $4.00 per permit
III. PLAN REVIEW FEES
Building
Plan Review Fee shall be 65% of the building permit fee.
Plumbing
Plan Review Fee shall be 25% of the plumbing permit fee.
Mechanical
Plan Review Fee shall be 25% of the mechanical permit fee.
Sprinkler
Plan Review Fee shall be 25% of the sprinkler permit fee.
Investigation
Whenever work has commenced without first obtaining said permit,
the investigation fee shall be equal to the amount of the building,
plumbing, mechanical, electrical, sprinkler or alarm permit fee. All
other fees shall be in addition to the investigation fee.
Fast Track
Plan Review for a fast track permit, when plans are not totally
complete shall pay a plan review fee equal to the building permit fee.
Restaurant Fee
Health Department Plan Review for kitchens shall be a flat fee of $75.00
Preconstruction Meetings
A fee may be charged when time spent is determined to be excessive
by the building official (excessive review is over 2 meetings or four
hours). $55.00 per hour
Additional Plan Review
Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions to
approved plans. $55.00 per hour
IV. PLUMBING PERMIT FEES $15.00 per $1,000.00 valuation (valuation - $500 per trap opening)
V. MECHANICAL PERMIT FEES $20.00 per $1,000.00 valuation (valuation - $500 per opening)
VI. SPRINKLER PERMIT FEES $350.00 plan check fee plus 4.25% of the valuation
VII. FIRE ALARM PERMIT FEES $232.00 plan check fee plus 3.75% of the valuation
cdev /building /tee schedule /Permit Fees. adopted2003.3- 13- 06_wilI call update.xls 3 -13 -2006
VIII. ELECTRICAL FEES
A. Residential Fees
B. All Other Fees
Not more than $300.00
$301.00 to $2,000.00
$2,001.00 to $50,000.00
$50,001.00 to $500,000.00
More than $500,001
Reinspections on all of the above
Includes new construction, remodeling or addition and repair to: single family homes, duplexes,
condominium and townhouses. Excluded in this fee is hotel accommodation units which are
calculated based on Section B, below.
not more than 1,000 sq. ft. $ 51.75
over 1,001 sq. ft. & not more than 1,500 sq. ft. $ 57.50,
over 1,501 sq.ft. and not more than 2,000 sq.ft. $ 86.25
per 100 sq. ft. in excess of 2,000 sq. ft. $ 4.60
Includes commerical, accommodation units & temporary construction meters, shall be computed
on the dollar value of the electrical installation, including time and materials, whether they are
provided by the contractor or the property owner. Such fees shall be computed as follows:
$ 48.75
$ 57.50,
$21.85 per each $1,000 valuation or fraction thereof of total valuation
$20.70 per each $1,000 or fraction thereof of total valuation Plus $57.50
$19.50 per each $1,000 or fraction thereof of total valuation Plus $632.00
$ 42.00
IX. Planning Application Fees - these are not charged on the building permits but when planning apps are submitted.
Type
Fee
Fee
Fee
Conditional Use
$
650.00
Variance
$
500.00
LMU1 (Lionshead Mixed Use 1
$
1.00
ABD (Arterial Business District)
$
1.00
LMU2 (Lionshead Mixed Use 2)
plus $1.00
1.00
SB /RD (Ski Base /Rec District)
$
0.70
PA (Public Accommodation)
$
per sq.ft. of
Special Development District
$
0.10
CC1 (Commercial Core 1)
$
1.00
total sign
(New /Major)
$
6000.00
Sign
$
50.00
area
Special Development District (Minor)
$
1500.00
Additional GRFA
$
300.00
0.15
Special Development District
$
1.00
RC (Residential Cluster)
$
0.30
HS (Heavy Service)
Major -no ext. changes)
$
1250.00
Rezone
$
1300.00
$
Minor Subdivision
$
650.00
Minor Exterior Alteration
$
650.00
Major Subdivision
$
1500.00
Major Exterior Alteration
$
800.00
$
Sign Variance
$
200.00
Zoning Code Amendment
$
1300.00
X. RECREATION FEE PER SQ. FT.
Type
Fee
HR (Hillside Residential)
$
0.15
LMU1 (Lionshead Mixed Use 1
$
1.00
ABD (Arterial Business District)
$
1.00
LMU2 (Lionshead Mixed Use 2)
$
1.00
SB /RD (Ski Base /Rec District)
$
0.70
PA (Public Accommodation)
$
1.00
PD (Parking District)
$
0.10
CC1 (Commercial Core 1)
$
1.00
PUC (Public Use District)
$
0.10
CC2 (Commercial Core 2)
$
1.00
SFR (Single Family Residential)
$
0.10
CC3 (Commercial Core 3)
$
1.00
R (Two Family Residential)
$
0.15
CSC (Commercial Service Center)
$
1.00
RC (Residential Cluster)
$
0.30
HS (Heavy Service)
$
1.00
R P/S (Primary/Secondary Residential)
$
0.15
A (Agricultural & Open Space)
$
0.10
LDMF (Low Density Multi- family)
$
0.35
SDD (Special Development District)
Rate of zone district
MDMF (Medium Density Multi- family)
$
0.701
applicable to the density
HDMF (High Density Multi- family)
$
1.00
projected.
cdev /building /fee schedule /Permit Fees. adopted2003.3- 13- 06_wi11 call update.xls 3 -13 -2006
JUN 0� . 2008
TOWN OF VAIL
DRAFT WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
BEAVER DA M ROAD DELINEATION
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
Prepared for—
ERM -Rocky Mountain, Inc.
6455 South Yosemite St.
Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111
CL
September 13, 2007
®
Prepared by--
ERO Project #4004
ERO Resources Corporation
1842 Clarkson Street
Denver, Colorado 80218
(303) 830.1188
�s
September 13, 2007
ERO Project #4004
DRAFT WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
SEPTEMBER 13, 2007
Introduction
ERM -Rocky Mountain, Inc., retained ERO Resources Corporation (ERO) to provide
a wetland delineation report for a property located at 333 Beaver Dam Road in Vail,
Colorado (Figure 1). The project area is in the northeast' /4 of Section 7, Township S
South, Range 80 West of the 6 th Principal Meridian, in Eagle County, Colorado. The
UTM coordinates of the approximate center of the project area are 381306mE and
4388862rnN, Zone 13.
Methods
On August 30, 2007, Moneka Worah, an ecologist with ERO Resources Corporation
(ERO), surveyed the project area for wetlands and other waters of the U.S. Using
methods outlined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
wetlands were determined based on the presence of three wetland indicators: hydrophytic
vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. Hydric soils were identified using field
observation for gleying, mottling, sulfidic odor, inundation and saturation levels, or other
hydric soil indicators accepted by the U.S. Anmy Corps of Engineers (Corps). A Munsell
Soil Color Chart was used to detenmine soil color. Wetland indicator status for
vegetation was determined by Sabine (1994) (Table 1). Common and scientific names of
plant species were obtained from Weber and Whitman (2001).
ERO flagged the boundary of the wetlands using pin flags that were sequentially
numbered and correspond to pin flag locations on Figure 2. ERO delineated wetlands
using a Trimble ProXR Global Positioning System (GPS) unit and TBC1 data logger.
Data were differentially corrected using the CompassCom base station. All differential
correction was completed using Trimble Pathfinder Office 3.0 software. The GPS data
were incorporated onto aerial photography using ArcMap. Data forins were completed at
representative locations to document wetland and upland conditions (Appendix A).
Photos of representative wetlands are provided in Appendix B.
P`4000 projects \4004 Vail Beaver Dam Rd Del ineationMetland Delineation Report.doc
ERO Project #4004 1
DRAFT WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
Site Description
The project area is located at 333 Beaver Dam Road in Vail, Colorado (Figure 2).
The project area is adjacent to a house within a residential neighborhood of Vail. Dense
willows (Salix spp.), snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophihts), and birch (Betula spp.),
with an understory of quackgrass (Elytrigia repens), smooth brome (Bromopsis inermis),
star false Solomon's -seal (Maianthemum stellatunl), and Canada thistle (Breea arvense)
occur in the unlandscaped portions of the project area (Photo 1). Several blue spruce
(Picea pungens) surround the willows. A small pond is located to the west of the project
area (Photo 2). The pond drains into the northwestern corner of the project area, forming
a 1- to 2- foot -wide channel (Photo 3). The channel has a small fringe of wetlands
dominated by willows, fowl bluegrass (Poa palustris), rnanhagrass (Glycerin striata),
beaked sedge (Carex utriculata), and redtop (Agrostis gigantea) (Photo 4). The project
area is surrounded by residential development to the south, east, and west, and by Gore
Creek and its riparian corridor to the north.
Description of Wetlands and Other Waters of the U.S.
The project area was assessed for wetlands and other waters of the U.S. No streams
are shown on the USGS Vail West quadrangle within the project area. A small channel
with adjacent wetlands (Wetland 1) in the northwestern portion of the project area has
characteristics of a water of the U.S., including an ordinary high water mark and a bed
and bank. The channel flows north to Gore Creek, a perennial stream with relatively
permanent flow. There is 0.003 acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, within
the project area.
Wetland 1
Wetlands along the 1- to 2- foot -wide channel are dominated by shining willows
(Salix lucida cauclata), sedge, mannagrass, willow herb (Epilobium spp.), and redtop.
Data collected from a soil pit (sp3 on Figure 2) revealed hydric soils with a low chroma
matrix (IOYR 2/1) at 0 to 12 inches. Red parent material was present at 8 inches with a
chroma matrix of 7.5YR 4/3. Large mottles (4/6 7.5YR) were also present at 4 inches.
Soil texture is clay. The primary hydrologic indicator for this wetland is saturation at the
soil surface. Secondary hydrologic indicators include drainage patterns. The boundary
ERO Project #4004 2
DRAFT WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
BEAVER DA M ROAD DELINEATION
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
of the upland was determined by a higher dominance of quackgrass, a facultative upland t
species. Additionally, data from soil data point spl (Figure 2) lacked indicators for
hydric soils and wetland hydrology.
Upland Soil Points
Area 1
An area dominated by willows, a wetland indicator species, was investigated for the
presence of hydric soils and wetland hydrological indicators. Soil data point sp2 (Figure
2) is located in a mesic area dominated by willow species. Although willows are
typically a wetland indicator species, the understory species, quackgrass, Canada thistle,
smooth brome, and snowberry, are facultative upland or upland. Although the soil matrix
chroma was low, it is typical of mountain soils and no mottles were present —a strong
indicator of a fluctuating water table. No red parent material was present as it was in
Wetland 1 (see Appendix A). No hydrologic indicator was present at the time of the site
visit.
Table 1. Common and scientific names and wetland indicator status of
..1....4 .. ,; *h ;n 4ha nrniart nrP1_
C01111110n IIQU� Icwca
vr■■a■u■ u,■ ,
Wetland indicator
Common Name
Scientific Name
Synonyms
Status,
Redtop
Agrostis gigantea
Agrostis albs
Faculative Wetland
Birch
Betula spp.
Facultative
Wetland/Obligate
Canada thistle
Breea arvense
Cirsitnn arvense
Facultative Upland
Smooth brome
Brontopsis inernds
Brontus inern is
Upland
Beaked sedge
Carex tttriculata
Carex rostrata
Obligate Wetland
Quackgrass
Elytrigia repens
Faculative Upland
Willow -herb
Epilobiunt spp.
Obligate Wetland
Mannagrass
Glyceria striata
Obligate Wetland
Star false Solomon's -
Maianthenntnt stellatunt
Upland
seal
Blue spruce
Picea tntgetts
Facultative ( -)
Fowl bluegrass
Poa palustris
Faculative Wetland
Shining willow
Salix htcida caudate
Obligate Wetland
Willows
Salix spp.
Facultative
Snowberry
Synrphoricarpos oreophilus
Faculative Upland
'Obligate Wetland - Occurs with an estimated 99% probability in wetlands
Facultative Wetland - Estimated 67 % -99% probability Ofoccunrence in wetlands
Facultative - Equally likely to occur in wetlands and nonwetlands (34 % -66% probability)
Facultative Upland - 67 % -99% probability in nonwetlands, 1 % -33% in wetlands
Upland - >99% probability in nonwetlands in this region
A negative sign ( -) indicates a frequency toward the lower end of a category (less fi found in wetlands)
ERO Project R4004
DRAFT WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
References
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual. Technical Report Y -87 -1, U.S. Anny Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Sabine, B. (editor). 1994. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands:
Regions 4, 5, and 8. Resource Management Group, Inc.
Weber, W.A. and R.C. Wittmann. 2001. Colorado Flora Eastern Slope. Third Edition.
University Press of Colorado.
FRO Project T 4004 4
:w ►
.12
• - -�,,
fit. _ • M w „Alig• a , ,�• r
:P�o'ect.Are�t
- Wetland 1 , _
•1 .w1 7�Q — ., Y r.
.-4 •w _6 _ y 8► i ' r gi may
V
- ,�w. •. - n . '�": I A�4 �T. r � � - "'•yi ,.°� ' k � ��
A'2 • .? I '�' r' �N.�y
f. �'
_ r -r ♦. �,� ��.���� ���r -c_r rsL f� y! 'i j:
Area 1 !► ' r d � ii
-•', r Beaver pa Raad °
rn- '+
Ai
- ,rte. :. J'"�? . . tis:.,. {�i► �.. � *� " � .. '�' 1 � •. � ,.. ,�
BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
PHOTO LOG
AUGUST 30, 2007
Photo 2 - View of small pond directly west of the project area. View is to the west.
Photo 1 - View of shrubs and herbaceous vegetation within the project area, south of the
residential house. View is to the south.
BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
PHOTO LOG
AUGUST 30, 2007
Photo 4 - View of wetlands along the channel. View is to the west.
Photo 3 - View of small channel within the project area. View is to the south.
l
DATA FORNI - ItnUTINE WETLAND DF; TERIIINATION Site
(1987 COE Wetland Delineation NIanual)
Project/ Site: �1 - �1,,�)?.�m �O GI��- li O(l Date:('�Q��_ co
investigator: '�q>r t,�CC. _'1 — County /State___ L _
Is the site significantly disturbe (atypical situation)? Yes No USGS Quad: \Jg i %L S�
i..4In.. ..rnennf? h' nc� Nn
VEGFTATION
Dom. Plant Species
Rel. °a
Strntuln
Indicator
12
Other Plant Species
ncl- °:
S1ra1unl
indicator
1
Horizon
(Munsell Moist)
(Munsell Moist)
6 1 Leldc-, Ctx
)
NT_
2
,
2 P ' n,/lft. nr A l --klizX
3
4
3
Hydric Soil indicators:
D ilistosol n Aquic moisture regime
n Organic streaking in sandy soils
4
❑ Concretions
o Sulfidic odor o Gleyed or low- chroma colors
rn Listed on hydric soil list
5
Remarks: i! t'Y'l�� VS V1& ��.� —� t t CG.V
A ��V -N cl�
D�- (-_n l t}— oo MfJ' ]
S
�
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or PAC (excluding FAC - )pL �n 10 FAC- neutral D ID
Remarks:
•sJ..�ln...1 I, d—Inav nreQ011r? Yes NO
HYDROLOGY
Primary indicators:
inundated depth {in.)
saturated upper 12" depth ______ (in.)
drift lines sediment deposits
drainage patterns in wetlands
Remarks: ND O (Aer)u_
Secondary indicators (2 or more required):
oxidized root channels in upper 12"
water- stained leaves FAC- neutral test
local soil survey data other
Hydric soils present? Yes
wil.a
Map Unit name: Do field observations confirm mapped type?
Depth
Matrix Color
Mottle Colors
Mottle
Texture, Concretions, Stnacturc, etc.
(inchc�
Horizon
(Munsell Moist)
(Munsell Moist)
Abuntinnee /Contrast
c kly
,
Hydric Soil indicators:
D ilistosol n Aquic moisture regime
n Organic streaking in sandy soils
o Histic epipedon n Reducing conditions
❑ Concretions
o Sulfidic odor o Gleyed or low- chroma colors
rn Listed on hydric soil list
❑ I ligh organic content in surface layer in sandy soils
Remarks: i! t'Y'l�� VS V1& ��.� —� t t CG.V
A ��V -N cl�
D�- (-_n l t}— oo MfJ' ]
we cam. �b•�e,�'cf2.ca
�
1'F,1'LAND DiiTE_ Is this TI!1 p oint witilm a IYUM111u.
Remarks: N_ �cb\00 A :- �n -
POTENTIAL NEXUS TO KNOW WUS
Is wetland adjacent or neighboring to jurisdictional waters (waters of the U.S. or (heir tl or jurisdictional wetlands (+vctlands adjacent
to ur with surliace crnulcctions to juristlietional wntcls)'? t Ytss nNo
Does welland have a surface connect to iuris (lictio nal waters or juristlictiunal actlmxls'1 ' uNo
Remarks:
I RO h�sourica (�1Rloraliun Iti�l "_ l'larksnn iuc[I, Ilcurci, t �:6n,.tlu "u � lti Ph. 3) 8;U i 190
DATA FORM - ROUTINE WEATAND DE`ITERIMINATION
site : �2U_
1987 COE \Wetland Delineation Manual)
Project /Site: I�,es�e��. Qr1, [)ate: `b13 O
Investigator: 'M2►�e1� t�lr]c Counq' /State W.1
Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)'? Yes No tJSGS Quad:
YI:GE rAT1UlV
Dom. Plant Species
Rd. ;'.
Stnnun
ludicrtnr
O thl r I last S t)_iCl
Rcl. io
Strauun
hrJicatcu
�A It
Ilydric Soil Indicators:
n Ilistosol o Aquic moisture regime n Organic streaking in sandy soils
o Ilislic epipedon o Reducing conditions n Concretions
o Sulfidic odor o Gleyed or low- chron,a colors o Listed on hydric soil list
n I ligh organic content in surface layer in sandy soils
Ren, arks: I�1 -1J- t�,
l.ojol �s ,��� Vt Cox "Q \� n1 iJ� Q.C�^ -� Yo
?
e Irrn�r
3,f�
-
4 - I S. -
5
—
4
S
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL., FACW or FAC (excluding FAC -) FAC- neutral " J ,;N
Remarks: r�rncr•n V
HYDROLOGY .......... _._
Primary indicators: Secondary indicators (2 or more required):
inundated depth (in.) oxidized root channels in upper 12"
saturated upper 12" depth (in.) water - stained leaves FAC neutral test
drift lines sediment deposits local soil survey data other
drainage patterns in wetlands
Remarks: N C ) eUk4tfte C VjA4fZ:A '1
!lydric soils present? Yes �'No)
u Map Unit name:
Do field observations confirni mapped type?
Depth
(inche)
tiff, on
Matrix Color
(M,,onsseell - M�
Nlottle Colors
(Mansell Moist)
Mottle
Abundance /Contrast
Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc.
Ilydric Soil Indicators:
n Ilistosol o Aquic moisture regime n Organic streaking in sandy soils
o Ilislic epipedon o Reducing conditions n Concretions
o Sulfidic odor o Gleyed or low- chron,a colors o Listed on hydric soil list
n I ligh organic content in surface layer in sandy soils
Ren, arks: I�1 -1J- t�,
l.ojol �s ,��� Vt Cox "Q \� n1 iJ� Q.C�^ -� Yo
WETLAND DE' E _ is this mm point Vti L, 11 a WeAN nus r
EEL
POTENTIAL NEXLIS TO KNOWN WU S is wetland adjacent or neighboring to jurisdictional waters (seaters of the U.S. or their iribuiaries) or jurisdictional wetlands (wetlands adjacent
u) or with surface connections to jurisdictional waters)'? Ltl'cs eNo
Does wetla ti to juris d i ctional water
d have a surface connection u a , or lurisdi rtional wetlan nYcs uN
I _ _ .. _ _ ....�_� t -•- --
� --
Remarks: u �
- H11r1 Rr:�uir iti l nrpot:Uiun IX l? l.'lar) ecn tiu.rt. 1)cmcr. ( lomd.� Z02IN I'Ir. l.iutt tiill.l 1. ti Fax l ?i131 >:±li.l l'19
DATA FORM - ROUTINE w, fLAND Dl, UNIINATION
(1987 COE W etland Delineation Manual)
Project /Site:
inv,•ciivatnr:
,_ .,__ :r,• ,,,t.r rl;rt„rhrrl (atvnical situation)'?
Yes No
I l t'
vrca,
Dom. Plant Species Rc1. strrtwu L,diruar Oilier Plant
2 C t >;IrtcLu.lc;�i� Ir-. 2
3 C0 i IObiuty-, _ 3 goo 4
4C-1 jpf
5
5 C ' Gsl'` Cam!
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding f AC -
Remarks:
is
S
Site
E 61 0 ; ty /StateS Quad: \J�, '�
ation teesent? 'es No
Rel. % Stratum I Indicator
':' FAC- neutral 1 _
Wetland hydrolo } resent? - /Yes No
YDROLOGY
Primary indicators: Secondary indicators (2 or more required):
inundated depth (itt•) oxidized root channels in tipper 12
saturated u depth 12" de tit � ( in.) water- stained leaves FAC- neutral test
._ other
drift lines sediment deposits local soil survey data
drainage patterns in wetlands
Remarks:
Hydric soils present? Yes No
soil's
Map Unit name: Do field observations confirm mapped type?
Motile Texture, Concretions, Stnic►ure, etc.
Depth hlalrix Color Mottle CalmT bundance /Contrast (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Mots t
Hydric Soil Indicators: o Organic streaking in sandy soils
[I 1 listosol ❑ Aquic moisture regime
n Reducing, conditions 13 Concretions
o l listic epipedon
jrI(ileyt d or loin -chroma colors
❑ Listed on hydrie soil list
o Sulfidic odor
n Iligh organic content in surface layer in sandy soils
Remarks:
) .Cj — j c_
is this sa point �vwiji a wetland? Yes No
_-
11'ETLAND DIs' T101IN -
Remarks:
nnrv,tc •rr% V Nn\ %'N GUIs
is wetland adjacent or neighboring to jurisdictional waters (waters of the 1_ ... or t tctr n u : t
to or with surface cnnnccliuns to jurisdictional %valers) ". ❑Yes n No
Does wetland h ave a su rlaca connectio to jurisd ictional haters or jurisd wcllands r1 : o
Remarks:
....y- I'.RO Itc;uur.c•; l'nrporuu l..-t? t'Iarl:;un tin�r,. I)n,t cr, t',duradn hU'_ I S 1'l,. 0030,30-11%,"i
x�
r .
k
REScheck Software Version 4.1.3
Inspection Checklist
Date: 06/05/08
Ceilings:
❑ R1:: Cathedral Ceiling (no attic), R -38.0 cavity + R -24.0 continuous insulation
Comments:
❑ R3: Cathedral Ceiling (no attic), R -35.0 cavity + R -24.0 continuous insulation
Comments:
Above-Grade Walls:
❑ W2- 2x6 Stud: Wood Frame, 24" o .c., R -21.0 cavity insulation
Comments:
❑ W8: Solid Concrete or Masonry: Exterior Insulation, R -15.0 cavity + R -12.5 continuous insulation
Comments:
Windows:
❑ Windows: Metal Frame:Double Pane with Low -E, U- factor: 0.280
For windows without labeled U- factors, describe features:
#Panes Frame Type Thermal Break? Yes No
Comments:
Doors:
❑ Garage Doors: Solid, U- factor: 0.060
Comments:
❑ Exterior Doors: Glass, U- factor: 0.280
Comments:
❑ Entry Door: Solid, U- factor: 0.270
Comments:
Floors:
❑ FL1: Slab -On- Grade: Heated, 4.0' insulation depth, R -20.0 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.
Exterior insulation has a rigid, opaque, weather- resistant protective covering that covers the exposed (above - grade) insulation and extends
at least 6 in. below grade.
❑ FL3: All -Wood Joist/Truss:Over Outside Air, R -19.0 cavity insulation
Comments:
Heating and Cooling Equipment:
❑ Heat Pump 1: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 2: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 3: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 4: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
Project Title: Smith Residence Report date: 06/05/08
Data filename: P: \2725 -Smith Residence Beaver Dam Road \II. Project Administration \11. REScheck Compliance
❑ Heat Pump 5: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 6: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 7: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 8: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 9: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 10: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 11: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 12: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 13: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 14: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 15: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 16: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
❑ Heat Pump 17: Air Source: 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER or higher
Make and Model Number:
Air Leakage:
❑ Joints, penetrations, and all other such openings in the building envelope that are sources of air leakage are sealed.
❑ Recessed lights are 1) Type IC rated, or 2) installed inside an appropriate air -tight assembly with a 0.5" clearance from combustible
materials. If non -IC rated, fixtures are installed with a 3" clearance from insulation.
Skylights:
❑ Minimum insulation requirement for skylight shafts equal to or greater than 12 inches is R -19.
Vapor Retarder:
❑ Installed on the warm -in- winter side of all non - vented framed ceilings, walls, and floors.
Materials Identification:
❑ Materials and equipment are installed in accordance with the manufacturer's installation instructions.
❑ 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, glazing U- factors, and heating and cooling equipment efficiency are clearly marked on the building plans or
specifications.
❑ Insulation is installed according to manufacturer's instructions, in substantial contact with the surface being insulated, and in a manner
that achieves the rated R -value without compressing the insulation.
Duct Insulation:
❑ Supply ducts in unconditioned attics or outside the building are insulated to at least R -11.
❑ Return ducts in unconditioned attics or outside the building are insulated to at least R -6.
❑ Supply ducts in unconditioned spaces are insulated to at least R -11.
❑ Return ducts in unconditioned spaces (except basements) are insulated to R -2. Insulation is not required on return ducts in basements.
❑ Where exterior walls are used as plenums, the wall is insulated to at least R -11.
Duct Construction:
Project Title: Smith Residence Report date: 06/05/08
Data filename: P: \2725 -Smith Residence Beaver Dam Road \ll. Project Administration \11. REScheck Compliance
❑ Duct connections to flanges of air distribution system equipment are sealed and mechanically fastened.
Lj All joints, seams, and connections are securely fastened with welds, gaskets, mastics (adhesives), mastic -plus- embedded - fabric, or
tapes. Tapes and mastics are rated UL 181A or UL 181 B.
Exceptions:
Continuously welded and locking -type longitudinal joints and seams on ducts operating at less than 2 in. w.g. (500 Pa).
Lj The HVAC system provides a means for balancing air and water systems.
Temperature Controls:
Ll Thermostats exist for each separate HVAC system. A manual or automatic means to partially restrict or shut off the heating and /or
cooling input to each zone or Floor is provided.
Service Water Heating:
Water heaters with vertical pipe risers have a heat trap on both the inlet and outlet unless the water heater has an integral heat trap or
is part of a circulating system.
Lj Circulating hot water pipes are insulated to the levels in Table 1.
Circulating Hot Water Systems:
Lj Circulating hot water pipes are insulated to the levels in Table 1.
Swimming Pools:
0 All heated swimming pools have an on /off heater switch and a cover unless over 20% of the heating energy is from non - depletable
sources. Pool pumps have a time clock.
Heating and Cooling Piping Insulation:
Lj HVAC piping conveying Fluids above 105 degrees F or chilled fluids below 55 degrees F are insulated to the levels in Table 2.
Project Title: Smith Residence Report date: 06/05/08
Data filename: P: \2725 -Smith Residence Beaver Dam Road \II. Project Administration \11. REScheck Compliance
Table 1: Minimum Insulation Thickness for Circulating Hot Water Pipes
Range( F)
Insulation Thickness in Inches by Pipe Sizes
2.0
Non - Circulating Runouts Circulating Mains and Runouts
Heated Water
Up to 1" Up to 1.25" 1.5" to 2.0" Over 2"
Temperature ( "F)
Steam Condensate (for feed water)
170 -180
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
140 -169
0.5 0.5 1.0 1.5
100 -139
0.5 0.5 0.5 1.0
Table 2: Minimum Insulation Thickness for HVAC Pipes
Fluid Temp. Insulation Thickness in Inches by Pipe Sizes
Piping System Types 2" Runouts 1" and Less 1.25" to 2.0" 2.5" to 4"
1.0
Range( F)
Heating Systems
2.0
Low Pressure/Temperature
201 -250
Low Temperature
106 -200
Steam Condensate (for feed water)
Any
Cooling Systems
2.0
Chilled Water, Refrigerant and
40 -55
Brine
Below 40
1.0
1.5
1.5
2.0
0.5
1.0
1.0
1.5
1.0
1.0
1.5
2.0
0.5
0.5
0.75
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.5
1.5
NOTES TO FIELD: (Building Department Use Only)
Project Title: Smith Residence Report date: 06 /05/08
Data filename: P: \2725 -Smith Residence Beaver Dam Road \ll. Project Administration \11. REScheck Compliance
REScheck Software Version 4.1.3 a
Compliance Certificat i D
JUN 0t 1008
Project Title: Smith Residence L TOWN OF VA
Report Date: 06/05/08
Data filename: P:\2725 -Smith Residence Beaver Dam Road \II. Project Administration \11. REScheck Compliance
Certificate\20080605- rescheck. rck
Energy Code:
2003 IECC
38.0 24.0
Location:
Vail, Colorado
1220
Construction Type:
Single Family
W2- 2x6 Stud: Wood Frame, 24" o .c.
Glazing Area Percentage:
34%
273
Heating Degree Days:
9248
0.280
Construction Site:
Owner /Agent:
Designer /Contractor:
333 Beaver Dam Road
16
Anne Gunion
Vail, CO 81657
0.280
VAg Architects and Planners, Inc.
Entry Door: Solid
40
90 Benchmark Rd
11
W8: Solid Concrete or Masonry: Exterior Insulation
Suite 202
15.0 12.5
166
Avon, CO 81620
670
20.0
970.949.7034
a �
Compliance: 21.4% Better Than Code Maximum UA: 3018
Your UA: 2373
R1:: Cathedral Ceiling (no attic)
4197
38.0 24.0
67
R3: Cathedral Ceiling (no attic)
1220
35.0 24.0
21
W2- 2x6 Stud: Wood Frame, 24" o .c.
10101
21.0 0.0
273
Windows: Metal Frame:Double Pane with Low -E
3802
0.280
1065
Garage Doors: Solid
270
0.060
16
Exterior Doors: Glass
1118
0.280
313
Entry Door: Solid
40
0.270
11
W8: Solid Concrete or Masonry: Exterior Insulation
4263
15.0 12.5
166
FL1: Slab -On- Grade: Heated
670
20.0
426
Insulation depth: 4.0'
FL3: All -Wood Joist /Truss:Over Outside Air
326
19.0 0.0
15
Heat Pump 1: Air Source10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 2: Air Source10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 3: Air Source10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 4: Air Sourcel0 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 5: Air Source10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 6: Air Source10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 7: Air Sourcel0 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 8: Air Sourcel0 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 9: Air Source10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 10: Air Source 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 11: Air Source10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 12: Air Source 10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 13: Air Sourcel0 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 14: Air Sourcel0 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 15: Air Source10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 16: Air Source10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Heat Pump 17: Air Source10 HSPF, 18.5 SEER
Project Title: Smith Residence Report date: 06/05/08
Data filename: P: \2725 -Smith Residence Beaver Dam Road \ll. Project Administration \11. REScheck Compliance
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 building has been designed to meet the 2003 IECC requirements in
REScheck Version 4.1.3 and to comply with the mandatory requirements listed in the REScheck Inspection Checklist.
Name - Title
Signature Date
Project Title: Smith Residence Report date: 06/05/08
Data filename: P: \2725 -Smith Residence Beaver Dam Road \II. Project Administration \11. REScheck Compliance
Town of Vail
OFFICE COPY
ASBESTOS INSPECTION AND SAMPLING REPORT
333 Beaver Dam Road, Vail, CO 81658
Presented to:
Mr. Charles Dolan
Dolan Construction, Inc.
PO Box 2721
Edwards, CO 81632
Performed by:
Mr. Brandon Sinkbeil
DS Consulting, Inc.
PO Box 6864
Avon, CO 81620
DSC Project # 0398
April 17, 2008
DS Consulting, Inc. (a
Unmatched Credentials. Superior Results.
F�
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On April 7, 2008, Mr. Brandon Sinkbeil of DS Consulting, Inc. (DSC) performed an
inspection and limited asbestos sampling at 333 Beaver Dam Road in Vail, Colorado, in order
to identify potentially hazardous friable and non - friable asbestos containing materials (ACM)
within a portion of the above - referenced, single - family residence. Mr. Brandon Sinkbeil
performed asbestos bulk sampling of various surfacing materials on sheetrock in a total of
seventeen (17) locations on all three levels of the residence. All seventeen (17) bulk samples
were analyzed by Reservoirs Environmental, Inc. with all laboratory results being non - detect
for ACM (see Appendix A for laboratory results).
I. Introduction
An inspection and bulk sampling for ACM was conducted at 333 Beaver Dam Road, Vail,
Colorado, by Mr. Brandon Sinkbeil on April 4, 2008, at the request of Mr. Charles Dolan with
Dolan Construction, Inc. Mr. Sinkbeil is a Colorado State Certified inspector, and has EPA
Accreditation #13442 (see Appendix B for a copy of this certificate). The purpose of the
inspection was to identify, sample and assess potentially hazardous friable and non - friable
ACM in a portion of the single - family residence referenced above.
II. Structural Design
The structure is a three- level, wood - framed, single - family home.
III. Sampling and Analytical Procedures
The inspection and assessment were conducted by an EPA and AHERA accredited Inspector
qualified by experience, education and training in the recognition of potential ACM and
approved bulk - sampling techniques. The asbestos bulk sampling was conducted on suspect
ACM with a limited number of bulk samples being collected in the residence.
The inspection and assessment were performed in accordance with Environmental Protection
Agency / AHERA recommended procedures. These procedures call for the visual inspection
of the area of concern and collection and analysis of representative bulk samples of suspect
material.
Some minor destructive sampling was conducted. Walls, columns and perimeter pipe chases
were not broken into in order to locate and quantify suspect ACM. It should be noted that
additional ACM might be located in other inaccessible areas.
Random bulk samples, representative of the suspect asbestos - containing building materials
(ACBM) of each homogeneous area (HA), were collected according to the guidelines
published as Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Final Rule: Title II of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 USC, Sections 2641 through 2654 and in compliance
with 40 CFR, Part 763. Representative sampling is based on the following criteria:
1. The distribution of the suspect material throughout the HA.
2. The suspect material's physical characteristics and application.
3. Random sampling patterns determined for each HA.
Suspect materials sampled and analyzed should be considered to be representative of
materials in each HA if:
1. They exhibit similar physical characteristics; and
2. The application of the sampled material can be correlated to the application of
unsampled material.
2
Bulk samples collected were analyzed utilizing the EPA's Method for the Determination of
Asbestos in Bulk Building Materials (EPA 600 /R/116, July, 1993) and the McCrone Research
Institute's The Asbestos Particle Atlas as methods references.
Analysis of the bulk samples was performed on the "date reported," as listed in the bulk -
sample analysis report.
IV. Notes on Report Format
Suspect materials alike in appearance and application were sampled as HAs. Suspect
materials were divided into three classifications:
1. Surfacing material: sprayed or troweled onto structural building member.
2. Thennal systems insulation: any type of pipe, boiler, tank, or duct insulation.
3. Miscellaneous: other suspect materials, including flooring, ceiling tiles, insulation,
and finishing materials.
Condition assessments were performed by the accredited inspector at the time of inspection.
Condition assessments are listed in the following section. Ratings of "good," "damaged," and
"severely damaged" are meant to indicate the overall condition of the material.
A material in "good" condition has no visible damage or deterioration, or showing only very
limited damage or deterioration.
A material in "damaged" condition has the following characteristics:
• The surface is crumbling, blistered, water - stained, gouged, marred or otherwise
abraded over less than one -tenth of the surface if the damage is evenly
distributed (one - quarter if the damage is localized).
Accumulation of powder, dust or debris similar in appearance to the suspect material on
surfaces beneath the material can be used as confirmatory evidence.
A material in "severely damaged" condition has one or more of the following characteristics:
• The surface is crumbling or blistered over at least one -tenth of the surface if
the damage is evenly distributed (one - quarter if the damage is localized).
One -tenth (one - quarter, if localized) of the material is hanging from the
surface, deteriorated, or showing adhesive failure.
• Water stains, gouges, or mars are over at least one -tenth of the surface if the
damage is evenly distributed (one - quarter if the damage is localized).
Kj
Accumulation of powder, dust or debris similar in appearance to the suspect material on
surfaces beneath the material can be used as confirmatory evidence. Response- action
recommendations for asbestos containing HAs are also listed in the following section.
Recommendations may be for more than one HA, if materials are alike. Recommendations
are either "general" or "immediate." An immediate recommendation indicates an imminent
hazard exists and should be addressed as soon as possible.
V. Inspector Comments
No ACM was identified during the bulk sampling conducted at 333 Beaver Dam Road, Vail,
Colorado. A total of seventeen (17) bulk samples were collected from the above - referenced
residence. All seventeen bulk samples were reported as non - detect for asbestos (see
Appendix A for laboratory results of bulk samples).
VI. Asbestos - Containing Homogeneous Area Descriptions and Sample Locations
The following section contains sampled HA descriptions and sample locations. Percent -
asbestos content for each sample indicated can vary depending on sample locations,
homogeneity of the materials, and type of application. The following samples were collected
from the single - family residence at 333 Beaver Dam Road, Vail, Colorado, on April 7, 2008:
Homogeneous Area #01
Homogeneous Area #01
Material Description: White plaster w /white
p aint; Tan/ green drywall
Material Description: White plaster w /white
paint,
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Location: Main Level East
Bathroom Ceiling
Material Location: Main Level Hallway
Ceiling at Central Stairs
Material Condition: Good
Material Condition: Good
Material Quantity: N/A
Material Quantity: N/A
Sample #: DOLANO101
Sample #: DOLAN0102
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect
Composition: Non - detect
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
E
Homogeneous Area #01
Homogeneous Area #02
Material Description: White plaster w /white
paint; White tape; White plaster; White /tan
drywall
Material Description: White plaster; White
tape; White plaster /white paint; White drywall
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Location: Main Level Laundry
Room Ceiling
Material Location: Main Level East Bedroom
Closet Wall
Material Condition: Good
Material Condition: Good
Material Quantity: N/A
Material Quantity: N/A
Sample #: DOLAN0103
Sample #: DOLANO201
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect; Non-
detect; Non - detect
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect; Non -
detect; Non - detect
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Homogeneous Area #02
Homogeneous Area #02
Material Description: White woven tape;
White /off -white plaster w /white paint
Material Description: White plaster w /white
paint; White /tan drywall
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Location: Main Level Hallway Wall
at Central Stairs
Material Location: Main Level Laundry
Room Wall
Material Condition: Good
Material Condition: Good
Material Quantity:
Material Quantity: N/A
Sample #: DOLANO202
Sample #: DOLANO203
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Homogeneous Area #03
Homogeneous Area #03
Material Description: White plaster w/
tan/gray paint; White /tan drywall
Material Description: White plaster; White
tape; White plaster w /tan paint; White /tan
drywall
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Location: Main Level East Bedroom
Wall
Material Location: Main Level East Bedroom
Wall
Material Condition: Good
Material Condition: Good
Material Quantity: N/A
Material Quantity: N/A
Sample #: DOLANO301
Sample #: DOLANO302
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect; Non -
detect; Non - detect
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Homogeneous Area #03
Homogeneous Area #04
Material Description: White plaster; White
tape; White plaster w /tan paint; White /tan
drywall
Material Description: White plaster; White
tape; White plaster w /white paint; White /tan
drywall
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Location: Main Level East Bedroom
Wall
Material Location: Drywall from Wall in
U stairs West Bedroom
Material Condition: Good
Material Condition: Good
Material Quantity: N/A
Material Quantity: N/A
Sample #: DOLANO303
Sample #: DOLAN0401
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect; Non-
detect; Non - detect
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect; Non -
detect; Non - detect
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Homogeneous Area #04
Homogeneous Area #04
Material Description: White plaster; White
tape; White plaster w/brown & white paint
Material Description: White plaster; Off -
white plaster; White plaster w /white paint;
White tape
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Location: Drywall from Wall at
Upstairs Main Stairway
Material Location: Drywall from Wall in
Upstairs East Bedroom
Material Condition: Good
Material Condition: Good
Material Quantity: N/A
Material Quantity: N/A
Sample #: DOLAN0402
Sample #: DOLAN0403
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect; Non-
detect
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect; Non -
detect; Non - detect
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Homogeneous Area #04
Homogeneous Area #04
Material Description: White plaster w /white
paint; White /tan drywall
Material Description: White plaster w /white
paint; White tape; White plaster; White /tan
drywa ll
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Location: Drywall from Wall at
Upstairs West Stairway
Material Location: Drywall from Wall in
Upstairs South Bathroom
Material Condition: Good
Material Condition: Good
Material Quantity: N/A
Material Quantity: N/A
Sample #: DOLAN0404
Sample #: DOLAN0405
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect; Non -
detect; Non - detect
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Homogeneous Area #05
Homogeneous Area #05
Material Description: White plaster; Tan
p laster w /white paint; White /tan drywall
Material Description: White plaster; White
plaster; White tape; White /tan drywall
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Location: Drywall from Wall in
Downstairs Water Filter Room
Material Location: Drywall from Ceiling in
Downstairs Boiler Room
Material Condition: Good
Material Condition: Good
Material Quantity: N/A
Material Quantity: N/A
Sample #: DOLAN0501
Sample #: DOLAN0502
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect; Non-
detect
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect; Non -
detect; Non - detect
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
Homogeneous Area #05
Material Description: White plaster /white
paint; White tape; White plaster; White /tan
drywall
Material Classification: Surfacing Material
Material Location: Drywall from Ceiling in
Downstairs Hallway Outside Boiler Room
Material Condition: Good
Material Quantity: N/A
Sample #: DOLAN0503
Composition: Non - detect; Non - detect; Non -
detect; Non - detect
Immediate Recommendation: NONE
VII. Recommendations
The laboratory results of the potential ACM sampled at 333 Beaver Dam Road, Vail, Colorado,
indicated that no bulk samples were reported as positive for asbestos. Therefore, no abatement
activities are recommended at this time.
DSC recommends that when ACM is removed/abated, that only a Colorado - licensed asbestos
abatement contractor using personnel trained in the handling of ACM be allowed to conduct such
activities using appropriate methods (HEPA- filtered vacuuming, wet cleaning methods,
respiratory protection, protective clothing, personnel decontamination, negative -air enclosures, air
monitoring, etc.).
0
APPENDIX A
BULK SAMPLE ANALYSIS
R E I LAB Reservoirs Environmental,
1�
April 15, 2008 Laboratory Code: RES
Subcontract Number:
NA
Laboratory Report:
RES 153088 -1
Project Description:
None Given
None Given
Brandon Sinkbeil
DS Consulting, Inc.
10988 E. 116th Ave.
Henderson CO 80640
Dear Customer,
/nC_
Reservoirs Environmental, Inc. is an analytical laboratory accredited for the analysis of Industrial Hygiene
and Environmental matrices by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program ( NVLAP), Lab
Code # 101896 for Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) and Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM)
analysis and the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA), Lab ID 101533 - Accreditation Certificate
#480 for Phase Contrast Microscopy (PCM) analysis. This laboratory is currently proficient in both
Proficiency Testing and PAT programs respectively.
Reservoirs Environmental, Inc. has analyzed the following samples for asbestos content as per your
request. The analysis has been completed in general accordance with the appropriate methodology as
stated in the attached analysis table. The results have been submitted to your office.
RES 153088 -1 is the job number assigned to this study. This report is considered highly confidential
and the sole property of the customer. Reservoirs Environmental, Inc. will not discuss any part of this study
with personnel other than those of the client. The results described in this report only apply to the samples
analyzed. This report must not be used to claim endorsement of products or analytical results by NVLAP or
any agency of the U.S. Government. This report shall not be reproduced except in full, without written
approval from Reservoirs Environmental, Inc. Samples will be disposed of after sixty days unless longer
storage is requested. If you have any questions about this report, please feel free to call 303 - 964 -1986.
Sincerely,
Jeanne Spencer Orr
President
Analyst(s):
Paul D. LoScalzo Wenlong Liu
Paul F. Knappe Rich Wegrzyn
Michael Scales
P: 303 - 964 -1986 5801 Logan Street, Suite 100 Denver, CO 80216 1- 866 -RESI -ENV
F: 303 - 477 -4275 www.reilab.com
Page 1 of 4
U
z
J
L Q
r
z
W
2
z
z
w �/�
v/
O
W
C/)
W
Ix
V
O
N
W
0
ca
d
rn �
2 M
CJ �;
CJ
O
o
o @
a
J `o
J ,p
(9
J
a c
U C
U �
Q U
� J
2
z
T
C
Q
�n ^
°
0 0
C w
C
0 0 0 0
D
Ln C)
J
O Ln
O
O (D
O
O r O (D
}
N O
m
O Ln
z
O
H
O
a
2
O
c
E
— O
w
CL
�f�
0
CD m
r c N O
I.L
Q
O C c O O
z
M N _> > N L N
U
r o R�
U °� �— ❑-
w
d
W fn O o O.� `a
r
U
w z z Q(L M
N
J
0 0
v
Q
O
z
Q
a E .
— o 0
Y
J
�
O C
N a) "
� U �
m
a) a)
g
z 0 a
J
a
E `
U U N Q a)
z m a� Q a o >
o o E ~ a3
w
aQ
��.aaC/) cn
T
m
0 C C C � c a)
= m E
Q
W _ -= — _ co c M is
=. —
F
of UUUOQF -0
�n ^
°
0 0
0
0 0 0 0
0 o o L!)
Ln C)
00
O Ln
0 0 ID
O (D
O
O r O (D
O — O Ln
N O
O In
O Ln
O
Q
E
O
U
c W w ^
O o
0 0
v
O
0 0 0 0
rn T
0 0 o Ln
O V
Ln o
V-
0 0
Ln
o Ln
v
O C
N a) "
o
W n.
Q E
0
o
❑ ❑
❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
C oco
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
N
z z
z
z z z z
z z z z
z z
z z
z z
_ > IC
a> E
c in
O w
U
O
O
m
.a
Q
�
•- ^
Z3 m
00
0
O
0000
0000
Ln
00
00
mo d°
N OD
N N N V
N (') V
U) O
N 00
";T (D
C
Q
_N
L
C
a
c
c
c
c
O
(6
_c
(0
@
(0
_3
3
_c
(0
>,
U
0_
a
d
Q
d
L6
U)
f
L
L
L
(n
L
c
n
3
3
3:
3
a) E
3—
°
—
(n c
U)
En a� °
a� 3
> 3
o
N a
ca a)
m
m a m c
(U d m
0
(0 c
as C
a a)
a
an aE
a@ - a a
3 o
a m
a
m
a
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
a) a)
a) a)
a) a)
L
t
-E L L L
L L L L
L L
L L
L L
�>3
�:F-
?:
3: ?: 3: 3:
�: 3: �: �:
�: 3:
3: ?:
-i Q
Qm
Q
QmUO
QmU0
Qm
Qm
Qm
(n
(D
rl-
00
rn
o
L
O
O
O
O
O
—
.-
a)
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
U')
Ln
LD
.0
co
Cl)
M
C)
co
C
(h
E
(D
(D
(D
(D
to
(D
(D
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
�Z
2
2
2
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
r
N
M
r
N
M
r
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
r
r
r
N
N
N
M
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
z
Z
CL
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
y E E
- ea :3
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
(n z
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
Q
d
(D
r 0
° o
v
c
C
O
T
A
0
v
z
E
E
U
U
E c F
W u T
_o
> i VI
E A
E �
m
C v u y
I s
II III u °' a
z
U
Z
J
Q
H
z
LLI
2
Z
z
' LLJ
vJ
w
55
Ix
Lll
N
w
w
v
O
Cl)
(L)
0)
c6
d
rn �
CO o,
o a
� o
c+�
o �
` o
J �
U J
N m
U C
U �
a
z
N
f0
C
Q
w
2
D
J
O
m
u
V)
O
a
E
O
O
O O O LO
O
/
V r c
a
w co
Q w_ c
c 0 O CD
r O
O — O IT
(
W cA U c
ao t6
c '� � ❑ '�
a w fn O
W❑zzQa
O O. J O.
vi
J
Q
O
O O O LO
z
a .
O O O O
Q
o m
O— O LO
O — O IT
O— O
0 0 0 r-
a)
E u
m
N
z 0
J D
U U W cn p,
a
N
a
a) a) a >, a
z
U .o E ~
w
Z3
m
O
00 U
c
m
a
w _
a aci
_ — co c :3
io
F xUUU0<
0
' N N °
O O O Ln
O O O LO
O O O LO
O O O
O O O O
O — O LO
O— O LO
O — O IT
O— O
0 0 0 r-
-0 o
i� Q
E
O
U
C v N W
O 7 o
0 0U
O
O O O LO
O
Q' 0 0 M
O LO
O O O
O
O O
O
N O �--
(U c
-0 E °a
Q E
O
o
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
C oco
N
z z z z
z z z z
z z z z
z z z
z z z z
c > m
E
rt
c N
O w
U
N
O
N
a)
N
Q �
d
c
L o
o
M LO O
Lf) M LO
LO O O
O Lo LO
CO LO O
(n a
N N (D
LL') N LO
LO r- M U)
N CO I
N r M LO
c
M
a
_N
t
(� .O
C
C
Q
RCS
Q
U
(n
Q.
a)
a)
>+ U
L !/)
L
L
cu
cn a) N
in a) in
N al N
N O in
in a in W
M Q ca c
M n. co c
ca Q ca c
m n m
ca M n
a @ 'an
a doam
'a a
amQ
a'- am
(D Q) a> m
a) a) a> m
a> a> a>
L L L L
L L L L
L L L L
L L L
L ' E ' E
3: 3: 3: �:
O �: 3:
J Q} w 2
Q m U 0
Q m U 0
Q m U 0
Q m U
Q m U 0
N
M
LO
(D
d
O
LO
M
co
Cl)
Cl)
Cl)
E
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
N
N
N
N
N
ca
w
w
w
w
w
N
M
r
N
z
M
O
O
O
O
O C
M
M
IRT
O
O
O
O
O o
m y
z
z
z
z
z z
J
J
J
J
J
M=
O
O
O
O
O
(n z
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
S
0
m
v
`o
c
T
V
2
m
0
w
E
0
« „ ."
E
E
.. c f
W " T
y «_
7 c m u
E ro
V F s H
v L r
u °
A Q �
F E o a
F z w
U
z
J
a
z
w
2
z
N 0
I
z
''
v
1.I.
0
W
U)
W
ir
V
G
m
0)
c�
a
0
o
J
a m
� J
D
a� ID
U C
U
Q U
J
CL _
z �
z�s$
Q
0
m
76
0
0
r
v
0
T
9
bu
E
0
E � F
A e
v 7 O A L
oar- v
z ti a
p F u o a
z Fz�L
cn 2 °
O O L()
O O O O
O O O LO
O LO
C) 0 0 LO
O O V
O O r- I-
O .-- O It
C) "T
O •- O (O
L
O
LL a
E
O
U
c (/) w o
O n o
oc�Lr)
LO
00
6) M
000Lr)
m LO
OLO
U')
o00LO
O
U)
z O a)—
_0
L O
(n a
T
co
Q E
c
O
Q
�
coo
Coco
0000
cc
c0 ❑o
N
Z Z Z
Z Z Z Z
Z Z Z Z
Z Z
Z Z Z Z
_ y
c > m
w E
� N
O W
U
N
O
O
.O
O
Q
c
-0
:3
O O O
m O �O
O O O O
00
N 00
O O O O
U) 0-
. M (D
(N - N CO
N N N'T
V UO
N N N 'c7
C
W
(6 .o
c
(II
a3
(0
2
a
a
a
a
O
U)
a
()
a)
a)
J
t U)
a)
t
L
O
o m
0
3 3
3
3 3
_�—
3 3
_3
3 3
Z
a)
a) °
(L) a
a
a) v) -0
O
(0 C
m m a C
m a m C
m C
m a m C
amp
aa
o 2
m a a)
a) a) a) m
a) a) a) a)
a) a)
a) m m a)
N
0
L C L
L L L L
L L L L
L L
L L L L
a
���
2
c O
J Q W0�
Q m U
Q m U 0
Q m U 0
Q m
Q m U 0
W
a
O
Q
oD _, c c 00 O
o G
ti
00
CF)
C)
.-
H
Z
00 y � o
O > >_ O N
N
L
a)
LO
r
u�
LO
N
LO
N
LO
W
_>
, y M
r
E
M
m
M
co
Cl)
U
0 f6
N
N
N
N
N
a
w cn o o a� u? a
m z
a❑zz<aMQ
w
w
w
w
w
(
U)
U
U
U
U
O
O
O
O
J
Z
Q
n- 0 .
O
O
O
O
Y
m
a) .fl- .�
c
c
c
c
.J
E v
O
O
O
O
z ❑ LL
Z
Z
Z
Z
J
CL
E N O a)
m Q Q�
o
C)
Cl)
0
CD
Z N
O O E C
U)
l0
N
et
�
W
o a` a `� o c
L
m
O
Z
O
Z
O
Z
O
Z
O
Z
_
Q
c a)
W
_
J
J
J
J
J
c� is
m=
O
O
O
O
O
H
�UUUDQE - ❑
cnZ
❑
❑
❑
in
❑
z�s$
Q
0
m
76
0
0
r
v
0
T
9
bu
E
0
E � F
A e
v 7 O A L
oar- v
z ti a
p F u o a
z Fz�L
00
co
0
CO
W
U
^
W
O
n
W
m
g
!(1
Q
V
1 (`
m E
cu
o �
O
Q
g «
LL iJ a LL
Z
f•-
U
Q
Z
O y ,
U
C �ICn
0 r co
O CO
m m Om
W
CL'
W
LL O
LL_ �
O y co
O
`cQ°°
CJ
O c U
� r C
W p
U CO W
Z 0 O =
}
m
0
uj
� C
m
a O
W c V co
co au
to m
C
p X U
U m c
4
S o
H
E
a
v E
y A
E E
3 �
c `m
m
U «
s E
a
E
_u
�E
T
�o
m
E z
m o
rn E
v
i -
r � m
i N
0
� r
� v 3
0
i � E
� 4 0
I
I � N
i E u
° 2
O
I C
O A
i
d
� a
�8
a U
o
0 g�
m
0
pp
A
D
m-
E
y
o °
c m
0 0
� m
m E
E
w
o
z t
S�
�r
r J
c
1
Y -�
INJ
J
S
J
i L^
66
a a
LU
I -
$
. J
7
z
Z O
Wg
c
N
CO
CL
?�
o
_E E
W
aY_go
II
II
II
E-
U r
m
a
1
K
U
u
O
$
a�
d
E
a
0 E
U
I
zz
U
s�aulR�o'J #
C o
Q
O
C
N
E Q
I`
IN
II
o
w
apoo >13eW
-
-
-
eaiv / N
-
a
awnlon aldweS
3
n
� N
- tl3H10
r
Oaa '0 9E) '0969 '3elw 'x31a -=NVONO
Q
ueOS slelaA 'awnj 6 u1PIW 'd101 'S V808
Q
(s)aCAleuV sitl
W
I-
alqudsoa 'let °1 Lsna
(0
W
- - --
VHSO 'a00bL 'VOODL WOd
(J
sdaJd
W
tY
I°aJIPUI - OSI 'Oen - OJOIW 'Juenb 'Juenp
`l+ 'OSI 'L07L 'Il lanai w83HV - W3L
Iunoo pod 'uodai 6uo•I 'uodai PoyS ld
0
N
C =
0
V
CI
> N
c
Q
u
Z
p
°
c m m
_ L
c
a`
A
�
d "
Z L
a
Lo
T
O m
6o
c
z
<
c°
E
ro o
9
Wco
I I I - ° Y
ix
a r
T
N
C',
I�
W
Y
d
m U
o a-
a'
d_
3 co
_
u> s
m
7c ro
e
E
v
a�
E
a: NI
O
=�
8�
=
w
=
A f
y
�
N
4
°
O
N
N
O
y
N
6
1
J
��0�,0
J
v a
I
o
O
E
Q
�O
a
V
C
d
e
t
E
0
d'
O c
E
'
m
ti
w
°_
�
v °° U
2
R
c
a
m
g
uj
„
:° g E �
"
E
Q
a
0
�ti O
N
U�Nrf
r
NM
Z
S o
H
E
a
v E
y A
E E
3 �
c `m
m
U «
s E
a
E
_u
�E
T
�o
m
E z
m o
rn E
v
i -
r � m
i N
0
� r
� v 3
0
i � E
� 4 0
I
I � N
i E u
° 2
O
I C
O A
i
d
� a
�8
a U
o
0 g�
m
0
pp
A
D
m-
E
y
o °
c m
0 0
� m
m E
E
w
o
z t
S�
�r
r J
c
1
Y -�
INJ
J
S
J
i L^
W
o
O
Z
W ti
ta
d
E
o
-.
m
t a
° 5 v
LU
O CO IL.
� � �' p. > m
X
m d u U E
F-
Q
7 a O
d O m slaw.eWo #
I
O
a U' apoo xuleW
� n o � ' �j w
j
ai c eaJV 1
a alunl0A aldweg
v.
I I I i
a3H1 O
N
OaO - OH9 o9Z8 '391W X318 -SOINVONO
a
Z
ueoS slelaW 'awn .1 Bu!gaM 'd101 's V80a
S)914euV - S
W
alQei!dsaa 'lelol - 1SRC4
W
VHSO '900bL b00bL - WOd
1 I_rtf'li!
;j
sdaid IOaJpul-OSI 'Oen -Oiayy 'luenb -!wag
it
'ZOhL 'II lanai 'Va3HV - W31
VI.
I
IunoO lulOd 'yodai 6uOl 'Nodal S ' Wld
'.� :
I '
I I
I
�_ NI
i
�l
D ili
j
co
a
i
II
'
1
I ,
E
r a
a
i
E
Ws
�
�III�I��liillll
I�I
yl l ✓
� i
i �
i
I I
i
I l
i
�
�
l
�
Q O
V�1
W Cl)
W
Q (n
m
"!
V
W) tD f� N Qf O r N M ' r W) tD f-
r -- -- r W O1 —O e.�i m ..
N N N N N N N N [v tv - TA TO t! cO -M 0 r N M d
CERTIFICATE
M
X" I
-;ps
4 q, R."P
R IN
0 � �0 I Ww i "
g
RPM
11 m
V
ti
P,
STATE OF COLORADO _� .:.
ASBESTOS
CERTIFICATION*
Colorado DeparU of Public Health
and Environment
Air Pollution Control Division
zi ; I ...........
This certi(ics that
Brandon Sinkbeil
Certification No: 13442
has Met the requirements of 25-7-507, C.R.S. and Air QuaRy Control
. . . . . . . . . . .
Commission Regulation No. 8, Part B, and is hereby certified by the
state of Colorado in the following discipline:
iq 2.
Building Inspector*
.
Issued: 5116/2007
Expires on: 511612008
E21i
ti
er
"A.
; "a
S-1
A7jr M!Ircuemwive
• T/JiT 1 is Whit VNIF PI 1IMPOSsevdair of cmrremir Divalon-appromd tm;jFjpg c4yjrj-3r
&C d;.qCjPj;rI spedfred abort
AI :�ji
"Alo,
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO Statement
Statement Number: R080000687 Amount: $6,611.31 05/13/200809:42 AM
Payment Method: Check Init: RLF
Notation: 10094 DOLAN
CONSTRUCTION INC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Permit No: B08 -0145 Type: NEW (SFR,P /S,DUP) PERMIT
Parcel No: 2101 - 071 - 1200 -6
Site Address: 333'BEAVER DAM RD VAIL
Location: 333 BEAVER DAM RD
Total Fees: $61,586.56
This Payment: $6,611.31 Total ALL Pmts: $6,611.31
Balance: $54,975.25
************************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
ACCOUNT ITEM LIST:
Account Code Description Current Pmts
-------------- - - - - -- ------------------------ - - - - -- ------ - - - - --
PF 00100003112300 PLAN CHECK FEES 6,611.31
Building Plan Review List: Permit # °
Single Family Dwelling
Duplex/Townhome
V -B construction Review date:
2003 IRC plan revisions require /N
Reviewed by: — o tw
IRC Approval date:
Architectural:
Digitize floor plans for building area totals.
Correction
Required
Two - Family Dwelling Units:
Y / One hour wall assembly for vertical separations to underside of roof sheeting (IRC R317.1)
Y / One hour floor /ceiling assembly for horizontal separations. Supporting construction shall also
have equal fire resistive rating. (IRC R317.1.1)
Y / Check common walls or floors have minimum sound transmission class (STC) of 50. (IBC 1207)
Townhomes
Y / (Two) one hour wall assemblies, or (one) two hour wall assembly (plumbing /mechanical
penetrations not permitted) (IRC R321.2)
Y/ Check common walls have minimum sound transmission class (STC) of 50. (IBC 1207)
Y / 1 Continuity of common wall shall be continuous from foundation to roof sheeting and extend full
length of the wall. (IRC R317.2.1)
Y / Parapets shall be required unless alternate construction is provided per exceptions (IRC
R317.2.2 and R317.2.3)
Y / Each townhouse shall be structurally independent (IRC R317.2.4)
Y / Check common wall detail is per actual structural wall /floor /roof conditions.
Building planning
Y /X, Check location on property for exterior wall, overhang and opening protection.
One hour walls less than 3', overhangs, no openings <3' (IRC R302)
Y /K Check dwelling unit is maximum 3 stories and maximum 40' height (IBC Table 503, 101.2)
Y 1W Check separation and opening protection specified between dwelling /garage or carport if
not open on 2 or more sides (IRC R309)
Y /�W- Check no openings from garage directly into sleeping rooms (IRC R309)
Y /�D Check 1 /2" gypsum board specified on underside of enclosed usable space under stairs
(IRC R311.2.2)
Y / AD Check one hour fireplace flue shaft for other than appliance fireplaces.
Y 110 Check minimum of one side hinged 3 ft. x 6ft.8in. exit door provided from dwelling to exterior.
Exit path may not travel through the garage. (IRC R311)
Y PW Check minimum room areas. One room 120 s.f., habitable rooms not less than 70 s.f. (IRCR304)
Y /,fit Check habitable rooms not less than 7' in any dimension (IRC R304)
Y Check minimum 7' ceiling height in habitable rooms, hallways, bathrooms, laundry rooms and
basements (IRC R305)
/ N Check for glazing area (8% of floor area) and natural ventilation (4% of floor area) in
habitable rooms (IRC R303). See exceptions for mechanical ventilation.
Media rooms /rec rooms etc. may be artificial light if mechanical ventilation system provided per
IRC R303
Y / Check ventilation in bathrooms (IRC R303.3)
O N N Check bedrooms and basement for emergency escape door or window and window well
(IRC R310) Mark egress windows on the plans for the field inspector.
Check safety glazing provided in hazardous locations, highlight windows on floor plans for field
inspector:(IRC R308)
Y /1� glass in side hinged doors, sliding doors, shower doors
Y glass in shower, bath, hot tub, sauna etc. enclosures where window is <60" above floor
Y / J V glass within 24" of either door edge in closed position and <60" above floor.
Y / Aim any glass panels >9 s.f. and <18" but >36" above floor
Y / W glass in railings
Y /,N glass within 5' of water's edge of pool or spa and <60" above floor
Y 1,N glass at top or sides of stairways within 36"
Y / Nt - glass at bottom of stairways within 5'
Y / Ad' Check rafter space or attic space ventilation specified and ridge /eave detail provided
jJRC R806)
Y / p� Check underfloor ventilation specified, or plans show other approved method per
. /z exceptions (IRC R408)
Y 14 Check floor level and landings at doors. See exception for additional doors (IRC R311.4.3)
C35/ VCheck guards provided where required and detail provided. (R312)
Y /X' stairway for tread /riser size and nosing profile, open risers, width, landing size,
handrail /guard (IRC R311)
Y /K Check fireplace chimney termination, 2' above roof within 10'. If decorative shroud is used on
factory built fireplace, it must be listed for use with the specific fireplace. (IRC R1004)
Y /,A" Check weather protection specified on exterior walls and any waterproof decks with
/ enclosed space below. (IRC R703)
Y Check dampproofing /waterproofing specified on basement foundation walls (IRC R406)
Y /.III Check roof covering /underlayment specified. (IRC Ch. 9)
Y Check vapor retarder installed on warm side of insulation. (IRC R318)
Y /Check any foam plastic insulation specified to have thermal barrier installed where exposed to
interior of building or crawl space. (IRC R314)
Check for pool, hot tub or spa on site plan. Check compliance with pool barrier
provisions. Separate permit may be required if plans are not included. (IRC Appendix G)
IRC
Mechanical:
Correction
Required
Y /,K Check required heating is provided (IRC R303.8)
/ Check clothes dryer location
Y /'IV Check vent length, and termination comply with (IMC 504, IRC M1501)
Check mechanical equipment location
Y / N " Check mechanical equipment is not located in a sleeping rooms, bathroom /toilet rooms or
storage closet unless allowed per exceptions. (IMC 303.3, IRC G2406)
Y /,Fd Check any equipment in garage specified to be 6' above floor unless vehicle barrier
is provided, then 18" above floor permitted. (IMC 304.3, IRC G2408.3, G2408.4, M1307.3)
Y / N 30" deep working space provided in front of equipment (IMC 306, IRC M1305.1)
Y kN Check door large enough to remove equipment (IMC 306, IRC M1305.1.2)
Y / N Check mechanical room large in comparison with size of equipment (IMC 303.5, IRC G2409.4.1)
Y / N Check floor drain provided in mechanical room (IMC 1004.6 )
Y IN Check mechanical equipment vent shaft and vent termination shown. (IFGC 503.6)
Y /
Y / ;N� ote combustion air required per IMC Ch. 7
Y /�V Check mechanical room is provided with 1 hour construction on mechanical room side and 20
minute door if equipment is over 400,000 Btu (TOV)
Y / N Check if any mechanical equipment in crawl spaces is separated with 1 hour construction and 20
minute door. (TOV)
Check fireplaces:
l Y N Check total number of fireplaces are per Town Code 5 -3 -3. (1 EPA wood burner with max. 2
appliances, or 2 gas log set and 2 appliances.)
/ N Check fireplaces are specified to have gas log set if they are not an EPA unit.
( —I il N Check fireplaces in bedrooms are appliance units. (IMC 303 and IRC M1701.4)
IPC
Plumbing:
Correction
Required
Y /P477—Check minimum sanitation facilities provided: bathroom, kitchen, water, sewage disposal.
IRC R306)
Y / Check sewer manhole elevation. Check if building sewer backwater valve, or valve and sump
/ pump are required. (IPC 712 and 715)
Y / I`V Check if garage floor drains are shown. Floor drains may not be connected to sewer
unless interceptor is provided. (IPC 1003) Daylight to drain is permitted.
YIN Check any floor drains other than met;hanical room noted to be provided with automatic trap
primer valves where necessary. Laundry floor drains etc. (IPC 1002.4)
heck bathrooms
Y / Check for minimum clearances at water closet, 30" wide, 21" clear in front (IPC 405.3.1, IRC 307)
Y / ' Check for minimum clearances at tub /shower, 24" clear in front (IRC R307)
Y Check shower compartment meets minimum size, 900 sq. in. ", 30" circle (IPC 417.4)
Y / N Check for minimum clearances at lavatories, 21" clear in front (IRC R307)
IRC
Structural:
Correction
Required
Y /.N Check structural sheets of plans and details wet stamped and signed by Colorado State Licensed
Engineer or Architect (IRC R301.1.3)
Check the following plans are included
Y 19' structural design loads and material specifications sheet
Y / N foundation plans and details
Y / N' dedicated floor framing plans for each floor level
YIN dedicated roof /ceiling framing plans or truss layout
YIN framing details
YIN f soils report for correct lot
Check desiqn criteria used in structural design
Y / N' roof and deck live load per TOV snow loads: roofs >4:12 (80 psf) decks and roofs <4:12 (100psf)
Y / DY floor design for 40/30 psf live load and min. dead load if concrete topping or stone
Y /,W wind design for minimum 90mph (3 second gust), exposure referenced
Y /,N' seismic design for zone C
Y / - tom foundation designed per soils report bearing capacity.
Y / N Check specifications called out for lumber grades /species, beams (LVL, Glulam etc.), log grades,
concrete, foundation reinforcing, steel framing
Footing /foundation, slab and floors:
Y / N Check retaining wall design provided where greater than 4' in height
Y / W Check footing /foundation sized in accordance with soils report
Y /M' Check footing, foundation stepped if site grade slopes greater than 10 %. Top of
wall /bottom of footing elevations shown.
Y /M Check foundation sections /details are provided for each type of footing /foundation and referenced
/ on the foundation plan, dimensions clearly shown
Y / W Check foundation sill plate pressure treated or redwood, bolt spacing specified. Check
joist/foundation wall connection details.
Y / N Check minimum frost depth specified for bottom of footing
Y / N Check minimum slab thickness is specified and expansion joints are shown between thickened
slab at bearing walls and post footings per soils report if expansive soil
Y / N Check proper bearing is provided at all bearing walls /columns. Trace loads from all levels above
to the foundation.
Y / N Check floor joist and beam spans, minimum bearing for beams or joists ends
Y / N Check deck joist and beam spans, joist material suitable for exterior
YIN Check joist hangers and beam hangers are specified, beam to beam connections specified
Y / N Check through bolting connections specified for side loaded (4) member LVL beams
Y / N Check minimum underfloor joist/girder clearances
Y / N Check floor sheathing type thickness and attachment
Y / N Check all wood framing minimum 6" above grade
Y / N Check wood framing not supporting dead load of masonry/concrete over 4" thick. See exceptions
for veneer.
Y / N Check support details are provided for stone or masonry veneer and height does not exceed 30',
or 38' at gable ends (R703.7)
Y / N Check if masonry fireplace or prefab masonry type fireplace. Non - combustible support and
construction details provided.
Walls:
Y / N Check stud size and spacing and height specified and complies with specifications for bearing
stud heights indicated on the plans.
Y / N Check header specified over openings in stud wall
Y / N Check columns clearly specified at concentrated loads. Columns clearly shown where
transferring from upper level
Y / N Check stud wall lateral bracing specified on plans.
Roof:
Y / N Check rafter, hip, valley, beam spans
Y / N Check ridge designed as beam or rafters ties provided at ceiling level
Y / N Check rafter hangers are shown, beam to beam connections specified, welding or bolting
connections for bent beams specified
Y / N Check through bolting connections specified for side loaded (4) member LVL beams
Y / N Check construction details provided for site built trusses (log or timber)
Y / N Check truss layout plan if manufactured trusses, note truss shop drawings to be submitted at
frame inspection
Y / N Check overframing at infill areas size /spacing specified
Y / N Check roof sheathing type, thickness and attachment specified
O ".
G( Ta
otech
HEP`NOP ?H - PAWLAK GF01 FC HNIC`AL.
Town of Vail
OFFICE COPY
MAY 13 2008
TOWN OF VAIL
SUBSOIL STUDY
FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED SMITH RESIDENCE
LOT 41, BLOCK 3, VAIL VILLAGE 3 RD FILING
333 BEAVER DAM ROAD
VAIL, COLORADO
JOB NO. 108 146A
APRIL 30, 2008
PREPARED FOR:
VAG, INC.
ATTN: MELISSA BAUM
P. O. BOX 1734
VAIL, COLORADO 81658 -1734
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ......................... ...............................
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION .. ...............................
SITE CONDITIONS .......................
FIELDEXPLORATION
............................................................. ...............................
- 2 -
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .........................
,
...............
- -
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS ..............
...............................
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
..................
FOUNDATIONS
_
.................. ............................... ......... ...............................
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS
_ _
............... ...............................
FLOOR SLABS
.......................... .............................. ...............................
DERDRAIN SYSTEM
.................
ITE GRADING ...............................
........................
SURFACE DRAINAGE
.......................................................... ...............................
- 8 -
LIMITATIONS ......................
FIGURE 1 - LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURE 4 - SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 5 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a subsoil study for the proposed Smith residence to be
located on Lot 41, Block 3, Vail Village 3 Filing, 333 Beaver Dam Road, 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 VAg, Inc. dated
April 4, 2003.
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
An existing residence on the lot will be removed and the new residence constructed. The
proposed residence will be a one and two story wood frame structure over a partial
basement level located on the lot as shown on Figure 1. The basement will be below the
northern portion of the residence. Ground floors will be slab -on -grade in the basement
and attached garage, and structural over crawlspace in the non - basement portions.
Elevations of the floor levels are shown on Figure 2. Grading for the structure, as
proposed, will require cut depths between about 3 to 9 feet. We assume relatively light
foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction.
Job No. 108 146A
G4Mectl
IIPZ
If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described
above, we should be notified to re- evaluate the recommendations contained in this report.
SITE CONDITIONS
The lot is occupied by the existing two story residence over crawlspace located as shown
on Figure 1. The terrain is typically relatively flat with a strong slope down to the north
at grades from about 8 to 12 %. The terrain becomes steeper in the northern part of the
lot, on the order of 20 to 25 %, down to Gore Creek. Elevation difference across the
proposed residence is about 12 feet and across the lot is about 25 feet. There is a small
creek along the western side of the lot that apparently flows from a pond located on the
adjacent Lot 6 to the west. Vegetation consists of scattered pine tress and areas of
willows with landscaping and grass. The site was covered with about 2%z to 3%2 feet of
snow at the time of our field exploration. Gore Creek is located about 150 feet north of
the lot and 40 feet lower in elevation.
During our field exploration, we observed the crawlspace of the existing residence. The
soils in the crawlspace consisted of clayey sandy gravel and cobbles. No free water or
wet soils were observed in the crawlspace and the subgrade was relatively dry.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on April 16, 2008. Three 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 55 drill rig. The track rig was needed due to the snow
cover and some snow removal was needed to access 2 of the 3 boring sites. The borings
were logged by a representative of Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with I% inch and 2 inch I.D. spoon samplers. The
samplers were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140 pound
hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described
by ASTM Method D -1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the
Job No. 108 146A --
G(�(&ech
-3-
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. Slotted PVC pipe was installed in two of the three borings to allow
monitoring of the groundwater levels.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2.
The subsoils encountered, below about 1 to 3 feet of organic topsoil, consisted of
medium dense, clayey to very clayey silty sand with scattered gravel underlain at depths
from about 3 to 7 feet by medium dense to dense, silty sandy gravel and cobbles with
scattered boulders that extended down to the maximum depth drilled of 30 feet. Drilling
in the dense coarse granular soils with auger equipment was difficult due to the cobbles
and boulders and drilling refusal was encountered in the deposit.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural
moisture content and density, gradation analyses and Atterberg limits. Results of swell -
consolidation testing performed on a relatively undisturbed drive sample of the clayey
silty sand, presented on Figure 4, indicate low to moderate compressibility under
conditions of loading and wetting. Results of gradation analyses performed on a small
diameter drive sample (minus 1 % inch fraction) of the coarse granular subsoils are shown
on Figure 5. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1.
Free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and when checked 2
days later a depths from about 4 to 9 feet. The subsoils were moist to very moist
becoming wet near and below the free water level.
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS
At proposed excavation depths, the subgrade soils will probably transition from the silty
sandy gravel and cobble soils in the deeper cut areas to the clayey silty sand soils in the
shallower cut areas. The sand soils generally possess low bearing capacity and moderate
Job No. 108 146A
GE.�t�cr,
-4-
settlement potential, and the gravel and cobbles soils generally possess moderate bearing
capacity and relatively low settlement potential. Spread footings bearing on these soils
should be feasible for foundation support of the residence. There is some risk of
differential settlement due to the assumed variable bearing conditions. Placing the
footings entirely on the gravel and cobble soils would provide a relatively low risk of
differential settlement, and probably require subexcavation below design bearing
elevation in areas.
Groundwater will probably be encountered in the excavation and need to be controlled for
construction and permanently lowered for the basement level to prevent wetting of the
basement and crawlspace areas, and possible uplift of the swimming pool. We expect
that trenches placed outside the footing areas and sloped to gravity outlet or sumps and
pumps should be feasible for shallow draw -down.
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 coarse granular soils. The need for subexcavation of the
fine grained soils to suitable bearing soils should be further evaluated at the time of
construction.
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 settlement of footings designed and constructed as
discussed in this section will be up to about 1 inch.
Job No. 108 146A Gctgtech
2) . The footings should have a minimum xvidth of 18 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 48 inches below exterior grade is
typically used in this area.
4) Continuous foundation walls should be well reinforced top and bottom to
span local anomalies and better withstand differential movements such as
by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12 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) All existing fill, topsoil, debris and any loose disturbed soils should be
removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the firm natural
granular soils. If water is encountered, the footing areas should be
dewatered before concrete placement. The dewatering can probably be
accomplished by trenches placed outside the footing areas and sloped to
gravity outlet or a sump where the water can be collected and pumped. It
should be feasible to place a shallow depth (up to about 1 foot) of screened
rock in the excavation bottom to aid in the dewatering after installing the
trenches and sumps.
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 residence and can be expected to deflect sufficiently to
J00 lvU. 1 UiS 140A _ � 9tech
SZ
mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth
pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 45 pcf for
backfill consisting of the on -site granular soils. The wall backfill should not contain
debris, topsoil or oversized rocks.
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. Use
of a select granular material and increasing compaction to at least 98% standard Proctor
density should help mitigate the settlement potential.
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 350 pcf for moist condition and 200 pcf for buoyant condition. 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
Job No. 108 146A "' F' tech
-7-
occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed
against the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be a granular material
compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content
near optimum.
FLOOR SLABS
The natural on -site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab -
on- grade construction. 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 6 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 debris, topsoil and oversized rock.
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Free water was encountered during our exploration and it has been our experience in
mountainous areas that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy
precipitation or seasonal runoff, or groundwater level can rise seasonally. Frozen ground
during spring runoff can also create a perched condition. We recommend below -grade
construction, such as retaining walls, crawlspace and basement areas, be protected from
wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. It may be desirable to
incorporate the permanent underdrain system with the construction dewatering.
Job No. 108 146A --
Ge<�tech
-8-
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 I foot below lowest adjacent finish
grade and sloped at a minimum 1 % to a suitable gravity outlet. Interior lateral drains on
about 12 to 15 feet spacing should be provided below basement slab areas. Free - draining
granular 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 and extend to above any
seepage in the adjacent cut face. A blanket underdrain consisting of at least 12 inches of
free draining gravel that connects to a drain pipe sloped to daylight should also be
provided below the swimming pool.
SITE GRADING
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 existing fill 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. The risk of slope instability will be increased if seepage is
encountered in cuts and flatter slopes may be necessary.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and
maintained at all times after the residence has been completed:
1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be
avoided during construction.
Job No. 108 146A —
G;Ttech
IVE
2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and
compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density in
pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard
Proctor density in landscape areas.
3) The ground surface:surrounding the exterior of the building should be
sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We
recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved
areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in paved areas.
Free - draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 feet of the on-
site finer graded 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
Gec�tech
mile
project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during
construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to
verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design
changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations
presented herein. We recommend on -site observation of excavations and foundation
bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical
engineer.
Respectfully Submitted,
HEPWORTH ('>iiHQy ICAL, INC.
�e�° �O Rr`
David A. Young, P.E.
Reviewed by: �01VAL P`®
7 ��`,
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
DAY /vad
cc: Dolan Construction — Attn: Charlie Dolan (e -mail only)
Job No. 108 146A - -- -- - --
GecPtech
r
'F I
LOT 6 S;t?71 p p F lit
BENCH MARK: r
EXISTING GARAGE 7 .�—
SLAB. ELEV.= 979.2',
AS PROVIDED. �, {� •, E -�-
0.
7�STI y
RESIDENCE
�-
1 � I
RING 2
r• r
EXISTING
POND
BASEMENT
AREA C
EXISTING
RESIDENCE `
iSHADED}
BONING 3
I
PROPOSED I
® RESIDENCE
FOOTPRINT
I s8a7 _ s GARAGE
MBR k
Lot 47 G — \..• {
Q , O I G 1 C.sao acres
LOT t
l o
f CL / k
i
f
--
__- - --a —�
BEAVER DAM ROAD
LOT tip
EXISTING
RESIDENCE
108 146A I Gel ech I LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS (FIGURE 1
ri PrIOR'H-PAW ,EO?ECH!+iCAL
LL
c 7970
0
6
LL
7965
50/1
16/12
6/12
WC = 20.8
- 200 =23
BASEMENT LEVEL
FFE = 7-n7 4.5'
20,50/5
+4= 36
-200=25
50/3
501/1
7960
7955
19/12
WC =12.8
DD =116 7980
20/12
WC -85
-2.00- 18
7975
31,12
50, 4
50,5
C)
LL
7970 c
0
LLI
7965
7960
7955
L_ 7950
7950
Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 3.
1081464 ~
h LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 2
k�oworth— Pawlok Geotechninnl
BORING 2 BORING 3
ELEV. = 7982.2 ELEV. = 7983.7
GARAGE FFE = 7989' 7990
MAIN LEVEL FFE - 7986.5'
7985
BORING 1
ELEV. = 7987.2
7990
MBR FFE - 7988'
7985
1 o/12
0
10/12
WC -17.0
- 200 =47
2
LL =25
7980
_
o.
P1= —
0"
18/12
-200=24
7975
o�
0•"
70/12
LL
c 7970
0
6
LL
7965
50/1
16/12
6/12
WC = 20.8
- 200 =23
BASEMENT LEVEL
FFE = 7-n7 4.5'
20,50/5
+4= 36
-200=25
50/3
501/1
7960
7955
19/12
WC =12.8
DD =116 7980
20/12
WC -85
-2.00- 18
7975
31,12
50, 4
50,5
C)
LL
7970 c
0
LLI
7965
7960
7955
L_ 7950
7950
Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 3.
1081464 ~
h LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 2
k�oworth— Pawlok Geotechninnl
BORING 2 BORING 3
ELEV. = 7982.2 ELEV. = 7983.7
GARAGE FFE = 7989' 7990
MAIN LEVEL FFE - 7986.5'
7985
LEGEND:
TOPSOIL; organic clayey silty sand, highly moist, dark brown.
SAND (SC -SM); clayey to very clayey, silty, scattered gravel, medium dense, moist to very moist, brown, low
plasticity fines.
GRAVEL AND COBBLES (GM); with scattered boulders, sandy to very sandy, silty, medium dense becoming
dense with depth, moist becoming wet near and below free water level, brown, rocks are primarily subrounded.
Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2 -inch I. D, California liner sample.
Drive sample; standard penetration test (SPT), 1 3/8 inch 1. D. split spoon sample, ASTM D -1586.
39/12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 39 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were
required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12 inches.
Indicates 2" diameter PVC pipe placed in the boring. The slotted portion of the PVC pipe is indicated by dashed
lines.
--- Depth at which boring had caved following drilling.
0,2
Free water level in boring and number of days following drilling measurement was taken.
T Practical drilling refusal. Where shown above bottom of log, indicates that multiple attempts were
made to advance the boring.
NOTES:
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on April 16, 2008 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 measured by instrument level and refer to the Bench Mark shown on Figure 1.
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. Water level readings shown on the logs were made at the time and under the conditions indicated. Fluctuations in
water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Water Content ( %)
DD = Dry Density (pcf)
+4 = Percent retained on the No. 4 sieve
-200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
LL = Liquid Limit ( %)
PI = Plasticity Index ( %)
108 146A
LEGEND AND NOTES I Figure 3
G
Moisture Content = 12.8 percent
Dry Density = 116 pcf
Sample of: Clayey Silty Sand
From: Boring 3 at 2 Feet
0
1
c
No movement
upon
2 wetting
E
0
U 3
4
1.0
1.0
APPLIED PRESSURE - isf
108 146A C I SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS I Figure 4
HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL
w��N
U
Z
r-r
J
U
Z
2
U
F—
LU
I 0
V
¢ Y
Q
Q
d
i
2
O
CL
LL
Q
00
O
O
Z
O
J
Ln
LU
H
Ul)
O
Q
O.'
4 m
J
LL
0
Q
W
J
m
I
M
cn
>
cr �
>,
c�
O U
>
O O
n
�.
U
1. It
A
�.
LU
m
z
`i
'
C
U
Ln
u
Y
` �
L
y
>
>
v)
w
-
Z uli
zwU w
w
O0.w a
ZO
D U
u
�^ t w
tn
a�
ui
w
m
F
(0 C)
u Ln nl W
w Ln
[�
N
M
N
V)
N
00
--�
LL.j <
a. Z
O
0
O
N
M
a
0
Q
l7 CC
J
w
Q o
C7
J
a
"
HoZ la
z o
J ui I -
(�,�
\
C
r
00
'o
z
E5 O
.--a
O
.-.. 00
Z
I�
Z
p o
D\ d
D\
N �t
O
J,
I
w
a
t 0 � I f V
M I i
m
I
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
Q
O
O
Z
O
n
V
_Z
J
V
Z
2
V
LLJ
F
LU
/ 0
V
Y
¢
J
a
2
I—
o:
CL
w
i--i
W
J
m
V)
J
(!)
w
w �
F-
O
OC
m
J
U-
0
i
w
CL
n
y
>
z
_
0 ,
>
C
W)
C,
>
U
O
L
h
b
�
��.
of O 0
>>
+�j
cC
+�
>1
w
m
G
�
C
C
U
CIS
y
{r
` c
}
>1
W
CZ
>
w
w�:=
Z Ln
Oaw
z00 U)
U
�x
�
g o o
�
�
a
cc
uj
w
to
w
H
a
a
N
J
F CDo
w
w ¢
'IT
N
N
N
00
--�
z
a n.
o
z
Os
Z
O
Q °
N
M
0
J
V
w �.
l7
J
p Z
Q w
z
J � E
h L4 z
zc o
O
N
Z
=
~ a
w
't
O
ct
O
N
"
Q
�
O
J
W
<1
i
m
1 �
Department of Community Development
Building Safety and Inspection Services
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970 - 479 -2138
FAX 970 - 479 -2452
www. vailgov.com
BUILDING SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICES PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS:
TO: Contractor /Applicant Architect
Dolan VAG
proj #2725
FAX /Email #: cdolanconstruction @yahoo.com annefg@vagarchitects.com
NUMBER OF PAGES:
FROM:
DATE:
BUILDING PERMIT #:
OWNERS NAME:
SITE ADDRESS:
OCCUPANCY GROUP:
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:
NUMBER OF STORIES:
BUILDING AREA:
2
John Plano, Building Plans Examiner
05/29/2008
B08 -0145
Smith
333 Beaver Dam Road
single family
IRC
3
10,000+
The documents submitted for this project have been reviewed for compliance with the 2003
International Building Code, 2003 International Residential Code, 2003 International Mechanical
Code, 2003 International Fuel Gas Code, 2003 International Plumbing Code, 2003 International
Energy Conservation Code and 2005 National Electrical Code as modified and adopted by the Town of
Vail.
The following comments will need to be addressed prior to issuance of a building permit:
For processing:
• Please submit four complete sets of revised construction documents containina the reauested
information with all plan revision items clouded or otherwise identified. Partial Dian sets or
loose Dian sheets are not accepted.
• Please respond in writing to each comment by marking the attached list or creating a response
letter. Indicate which plan sheet, detail, specification, or calculation shows the requested
information. Please send revisions to the attention of the plans examiner with the building
permit application number noted.
• Please be sure to include on the resubmittal the engineer's or architect's "wet" stamp, signature,
registration number and date on the cover page of any structural calculations, all structural
details and structural sheets of the plans. For commercial or multi-family projects all sheets of
the plans must be stamped.
Architectural Comments:
1 4 , The Bunkroom 108 requires an egress window. The egress window is required to be in the "room ".
(IRC R310.1)
Z Provide natural ventilation to Bunkroom 108. To allow the openings in the Sitting Room to count
toward the required openings, the wall between has to be 1 /2 open. (IR R303.1 and R303.2)
�3 The town's regulations restrict the number of gas log sets to 2 in each home. The plans indicate two
logs sets on the main level and one on the second level. The contempo box is a wood box requiring a
log set.
1 4 The contempo fireplace proposed in the master bedroom is required to be direct vent or specifically
listed for bedroom use. This is a wood burning box that is not allowed in bedrooms. (IRC G2406.2)
�5- Please provide the size of the opening of the fire boxes of the masonry fireplaces. Indicate the size of
the flues for these fireplaces. It is questionable whether there is enough room in the chase through
the second level to adequately house the flues. (IRC 1001.12)
L5 Please provide documentation on the gas grill on the outdoor deck. Verification to clearances to
combustibles and being covered with a roof are the concerns.
Provide guard details for the interior guards. (IRC R312)
V-7' Please provide structural details for the gunite spas and pool. (IRC R106)
� Provide (2) copies of ResCheck compliance certificate and inspection checklist. Coordinate all
insulation R values shown on the ResCheck report with the building plans and sections.
-,9 The ResCheck report is indicating 17 heat pumps, if a geo- thermal system is installed it needs to be
specified on the plans. If the boilers are used please add to the report.
x,14 The roof assembly on the plans indicates a foam nail base (continuous insulation) that is not
indicated on the ResCheck report.
(.1 The ResCheck report is indicating window U values at .28. Please provide a specification sheet on the
windows to verify this U value is being met.
'12 The planning department has a note to verify roof height. Please contact the planner, Bill Gipson, to
resolve this issue. His phone number is 479 -2173
Please refer to the cover sheet for information on resubmitting plans. In order to avoid delays in issuance of
a permit, please check all requested information is included with the resubmitted plans. Please submit
revised plans as a complete set. Partial plan resubmittals will not be reviewed.
John Plano
I.C.C. Plans Examiner
Town of Vail Building Safety and Inspection Services
970.479.2140
jplano @vailgov.com
F: \cdev \CH RIS \PERMTT.COMMENTS \B08- 0145 \B08 -0145. DOC
VAg, Inc.
June 5, 2008 Architects & Planners
John Plano
I.C.C. Plans Examiner
Town of Vail Building Safety and Inspection Services
Re: Building Permit Comments
Dear John:
JUN 05 2008
TOWN OF VAIL
Thank you for your comments. Submitted with this letter are four revised sets, 2 copies of the Res Check compliance
certificate and inspection checklist, and 1 copy of the Wetland Delineation Report from ERM- Rocky Mountain, Inc. Please
find my remarks to your comments.
1- The Bunkroom 108 and Sitting 106 should be considered as one room. We have exterior doors on ground level for
egress. Revised on sheet A2.01.
2- Per revised sheet A2.01, the opening in the Sitting/ Bunk Room is more then '' /z the wall length.
3- The second level fireplace has been exchanged for a gas appliance fireplace, Heat -N -Glo ST- HV -IPI Direct vent.
Revised on sheet A2.03.
4- No longer applicable, refer to comments above #3.
5- The Great Room fireplace opening is proposed as 3' -6" x 2' -7 '' /z ". The Dining Room fireplace opening is proposed
as 3' -6" x 2' -7 '' /z ". The fireplaces flues are drawn with 18" diameter flues with 1 -1/2" clearance around each of them
to the CMU structure. Revision on sheet A2.03.
6- The outdoor gas grill does not have a roof over it. The clearances to combustibles will be followed per grill
specifications once final appliance is selected. We would be happy to submit the specification at a later date.
7- Guard detail for the interior guards was added to sheet A9.09/6.
8- The gunite spas and pool are design built items and we will submit requested details once a supplier is selected.
9- Revised ResCheck compliance and inspection checklist copies submitted.
10- We are planning on having a geo- thermal system installed for this project. The geo- thermal specialist is finalizing
their report and can submit it at a later date.
11- The continuous installation has been revised on ResCheck form.
12- The window U Value specification sheet will be submitted at a later date. We have specified double glaze low -e
glass on sheet A9.05.
13- VAg meet with Bill Gibson on May 19' about the roof heights. Revisions were made on sheets A0.05 and A4.01.
Please do not hesitate to contact me directly if you have any further clarifications on these items.
Sincerel ,
VAg, Inc., Architects & Planners & Z' ( X 31 � 2
Melissa Baum, Sr. Project Manager
Encl.:
Rev. sheets are A0.05, A2.01, A2.03, A4.01, and A9.09.
Physical Address: (970) 949 -7034 Mailing Address:
90 Benchmark Road, Suite 202 fax: (970) 949 -8134 P.O. Box 1734
Avon, CO 81620 email: general@vagarchitects.com Vail, CO 81658 -1734
WICCOG
�0� 859
Date // iY�� �
Northwest Colorado Council of Governments Da Da �,eir� )
ELEVATOR PERMIT APPLICATION From
Permit # �� J � 3 �L Jurlsdict on - xf t1 C4;j Fax#
Total Fee $2� 1 . ,.ate Paid 7�LC`� .Receipt # _U_aL6______ / # of pages
Plan Reviewed and Approvo -i b - _ Date Issued 7 � [ `'t
b t o N Permit E- xpiration Date
** All the foiiowing must be completed by the elevator contractor **
inaccurate, iiiegible or missing information will cause a delay in the application process.
Please complete a separate application per conveyance.
Jurisdiction Building Permit # ��/ l
Job Address 31 {z tip Za&
Owner i, IJI I
Mailing Address _ k� . fi��( D LZ! ��•� / _
Phone # A70 1) 1 1�u Fax #
Elevator Contractor 1 � - �� S �
Mailing Add r/eiss , / � _.____._
Phone # `�7Q`0-(/J q r l2- Fax # 7 2��" J'� - -
4 � Permits expire In one year for new I nstallati ons and six mo for alterations *{
_ New Installation Unit or Contract #
_ Alteration (un t be returned to service un,fll
Describe Work _ �� .J r1 �1:2 l /u�l
by NWCCO�)
l3 4ao - HY_P
NOTICE
I hereby certi that I have read ani. examined this application
and know the same to be true and All provisions laws
and ordinances governing this type of work will be complied wlth
whether specified 'herein or not- The of a permit does
not presume to give authority +j violate or cancel the provisions
of any other state or local law regOating oonstruction or the
L° m ''1 ' a {``?�f_cti�RM�w�'IM, .s".
1
K EW INS TALLATION F EES
Passenger or freight elevator, lu \la, escalator, moving walk:
Up to and including $50,000 of valuation = $375.00
Over $50,000 of valuation = $375.00 plus !7.00 for each
$1,000.00 or fraction thereof over $50,000 -00
Lift, Dumbwaiter or private residence elevator:
Up to arid Including $20,000 of valuation - $275.00
Over $20,000 of valuation = $275.00 plus $4.00 for each
$1,000.00 or fraction thereof over $20,000.00
MA�011 ALTERATION FEES:
f=ees for major alterations shall *be as set forth in Table 3 - of the
Uniform Administrat:iv or Table 1 -A.
1425 n In -r. I - .r,
•Gy,�fO \ ` i P �f P,L P
STgir, OF
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SACRAMENTO
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
COLORADO WEST REGULATORY BRANCH
400 ROOD AVENUE, ROOM 142
GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 81501
August 4, 2008
Regulatory Division (SPK- 2008 -997)
Ms. Stephanie Larsen
Environmental Resource Management
6455 South Yosemite Street, Suite 900
Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111
Dear Ms. Larsen:
We are responding to your consultant's request for an approved jurisdictional
determination for the Beaver Dam Road Project.; This site is located within Section 7, Township
5 North, Range 80 West, 6` PM, Latitude 39.64 1 North, Longitude - 106.383 West, City of Vail,
Eagle County, Colorado.
Based on available information, we concur with the estimate of waters of the United
States, as depicted on the July 10, 2008 Wetland Delineation drawing prepared by ERO
Resources. Approximately 0.037 acres of waters of the United States, including wetlands, are
present within the survey area. These waters are regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act, since they are wetlands abutting an unnamed stream. The upland area dominated by
willows, is not regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, since they lack hydrological
indicators.
This verification is valid for five years from the date of this letter, unless new information
warrants revision of the determination before the expiration date. This letter contains an
approved jurisdictional determination for your subject site. If you object to this determination,
you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form is
enclosed. If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to
the South Pacific Division Office at the following address: Administrative Appeal Review
Officer, Army Corps of Engineers, South Pacific Division, CESPD- PDS -O, 1455 Market Street,
San Francisco, California 94103 -1399, Telephony: 415 -503 -6574, FAX: 415 -503 -6646.
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is
complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal under 33 CFR Part 331.5, and that it has been
received by the Division Office within 60 days of the NAP. Should you decide to submit an
RFA form, it must be received at the above address by 60 days from the date of this letter. It is
-2-
not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the
determination in this letter.
You should provide a copy of this letter and notice to all other affected parties, including
any individual who has an identifiable and substantial legal interest in the property.
This determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps of Engineers' Clean
Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site identified in this request. This determination may
not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or
your tenant are USDA program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you
should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
We appreciate your feedback. At your earliest convenience, please complete our
customer survey at http://w ww. spkusace .army.mil/customer_survey.html. Your passcode is
"conigliaro ".
Please refer to identification number SPK- 2008 -997 in any correspondence concerning
this project. If you have any questions, please contact me at this office, email
Nick.Mezei @usace.army.mil, or telephone (970) 243 -1199, extension 18.
Sincerely,
Nick Mezei
Environmental Engineer
Enclosure
Copy furnished without enclosure
Ms. Moneka Worah, ERO Resource Corporation, 1842 Clarkson Street, Denver, Colorado
80218
Ms..Melissa Bawn, VAG,.Inc., Post Office Box 1734, Vail, Colorado 81658
July 10, 2008
Mr. Nick Mezei
AUG _8 zooa
TOWN OF VAIL
US Army Corps of Engineers- Sacramento District
Colorado /Gunnison Basin Regulatory Office
Wayne Aspinall Federal Building
400 Rood Avenue, Room 142
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 -2563
RE. Wetland Delineation for the property located at 333 Beaver
Dam Road, Vail, Colorado
Dear Mr. Mezei:
On behalf of Mr. Paul Smith, property owner, and VA& Inc.,
Environmental Resources Management Inc. (ERM) is submitting a
wetlands delineation of the above referenced site for your concurrence.
As you know, a prior wetlands delineation of this property was
conducted in August 2007, which was submitted for your review in
June of this year. Based upon the field visit to the property on June 25,
2008 in which you, ERM, ERO Resources, the Town of Vail, VA& and
neighboring parties attended, we revisited the wetland boundaries
associated with the small drainage located along the western portion of
the subject property, the small spring located near the northern
property boundary, and the willow area located on the southwestern
section of the subject property on June 30, 2008, per your request.
The attached document is a revised delineation report, the findings of
which are summarized below:
• the total area of the wetland associated with the drainage on the
subject property expanded from 0.003 acre to 0.037 acre;
the location of the spring identified during the group field visit
was mapped and found to be to the north of the subject property
boundary;
Environmental
Resources
Management
6455 South Yosemite Street
Suite 900
Greenwood Village
Colorado 80111 -4954
(303) 741 -5050
(303) 773 -2624 (fax)
www.erm.com
EIZM
• five additional soil pit locations throughout the willow area were
evaluated to document site conditions, which verified the lack of
Mr. Nick Mezei
July lo, 2008
Page 2
hydrology during the very first part of the growing season when
hydrology would most likely be present;
• well data from the monitoring well in the willow area indicated
that shallow ground water was at a depth of 5.55 to 5.85 feet
below ground surface during this time (May and June); and
a functional assessment of the wetlands on site, which indicated
mostly low or moderately rated functionality.
If you have any questions regarding the wetlands delineation, please
contact Stephanie Larsen or Ken Waesche at (303) 741 -5050. Your
attention to this delineation submittal and request for jurisdictional
determination is greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
ERM -Rocky Mountain, Inc.
S�ba� D L"IPI-_
Stephanie D. Larsen
Project Manager
/. "-nk
Kenneth L. Waesche, P.G.
Partner -in- Charge
enclosures: Wetland Delineation Report, 333 Beaver Dam Road
Delineation, Vail, Eagle County, Colorado
Environmental
Resources
Management
cc: Mr. Paul Smith c/o Ms. Melissa Baum, VA& Inc.
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
333 BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
Prepared for—
ERM -Rocky Mountain, Inc.
6455 South Yosemite St.
Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111
Prepared by—
ERO Resources Corporation
1842 Clarkson Street
Denver, Colorado 80218
(303) 830 -1188
July 9, 2008
ERO Project #4004
I It
CONTENTS
Introduction.........................................................................................................................
I
Methods...............................................................................................................................
I
SiteDescription ...................................................................................................................
2
Description of Wetlands and Other Waters of the U.S ........................
............................... 2
Wetlands................................................................ ........................................................
3
Uplands................... .......................................................................................................
3
References...........................................................................................................................
7
TABLE
Table 1. Common and scientific names and wetland indicator status of common plant
specieswithin the project area . ........................................................................................... 4
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Wetland Delineation
FIGURES
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Data Forms
Appendix B. Photos
Appendix C. Ground Water Measurements
ERO Project #4004 1 ERO
p:\4000 projects\4004 vail beaver dam rd delineation\2008 reportwedand delineation report 7-08.doc Resources
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
333 BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
JULY 9, 2008
Introduction
ERM -Rocky Mountain, Inc. retained ERO Resources Corporation (ERO) to provide a
wetland delineation report for a property located at 333 Beaver Dam Road in Vail,
Colorado (Figure 1). The project area is in the northeast t /4 of Section 7, Township 5
South, Range 80 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, in Eagle County, Colorado. The
UTM coordinates of the approximate center of the project area are 381306mE and
4388862mN, Zone 13.
Methods
On June 30, 2008, Denise Larson and Moneka Worah, an ecologist and natural
resource specialist with ERO, respectively, surveyed the project area for wetlands and
other waters of the U.S. Using methods outlined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetlands Delineation Manual and the Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region,
wetlands were determined based on the presence of three wetland indicators: hydrophytic
vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. Hydric soils were identified using field
observation for gleying, mottling, sulfidic odor, inundation and saturation levels, or other
hydric soil indicators accepted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). A Munsell
Soil Color Chart was used to determine soil color. Wetland indicator status for
vegetation was determined by Sabine (1994) (Table 1). Common and scientific names of
plant species were obtained from Weber and Wittmann (2001). Data points were paired
within the wetland and upland areas to define the wetland boundary. The delineation was
conducted within the growing season, which is between June 9 and September 11 in
Eagle County (NRCS 2002). Additionally, ERO conducted this delineation during
seasonal high flows (run -off) based on the observation that Gore Creek and other streams
in the area were flowing at bankful to over - bankful.
IRO
FRO Project #4004 1 Resources
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
333 BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
ERO flagged the boundary of the wetlands using pin flags that were sequentially
numbered and corresponded to pin flag locations on Figure 2. ERO delineated wetlands
using a Trimble ProXR Global Positioning System (GPS) unit and TBC1 data logger.
Data were differentially corrected using the CompassCom base station. All differential
correction was completed using Trimble Pathfinder Office 3.0 software. The GPS data
were incorporated onto aerial photography using ArcMap. Data forms were completed at
representative locations to document wetland and upland conditions (Appendix A).
Photos of representative wetlands are provided in Appendix B.
Site Description
The project area is located at 333 Beaver Dam Road in Vail, Colorado (Figure 2).
The project area is adjacent to a house within a residential neighborhood of Vail. An area
with dense willows (Salix eriocephala subsp. ligulifolia, S. brachycarpa), water birch
(Betula fontinalis), honeysuckle (Distegia involucrata), and whitestem gooseberry (Ribes
inerme), with an understory of smooth brome (Bromopsis inermis), Canada thistle (Breea
arvense), horsetail (Equisetum arvense), false Solomon's seal (Maianthemum stellatum),
dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), and quackgrass
(Agropyron repens) occur in the southern portion of the project area (Photos 1 and 2). A
small pond is located to the west of the project area. The pond drains into the northwest
corner of the project area, forming a 1- to 2- foot -wide channel (Photo 3). The channel
has surrounding forested wetlands dominated by blue spruce (Picea pungens) and other
conifers, willows, fowl bluegrass (Poa palustris), beaked sedge (Carex utriculata), and
redtop (Agrostis gigantea) (Photo 4). A small spring is located directly north of the
existing house, and wetlands surround the spring and connect with the small channel in
the northwest portion of the project area (Photos 5 and 6). The project area is surrounded
by residential development to the south, east, and west, and by Gore Creek and its
riparian corridor to the north.
Description of Wetlands and Other Waters of the U.S.
The project area was assessed for wetlands and other waters of the U.S. No streams
are shown on the USGS Vail West quadrangle within the project area. A small channel
ERO Project #4004 2 ERO
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
333 BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
with abutting wetlands in the western portion of the project area has characteristics of a
water of the U.S., including an ordinary high water mark and a bed and bank. The
channel flows north to Gore Creek, a perennial stream with relatively permanent flow. A
spring is also located directly north of the project area with surrounding wetlands, and
connects with the small channel and the Gore Creek riparian/wetland corridor.
Wetlands
The wetlands within the project area are forested wetlands that surround the small
channel and spring, and connect with the Gore Creek riparian area. Blue spruces are the
dominant tree species throughout the wetlands. Within the wetlands, the dominant shrub
species includes strapleaf willow, shortfiuit willow, twinberry honeysuckle, and
whitestem gooseberry. The dominant understory within the wetlands includes false
Solomon's seal, horsetail, bluejoint reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis), beaked sedge
(Carex utriculata), stickywilly (Galium aparine), dandelion, Richardson's geranium
(Geranium richardsonii), and Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Data collected from six
soil pits (SP I, SP3, SP4, SP5, SP6, and SP9) revealed hydric soils with a low chroma
matrix (1OYR 2/1) at 0 to 12 inches, with mottles (7.5YR 3/4) present at 4 inches. A few
of the soil pits also contained gleyed streaks (Gley 1 2.5/N) below 4 inches. Soil texture
is loam or silt loam. The primary hydrologic indicator for the wetlands is saturation
between 0 and 5 inches below the surface. The boundary of the upland was determined
by the lack of beaked sedge, an obligate wetland species, and by the lack of saturation
within the soils during the growing season and high flows (SP2, SP7, and SP8).
Uplands
An area dominated by willows, an obligate wetland indicator species, was
investigated for the presence of hydric soils and wetland hydrological indicators. A small
stream is located directly south of the project area and has been diverted from the low
flow channel to a ditch paralleling the south side of Beaver Dam Road, indicating this
portion of the project area was likely previously supported by the stream before it was
diverted. This intermittent stream is currently flowing; although, it was not flowing in
August 2007. Several data points were taken throughout the willow - dominated area to
ERO Project #4004 3 ERO
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
333 BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
determine if the area contained hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, or wetland
hydrology (SP10, SP11, SP12, SP13, and SP14). None of the data points taken contained
any indicators for wetland hydrology even though saturated soils are found in nearby
wetland areas and nearby intermittent streams are currently flowing. The dominant shrub
species within this area include willows, water birch, honeysuckle, and whitestem
gooseberry. The understory is dominated by smooth brome, horsetail, false Solomon's
seal, dandelion, Kentucky bluegrass, and Woods' rose (Rosa woodsii). Although willows
are typically a wetland indicator species, they can occur in uplands, especially where the
hydrology has changed. The understory species are facultative, facultative upland, or
upland species. The soils within this area did contain a low matrix chroma (10YR 2/1);
however, most soil pits did not contain mottles or gleyed streaking, and mountain soils
typically have a low matrix chroma. The main rationale for determining this area as
upland was based on the lack of any wetland hydrology indicators during the growing
season during seasonal high flows. A ground water monitoring well was also installed
along the western border of the project area within the willows by LKP Engineering, Inc.
to assess on -site hydrology for future site construction purposes (Figure 2). Ground
water levels were measured between May 19, 2008 and June 26, 2008. The ground water
levels within this area have been between 5.55 feet and 5.85 feet below ground surface
during seasonal high flows (Boring -1, Appendix C). These levels indicate this portion of
the project area does not have sufficient ground water to support wetlands.
Table 1. Common and scientific names and wetland indicator status of common
plant species within the project area.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Synonyms
Wetland Indicator
Status
Water birch
Betula fontinalis
Facultative Wetland
Canada thistle
Breea arvense
Cirsium arvense
Facultative Upland
Smooth brome
Bromopsis inermis
Bromus inermis
Upland
Bluejoint reedgrass
Calamagrostis canadensis
Obligate Wetland
Beaked sedge
Carex utriculata
Carex rostrata
Obligate Wetland
Orchardgrass
Dactylis glomerata
Facultative Upland
Honeysuckle
Distegia involucrata
Lonicera
involucrata
Facultative
Quackgrass
Elytrigia repens
Faculative Upland
Field horsetail
Eguisetum arvense
Facultative ( +)
ERO Project 94004 4
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
333 BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
Common Name
Scientific Name
Synonyms
Wetland Indicator
Status
Scouringrush horsetail
F.quisetum hyemale
Facultative Wetland
Stickywilly
Galium aparine
Facultative Upland
Richardson's geranium
Geranium richardsonii
Facultative Upland
Largeleaf avens
Geum macrophyllum
Obligate Wetland
Mannagrass
Glyceria striata
Obligate Wetland
Star false Solomon's-
seal
Maianthemum steHatum
Smilacina stillata
Facultative
Blue spruce
Picea pungens
Facultative ( -)
Fowl bluegrass
Poa palustris
Faculative Wetland
Kentucky bluegrass
Poa pratensis
Facultative Upland
Shrubby cinquefoil
Potentilla fruticosa
Facultative Wetland
Whitestem gooseberry
Ribes inerme
Facultative ( +)
Woods' rose
Rosa woodsh
Facultative Upland
Shortfruit willow
Salix brachycarpa
Facultative Wetland
Strapleaf willow
SaRx eriocephala ligulifolia
Obligate Wetland
Dandelion
Taraxacum officinale
Facultative Upland
'Obligate Wetland- -Occurs with an estimated 99% probability in wetlands
Facultative Wetland— Estimated 67•/x99% probability of occurrence in wetlands
Facultative — Equally likely to occur in wetlands and nonwetlands (34 % -66% probability)
Facultative Upland -67 % -99°/u probability in nonwetlands, 1 % -33% in wetlands
Upland — >99% probability in nonwetlands in this region
A negative sign ( -) indicates a frequency toward the lower end of a category (less frequently found in wetlands)
Wetland Functional Assessment
An understanding of the stream and adjacent riparian functions can assist in the
analysis and mitigation of potential impacts. Studies have recognized that riverine and
palustrine systems provide particular functions to the environment. These functions are
the physical, chemical, and biological processes or attributes vital to the integrity of
wetland and riparian systems. Various researchers and methods recognize a variety of
wetland and riparian functions that typically are related to water quality, biodiversity, and
hydrological and ecological processes. Stream values, such as recreation and uniqueness,
are attributes not necessarily important to the integrity of stream and associated riparian
systems; however, these values are perceived as being valuable to society. The wetlands
at this project were assessed based on the Montana Wetland Assessment Method
(Berglund 1999).
ERO Project #4004 5
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
333 BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
The wetlands within the project area are classified as a riverine nonperennial system
that contains palustrine forested wetlands (Cowardin et al. 1979). The spring, adjacent
pond, storm events, and ground water are the main sources of hydrology. The forest and
shrublands provide wildlife habitat, stabilize the soils during storm events, and provide
other wetland functions. Large homes, roads, and other structures encroach on this
wetland.
Functions Provided by Project Area
The aquatic and riparian areas within the project area were assessed and qualitatively
rated for the common functional categories. Because of the dense urbanization near the
site, most functions were low or moderately rated, with only a couple of functions rated
as high. The project area has an overall rating of a Category III, within an I -IV rating
system with I being the highest and IV being the lowest. Category III wetlands are more
common, generally less diverse, and are often smaller and more isolated than Category I
or II wetlands (Bergund 1999). They can provide many functions and values but may not
have many high ratings. Ratings for wetlands within the project area are described
below.
Low rated functions and values:
1. Threatened and Endangered Species Habitat
2. Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat
3. General Wildlife Habitat
4. Flood Attenuation and Storage
5. Short- and Long -Term Surface Water Storage
6. Recreation/Education Potential
Moderately rated functions and values:
1. Sediment/Nutrient/Toxicant Retention and Removal
2. Production Export/Food Chain Support
3. Uniqueness
Highly rated functions and values:
1. Sediment/Shoreline Stabilization
2. Ground Water Discharge/Recharge
ERO Project #4004 6 IRO
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
333 BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
References
Berglund, J. 1999. Montana Wetland Assessment Method Prepared for Montana
Department of Transportation and Morrison- Maierle, Inc.
Cowardin, Lewis M, et al. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the
United States. U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington D.C.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS). 2002. Climate Analysis for Wetlands by
County. Available at: httu: / /www.wcc.nres.usda.jzov /climate /wetlands.httnl
Sabine, B. (editor). 1994. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Regions 4,
5, and 8. Resource Management Group, Inc.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual. Technical Report Y -87 -1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, MS.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2008. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region.
Technical Report ERDC/EL TR- 08 -13, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development
Center, Vicksburg, MS.
Weber, W.A. and R.C. Wittmann. 2001. Colorado Flora Western Slope. Third Edition.
University Press of Colorado.
ERO Project #4004 7 IRO
<
J M-
Vad
Z
NI .s..14-- '� � If
AL
Of
ERA Beaver Dam Road Delineation Figure 1
NE 1 /4 of Section 7, T5S, R80W Site Location
ERO Resources Corp. UTM Coordinates: Zone 13; 381306mE, 4388862mN
1842 Clarkson Street Latitude /Longitude: 39.64131', 106.38334°
Denver, CO 80218 Prepared for: ERM
(3 03) 830 -1188 USGS Vail West, CO Quadrangle; Eagle County, Colorado N p
File: 4004 figure l.pdf
Fax: (303) 830 -1199
0 2000 4000 feet 1 Inch = 2,000 Feet A July 2008
a
w1"7 a
w1 -8
well -7
well -4
wetl -6 spa
wetl -3
spy
wet l -2
�i wetl -1
Sp2
4 \ w1-9
w1- U
w1�10
� w1 -11
W11-113 .
w1 -14
Sp9 i
w1 -16
w1 N
_ 1 -
_ I p 8
�.) �s sp11
WI-15 w _
sp10 ,re
well b -1 ^' sp12 sp13
a
F
1:
sp14
O
4 t
Beaver D ahi T"
R oad>
ERA Figure 2
Data Point • well -81 Wetland Delineation
ERO Resources Corp. 0 Soil Pit • We11-83
1842 Clarkson Street
Denver, CO 80218 Spring Wetland Limit
(303) 830.1188 N Prepared for:ERM
,p��„ �b File: 4004 Figure 2.mXd [dlh)
Fax: (303) 830 -1199 Feet • ar;oi p
0 50 100 1 inch equals 50 feet July 2008
Appendix A. Data Forms
010
ERO Project W04 0.
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: �) ZA City /County: 1'c lke Sampling Date: Vt
ApplicantlOwner: State: _(f Sampling Point:
Inveshgator(s): J)lryV� LP x3r)o v"C]t 1 (4 .A C ection, Township, Range: �� �� 60\,A/
Landform (hillslope. terrace. etc.):
Subregion (LRR):
Soil Map Unit Name:
NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes —� No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances present? Yes —y— No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes_ No
within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes _ No
_
Remarks:
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %):
l at: .7� Long. �Ln •,�� 1 _ Datum:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover S pecies? Status
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC' Q (A/B)
= Total Cover
Sa tin /Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
j n� j C��
�� �.Vti"
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
2. �7CA� 12C Ic��CK_ir \i�C Z0, � �
. T��
3
OBL species x t =
4,
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x3=
5.
Total Cover
FACU species x4=
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
UPL species x 5 =
I. I'IG t01\� f'ltlli� `� 1Q��C�{ (Ill 1
�_ SAC"
2.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
index = B/A =
c f\C�C�E (�1`� C)
L
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
_ Prevalence Index is 53.0'
5 . • C GCP X Lxfr1E U' 3 _ � -�
6. :�QLkldl6ftl h p Ln Z
7 1Q:\CE�i LiTn C oi; . 9 Y `t=:S .
`3 L
_ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
8
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
9.
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
10
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
11.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic-
- = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1.
Hydrophytic
2
Vegetation
Present? Yes Xl— No
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %):
l at: .7� Long. �Ln •,�� 1 _ Datum:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point: `)
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
Prima!yIndicators (minimum of one required check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (_moist) % Type Loc
Texture Remarks
O—I Ole_ U
5►\A 1031 h h o, Ic
12" 1 1019— Z/
Saturation (A3)
'Type: C= Concentration. D =De etion. RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 'Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Ft) (except MLRA 1)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Iron Deposits (85)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (06)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
—� - -� --
Depth (inches):
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Prima!yIndicators (minimum of one required check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (139) (except MLRA _
Water - Stained Leaves (1219) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (B11) _
Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Water Marks (61)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) _
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (82)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Drift Deposits (63)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Iron Deposits (85)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (06)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (01) (LRR A) _
Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks) _
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No -X— Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes -X— No
includes capillary fringe
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
- - - - --
Remarks:
- - -- ---------------
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA ( V FORM — Western f Mou ` ntaiins, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: V Q — �xk&- ?' ^ )C City /County: Cr � 1 . 'CC Ae Sampling Date: ( /i / ?�o l
Applicant/Owner: m
State: C 0 Sa
InvesUgator(s): 4sd )VV V �CX >n _ 1 `t�(f'kc1 0 c-, Section, Township, Range :Z
Landform (hillslope. terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR) Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ( No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation . Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes �<— No
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes \, No
Is the Sampled Area
Welly Soil Present? Yes es No within a Wetland? Yes No _
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No �
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum
(Plot size:
Absolute Dominant Indicator
%Cover Species? Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
1.
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
3-
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (AIB)
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
fXt C
� 1� V,
Prevafence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by
2. � 1 '
3.
11r dAyr
NAC--
OBL species x t =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x3=
4.
5.
= Total Cover
FACU species x4=
Herb Stratum
(Plot size: )
UPL species x 5 =
-
-� ��--
Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. 'I
e
Prevalence Index = BIA =
3. �'Af1C3� z' Qly�
4.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_�( Dominance Test is >50%
5.
6. -
e
Prevalence Index is 53.0'
7,
Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
8.
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
9.
—
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
10.
—
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
11.
(( = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum
(Plot size )
1
Hydrophytic
2
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
=Total Cover
__k_
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point: ti
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confine the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
_ Surface Water (A1)
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) 36 Type Loc
Texture Remarks
Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (811)
_ Water Marks (BI)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (813)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_' Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM=
Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 'Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all
LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
` 2 cm Muck (At 0)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Black
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Malrix (F21
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches).
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
— Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
wetland hydrology must be present.
Sandy Gleyed Matr (S4)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X_ No
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
P rimary Indicators (minimum of one re check all tha ap - plyl —
_ Surface Water (A1)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (139) (except MLRA
— High Water Table (A2)
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (811)
_ Water Marks (BI)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (813)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (84)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (CO)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (01) (LRR A)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface
(88)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches).
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reauired)
Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 48)
Drainage Patterns (810)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A)
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Saturation Present? Yes . No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well aerial photos, previous inspections), if
Vo �ml�� o1�v
No
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: _ \ � 1 )QgDc, ?,LYV– City /County: _VQt I Sampling Date: lDr �l /Cl
Applicant/Owner: Slate: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): jt- D F l.�t '�tl , lYk, l� Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace. etc.):
Subregion (LRR):
Soil Map Unit Name:
Local relief (concave, convex. none):
Lat.
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _.,
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic?
Slope ( %):
Long: Datum: _
NWI classification:
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are 'Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X_ No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
--- - -- - - -- - - - - --
Hydrophylic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _� No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes_ No
Remarks:
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum I O
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
(Plot size )) \
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 4
. tiwCl of ti l�
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A)
V
2
Total Number of Dominant ! r
3.
Species Across All Strata: ' (B)
4.
= Total Cover
Percent of Dominant Species rtrt^^
m )
Saplinp/Shrub Stratu (Plot size:
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: 0J (AIB)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
2. D > e �1C,. t SKI C
�Q_ _ F
OBL species x t =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
_
UPL species x 5 =
t ' ( , 44T X L& \l i �.
-
=� =
Column Totals (A) (B)
2. %
fWc
3. , t[T(�Vl'fYY - �l��sN — mil
_
_
Prevalence Index = BIA =
4. L'3cWr� !t�[ \C (t> > (U
Z ��j�
H ydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
�/ Dominance Test is >50%
5. l AA M — ��
g.
���
_ Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
7. (�SC nl i u G\LDR M 10 L\
8
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
9.
—
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
tQ
_
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
11
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
I •
Hydrophytic
2
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point: _ D B
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
— Surface Water (Al)
(inches) Color (moist)
% Color (moist) % Type Loc
Texture Remarks
ev
4A, and 4B)
]
t-( iJtiZZI 1
'751►R- 39 s ,Nr loc
Water Marks (B1)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) _
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
- ' Type: C = Concentration, D= Deletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 'Location. PL =Pore Lining. M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
_ Histosol (Al)
— Sandy Redox (S5)
_ 2 cm Muck (Al 0)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
— Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
— Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A41
— Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A)
Thick Dark Surface (A72)
- ><'Redox Dark Surface (F6)
'Indicators of hydrophylic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
welland hydrology must be present.
_— Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Yes No Depth (inches).
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
includes capillary fringe
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
—
Pri mary Indicators (minim of one re check all th ap ply ) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
— Surface Water (Al)
— Water - Stained Leaves (139) (except MLRA _
Water - Stained Leaves (69) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)
1, 2, 4A, and 413)
4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (B 11) _
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) _
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
— Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) —
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) —
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (84)
— Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _
Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (86)
— Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) _
Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) — Other (Explain in Remarks) _
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present?
Yes No Depth (inches).
Saturation Present?
Yes �_ No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe
_k_
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
-- - --- - --- -- — - --
Remarks:
— -
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM —Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: 1J�cC j �C>(YT ;[�, City /County: VC_,CAIQ, Sampling Date:
C
Applicant/Owner: State: CD Sampling Point:
Invesligator(s): = nfy' Qt�C � HTf;.ri kl Section. Township, Range: �Q W
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (if no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances" present? Yes )(— No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
within a WeNand? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Presents Yes A No
Remarks:
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree C St � ratum (Plot size. �_ )
1. T ►(`,�G T �.1fY' (l�J
% Cover Species? Status
�Q — �__�
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant G"
3
Species Across All Strata: J (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: ��1�� (A/B)
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratu m Plot size:
)
1. i
_ �
Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.
2. _ � Cl+t9Q 4 \l ACC
Z J�
Total % Cover of: Multiply by.
1
_
OBL species x 1 =
4.
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x3=
FACU species x 4 =
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
)
UPL species x 5 =
1�
Column Totals: (A) (B)
3
Prevalence index = B/A =
4. ` AM r4
- �
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
5_ "C3Cy, 10 �3 L�
!
6. SO 3( IA�iJ�t)1_
�1 L
— Prevalence Index is 53.0'
7.
_ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
8.
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
9.
—
— Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
10.
11.
Total Cover
--
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
Hydrophytic
2
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
Primary Indicators (minimum o one re quired: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc
Texture Remarks
Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)
1, 2, 4A, and 48)
4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (811) _
Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Water Marks (81)
'Type: C= Concentration, D =De ebon, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
'Location: PL =Pore Lining. M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al) — Sandy Redox (S5)
— 2 cm Muck (Al 0)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2) — Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Black Histic (A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) — Loamy Gleyed Ma'rix (F21
Iron Deposits (65)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Off:6 � Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
welland hydrology must be present.
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Redox Depressions (F8)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum o one re quired: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (69) (except MLRA _
Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)
1, 2, 4A, and 48)
4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (811) _
Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Water Marks (81)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) _
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) _
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Drift Deposits (63)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _
Shallow Aquitard (03)
Iron Deposits (65)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) _
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present?
Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?
Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X— No
includes cap illary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
---------------- - - -- --
Remarks;
- - -- - - - --- - - -
- -- - - -- - - -- -- —
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region /
Project/Site: fi�f� pan, E o City /County: �1 CAS` (`(`t.,�, Sampling Date: I
Applicant/Owner. SIale Sampling Point: F
Investigator(s). __t}Jer,1) > L.9JFQ" M �. LQ r. Section. Township, Range: VY ' Q)VXJ
Landform (hillslope. terrace. etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: _—
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _)�, No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances' present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
That Are 08L. FACW, or FAC: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant `J
3.
Species Across All Strata (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
Are 1 0
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
That 08L. FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
( C
Prevalence Index worksheet: - -- - --
Total % Cover of. Multiply by:
2.
3.
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x3=
FACU species x 4 =
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
UPL species x5=
1��� «4
_
2. N ',
l� F v✓
Column Totals: (A) (B)
3.
��
Prevalence Index = B/A =
r
4. [i
C
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
_ Prevalence Index is 53.0'
6. _ _ _
7.
_ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
B.
9.
—
Problematic Hydrophylic Vegetation' (Explain)
10.
—
11
'Indicators of hydric sort and wetland hydrology must
be present. unless disturbed or problematic.
—
_ = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1
Hydrophytic
2_
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point: S I S T 5
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
Primary indicators (minimum of one required: check all that_
Color (moist)
°A Color (moist) % e Lp coL �
Remarks
r (inc h es)
_ High Water Table (A2)
( Tex � ture �
,4-1'& IC V
' 7 6 \ 1t " L A/ - :S
_ Salt Crust (811)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Water Marks (Bi)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C 1)
'Type: C= Concentration. D =De letion.
RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 'Location: PL =Pore Lining. M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosoi (Al)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
2 cm Muck (Al 0)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F 1) (except MLRA 1)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_- Loamy Gleyed Manx (F2)
_ Frost -Heave Hummocks (137)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
wetland hydrology must be present.
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Redox Depressions (FS)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes k— No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary indicators (minimum of one required: check all that_
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (89) (except MLRA
_ Water - Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
_ High Water Table (A2)
1, 2, 4A, and 48)
4A, and 48)
Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (811)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Water Marks (Bi)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C 1)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Drift Deposits (1213)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (84)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Iron Deposits (85)
— Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (86)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
_ Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Frost -Heave Hummocks (137)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present? Yes Nof Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): _ 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
Q � WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: \�c"x► _ 1 ^' n
4.�(r l kCci{`" City /County: _ V CA 11 r ���Q 1,� Sampling Date: �-t� � .�./ 0
ApplicantlOwner: � State: Sampling \P,o�i �:
InvesGgator(s): _i _&1�- W / Section, Township, Range: , �� SO V y
Landform (hillslope, terrace. etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long. Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: \\ NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yey<— No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation . Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes V— No
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
ttemarxs:
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover ?
Dominance Test worksheet:
size: _VO
�
Sp ecies Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. 1 CCCA 21�re,
ClL� -
That Are OBL. FACW. or FAC: �_ (A)
_I�
2.
Total Number of Dominant J_
3.
Species Across All Strata: ly (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
Z /
= Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum ,(Plot size:
)
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
1. yi w G IrW1jl
_ N {�C -
Prevalence Index worksheet
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
2.
�� �
OBL species x 1 =
3.
4.
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
UPL species x5=
" - '�4�'� fix
j }(�
—r `� ��
Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. ClS���L1yYl
3. � ue5 � hl �{y1p�_
_ _ _
' Prevalence Index = B/A
4. CCKAQX GffiAUA its
Z
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Testis >50%
l u - - - r
5. C`r�'CZ(11tnIM\ 6 �C Y`�{�Y1
Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
7.
8.
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
9.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
10.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
11
_ = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size.
)
1 •
Hydrophytic
2
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) °k Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
O -I Z ow_ Z/1 _ OQ" r✓)
'T e: C= Concentration, D =De letion. RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 'Location: PL =Pore Lining. M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al) — Sandy Redox (S5) _ 2 cm Muck (A10)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2) _Stripped Matrix (S6) _Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Black Histic (A3) — Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) _Other (Explain in Remarks)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy G!eyed Matrix (F21
j
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Present? Yes y_ No
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one requi check all
that apply Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
_ Surface Water (Al) —
Water- Stained Leaves (Bg) (except MLRA _
Water - Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2,
_ High Water Table (A2)
1, 2,4A, and 48)
4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) —
Salt Crust (611) _
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
— Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
wetland hydrology must be present.
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Present? Yes y_ No
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one requi check all
that apply Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
_ Surface Water (Al) —
Water- Stained Leaves (Bg) (except MLRA _
Water - Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2,
_ High Water Table (A2)
1, 2,4A, and 48)
4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) —
Salt Crust (611) _
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Water Marks (B1) —_
Aquatic Invertebrates (613) _
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2) —
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _
Geomorphic Position (132)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Iron Deposits (BS) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _
FAC- Neutral Test (05)
Surface Soil Cracks (66) —
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) _
Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) _
Other (Explain in Remarks) —
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches): 7
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks: -------- - - - - -- - -
— - - -- -- -- - - - - -- -- --
-- - -- —
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Projec(/Site: 1 G (- � Count
Y Y - V �r`�� Cit ! oil + `
-- ,- ��-,;� Sampling Date: -����
c 7
Applicant/Owner: A , _ / State: Sampling Point: J
Investigator(s):. �_- j mt �n `VV Section, Township, Range: - 7.
Landform (hillslope. terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %):
Subregion (LRR): Lat. Long: Datum: _
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances present? Yes X_ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No _
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No _�
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species ? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
2.
3.
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
Z/
= Total Cover
SaplinulShrub Stratu (Plot size:
m )
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
1. Ipw-,*, C'._ jnydt- tV�
Zn -
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply bV:
2. —
3.
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x2=
FAC species x3=
FACU species x 4 =
4.
5.
Z_� = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
UPL species x 5 =
11
2. e P%'j%AM
n
Column Totals: (A) (B)
3.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
{� � {� 1
4. 1 6 C'l /p[ �)
k MIZ 1 t tAl"
"`
- g
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
_Prevalence Index is s3.0'
S
6. _
7. C t
��
— Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
8.
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
9.
—
— Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
10.
11.
_
C:1 Total Cover
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1•
2
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
�ecz4
SAC
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc
Texture Remarks
Z I
r
0a �
_ Water - Stained Leaves (69) (MLRA 1, 2,
_ High Water Table (A2)
1, 2,4A, and 48)
4A, and 48)
C= Concentration. D =De lelion. RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
'Location: PL =Pore Lining. M= Matrix.
- ' Type:
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al) _ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2) _ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Black Histic (A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) _ Loa•ny C,'Qy Malnx (F
_ Algal Mat or Crust (84)
Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
- Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present.
unless disturbed or problematic.
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Y_ No
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
PrimatyIndicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (69) (except MLRA
_ Water - Stained Leaves (69) (MLRA 1, 2,
_ High Water Table (A2)
1, 2,4A, and 48)
4A, and 48)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (B11)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (Bi)
—_
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (613)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (82)
— Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _ Geomorphic Position (132)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (84)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (137) (LRR A)
_ Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
— Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Frost -Heave Hummocks (137)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface
(B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No Depth (inches): _
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos. previous inspections), if available:
- --
Remarks: Mf�►�t- -- �
- � -- �� ^1 — ���
����
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: ��'_ t ! 1 , V A% ( 1 C'(' Q t. Sampling Date:
City /County: p g
Applicant/Owner: State: _ Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range: :7
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %):
Subregion (LRR):
Lat.
Long:
NWI classification:
Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name:
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _ A No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are'Normal Circumstances' present? Yes _,!;� No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No
Welland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks: - -- -- -- - - - --
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cove Spe cies? Status
Number of Dominant Species
L A,_
t
That Are OBL. FACW. or FAC: (A)
z.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: (B)
_
4.
Percent of Dominant Species Z
= Total Cover
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Saolina /Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
_
1. Garth �G%Cr -e< -J� IiCA �,A.�
IIC -�
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total %Cover of: Multiply by:
2. ► n, /S,j� i� � f,ge
3. Wax. x�5
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
4.
5.
FAC species x3=
FACU species x 4 =
�Z = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
species x =
1
' ^
Col
Column Totals:
2.
— -��--
(A) ) (B)
3. 6��C `� S .�fC W(Y�
��� _ ��
Prevalence Index = B/A =
4. XtAPS Q
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is 53.0'
5. �iaCt ,?�� - r/l 4 iC 11Q. ��>��
7.
_ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Non - Vascular Plants'
8-
g
_Weiland
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
10.
—
11
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
—
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
I
Hydrophytic
2
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
W
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point: ! ` X- _
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
( C (moist) °� Color (moist) % Type loc Texture Remarks
(i inc - h � e .� s)
=i— El y Z
�
.�
f
_ High Water Table (A2)
1, 2,4A, and 48)
4A, and 4B)
_ Saturation (A3)
'Type: C= Concentration. D =De etion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
'Location. PL =Pore Lining. M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histoso( (A1) _ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ 2 cm Muck (Al 0)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2) _ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Black Histic (A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
— Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A41 Loamy Gieyed Ma'rir !F 21
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si)
_ S andy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
- Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Type:
Depth (inches):
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primes Indicators (minimum of one r equired: check all that ao - p ly)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (Al)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (69) (except MLRA
_ Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
_ High Water Table (A2)
1, 2,4A, and 48)
4A, and 4B)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (811)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Water Marks (BI)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313)
u Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C f)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
— FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
_ Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present? Yes No ^ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches)'
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No-14
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: - - -- __- �,__----- - -- - --
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
WETLAND c D EE TERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region 2^
Project/Site: Lx !L �J car - �i City /County: V Ch\ f ,�k, Sampling Date: ( D! Q h�,
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point: ^
Investigator(s): dJC L—� miyyV\f Section, Township, Range: I
Landform (hillslope. terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes --y' No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are `Normal Circumstances" present? Yes I No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Interim Version
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: }
% Cover Species Status
Number of Dominant Species
5
1.
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant
= Total Cover
That Are OBL. FAC or FASpecies
W, C: A/B)
(
Saplin4 /Shrub Stratum (Plot Size:
1.
1) G\ 145 1) _ 101- L
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total yo Cover of: Multiply by:
r
2. V �� { _
3. _ � \X Iglu "(4 V A T S`
species x 1
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: }
_]
UPL species X5=
4�Ej
Col umn Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = BiA =
,1�
2. 1 Q \ Cal n/� C 1(�C�. �� 1�� 4 1
3. �V.yY\ OQ�I>t'_ �_
4.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
X Dominance Test is >5o%
Prevalence Index is s3.0'
_�—
5. Mac ��/ktn/1
ck
^
T
7,
_ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
8
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
9
_
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
10
_
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
11.
Total Cover
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 •
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
2
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: lh'.' Dckol ZocGAa City /County: V / O►�' i ZQ,g � Sampling Dale:
Applicant/Owner. T�,� State: X19 Sampling Point: 00
Investigator(s): =T =.L-, M 1 V \_4 Section. Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope. terrace. etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Dalum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are - Normal Circumstances present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
within a Wetland? Yes No
Welland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks: - -- -- - - -- - --
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: }
% Cover Species Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
= Total Cover
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1
C_
1. \
V6C.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of Multiply by:
_y�
2. ' "J 7
3. �1
_j
�Z
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
4.
�
5. POGs�� lit Sl 1
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
UPL species x 5 =
1. � - 1� rC1Ci�i Y� i��
L
Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. _ 1 M)< Syy" -, 1W C Cale
3
Prevalence Index = B/A =
4_ _ 1`} e
�_
H drophytic Vegetation Indicators:
/N Dominance Test is >50%
_Prevalence Index is 53.0'
5. A -�� L.
g.
Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
8 1411bW\
te „ r
rac-A
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
g
_
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
10.
—
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
11
be present, unless disturbed or problematic -
� = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Hydrophytic
2
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point: - �
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tyne Loc Texture Remarks
• ► Z- �Ye ?! 1 _`3ti F !.x�r -y --
- ' Type: C= Concentration. D =De lelion. RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coaled Sand Grains. `Location: PL =Pore Lining. M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al) _ Sandy Redox (S5) _ 2 cm Muck (Al 0)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2) _ Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Glevofl
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
'Indicators of hydrophyhc vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Type:
Depth (inches):
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Present? Yes -)< No
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Pr imary Indicators (minimum of one required check all that _pply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (Al)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA —
Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
4A, and 4B)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (B11) _
Drainage Patterns (810)
_ Water Marks (61)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) _
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
— Sediment Deposits (82)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) _
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _
Geomorphic Position (02)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _
Shallow Aquilard (133)
Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _
FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) —
Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(137) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _
Frost -Heave Hummocks (137)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: f:/lK/:a pGl(11 Y 1 \" City/County: JOLI , 100 le— Sampling Date: W�Ih/�♦
Applicant/Owner: n State Sampling Point:
�^ (
Investigator(s): �, - fvl,• ` Vy Section. Township, Range �� �_�\
Landform (hillslope. terrace, etc.): _ Local relief (concave, convex. none): Slope ( %):
Subregion (LRR):
Soil Map Unit Name:
Lat:
Long:
NWI classification:
Datum:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances" present? Yes �C_ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS —
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Yes No
within a Wetland? Yes No
Yes No
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species 4
1.
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
2.
3.
Species Across All Strata: (B)
�—
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
= Total Cover
That Are OBL. FACW. or FAC: (A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
_ _
1. \)C \!x<,�d1��
k-X.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3.
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
4_
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
t
UPL species x 5 =
1.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. 'TCrtz1 X 1 C \ P
Prevalence Index = B/A =
3. tit (x1 Y�rnt,rm 7R f��C�t(Y� _
4
i
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
C Lkt
_ Prevalence Index is 53.0'
Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
-Y
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
8.
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
9.
—
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
10
_
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
11
be present. unless disturbed or problematic.
=Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Hydrophytic
2
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point: -V
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) or (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
�_ goy r� �/a S►N 1
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. `location: PL =Pore Lining. M-
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
_ Hislosol (Al) _ Sandy Redox (S5) _ 2 cm Muck (AID)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Black Histic (A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (1 (except MLRA 1) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide fA4) Loamy Gteved 0.1,06x (F2)
— 1 hick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) — Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Redox Dep (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
HYDROLOGY
'Indicators of hydrophylrc vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present.
unless disturbed or problematic
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators Jyinimt of o ne req uired: check all that ap ply]
_ Surface Water (A1) _
Water- Stained Leaves (69) (except MLRA
_ High Water Table (A2)
1, 2.4A, and 46)
_ Saturation (A3)
Salt Crust (B11)
_ Water Marks (BI) —
Aquatic Invertebrates (813)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Drift Deposits (B3) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Algal Mal or Crust (84) —
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
— Surface Soil Cracks (86) _
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Water- Stained Leaves (09) (MLRA 1, 2,
4A, and 4B)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
— Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
— Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (133)
— FAC- Neutral Test (05)
— Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A)
— Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge
AVCv r (-On T11 IN
No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: p4 T \ V-1 . City /County: V CA \ ` J C C � Sampling Date: W
Applicant/Owner: — State: sampling Point: �
Investigator(s): _ Dieu— ���� r3
Section, Township, Range: 5 f p \J
Landform (hillslope. terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long. Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes -XI- No (It no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes_ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species y lt
1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: _J (A)
Total Number of Dominant
2.
1
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
= Cover
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum of
)
( (�Pl�tsize:
1. k> {C�f itC{1a�j�
L ,J 1 "-)6
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover o(: Multiply by,
2. �f hliNQS -� or.�
�_ 0_
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
n ;�t'�
3. Cax� b_(o ine-c -=3
4.
5.
= Total Cover
FACU species x4=
Herb Stratum (Plot size: _�)
UPL species x 5 =
1. 1 �m,)�t5 1rmn1S
- - —
Column Totals: (A) (B)
`^ _LZ
2
-1-o— C
3.
fl�
Prevalence index = BIA =
q
--5
'' +
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is 53.0'
5. �_ _1p (� { _
g ^
7,
_ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
8
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
9
—
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
10
—
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
11
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
= Total Cover
Woody Stratum Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X/— No
2
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type _ Loc Texture Remarks
Primary Indicators (minimum o f one required: check all that anpty) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA _
Water - Stained Leaves (89) (MLRA 1, 2,
_ High Water Table (A2)
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
C= Concentration, D =De lelion. RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
'Location: PL =Pore Lining. M= Matrix.
- ' Type:
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Histosoi (Al) _ Sandy Redox (S5)
` Histic Epipedon (A2) _ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_! Black Histic (A3) — Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
Hydrogen Sulfide (Ad) _ Loam's Glevi�(! kin'rir (F21
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ 2 cm Muck (AID)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (All)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
^_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present.
unless disturbed or pioblematic-
Type:
Depth (inches):
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No"�'_
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum o f one required: check all that anpty) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA _
Water - Stained Leaves (89) (MLRA 1, 2,
_ High Water Table (A2)
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
4A, and 4B)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (811) _
Drainage Patterns (BID)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (613) _
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Ci) _
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _
Geomorphic Position (132)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (84)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _
Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _
FAC- Neutral Test (05)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (86)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) —
Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(B7) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes
No A- Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge,
monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: AVE'� �.�J City /County: VG I CM IQ, Sampling Date: Co P �o kn Applicant/Owner. State: G * Cc), - Sampling Point:
Investigator(s). L_ if MM Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope. terrace. etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope
Subregion (LRR)
Lat:
Long:
Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name:
NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes �— No (If no, explain in Remarks.) ` /
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances' present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area ,
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks: _ __ -- _-- _ --- -- - _.__ --
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum
(Plot size —)
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1.
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC:
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: (8)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: I Q (A/B)
= Total Cover
Saplin4lShrub
Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
3�J
Prevalence Index worksheet:
2- R&NC,
rn CJ ��
�),
Total % Cover of: Multiply by.
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
-- —
3. th`'J l� e���_
4.
Total Cover
FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum
(Plot size: )
UPL species X5=
1 ' ���
�� �►
" ^' "��
Column Totals: (A) (8)
2.
mac,
Prevalence index = B/A =
4 i
rll�J� 5 ille(SY \a
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
X Dominance Test is >50%
_ Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
5. 5, .a_
6.
7,
B.
g
_
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
10
_
11.
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum
(Plot size: )
1 .
2
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that ap ply I Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
(inches) Color (moist)
°k Color (moist) Type Loc
Texture Remarks
o'��
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
4A, and 4B►
Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (811) _
Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Water Marks (81)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) _
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
'Type: C= Concentration. D =De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 'Location. PL =Pore Lining. M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable
to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Histosol (A1)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Black Hislic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide !A41
_.- Loamy G!evrd kla' (F21
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
X Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Indicators of hydrophylic vegetation and
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
wetland hydrology must be present.
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Depth (inches):
Type:
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)'
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks: -----
- - - - -- - - - - -- - - --
—
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that ap ply I Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (139) (except MLRA _
Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
4A, and 4B►
Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (811) _
Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Water Marks (81)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) _
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (Cg)
Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) `
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) —
Shallow Aquitard (03)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) —
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks) _
Frost -Heave Hummocks (137)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)'
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos. previous inspections), if available:
----------- ------ ---
Remarks:
---- ----- ----- - - - - -- --— -- -T - -—
- - --
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site 1 6 e o, , , 7 �(� e.t�
City /County: � Q% t .l `
f.
Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A)
State:
Sampling Point: c�
Investigator(s): 4 I YVNYVI VV
Section, Township. Range:
– 7, c � S .
7
Landfonn (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
Subregion (LRR): Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
Local relief (concave. convex, none):
Long: Datum:
NWI classification:
Are Gimatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _k No (It no, explain in Remarks.)
Are'Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Slope ( %):
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Yes No
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species ? Status
Number of Dominant Species
�-
That Are OBL. FACW, or FAC: (A)
2.
3
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
= Total Cover
SaDlino /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
That Are 013L. FACW, or FAC: �J (NB)
1. ZnO > E �� '
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
-:ac
3.
OBL species x t =
4.
FACW species x 2 =
5.
FAC species x 3 =
= Total Cover
FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
UPL species x 5 =
t L1�L(?i�� t ► n �— ,
Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. �
Prevalence Index = B/A =
3. �' — / C
4.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
,Dominance Test is >50%
_ Prevalence Index is 53.0'
5.
6.
7.
_ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
8.
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Wetland Non - Vascular Plants'
— Problemabc Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
10.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
I
Hydrophytic
2_
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks: U()C,Ae
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
SOIL
Sampling Point: '5 ` )
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
Primary Indicators (minimum of one req uired: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Loc
Texture Remarks
'J -12�
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
4A, and 4B)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (811) —
Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) _
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Type: C= Concentration. D =De lelion. RM=
Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coaled Sand Grains. 'Location: PL =Pore Lining. M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all
LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A41
Lriamv G!tv•*�d Matrix , F2i
_ Other (Explain in Remarks) _
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
— Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Indicators of hydrophylic vegetation and
— Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
welland hydrology must be present.
_ Sandy Gley M atr ix (S 4)
Redox Depressions (F8)
unless d or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
�<
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
includes ca ilia fr in e
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one req uired: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
_ Surface Water (Al)
— Water - Stained Leaves (89) (except MLRA _
Water - Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
_ High Water Table (A2)
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
4A, and 4B)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (811) —
Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) _
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
— Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)
— Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
— Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) —
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Iron Deposits (85)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _
FAC- Neutral Test (05)
— Surface Soil Cracks (66)
— Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) _
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks) _
Frost -Heave Hummocks (137)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present Yes No
� Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes ca ilia fr in e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), it available:
- - - - - -.
Remarks-
-
- - -- --
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version
Appendix B. Photos
ERO Project #4004
BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
PHOTO LOG
JUNE 30, 2008
"k-
,
1 45
Photo 2 - View of dense willows /uplands within the southern portion of the project area.
View is to the north.
Photo 1 - Overview of dense willows within the southern portion of the project area.
View is to the south.
BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
PHOTO LOG
JUNE 30, 2008
Photo 3 - View of small channel along the western border of the project area.
View is to the north.
Photo 4 - View of wetlands along the small channel in the northwestern portion of the
project area. View is to the north.
t i 4 •
BEAVER DAM ROAD DELINEATION
PHOTO LOG
JUNE 30, 2008
Photo 6 - View of wetlands north of the project area along the spring. View is to the east.
Photo 5 - View of spring located north of the project area. View is to the southeast.
I I
Appendix C. Ground Water Measurements
ERO Project M04
FRO
e .........
LKP
July 1, 2008
Engineering, Inc.
CMUGEOTECHNICAL
Melissa K. Baum
VAG, Inc.
P.O. Box 1734
Vail, CO 81658 -1734
Via Fax: 970- 949 -8134
Dear Melissa:
RE: Engineering Consultation for
Ground Water Measurements
Lot 41, Block 3. Vail Village 3r Filing
333 Beaver Dam Road. Town of Vail
Eagle County, Colorado
Project No. 08038
At the request of Mr. Charlie Dolan, we visited the construction site for the proposed
Smith Residence at Lot 41, Block 3, Vail Village 3`d Filing, 333 Beaver Dam Road, Town of
Vail, Eagle County, Colorado. The purpose of our site visits was to observe the site for drainage
and grading and to measure the water level in the monitoring wells already installed on the site.
There were two monitoring wells and they were marked Boring 1 and Boring 3. Boring
No. 1 was located near the west property line, close to the existing pond. Boring No. 3 was
located on the east side of the lot, near the existing pullout parking space. Following is a table
with the recorded measurements:
1). TI.
M TZ IN(i -
BORING-3
May 19, 2008
5.55'
8.75'
,\-1aN 28. 2008
5.60'
8.75'
June 2, 2008
5.55'
8.90'
June 6, 2008
5.66'
8.91 '
June 26, 2008
1 5.85'
9.07'
The measurements shown above are below the existing grade at the monitoring well
location. From the above measurements it appears that the ground water level is relatively steady
and slightly dropping from measurement to measurement. The ground water also. appears to
have a gradient to the east.
This report has been prepared according to locally accepted professional engineering
standards for similar conditions at this time. There is no other warranty either expressed or
implied.
Sincerely,
LKP F gineering, Inc.
Z
iza Petrovska, PE
President
R
nall
-o: 29526
Cc: Charlie Dolan, Fax No. 970 - 926 -8055 J " :Fip•..,,,,..••'��l�;��
);1_ P 12 -I.KP' 08038gwcons,wpd
P.O. Box 2837, Edwards, CO 81632, (970) 926 -9088 Tel, (970) 926 -9089 Fax
11 -16 -2011 Inspection Request Reporting Page 1
4:44 pm Vail, CO - City Of
Requested Inspect Date: Thursday, November 17, 2011
Site Address: 333 BEAVER DAM RD VAIL
333 BEAVER DAM RD
A/P /D Information
Activity B08 -0145 Type: B -BLD Sub Type: NSFR Status: ISSUED
Const Type 101 Occupancy: Use: lnsp Area:
Owner PAUL G. SMITH REVOCABLE TRUST -
REEDENHOLDINGS L
Contractor: DOLAN CONSTRUCTION, INC. Phone: (970) 926 -8054
Description: DEMO /REBUILD OF RESIDENCE- 2 STORY WOOD AND STEEL FRAMED BUILDING OVER A WALK-
OUT CONCRETE BASEMENT
Requested Inspection(s)
Item 537 PLAN -FINAL CIO Requested Time: 08:45 AM
Requestor Phone:
Comments 471 -3626
Assigned To BGIBSON Entered By: MHAEBERLE K
Action Time Exp:
Item 539 PW -FINAL CIO Requested Time: 11:45 AM
Requestor Phone:
Comments 471 -3626
Assigned To JMONDRAGON Entered By: MHAEBERLE K
Action Time Exp:
p rrr E J (
P r 1 `
iid
t
Inspection History
Item: 501 PW- Access /Staging /Erosion
Item: 502 PW -Rough Driveway Grade
09/28111 Inspector: Is Action: DN DENIED
Comment: Driveway exceeded approved grading shown on plans. Currently over 12% in a couple of
locations.
09/28/11 Inspector: Is Action: DN DENIED
Comment: Not ready
Item: 503 PW -Final Driveway Grade ** Approved **
11/01/11 Inspector: Is Action: AP APPROVED
Comment:
Item: 10 BLDG - FOOTING ** Approved **
11/05/08 Inspector: JGG Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: Minor corrections to matt done on site by Jesus. Read to pour, OK
11/19/08 Inspector: JGG Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: Footings have some water to drain, done on -site during inspection.
Form mising from footing, added 2x8 while on -site.
03/31/09 Inspector: JRM Action: PA PARTIAL APPROVAL
Comment: GROUTED AN D SHIMMED 7 STEEL COLUMNS LOWER LEVEL
07/02/09 Inspector: JRM Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: FINAL LIFT OF MASONARY FIREPLACE
11/20/09 Inspector: BW Action: AP APPROVED
Comment:
11/23/09 Inspector: BW Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: cancelled by contractor, already done Friday 11/20/07
01/21/10 Inspector: JRM Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: SLAB FOR ELECTRICAL METER ROOM EAST END
Item: 20 BLDG - Foundation /Steel ** Approved **
11/19/08 Inspector: JGG Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: Foundation wall steel #6's are OK.
REPT131 Run Id: 13781
,
08-08-2012 Inspection Request Reporting Page 1
_4:18 pm Vail, CO - City Of
Requested Inspect Date: Thursday, August 09, 2012
Site Address: 333 BEAVER DAM RD VAIL
333 BEAVER DAM RD
A/P/D Information
Activity B08-0145 Type: B-BLD Sub Type: NSFR Status: ISSUED
Const Type 101 Occupancy: Use: Insp Area:
Owner PAUL G. SMITH REVOCABLE TRUST-
REEDENHOLDINGS L
Contractor: DOLAN CONSTRUCTION, INC. Phone: (970)926-8054
Description: DEMO/REBUILD OF RESIDENCE-2 STORY WOOD AND STEEL FRAMED BUILDING OVER A WALK-
OUT CONCRETE BASEMENT
Requested Inspection(s) elCmotn.li
Item: 540 9 G-Final CIO Requested Time: 08:00 AM
Requestor: DOI N C NSTRUCTION, INC. Phone: (970)926-8054 -or- 970-
71-3626, Charlie
Comments 471-3626
Assigned To JMONDRAGON Entered By: JMONDRAGON K
Action Time Exp:
kp rcro t3 -
Inspection History
Item: 501 PW-Access/Staging/Erosion
Item: 502 PW-Rough Driveway Grade
09/28111 Inspector: Is Action: DN DENIED
Comment: Not ready
09/28/11 Inspector: Is Action: DN DENIED
Comment: Driveway exceeded approved grading shown on plans. Currently over 12% in a couple of
locations.
Item: 503 PW-Final Driveway Grade **Approved**
11/01/11 Inspector: Is Action: AP APPROVED
Comment:
Item: 10 BLDG-FOOTING **Approved**
11/05/08 Inspector: JGG Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: Minor corrections to matt done on site by Jesus. Ready to our, OK
11/19/08 Inspector: JGG Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: Footings have some water to drain, done on-site during inspection.
Form mising from footing, added 2x8 while on-site.
03/31/09 Inspector: JRM Action: PA PARTIAL APPROVAL
Comment: GROUTED AN D SHIMMED 7 STEEL COLUMNS LOWER LEVEL
07/02/09 Inspector: JRM Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: FINAL LIFT OF MASONARY FIREPLACE
11/20/09 Inspector: BW Action: AP APPROVED
Comment:
11/23/09 Inspector: BW Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: cancelled by contractor, already done Friday 11/20/07
01/21/10 Inspector: JRM Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: SLAB FOR ELECTRICAL METER ROOM EAST END
Item: 20 BLDG-Foundation/Steel **Approved**
11/19/08 Inspector: JGG Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: Foundation wall steel#6's are OK.
12/02/08 Inspector: JGG Action: AP APPROVED
Comment: All steel tied in OK, garage walls. Monolithic pour in 2x2 pier is OK.
05/14/09 Inspector: JRM Action: PA PARTIAL APPROVAL
Comment: APPROVED DECK STRUCTURAL SLAB FOR FIRE PLACE
05/21/09 Inspector: JRM Action: PA PARTIAL APPROVAL
Comment: 1ST LIFT OF CMU FOR FIREPLACE
05/29/09 Inspector: MH Action: PA PARTIAL APPROVAL
REPT131 Run Id: 14769
IMPROVEMENT LOCATION CERTIFICATE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Found #5 rebar with 1 -1 /2"
aluminum cap, illegible
S�2 o /4 100,,
r� \
10' Utility Easement
Reception No. 96382
81' -- 10.00'
Found I" aluminum
washer on I" angle iron
Lot 41, Vail Village, First Filing, according to the plat recorded August
10, 1962 in Book 174 at Page 180 as Reception No. 96382, County of
Eagle, State of Colorado.
W
V- CD
N
IMPROVEMENT LOCATION
r'FRTIPIr'ATP
I hereby certify that this Improvement
Location Certificate was prepared for
Paul G. Smith, and Stewart Title Guaranty
Company, THAT THIS IS NOT A LAND
SURVEY PLAT OR IMPROVEMENT
SURVEY PLAT, and that it is not to be
relied upon for the establishment of
fence, building, or other future
improvement lines.
I further certify that the improvements on
the above described parcel on this date,
December 10, 2008, except utility
connections, are entirely within the
boundaries of the parcel, except as
shown, that there are no encroachments
upon the described premises by
improvements on any adjoining premises,
except as indicated, and that there is no
APPARENT evidence or sign of any
easement crossing or burdening any part
of said parcel, except as noted.
- u i ' 37934 `: o
Q'
�� LAN
John D. McMahan
P.L.S. No. 37934
Colorado Licensed Professional
Land Surveyor
J &K, Inc.
Transformer
I
r �
I f o
I 1
I i q,
1 ^.
I i S'
1 i ZS
A
7974.60 \ \ \
\
? .0, �� I
o �
9
h 0�, —►� 15.00'
I ° o , a o �
6 Concrete �
I I h' Foundation / /•2 a / 1 1
NOTICE: According to Colorado law you MUST commence any legal action
based upon any defect in this survey within three years after you
first discover such defect. In no event may any action based upon
any defect in this survey be commenced more than ten years from the
date of the certification shown hereon.
Beaver Dam Road 50
( R.O.W.)
Sewer
Manhole �O
Edge of
Pavement
CURVE TABLE
9 (under construction)
I i
LENGTH
RADIUS
37. 4' h
DELTA
CHORD
BEARING
I tie
184.17'
m o i 30,
92.38'
11 ° 13'23"
°
2 .3' 1
Vail Village
I
9�,
Cb
Filing 3, 01--I,
o I i �,
/ -Z ^'
CI I
7986.34
.
So' ;
a
�S'
2.9' CID
I 1
� o• I
1
/S'
/ /.9 i 15.8'
16.8' I o' o o
it i tie
I
tie cy .�,
7987.96
a i
Found #5 rebar with
l i
a i I
1 -1/2" aluminum cap
I
stamped PLS 168
38 9
.4' i a
e I I
1 I
><
7989.20 I I
I Concrete
Foundation
I 7988.00
I 1 (under construction)
Lot 41
7989.22 I
I
1
0.880 acres
�
333
I
• = Top Wall
I
15.00' Elevation
1
1
I I
I
10' Utility Easement —�
10.00' I
i
Book 192, Page 331
1
10' Utility Easement
1
i I
W I
i Reception No. 96382
i I
o I
i
i I
N I-
20.00'
----- - -
ii
O I
- - - - - --- -- ------- - - -
Building Setback
- --
I
_______ - - - - --
I-------
Z I
I
Found #5 rebar with
1 -1/2" aluminum cap
stamped PLS 30084
Site BM Elevation = 7998.01 -- h
NOTICE: According to Colorado law you MUST commence any legal action
based upon any defect in this survey within three years after you
first discover such defect. In no event may any action based upon
any defect in this survey be commenced more than ten years from the
date of the certification shown hereon.
Beaver Dam Road 50
( R.O.W.)
Sewer
Manhole �O
Edge of
Pavement
CURVE TABLE
CURVE
LENGTH
RADIUS
TANGENT
DELTA
CHORD
BEARING
— Cl
184.17'
940.21'
92.38'
11 ° 13'23"
183.87'
N87° 14'06 "W
J &K, INC.
ARCHITECTURE
CML ENGINEERING
LAND SURVEYING
MAPPING
PLANNING
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
POST OFFICE BOX 'W
1286 CHAMBERS AVE.. SURE 200
EAGLE, COLORADO 81631
P 970 328 6368
F 970 328 1035
NN ]K- INCCOM
0
o
Ua
o u
m�
V Z
ZLL
0 j
a 5
° z J
D
REVISIONS ISSUE
0
wm
- I I
zr
o
1jo8 NO. 8167�NO. 816 1
S
10
Lift Lift Station
Concrete Pad
Wood
Rail
Fence
i
10.00'
v? -v (LiS
SEP 07 2011
TOWN OF VAIL
NOTES:
1) Record information from the Title Commitment No. 7038931
provided by Stewart Title Guaranty Company, dated June 18, 2007 and
the Final Plat of Vail Village, First Filing, recorded August 6, 1962 at
Reception No. 96382, County of Eagle, State of Colorado.
2) Date of Survey: December 10, 2008
3) Top of wall elevations are based upon the Site Benchmark shown
hereon.
4) Address: 333 Beaver Dam Road (not posted)
5) Improvement locations and apparent deed lines are based upon the
monuments shown hereon.
6) Lot 41 is subject to all matters shown on the plat of Vail Village, First
Filing, recorded August 10, 1962 in Book 174 at Page 180 as
Reception No. 96382.
7) Lot 41 is subject to an Easement recorded March 30, 1966 in Book
192 at Page 331.
8) Lot 41 is subject to Right -of -Way for all ditches and creeks crossing
subject property.
9) Lot 41 is subject to the Limited License Agreement recorded October
27, 2003 as Reception No. 855296 and all matters shown on "Plan A"
attached thereto.
10) Lot 41 is subject to the affidavit recorded January 19, 1970 in Book
216 at Page 842 as Reception No. 112394.
1 1) Dimensions are along outer edge of concrete wall.
12) Lot 40 lift station easement recorded in Book 561 at Page 181.
i
Limited License Agreement
P Reception No. 855296
M
d