Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutB05-0292 Geo Investigation , ~ ' ~ i ~ ~ GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR TENNIS COURT RESIDENTIAL LOTS, VAIL MOUNTAIN VAIL, COLORADO Submitted to: Vail Resorts Development Company 137 Benchmark Road P.O. Box 959 Avon, Colorado '81620-0959 Submitted by: Golder Associates Inc. 44 Union Boulevard, Suite 300 Lakewood, Colorado 80228 ~~ ~~~~~ G.~-era--~ ~ _ ~ elder ~~ ~~ Distribution: 3 6 Copies -Vail Resorts Development Company (~ bound, 1 unbound) S 1 Copy -Golder Associates Inc. December 18, 2003 7 033-2123 s L i~ 1 i ,~ i! December 2003 -i- 033-2123 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........ ......1 2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................2 2.1 Background .........................................................2 ................................................................ 2.2 Scope of Work .....................................................................................................................2 2.3 Information from Previous Studies .....................................................................................2 3.0 SUBSURFACE GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION .................................................3 3.1 Subsurface Drilling Program ...............................................................................................3 3.2 Laboratory Testing ..............................................................................................................4 4.0 ENGINEERING GEOLOGY ............................................................................................5 4.1 Geologic Environment ........................................................................................................5 4.2 Site Reconnaissance Observations ......................................................................................5 5.0 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNIC_AL ASSESSMENT .....................................................7 5.1 General .................... .......7 5.2 Earthwork and Grading ......................................................................................••---............7 5.3 Retaining Walls ...................................................................................................................g 5.4 Slope Stability Evaluation .................................................................................................11 5.5 Preliminary Foundation Recommendations ......................................................................11 5.6 Future Geotechnical Work ................................•----..............................----..........---....--••---.12 6.0 CLOSING ......... 7.0 REFERENCES LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Borehole Locations LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Borehole Logs Appendix B Laboratory Testing Results Appendix C Photographs ..............................13 ...............14 i ~o3Lizs~oaoo~oaoi~os3uz3 oao~.o9,b; Doc Golder Associates December 2003 -1- 1.0 INTRODUCTION 033-2123 This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation and engineering geology study for the residential lots proposed for the existing tennis courts near Lionshead of Vail Mountain, for Vail Resorts Development Company (VRDC). VRDC's current concept is for four residential lots to be sited where tennis courts exist presently. Prior to residential construction the site is to be returned to a grade similar to what existed before the tennis courts were constructed. The purpose of the study is to provide preliminary recommendations regarding engineering geology and potential geologic hazard conditions of the property along with recommendations for site work, foundation types, and drainage. L,03\2123\0400\0401\033?l]3.0101.09363.DOC Golder Associates u ~, i~ ~1~ 1 1 f t ~L ~i December 2003 -2- 033-2123 2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND 2.1 Background The site is located south of the town of Vail, adjacent to Forest Road in Eagle County, Colorado. The site is presently occupied by tennis courts, south of Gore Creek at Lionshead. Detailed grading plans identifying the thickness of fill below the tennis courts are not available, nor are quality assurance records regarding the fill placement. 2.2 Scope of Work The scope of work for the study included preliminary field reconnaissance, asubsurface drilli}:g investigation with installation of piezometers, laboratory testing, and a preliminary report of geotechnical conditions including a working stability model of the slope. The purpose of the report is to provide an evaluation of geologic and geotechnical conditions for planning of the site and foundation design information. 2.3 Information from Previous Studies Previous studies have been completed by Koechlein Consulting for the tennis court lots (Koechlein 2002). This previous report explored the fill thickness and foundation soils to total depths up to 30 feet at the tennis court area. This report estimated up to 14 feet of fill existed on the development site and recommended that all the ftll should be removed for future development. i.~o,~zrz,~.oaoo~o~oro„ziz3.oaoi o9s6a roc Golder Associates December 2003 -3- _ 033-2123 3.0 SUBSURFACE GEOTECI-INICAL INVESTIGATION 3.1 Subsurface Drilling Program The drilling program was conducted during the weeks of October 13 and October 20, 2003 by Golder Associates Inc. (Golder) and the drilling subcontractor, Spectrum Exploration Incorporated. The ' drilling program consisted of drilling a total of four boreholes at the locations shown on Figure 1, and installing two piezometers. The results of the drilling program and laboratory tests were used to determine the physical characteristics of the subsurface materials at the site. The boreholes were drilled using ODEX drilling in the overburden soils to depths ranging between 11.5 and 30 feet, followed by 2.5-in. ID HQ core drilling into bedrock. Standard penetration test (SPT) samples were collected/attempted in the overburden, but the rocky subsurface conditions limited effective testing and recovery. Contractors reviewing this report in regard to excavation difficulty should understand that the ODEX drilling method readily penetrates materials that would normally cause refusal to an auger rig. Furthermore, this method may affect the SPT blowcounts. In general, the boreholes encountered gravelly colluvial soils over sandstone, siltstone, and shale of the Mintum Formation. Based on the boreholes drilled, the depth to bedrock appears to be about ' 10 to 1~ feet, although the distinction between overburden soils and weathered bedrock was difficult to identify. Loose fill was interpreted in boring TC1 to a depth of about 6 feet. Objectionable materials were not encountered in the fill sampled in this boring. Fill was not encountered in the other borings performed for this investigation. Previous work on the site (Koechlein 2002) detected up to as much 14 feet of fill near the northern edge of the tennis courts. ~ Overburden soils characterized as loose to very dense silty or clayey sand and silty gravel, with cobble or boulder sized rock fragments were encountered in all borings. These soils may be either residual soil, weathered in place from bedrock, or colluvium. The upper portions of the overburden soils appear to have a greater amount of clay and silt. The boring standard penetration test (SPT) 1 blowcounts were variable in the upper ~ feet across the site, with values ranging from 6 to greater ! ~ than 30. This indicates variable densities of material, and no clear pattern of the less dense material was apparent. _~ ~ e'~o,~ziz3~aioo~oaoi~o33~i~3 uao~ 09363_~oc GOldef ASSOCIat@S December 2003 -4- 033-2123 The bedrock encountered below the colluvium in the boreholes was slightly to highly weathered, extremely weak to strong, tan to gray sandstone with some shale and limestone. Groundwater was not encountered in any of the boreholes drilled on the site. The borehole logs are presented in Appendix A. 3.2 Laboratory Testing Samples obtained from the field program were collected, tested, and analyzed for index properties (Atterberg limits and grain size distribution), and shear strength at Golder's laboratory in Denver, Colorado in accordance with applicable ASTM standards. Selected samples were classified according to ASTM D2487 based on the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The results of the laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B. Index testing was performed on samples of the colluvium overlying the bedrock. The in-situ moisture content ranged from 3.8% to 18.2% with an average value of 7.9%. The liquid limit tested for one sample was 44 and the plasticity index was 16. Results from direct shear tests performed on samples of the colluvial silty gravel -silty sand material from another near by Vail location (not this project) indicated a shear strength angle of 38 degrees with low cohesion. These materials are similar in character and are derived from the same bedrock type as the soils in the tennis courts area. L s t\0321 ^_3\0400\040!\03321230401 A9363.DOC Golder Associates 1 December 2003 -5- 1 4.0 ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 033-2123 This section of the report describes observed engineering geologic conditions at the site that are pertinent to site planning and development. 4.1 Geologic Environment In conjunction with the field reconnaissance, we reviewed available published information for the area, including the U.S. Geological Survey's 2002 Geologic Map of the Vail West Quadrangle, Eagle County, Colorado (Scott, Lidke, Grunwald 2002). Most of the area is covered with colluvium overburden soils overlying Minturn Formation sandstone bedrock that dips approximately north-northwest, in a similar direction and grade as the ground slope. Bedrock lies at depths on the order of 11.E to 30 feet. The USGS map does not show the specific geology at the project location, but describes this area as `disturbed by human activity". The USGS ' map also shows a Quaternary alluvial fan deposit in the vicinity and east of the proposed site. 4.2 Site Reconnaissance Observations Afield reconnaissance of the property was made on October 14, 2003. The following section presents the results of field reconnaissance. In a few locations, specific conditions were noted during ' the reconnaissance that could affect the proposed residential lots. These are summarized as follows: North of the tenciis courts, a large bedrock outcrop sits along the south bank of Gore Creek. This feature appears to be associated with the topographic knob between the creek and the tennis courts and suggests that shallow bedrock is supporting the knob. This suggests some degree of natural erosion protection from the creek as well as benefits to local slope stability. To the east and west of this topographic knob, the slopes down to the creek appear hummocky and irregular, suggesting some instability historically, possibly related to riverbank erosion. No surface features were observed that suggest active large scale instability. No evidence of instability or distress were observed at the tennis courts or the adjacent slopes. The area mapped by USGS as an alluvial fan deposit does not appear to be active. The slopes above the area mapped as alluvial fan are developed as part of the Vail ski area or are developed as residential t:\03\21L~\0400\0401\Oi321'_3.6501.09i63.DOC Golder Associates December 2003 -6- 033-2123 lots. The slopes appear to be well vegetated, including mature trees. No landslides were mapped by USGS in this immediate vicinity. A sizable slide area is located uphill and west of the tennis court site, but is not expected to impact development at this site. !:\03\2123\0400\4101`,0332123.040L09363.DOC Golder Associates December 2003 -7- 033-2123 5.0 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT 5.1 General Evidence of geologic hazards, slope instability or other condition that would preclude development of the site, other than as addressed in this report, was not found by this investigation. We understand that development plans call for placing additional sloping fill on the current flat surface of the tennis courts. We have been provided with grading plans prepared by Alpine Engineering dated November 24, 2003 depicting the proposed grading changes. Additional comments on existing f 11 are provided below. Final design of improvements should consider the possibility of stream bank erosion. Based on the grading plans provided, we do not believe that bank erosion poses a significant threat to use of this property, but this issue should be addressed in fmal design, and further analyses of bank erosion and its related impact in slope stability should be checked for development of lots 3 and 4, depending on the proposed location of structures. ~.2 Earthwork and Grading On-site soils are suitable for use as general fill, although select granular fills may be needed for some construction. We are available to assist your civil engineer with earthwork specification development. The large cobbles and boulders in the on site soils may result in difficult excavation, and may require some processing to remove the larger material such that the soil can be placed and worked in lifts. Cuts into native materials may encounter bedrock or weathered bedrock that is also difficult to excavate. Contractors bidding on this work should understand that the borings were drilled using an ODEX rig, which readily penetrates boulders, weathered bedrock, or other rocky ground conditions that would cause refusal to an auger rig. SPT blowcounts may also be influenced. Difficult excavation may be encountered at any location or depth on this site. t ~,m Zias~oaoo~oao~~o„z~z, oaoi.o9~6~.DOC GOlder ASSOCIatOS December 2003 -8- 033-2123 Preliminary recommendations are 2H:1V or flatter for cut slopes and for fill slopes. Surface water should be drained away from all structures and steep slopes. Previous studies suggest the fill on the site is primarily on the north west corner of the tennis court area. Borings indicate the bedrock surface varies from 11.5 to 16 feet below grade. Fill on the west side may be as much as 14 feet thick. The SPT blowcounts indicate the upper ~ feet of material ' across the site has inconsistent densities, ranging from loose to dense. In order to implement the proposes grading changes, we recommend that the top 5 feet of existing fill be stripped from across the site and the underlying soils proofrolled before placing additional fill. Excavation of the soft or loose zones should continue until the loose material is removed. Fill should then be placed in 6 to 8 inch lifts, and compacted to project specifications to bring the fill to the ~~ desired grade. We recommend 95% of Standard Proctor density for general fill, and 100% for building foot prints. Site specific investigations of each structure should be performed in final design to confirm fill quality and provide additional recommendations. The presence of the alluvial fan to the east of the development indicates a potential for soil collapse in foundations. A nearby boring for another project suggests alluvial fan deposits which may have collapse potential. Evidence was not found in the borings suggesting the tennis courts or proposed lots are sited on loose alluvial sands prone to collapse, but final design investigations of the individual lots should investigate for soluble sulfates and collapse potential. ' etainin Walls 5.3 R g General If retaining walls for cuts and ftlls are required for site development, they are likely to be either MSE walls or soil nail walls. Either wall type will likely have a rock masonry veneer, similar to other recent Vail Resorts projects. Specific criteria for design of each type of wall are presented below. i MSE Walls ' MSE walls appear to be feasible for fill retaining walls. Near surface soils encountered in the borings are variable in consistency, but often very rocky. With processing it appears that they could be used ' ros~~tz,~oaoo~oaor,osazta3oaot.o936s.DOC GOlder ASSOC18t@S December 2003 -9- 033-2123 for MSE fill; they generally do not appear to be excessively plastic or to have high clay contents. The primary consideration will be excavation difficulty, and processing as needed to remove oversized rocks from the MSE fills. An internal drain system, at approximately the back of the lowest reinforcing layer (or the "heel" of the wall) should be provided. This drain should consist of at least a 4-inch slotted pipe embedded in clean gravel, fabric wrapped, and sloped to a suitable outfall. Wall design parameters are recommended as follows: - a ' . On-site'Backfill Friction Angle 34 degrees Cohesion 0 Unit Weight 125 pcf The following criteria, which are independent of backfill type, may also be utilized: • Minimum Reinforcement Length: 0.7 x Total Wall Height; • Minimum Footing Depth: 18 inches; • Factor of Safety for Sliding: 1.5; • Factor of Safety for Overturning: 2.0; • Factor of Safety for Bearing Capacity: consider as part of global stability analysis. Additional criteria such as required geosynthetic strength, interaction coefficients, and maximum vertical spacing of reinforcing layers will be determined during wall design. Wall elevations (profiles) with reinforcement layout should be provided with the design, as well as specifications for i the wall construction. Soil Nail Walls Cut walls for the proposed site are possibly most economical if constructed as soil nail walls. Soil nail walls can be constructed from the top down as excavation proceeds and do not require additional i~ ' [:1032123\0400\040 P,03331?3.040L09363.DOC Golder Associates December 2003 -10- 033-2123 excavation for placement of wall reinforcement members. However, given the variable ground conditions of the deposits encountered, attention to these ground conditions will be required on the part of the designer to minimize construction difficulties. Specifically, stand-up time for the excavations may not be very good, at least where boulders or gravels are present with few or no fines in the soil matrix. The design and specifications must provide guidance to contractors for bidding and constructing in such conditions. Slot berms or flash coating of the excavation face may be required. Similarly, drill hole stability may be poor, and cased holes may be required. As was the case in the soil nail walls at Arrowhead in 2001, communication between drill holes and/or large grout takes are likely. The design should consider either grout socks or other methods to manage grout takes, and the specifications and contract documents should be developed with this possibility in mind, so that contractors can bid on and build the walls with reasonable risk and direction. The following soil nail design parameters are proposed for this project: __ -_ .`'.Parameter Value Friction An le 32 de ees Cohesion 25 sf Unit Weia t 120 cf Unit Ultimate Bond Stress 12 si The unit ultimate bond stress identified above is representative of dense sand and silty sand/sandy silt (FHWA 1998). A unit ultimate bond stress of 12 pounds per square inch (psi) results in an ultimate pullout resistance of greater than 2 kips per foot for a drillhole diameter of 6 inches, as would likely be recommended as a minimum drillhole diameter for this project. Soil nail designs should incorporate permanent drainage to relieve hydrostatic pressures and provide an outlet for groundwater or seepage that may develop seasonally. Other design measures for permanent soil nail walls outlined in the Federal Highway Administration's "Manual for Design & Construction Monitoring of Soil Nail Walls" (FHWA 1998) should be followed in the design. ' [ ~or~~z~~.awo~.osono~3aiz; oaoi o9ao;.DOC Golder Associates 1 December 2003 5.4 Slope Stability Evaluation -11- 033-2123 A preliminary slope stability evaluation was performed for the project site. Using the available topographic information provided by Alpine Engineering, Inc. the existing slope geometry was modeled using the SLIDE (Rocscience 2002) software. Given the relatively shallow depth of bedrock, the nature of the site soils, and the proposed site grading, construction modifications to the slope are not be expected to negatively impact overall slope stability. ' The slope below the development along Gore Creek does appear to have some potential for stream bank erosion. As discussed above, analyses may be necessary during final site design of this issue. A large rock outcrop along part of the creek does offer some protection, but a significant setback from the creek may be needed in final design to reduce the impacts of potential future erosion and satisfy County development requirements. The debris fan shown on the USGS geological map does not appear to be presently active or a concern for landslide or debris flow activity due to the amount of vegetation and development above the fan. 5.5 Preliminary Foundation Recommendations Investigations should be performed that include at least one boring at each building envelope to ' establish criteria for design of the residential foundations. These investigations should be performed once building envelopes are established, and site grading complete. Assuming that engineered fill or ' native materials are present in or under the building envelopes, preliminary foundation designs may consider conventional spread footings designed for allowable bearing pressures of 2 to 3 ksf. Slab on grade floors for basements and garages may also be used. Frost depth should be assumed to be 4 feet; exterior footing should be buried 4 feet below adjacent exterior grade. In addition to geotechnical investigation for final foundation design, all footing excavations should be inspected by a qualified geotechnical engineer or his representative to evaluate materials present- ~ ,o;uiz}~.oaoo•,oaot~,oas~i_a asoi 09303 Doc Golder Associates December 2003 -12- 033-2123 5.6 Future Geotechnical Work As the project proceeds location specific geotechnical investigation for residential structures, retaining walls, large crust and fills, and infrastructure should be completed to support fmal design. Actual site conditions should be verified by field review during construction. Quality control assurance testing of fill soils, pavement materials, and concrete will be required. Qualified inspection of excavations, cuts, and retaining wall construction is also recommended. e~,o3 zizs~oaoo~.oao~~o,sziza oaot oes6s_ooc GOlder ASSOdateS December 2003 -13- 033-2123 6.0 CLOSING Golder appreciates the opportunity to work with VRDC and we trust that this report for the tennis court site meets your current needs. Please feel free to contact the undersigned if you have any questions. [\03123\0400\0401\03i2123.040L09363.DOC Golder Associates John A. Chapman, Y.t/. Project Engineer FEH/JAC/ljd December 2003 -14- 033-2123 7.0 REFERENCES Federal Highway Administration. 1998. Manual for Design and Construciton Monitoring of Soil Nail Wall. October 1998. Koechlein Consulting Engineers, Inc. June 6, 2002. Preliminary Soils Investigation Proposed 5 lot Residential Development Lionshead Redevelopment Tennis Court Sites Vail, Colorado 02-059. Rocscience Inc.. 2002. Slide, 2D Limit Equilibrium Slope Stability for Soil and Rock Slopes, Version 5.0. Copyright 1989-2002. Scott, Robert; Lidke, David; and Grunwald, Daniel. 2002. Geologic Map of the Vail West Quadrangle, Eagle County Colorado, U.S. Geol. Survey Map MF-2369. I:\03\2123\0400\0401\0332I23410L09363.DOC Golder Associates ~ APPENDIX A BOREHOLE LOGS .. December 2003 Golder Associates ewrxiz3w,oawoi~anr,.aoi.nssr~~oc 033-2123 e 1 i 1 IJ 1 1 RECORD OF BOREHOLE GAI-TC1 sHEET 1 or z PROJECT: Snow Cat Road DRILLING METHOD: ODEX DATUM: ELEVATION: PROJECT NUMBER: 033-2123 DRILLING DATE: 10/22/2003 AZIMUTH: WA INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Val CO DRILL RIG: CME - 55 TRACK MOUNT COORDINATES: N: E: p SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES S~ TANCE RE PENETRATO S O _ ^ W v ELEV. ~ ~ to 20 30 40 a o ~ y = w w BLOWS m ¢ PERCENT ONTENT REMARKS p` Z DESCRIPTION y ~ O ~ ~ per 6 N v ) ( WATER C ~ DEPTH Z ~ 1 W ~ ~ (ft) 140 ~ hammer ~ , W, F ' m 30 irxh 0 0 O d 0 12:40 started dolling with - . . 0.4 ODEX 0.4 -6.5 BWk sample wtiings OS Loose, dark yeEOwish brown, wei graded, Clayey SAND with gravel, angular ro sufxounded, coarse to fine sand, coarse to fore gravel, weak reaction to HCI (50% ' . : . sand. 30% gravel, 20% (ales). Mast (Fiti) SP-SM ~: ':.. 5 1 ss s-2a s 5 ^ ' 6.5 -11.5 6.5 Bulk sample 6.5-10.0 w Camped, dark yepowish brevet, subangular o to s~ramded, coarse to fine we9-graded O SANG with gravel (SM), trace fares, strong HCI reaction (65% sand, 30% gravel, 5% fares), moist, (Residual SoB or Possible Fdl) SM 10 2 SS 4$-12 ~ 1.5 ^ 11.5 - 15.0 11.5 SANDSTONE, Fresh to stightiy weathered Sandstone. (bedrock) Mintum Fartnation 15 Continued as cored hole. See Oollhole log 15.0 npOR. 20 25 0 `m 0 C7 0 U K O C7 30 ' a ro O rZ (7 M N N iN 0 35 ~ ~ f- O = ll S s S 1 K O - H 40 ~ - SCALE: 1 in = 5 ft LOGGED: BRB °x DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Spectrum CHECKED: JAC = -Golder ~ DRILLER: S. Jager DATE: 11/24/2003 ~eS i~ RECORD OF DRILLHOLE GAI-TC1 SHEET2 of 2 PROJECT: Snow Cat Road DRILLING METHOD: ODEX DATUM: ELEVATION: INCLINATION: -9 PROJECT NUMBER: 033-2123 DRILLING DATE: 10/22/2003 AZIMUTH: N/A LOCATION: Vail CO ROCK TYPE D RILL RIG: CME - 55 TRACK MOUNT COORDINATES: N: E J.hirt FO-FoWtion STStepped SM-Smooth ~ F-Fauk PL-Planar Wregulx R-Rough CT~onhd : i f w ~ Z ~ D ~ .~ ^Diamehal D u u SShear CLunrod P-Po6shee vR-vRwgh pp~~ryled F e 2= o y z z p r? < O NOTES _ ~ p B~eddng U-UnduWMg KSlidcenscled iac Fr- ue F~q~ Odes ~ z_ F z F WATER LEVELS 0 ~ DESCRIPTION = ~ DISCONTINUITY DATA = ?Z ~ ~ H Zw ~ INSTRUMENTATION a ELEV i w ~ ~ O ROD FRACTURES TYPE, SURFACE O ~ ~ w_ u ~ _ U ~ K C a Continued hom noncon:d Sa DEPTH 2 ~ v v % PER f00T ()ESCRIPTKNJ, AND DIP wrt roRE Axes ~ n ~ ~ 3 ; ; .Qy ~ ~ ~ (Pn) borehole. See Borehole log report. ~ (l0 rc z m ~ x Staned coring at 15' 15 15.0 -18.0 15 0 1 0 0 0 ARKOSE SANDSTONE . 1 2 Fresh to siglsly weathered pale 16.0.17.0 browr4 meduim strong to strong. 5 , PL,R, medium to coarse grained. subargrdar to subraulded sand, `"'"' l ta o 1s.alss 3s 18.0-22.0 . 2 5 0 34 10« F,PL,VR, lasts croarsenin9: . CONGLOMERATE R3 20 20.0.20.5 30 R4 v 0 F, PL,R, o 1 2 21.0.21.5 PL R Fr 5 0 r` 22.0 22.0-22.5 85 `~ 220 - 25.5 FR ~ Run #3 Madxsn to coarse sand with • I~R• gravel lasts up to 314" 0-1 Syy m 3 5 ~ 90 23.5-24.5 5m 1 3 25 25.0-25.5 Piezometer completion 25.5 (10!22103) 25.5 - 27.0 S Screened PVC Color change to dark greenish gray (21.2J1.2~ 5 Sand padc(19.0-31.7) 27.0 - 28.0 ~ 27.0 Bentonite chips Cdar change bade to pale brown R3 (15.0-19.0) 28.0 5_0 28.0.28.5 77 to Cuttings (0-15') 4 5.0 96 B, PL,SM, R4 30 30.0.30.5 75 8. PL,SM, 15:15 (10/24103) Stopped Boring completed at 31.2 ft. drilfng 31.7 35 i i 40 o rn O U 3 ) 45 C7 vi C7 n N N 50 F _ O ~ 55 ucs (vs) -. SCALE: 1 in = 5 ft LOGGED: BRB Ri_iz°s n^ DR1LLfNG CONTRACTOR: Spectrum CHECKED: JAC R3-7500 W~ DATE: 11 /24/2003 R5='ss:~o ~.SSOCiTtLS ~ DRILLER: S. Jager Rs 1 RECORD OF BOREHOLE GAI-TC2 SHEET 1 of 2 PROJECT: Snow Cat Road DRILLING METHOD: ODEX DATUM: ELEVATION: PROJECT NUMBER: 033-2123 DRILLING DATE: 10/30/2003 AZIMUTH: NiA INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Vail CO GRILL RIG: CME - 55 TRACK MOUNT COORDINATES: N: E: ~ SOIL PROFILE SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE O BLOWS / ft ^ I=- = w ~ ELEV. ~ ~ fo 20 3o to o_ o p ~ ~ Z DESCRIPTION rn y =O a O w ~ w ~ BLOWS Par 6~ N < WATER CONTENT (PERCENT) REMARKS O ~ J DEPTH O w W 1 w O ft Z 140 Ib ftammer tr , W, 1 g m ( ) 30 inch 0 0.0 - 6.0 10!27/0310:40 Started Compact, dark yellowish brown, subangular dnlfmg to subrourtded, coarse to fine welyraded Sity SAND wiMt gravel (SM) (coarse grevel Bag sample wttings 1-S and cobbles maybe present, but broken by ttammerl, strong HCI reaction (70% sand, 30% grave, moist, (residual sal or. SM cogwium) 5 ~ 4 SS 5-7.6 13 1~5 ^ 6.0 - 7.0 ~ 6.0 Increasing gravel /cobble corderN SPSM : • Bag sample attings 5-10' Apprordmatey 60% sand, 40% gravel 7.0 7.0 -12.5 Compact, dark yellowish brown, subangular to suGounded, coarse to fine weNyreded Slty SAND with gravel (SP-SM) (coarse gravel and cobbles may be present, but ~ : . stron HCI reacbon hartwner) ~~ b SFSM 10 , g y (70% sand, 30% grave, moist, (residual 75 soi or coAuvium) 2 SS 7-15-14 29 1 5 ^ w ~ 125 - 16.5 12.5 Booklet encountered (approz 12.5-13.5') pink dust from borehole. (weathered bedrock) ~~~ SP-SM 15 Sample of spFt spoon 3 SS 7-238 >50 1 1.5 recovery 16.5 - 21.0 16.5 Boulder -White /tight gray dust 16.5-1 T SP-SM 20 Pieces of cobble /boulder ~ 4 SS 5015" 50/5' .5 1'S recovered are igneous M it 21.0-25.0 21.0 ennon e) ( Bedrock, ARKOSE SANDSTONE ~ 1 Fresh, pale broom, strong, poorty sorted, ~ Bedrock encountered -21' fine to coarse sand, subangular to Driller sets casing to 25' wbrounded, weak to no reation with HCI. More ce^n9 (Minlum Formalon) 0 25 Continued as cored hole. See Ordlhde log 25.0 ~ -n V rep0lt. C ~ ~ ri u Y n 7 O ~ 40 SCALE: 1 in = 5 ft LOGGED: BRB DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Spectrum CHECKED: JAC GOI(lel o DRILLER: S- Jager GATE: 11/27/2003 ~eS a f i r ~~ L_, 1 r 1 1 1 1 J 1 RECORD OF DRILLHOLE GAI-TC2 SHEET 2 of 2 PROJECT: Snow Cat Road DRILLING METHOD: ODEX DATUM: ELEVATION: PROJECT NUMBER: 033-2123 DRILLING DATE: 10/30/2003 AZIMUTH: NIA INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Val CO DRILL RIG: CME - 55 TRACK MOUNT COORDINATES: N: E: ROCK TYPE JJOiK FO-Foiafion ST Sb4Smuoth ~~~~ ~ •~ " nmetral FFauR PL~lanar Nrregular R-Ftaugh CTC~ontad E x ~ x 1 D O Z w 5-Shear C-Curvod p-PoEshed VR-VRouph R~~~ ~ w w ~ ~ B-Bed6rg U-UndulaWg KSWcensdad FrFndure Fyy~ Oda q ~ °z_ %F i O ~ WATER LEVELS F u d ~ DISCONnNINTY Darn = j~ ~ ro ~ F INSTRUMENTATION w ~ DESCRIPTION v ELEV ~ ... a Z ~ ~ ROD FRACTURES TYPE, SURFACE a ~ ~- w ~ v ~ ~ a ° t Continued 7rwn nor+-cored ~¢ DEPTH ~ o u % PER FOOT pESCRIPTK)N. AND Q4 ~ Dw vrtt coRE Axis r, LL ~ H ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ (Pa) ~ ° z (>q borel,de. See 8orel,de log report. 25 25.0 -28.0 25 0 1 1_0 82 5 ARKOSE SANDSTONE . 1 1 1 Fresh, pab brown, strong, P~dY sorted, fine to coarse sand, subang,darta s,Wounded, weak to 27.0.27.5 70 to reation with HCI. F, PL,R, 28 0 28 8 0 0 28.0 5 0 28.0-28.5 . - . CONGLOMERATE; Gasts up to 0 2 _ 0 5 ~ 0.2 I,VR, 80 5' ed wba ular 1 28.8 . 28.5-29.0 gp . 28.8-29.9 S, PL,SM, 90 30 N 29.9-31.0 O O 000 29.9 29.0-29.5 ST,R, 0 ~ FR R4 CONGLLMERATE, Clasts up to 37.0 29-530. Fr I VR 90 1.0' da, subrounded to , , 0.31 0 30 suba War. 0 -35.7 31 . . I,R,Fr 76 . LTSTONE 31.0-31.5 SI 0.1 0-33 0 32 3 5.1 ~ . . B, PL,R, 5.2 2.3 35.7 - 3 35.7 SILTST NE Fresh dark greenish S PL SM 13:50 1027/03 Drilling ' re a 'um s n completed to 36.3 Boring completed at 36.3 ft 14:00 Borehole dry to 36.3' Borehole bailed with cuttings 45 0 50 m O U 55 U1 C7 N N h 60 0 H 65 ucs tP~) _ SCALE: 1 in = 5 ft LOGGED: BRB R,-ns DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Spectrum CHECKED: JAC a =~~ Gojd~ er DATE: 11!27/2003 Ja DRILLER: S R6_}5,p0 0 ~~~ g . Cl RECORD OF BOREHOLE GAI-TC3 SHEET 1 of 2 PROJECT: Snow Cat Road GRILLING METHOD: ODEX DATUM: Z ELEVATION: INCLINATION: -90 PROJECT NUMBER: 033-2123 DRILLIR GDCME 155 RACK MOUNT OOR NAT S: N: E C : LOCATION: Vail, CO SAMPLES PENETRATION RESISTANCE O O SOIL PROFILE BLOWS ! ft ^ x r- t ELEV ~ ¢ m zo w •o xr. w ? . BLOWS REMARKS a m ~ m a 0 m a er 6 in N ~ WATER CONTENT (PERCENT) w" ~... O ? DESCRIPTION c i rn O O ~ J DEPTH ~ 2 ~ p ~ K W r-v --1 ~ O O ft 140 Ib Yammer . ) ( 30 inch dro _ _. m 0 0.0 - 6.0 Loose. dark yegowish brown. fine CLAYEY SAND (SC), low plastdty, bw toughness. no HCI reacfion (70% sand, 30% rues), moist, (Coquvium ar residual sad SC .. 5 1 SS 2~.1 6 ~ ~ ^ 6.0-111.5----------- - 6.0 Compact, dark yeAowish brown. coarse to tine, CLAYEY SAND with gravel (SC), subangular to subrounded sand and gravel, weak reaction to HCI, krw plasticity (fi0% sand, 25% gravel, 15 % fines), moist, SC (CoAuvium or residual soil) x w 1~ °o z ss a-to-12 22 i:s 11.5 -16.0 ~ 11.5 Very dense, dark yeAowish brown, coarse to fine subangular, weAyroded SAND with gravel (SM), (cobbles also noted), Vacs fines weak HCI reactions, moist (Weathered SM Bedrock) 3 SS 30-55-aa >F~0 15 76.0 -20.0 16.0 SANDSTONE (Bedrock) Driller notes weaker rods 16.0.17.5 17.5-18.0 OAve cokued sandstone 16.0-20.0 Hard pale brown snadstone '(cuttings are powder) 20 Continued as cored hde. See Drillhole log 20.0 re~~ i 25 30 35 tr O ~ 40 drilling Bag sample -cuttings Shc type dtange Geady shown in spoon sample Bag sample 6.0-10.0' (cuttings) ^ Bag san~le cuttings 12.o-17.a No ptueatic surface during drilAng but cuttings from 16.0-17.5 are moist SCALE: 1 in = 5 ft LOGGED: BRS W DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Spectrum CHECKED: JAC ° __ Golder DATE: 11 /27/2003 AS.SOC1c1teS DRILLER: S. Jager ~ RECORD OF DRILLHOLE GAI-TC3 SHEET2 of 2 PROJECT: Snow Cat Road DRILLING METHOD: ODEX DATUM: ELEVATION: PROJECT NUMBER: 033-2123 DRILLING DATE: 10/16/2003 AZIMUTH: NIA INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Vail CO DRILL RIG: CME - 55 TRACK MOUNT COORDINATES: N: E: ROCK TYPE JJoinr FOFoHation ST.smpped SMSmoorh CACalde 0 • Anal CLLIay z F ^Oiametral FFault PL?lanar Hrregulr R-Ragh ~ w w f C Z u n S-shear GCwved P-Poished VR-V.Rawh RO-Redtiled ~ O 8-Beddag 1111Mwating K-sYdnntided Frfnctun q=o Iwo a NOTES 2 O m O Fslron Orides ~ Z _ N v > asCONTINUfrv DATA ~ w ~ - F ; WATER LEVELS INSTRUMENTATION PT w ~ DESCRI IO of 3 o-- ELEV. o ww J ~ ~ TYPE.sl1RFACE ~o ~~ LL Z ROO FRACTi1RES a a ~ % PER FOOT DESCRIPTIOr{ AND Continued fnxn nontored Sa DEPTH j ~ ( g) ~ ~ H f S P rc rc ~ ~ borel,Ole. See 80n:hO/e b9 report. O (tG ~ rc DIP wrt CORE AXIS L7 20 20,p-41.0 R3 Started coring at 20' ARKOSE SANDSTONE 20.0 1 2 0 4 g, pt, R, z ~ 2 7 to 15:45 srgntly weathared, pale brown, 1.s 21.o- madam strong to strong, PAY 21.5 B, PL,R, 10 ~ Highly fradured zone sorted, mednm to coarse grained, 10+ 21.522.0 R3 s~angular to angular darts of B, PL,SM,Fr 5.7 quark feldspar, biotite, rrnlscovite, 23 0 22.0-23.0 1 n . 5_0 PL,R, 5,8 21.5 - 23.0 2 5.0 ~ 23.0-24.0 SILTSTONE 3b PL,R, FfeSh to ~~~ weathered, dark 24.0.26.0 g0 20 ,85 25 greerrish gray, weak to madam I , , , 23.0 -38.0 26.0-26.3 ARKOSE SANDSTONE B, PL,R, 8 70 0 Slightly weathered. pale txown, 26.3-27.5 madam strong to strong, poory 3 3 I,VR,Fr 70 R3 sorted madam to coarse sand with 3 _ 3.5 54 S 27.528.0 80 to some gravel. weak to no reaction to en to PL,R, 8 28 5 0 85 FR t R4 HCI. Some zones coars congbmerste. . . 2 - B, PL,R, o SW 28.529.0 3D PL,VR, Piezometer 29.831.8 90 screened interval: I R 18.0-38.0' sand pads 17.038.0' - 4 s_0 5.0 ~ 13 31.8-32.0 , PL,VR, bentonite dips: -10.0' backfilled with cuttings 0 - 33.0.34.0 5 8 , 3a.o-3a.s 8, PL,R, 80 35 1 5 34.535.0 5 _ 1 5 100 1 B PL R R3 . tO 1027/03 17:30 Finished R4 ' 36.537.0 85 drilling at 38.0 ' 6 89 1-2 I VR 1028!03 07:00 w.l. - 7.6 ~ _ 1.8 , , 37.0-37.3 Installed piezometer eortng completed at 38 ft. 37.3-37.5 ST,VR, 45 0 (7 O ' 50 a c~ A N 55 I r UCS (pv) SCALE: 1 in = 5 ft LOGGED: BRB R,-iz°s DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Spectrum CHECKED: JAC R =~SSOO s Golder ~ DRILLER: S. Jager DATE: 11 /27/2003 Re_ as;oa ASSOC1~eS o t RECORD OF DRILLHOLE GAI-TC4 SHEET2 of 2 PROJECT: SROw Cat Road DRILLING METHOD: ODEX DATUM: ELEVATION: PROJECT NUMBER: 033-2123 DRILLING DATE: 10/20/2003 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90 LOCATION: Vail CO DRILL RIG: CME - 55 TRACK MOUNT COORDINATES: N: E: ROCK TYPE J.Wint FO-Faiauon STStepped SMSmootli CA-Galata O •Anal F-Fauk PL?Wnar Nrregular R-Rough CTCaYihct SShear C-Curved p-Pofshed VR-VRaph ~~~ ¢ x ~ w w ~ x ~ Z w ° ^ Diametral ~ Fm p B-BedQeg UllndulaWg KSidcensided Fr-Fncturs Fa4o~Orides m~% r?~ _z of VVATER IFVELS w ° ~- DESCRIPTION ~ ELEV O ~ DISCONi1NUfTYDATA ~ rc~ ~ f° Zw INSTRUMENTATION ~ a . Z w w ROD FRACTURES SURFACE TYPE a ~ ~ w LL ra K ¢ ~ ti ~ j ~ ~ % PER FOOT , DESCRIPTION, AND ~ ~ ~ j a COnfinued rrOrn rloncore ° DEPTH ~ OIP aet CORE AKIS O ~ H f i K C ~ ~ tP~l borehole. See 8wehole log 2PoR- 04 rc ¢ 30 30.0 -34.0 30.031.3 Dark greenLsh gray ARKOSE SANDSTONE 30-0 1 ~1 3 0 -5 B. PL,R 20, ,80, 5 ,90 sistone recovered in spld d i h spoon. Drier thinks this is , gray s Fresft to srtghtly weaC>are brown, med'nm strong. poady top or bedrorJ< (bag l sorted, srwotaWed to subangular, 32.0323 samp e) Started coring at 10:50 at coarse to fine grained. weak to no 0.1 8, PL, SM, ~ reaction to HCI 2 5-0 68 33.534.0 90 34.0 -34.9 I 34.0 5.0 I,VR, 34.035.0 8 ,85, 5 ~` 34.9 -46.3 34.9 -5 B, PL,SM, 6' 936 SILTSTONE Irrterbed 34 35.035.3 . . grayish brown Sp~tly weathered B, PL,SM, . and greenish tlladt zones, weak bo ~ 35.335.6 rtredxun sfrorg, finely laminated, PL,SM, rturaceous (with mica crystals 35.636.0 PL,SM, B 70 R parapet to bedding), weak to no , 0.36 5 36 to o reaction with HCI 5 0 . . R SW R4 3 5 0 82 0-2 l V 5-38 0 37 80 . . . PL,R,Fr 40 38.8-39.3 ' . PL,VR, 0 3 1 0,8 40. -0 . 0 0 - _5 PL,VR, 0-41 8 41 1 , ,8 . . 8, PL,R, 4 3_3 3 3 82 1.2 42.32.5 F I R . , , , 43.0.43.2 I VR , , 33 5 43 . . R U ~ 5 ~ ~ 59 , , 43.5-44.0 7 80 0 PL, R, , , Boring completed at 46.3 ft. t VR Finished drilling at 12:25 at 46.3' 44.515.2 Borehole bacl~illed with PL,R, cuttings 452-46.0 PL,VR, 46.0-06.3 . PL,R. 50 55 O 60 ' o c7 r 65 K O 70 ucs (vs) _ SCALE: 1 in = 5 ft LOGGED: BRB R,.;zs DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Spectrum CHECKED: JAC ~-soo ° _ Golder _' DRILLER: S. Jager DATE: 11/28/2003 R6 35;pp p ~OC1~eS 1 1 1 1 1 i f p~ H ~ 1. (-r \M M H ] h..~ Q 1 G=, ~O ~., d i .n ' -'~t~ i., y0 ^ ~ ' ~, . - ~. C G ~ ~O r~p~ d ~ ~~„ O , C` ~ Q H O N O ~; , ar.. ~ i O ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .L 4 = q `D. i i i i i M i i i i i ~ V: ~ N rr ~ ,.~ _ C ~_.~, C~ '.~.i. fi . t ~ y `6 i. "i'T ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L C L "' u" - -C y :O N N 0 O ~ ~ O G=1I§~ i i t*'i i i i ~ N N r^ ' - 3s . ,.... .~ ~ : r-1 L ,_~. ~ i 1 O 1 ~ ~ t~ ~ [~ O V ~ d N \ '_ a > -: r. ~ _ = x: ~ `~ ~- ~ ~ ~ rn I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °O a' 1 o " ~' ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ' ' ~ r w '. ~~ ~ N . W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~'' ~ "' CJ- L. ~ ~ 6: '_': ~ O ~ O oo ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ h ~ O ~ >' ~ ~ [~ M V ~ O~ ~D ~D N : S' y.-~ ;.. r1 -~' ~:.. ~ _ O v: ~ _T ~ ~ i I i i ~ i i i I i U _~ ~. ~ i ~ ~ i ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~, O ,~ o ~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~~ .N . -.:. o ~ 0 y. ~ ~ N N N ~ c't to 7 ~!' ~ ~^'., C '. U U o U U U o U U U U U - ~ 1, U E-' H H U H F-' H F-' [-' n Z i N U U E~ E-~ u G ^ ^ c3 cC ftS cd C3 c4 cC cC cC cQ cC ct1 . ~, ~ ~, CA W P~ Cn ^.-1' Z.l W W CL7 C'a Cl G.'] M N_ N t'%1 M O F H 2 O ~ ~ N (Sa ~ U O z f-" F-~UO~~ c°n WQH¢E" Q ~,w¢wa ¢wQra¢ ¢ U O ~ ~ ~ H~~Caa II II II II II E-~~UQ~ W a E--' W ~~z~ °~~z aa~x a~a~ a~~.~ ..a~.a~ [T1 O O - N F_ qa E-~ > ° ° z z 11 03 033-2123.0003 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION & ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D421, D422, D4318 PR07ECT NAME: VRDC/Tennis Court Resident Lot/CO SAMPLE ID: TCl Composite Depth: 0-10 TYPE: Bulk 12" 3' 2' 1' 3/4' 3K' k !10 !20 960 9100 92 100 9G 80 % 70 P 60 a s SO s i n 40 g 30 20 10 0 1000 100 10 I 0.1 O.OI 0.001 Particle size in millimeters Coarse Fire Coarse Medium COBBLESI GRAVEL ~-- SAND Particle Size Particle Size <i o,.~4..e r1"<dF~"ri..n Pcrcentaoe u D z m N rn u u `m v A vi a 12.0" 304.8 100.0 3.0" 75.0 100.0 Cobbles 0.00 2.S" 63.5 100.0 2.0" 50.0 100.0 1.5" 37.5 100.0 1.0" 25.0 100.0 0.75" 19.0 99.1 Coarse Gravel 0.89 0.375" 9.5 85.4 #4 4.8 69.9 Fine Gravel 29.18 #10 2.0 59.1 Coarse Sand 10.82 #20 0.9 46.4 #40 0.4 39.6 Medium Sand 19.48 #60 0.3 36.6 #100 0.2 34.4 #200 0.1 31.8 Fine Sand 7.81 Finn ~ 31.81 ~ DESCRIPTION: Dark yellowish brown USCS: - PLASTICITY CHART 60 AJin< so y CH or H X 40 m 0 z Fr„ 70 u E„ Hw o off m ~ 20 - na< < a to h0. or L Clr a 0 !0 20 30 40 i0 60 70 SO 90 l00 110 LIQUID L[MIT (LL) ATTERBERG LIMITS M, LL PL PI SG TECH NG DATE 1 ]/l8/03 '~ REVIEW MB Golder Associates Inc. ASTM D 698 & 1557 ' ` PROJECT TITLE VRDCTI'ennis.Court Resident Lot/CO PROJECT NUMBER $33-212311003 SAMPLE IDENTITY TCL Composite - =0-L0 . ' SAMPLE TYPE ! e~dk TYPE COMPACTOR MOLD NUMBER 3 Mechanical 2264,9 ; MOLD WEIGHT (gm) COARSE TOTAL FRACTION SAMPLE MOLD DIAMETER (in) 3.998 TYPE PROCTOR MOLD HEIGHT (in) 4.585 staaeard MOLD VOLUME (cu.ft) 0.0333 ' S.5 -Ibf. RAM1~fER WITH 12 INCH DROP WATER CONTENT ' Wet Wt Tare & Soil Dry Wt Tan & Soil W t Tare Wt Moisture ' Wt Dry Soil Water Content (dec) Water Content (%) (Wl) IR'2) ("'3) (W4=Wl-W2) (W5=W2-W3) (w~W 4/W 5) (W4/WS)•100 POPi iT RESULTS (FINE) Wt. Soil & Mold Weight of Mold Wt. Of Wet Soil ' Wet Density, wd (pct) WATER CONTENTS Wt Tare & Soil I Wt Tare & Soil Wt Tare Wt Moisture Wt Dry Soil Water Content (%) Dry Density (pcf) (WL) (W2) (W3=WI-W2) (W4) CK~5) (M'6) (W7=W4-W5) (W 8=W 5-W 6) .1'36:39 145.20 29,16 0.00 11.19 0.00 116.04 0.0964 9.64 TEST TYPE D 698 D 4718 PROCEDURE METHOD B PREPARATION Wa Method TOTAL WEIGHT, WET (COARSE & FINE) ;5001.30 TOTAL WEIGHT, DRY (COARSE & FINE) 4565.08 WEIGHT RETAINED ON N 4 SIEVE (WET) 1505.20 WEIGHT RETAINED ON 3/8" SIEVE (WET) 728:St} WEIGHT RETAINED ON 3/4" SIEVE (WET) PERCENT RETAINED ON M 4 SIEVE (DRY) 32.97% PERCENT RETAINED ON 3/8" SIEVE (DRY) 15.97% PERCENT RETAINED ON 3/4" SIEVE (DRY) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4281 4 :' ' ...:4332.4 '.:.:..4330.5 4321.2 2269.90 2269.90 2269.90 2269.90 2011.50 2062.50 2060.60 2051.30 133.13 136.51 136.38 135.76 #17,91 334.46 331.30 376;06 _ '38859 301LS3 305.76. 341575 102.15 104.94 102 28 100.30 29.32 22.93 25.54 34.31 286.44 196.59 203.48 241.45 (w7Iw8)•100 10.2% 11.7% 12.6% 14.2% (wd/(l+wc)) 120.8 122.2 1212 118.9 I _- __ - MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (pct) OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT (%) Corrected Maximum Dry Density (pcf) ' Corrected Optimum Moisture (%) 122.3 DESCRIPTION Dazk yellowish brown 11.5 t 26.6 10.2 USCS - Specific Gravity And Absorption of Coarse Aggr bate - ASTM C 127-88 ' Weight of Oven Dry Sample (gm) A 609.78 Weight of Saturated-Surface-Dry (gm) B 628.40 Weight otSaturated Sample in Water (gm) C 382.70 Absorption of Oversize Particles (%) [(B-A)/Aj"100 3.05 ' Bulk Specific Gravity A/(B-C) 2.482 ' AVERAGE ABSORPTION 3.1 AVERAGE BULK SPECIFIC GRAVITY ~.as LL - PL - PI - MC 9.6 TECH P[tH DATE _ 1t-20-o3 REVIEW htB METHOD A: 20 % OR LESS RETAINED ON N4 METHOD B: > 20•/. RETAINED ON N4 AND 20 % OR LESS RETAINED ON 3/8" METHOD C: > 20 % RETAINED ON 3/S" AND <30 % RETAINED ON 3/4" TOTAL WEIGHT BEFORE PROCESSING AND PERCENT RETAINED Golder Associates 0 ~/' 1 M O c~1 0 N 0 o O Ey N Z H z 0 U F o O 0 0 a 0 c ~n o ~., o ~n o ~n o ~n c ~n o ~+ o ~ .-. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ...- ° ° ~ ~ oo ro r ~~d) A.LISI~i~Q A2IQ W 0 VI ~y N ~ 0 W N a~ m x 11 03 033-21?3.0003 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION & ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D421, D422, D4318 . PROJECT NAME: VRDC/Tennis Court Resident Lot/CO SAMPLE ID: TC2 Composite Depth: 0-17 TYPE: Sulk 100 90 80 70 P 60 a s 50 s i n 40 g 30 20 10 0 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Particle size in millimeters Coarx Fme Coirse Medium F Silt or Clav 000BLES) GRAVEL SAND ~ ONES Particle Size Panicle Size pLASTICTTY CHART (mm) % Passing Clazsification Percentage ~ .~ ;a u ~ y CH ~ ar Z c ~ ~ m z H F 30 U ~ E:. MH off .'+ ti ~ zo - aQ 4 m to ~ N r; cl.. eu. o< L ~ a 0 10 20 30 70 50 60 70 80 90 100 1l0 LIQIIll) LIlHIT (LL) Fnes 12.43 ATTERBERG LIMITS M, LL PL Pf SG DESCRIPTION: Dark yellowish brown USCS: - TECH NG DATE 11/18/03 REV"IEW MB 12.0" 304.8 100.0 3.0" 75.0 100.0 Cobbles 0.00 2.5" 63.5 100.0 2.0" '50.0 100.0 1.5" 37.5 100.0 1.0" 25.0 100.0 0.75" 19.0 97.4 Coarse Gravel 2.59 0.375" 9.5 74.8 #4 4.8 57.4 Fine Gravel 39.99 #10 2.0 43.9 CoaneSand 13.57 #20 0.9 30.8 #40 0.4 23.5 Medium Sand 20.31 #60 0.3 18.9 #100 0.3 15.4 ,".200 0.1 12.4 Fne Sand 11.11 Golder Associates Inc. 1 1 ii 1 1 1 ASTM D 698 & 1557 PROJECT TITLE VRDClI';nnis Court Resident LodCO TEST TYPE D 698 er Percentage Limits for D 4718 PROJECT MlMBER ;- 033-2123`.0003 PROCEDURE METHOD C SAMPLE IDENTITY 'TC2 Composite - 0-17 SAMPLE TYPE Bu11: TYPE COMPACTOR PREPARATION METHOD A: 20 % OR LESS RETAWED ON #4 MOLD NUMBER 4 Mechanical Wet Method MOLD WEIGHT (gm) '' 2271.] METHOD B: > 20 % RETAWED ON #4 AND MOLD DIAMETER (in) a.001 TYPE PROCTOR 20 % OR LESS RETAWED ON 3/8" MOLD HEIGHT (in) 4.569 Sm~dard MOLD VOLUME (cu.ft) 0.0332 METHOD C: > 20•/. RETAWED ON 3/8" AND 5.5 -Ibf RAt~IMER WITH 12 INCH DROP <30 % RETAWED ON 314" WATER CONTENT COARSE TOTAL TOTAL WEIGHT BEFORE PROCESSPi fG AND PERCENT RETAINED FRACTION SAMPLE Wet WtTare & Soil (W I) ib9.40 TOTAL WEIGHT, WET (COARSE & FWE) :,: 6562.60 !' Dry WtTare & Soil (W2) 162:42.' TOTAL WEIGHT, DRY (COARSE & FINE) 6238.67 Wt Tarc (W3) - 27.99 it : WEIGHT RETAINED ON # d S[EVE (WET) 2:794.60 Wt Moisture (W4=WI-W2) 0.00 6.98 WEIGHT RETALYED ON 318•' S[EVE (WET) ' , 165fi_4D , Wt Dry Soil (W5=W2-W3) 0.00 134.43 WEIGHT RETAWED ON 3/4" SIEVE (WET) 1?0:00 .. Water Content (dec) (wr-W4/WS) 0.0519 PERCENT RETAWED ON # 4 SIEVE (DRY) 44.79% Water Content (%) (W4/WS)*100 5.19% PERCENT RETAINED ON 3!8" SIEVE (DRY) 26.55% PERCENT RETAWED ON 3/d" SIEVE (DRY) 2.72 POINT RESULTS (FINE) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WL Soil & Mold (WI) Weight of Mold (W2) Wt Of Wet Soil (W3=W1-W2) Wet Density, wd (pcf) (W3/453.6*Vm) WATER CONTENTS WtTare & Soii (W4) ' WtTare & Soii (W5) - ' WtTare (W6) - Wt Moisture (W7=W4-WS) Wt Dry Soil (W8=W5-W6) Water Content (%) (W7/W8)*100 Dry Density (pcf) (wd/(l+wc)) MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (pcf) o.o DESCRIPTION Dark yellowish brown OPTIMUM h10LSTURE CONTENT (%) o.o Corrected Maximum Dry Density (pc() Corrected Optimum Moisture (%) USCS -- Specific Gravity And Absorption of Coarse Aggregate - ASTM C 127-88 Weight of Oven Dry Sample (gm) A LL - Weight of Saturated-Surface-Dry (gm) B PL - Weight o(Saturated Sample in Water ( gm) C PI - Absorption of Oversize Particles (%) [(B-A)/Al*l00 MC 5.2 Bulk Specific Gravity A/(B-C) TECH AVERAGE ABSORPTION DATE AVERAGE BULK SPECIFIC GRAVITY REVIEW - Golder Associates MOISTURE /DRY DENSITY CURVE D 698 METHOD C 145 ZERO AII2 OH)S CURV S 140 s=2.80 s=2.70 135 s=2.60 130 125 ~, 120 u a y, 115 F ., z 110 w A 105 cc A 100 95 90 85 80 75 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% MOISTURE CONTENT MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (pcf) Beyond the Upper Percentage Limits for D 4118 OPTIMUM MOISTURE (%) NO CORRECTION REQUIRED SAMPLE ID TC2 Canpc - SAMPLE TYPE Bulk SAMPLE DEPTH 0-17 DESCRIPTION Dark yellowish brown USCS - VRDC/Tennis Court Resident Lot/CO 033-2123.0003 LL -- PL - PI -- MC 5.2% DATE 1/0/1900 REVIEW 0 Golder Associates ii 03 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION & ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D421, D422, D4318 PROJECT NAME: VRDC/I'ennis Court Resident LodCO SAMPLE ID: TC4 Depth: 7-10 TYPE: Bag 033-2123.0003 l2' 3' 2' I' t!4' 3/E' 14 fl0 0 140 160 1100 1200 100 90 80 ' ~/, 70 P 60 a s 50 s I n 40 S 30 20 10 0 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Particle size in millimeters Particle Size Particle Sizc ., ..__ ri _~.: a.....:,.., o.« PLASTICITY CHART 60 .-s..~ i0 _ CHa H ?. % as 0 z E~., ]0 U F.. W4l OH a i 20 ••CLa L to rn. clr 0 0 70 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUU) LIMIT (LL) ATTERBERG LIMITS M, LL PL PI SpG 6.5 - - - TECH MC DATE 11/10/2003 REVIEW MB 12.0" 304.8 100.0 6.0" 154.2 100.0 Cobbles 0.00 3.0" 75.0 100.0 2.5" 63.5 100.0 2.0" 50.0 100.0 1.5" 37.5 100.0 1 0" 25.0 100.0 Coarse Gravel 5.54 0.75" 19.0 94.5 0.375" 95 70.0 #4 4.8 53.5 Fine Gravel 40.93 #10 2.00 413 Coarse Sand 12.22 #20 0.85 33.3 #40 0.43 '28.9 Medium Sand 12.43 #60 0.25 25.6 #l00 O.15 22.6 `4200 0.075 18.9 Fina Sand 10.00 Fines ~ ta.aa I DESCRIPTION: Dark yellowish brown , USCS: - Golder Associates Inc. ATTERBERG LIlVIITS ASTM D 4318 PROTECT NAME: VRDC/Tennis Court Resident Lot/CO PROJECT NUMBER: 033-2123.0003 SAMPLE ID: TC3 SAMPLE DEPTH (@): 0-5 SAMPLE TYPE: Bae SAMPLE PREPARATION Wet ~ Dry ' PLASTIC LIl~IIT DETERA4IlVATION Number of Blows weight of Wet Soil & Tare (gn) Wei of Soil & Tare g~ ~Y ~) Weight of Taze (gn) weight of Water (gm) ' Weight of Dry Soil (gm) Water Content NOTE: f-:y- •-.. - any. .--r'r vl :. : tiv:.v. - ~... :i~:r. ~.~~. 1.38 1.60 4.90 5.67 28.16 28.22 PLASTIC LIMIT (PL) 28 PLASTICITY INDEX (PI) 16 Mmus tt40 Sieve Yes LIQUID LihII'f DETERMINATION .;-- x .:::: - f. ::........... . ..:: ...... ..:. ./~t~ rr%~I~~ ~f f ::f-:~:• .- .. f.... -::r .. ., ::r?:~fiii :.. t-- i:i'{?i?-.'....~ -:'.f~+-3 iY,. v.•/~ •:Y.?•i: %iiii"~~:-.`~`:_j.'?=~ ::.iY:>'..:::. }~:+}'ri,-ri{-,'~•:~:~%,-(=`-1.-f-: - ., Fi7iJ',.,`2?~..:e::. ?-%i:.F.{,- -,}y~rr~:ice ..-.-piy{Lt,•fv~i 3.46 3.75 3.57 8.16 8.64 7.92 42.40 43.40 45.08 LIQUID LIMIT (LL) PLASTICITY CHART 60 50 40 w a >• 30 F U d ~ 20 MH o OH ~ 10 CL - ML 1V11. 7 O1, ~ , 0 0 10 20 30 40 ~0 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT (I.L) ~~ Golder Associates Inc. 1 1 1 1 1 033-21?3.0003 11 03 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION & ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D421, D422, D4318 PROJECT' NAME: VRDC/Tennis Court Resident Lot/CO SAMPLE ID: TC3 Depth: 6-10 TYPE: Ba lr 3• z• L" a74- ra aLO n t4a ebo kzoo >tzoo 100 90 80 70 P 60 a s 50 s i 40 n g 30 20 10 0 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Particle size in mitlimeters Coarse Fim Coarse Medium Fum Silr or Clay COBBLES GRAVEL. SAND FINES Particle Size Particl e Size P LA$ TICTTY C HAR T (mm) % Passing Classification Percentage 60 ~aR 12.0" 304.8 100.0 6 0" 154 2 100 0 Cobbles 00 0 . . . . jo °1 3.0" 75.0 100.0 ~ 2.5" 63.5 100.0 i CH H Z 2.0" 50.0 100.0 X ~ ~ ~ 'm 1.5" 37.5 100.0 ~ N 1.0" 25.0 100.0 Coarse Gravel 3.33 F 30 ~' 0 75" 19.0 96.7 ~ 'r -• I MI{ o OH '0 375" 0 9.5 71.5 < a . '~4 4.8 57.0 Fine Gravel 39.70 zo y cl.or L ~ q10 2.00 47.6 Coarse Sand 9.36 ~ k20 0.85 42.1 to h0 L ~ #40 0 43 38 9 Medium Sand 69 8 - ~ of .a ~ . . Ii60 0.25 35.9 0 #100 0.15 32.4 0 l 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 50 6 0 7 0 3 0 9 0 1 00 ll o #200 0.075 27.6 Fine Sand 11.?9 LIQ(JID L[M IT (LL ) Fines 27.63 ATTERBERG LIMITS M, LL PL PI SpG 9.6 - - -- DESCRIPTION: Dark yellowish brown USCS: - TECH MC DATE 1 1/1 0200 3 REVIEW NB Golder Associates Inc. 033-21?3.0003 11 03 100 90 80 ' % 70 P 60 ' a s 50 s t n ~ B 30 1 20 1C 1000 u s 9 u N ' u 9 A i i PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION & ATTERBERG LIMITS ASThi D421, D422, D4318 PROJECT NAME: VRDC/Tennis Court Resident Lot/CO SAMPLE ID: 'PC4 Depth: 0-~ TYPE: Baa Pa[tic(e Siu Particle S ize (mm) P/. Passing Classification Percentage 12.0" 304.8 100.0 6.0" 1S4:L 100.0 Cobbles 0.00 3.0" 75.0 100.0 2.5" 63.5 100.0 2.0^ 50.0 100.0 1.S" 37.5 100.0 1.0" 25.0 100.0 Coarse Gravel 0.00 0.75" 19.0 100.0 0.375" 9.5 85.2 .#y 4.g 70.3 Fine Gravel 29.68 #10 2.00 58.5 Coarse Sand 11.86 #20 0.85 48.6 #40 0.43 41.0 Medium Sand 17.49 #60 0.25 35.5 #100 0.15 30.6 #200 0.075 25.7 Fine Sand 1.27 Fines 2.70 DESCRIPTION: Dazk yellowish brown USCS: - Golder Associates Inc. O1 TECH MC DATE ll/1OR003 REVIEW biB__ 100 10 ~ Particle size in millimeters h r i crv~., ~.... ~...... _ LL PL Pl $pG M~ 6.5 - - December ?003 Golder Associates ~"-'- ~ ~3 [.`~~.'.~1?3',0.vQ`."aui:da;F:?1640; -d=5i DCC [ ~ass~z~:oa;x~~,oaoro~,~;>_, caoi ~»s t~oc December 2003 Golder Associates 033-2123 1 December 2003 Golder Associates ~~~-~ 123 1.,OS~?123i0~G0A.~461':ui3^_i?i OSGI U93o3-DOC ' GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR ' TENNIS COURT RESIDENTIAL LOTS, VAIL MOUNTAIN VAIL, COLORADO Submitted to: ' Vail Resorts Development Company 137 Benchmark Road P.O. Box 959 Avon, Colorado 81620-0959 ' - Submitted 6y: Golder Associates Inc. 44 Union Boulevard, Suite 300 ' Lakewood, Colorado 80228 _- - ~ _ ~~old _ ~-S f ' Distribution: ' 6 Copies -Vail Resorts Development Company (5 hound, 1 unbound) 1 Capy -Golder Associates Inc. December 18, 2003 033-2123 i 1 i Friday, December 09, 2005 Chris Gunion Town of Vaii Safety and Inspection Services Town of Vaii 75 S. Frontage RD. Vail, CO 81fi57 In Reference to: Dear Chris, This material is sent to you in as you are done, using Fed Ex Warmest Personal Regards, Renato S. Riccio, President Renato Ovens, Inc. Please return this Renato Ovens, Inc. Woodburning/Gas/Infrared/Brick Ovens*Rotisseries*Charbroilers File MH14621 Vol. 1 Sec. 1 Page 1 and Report D E S C R I P T I O N PRODUCT COVERED: Issued: 5-9-90 Revised: 12-13-96 Wood/gas-fired pizza ovens, Models AR-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, PR-310, -410, -510, ARS-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, and PRS-310, -410 and -510. GENER.~L These are wood/gas-burning ovens intended for restaurant or other commercial use. Ar. optional gas-fired burner is located inside the cooking chamber, near the side. Wood is also burned inside this chamber, near the side, opposite the burner. The smoke is~vented through a flue collar atop the unit near the front. The flue cellar is intended for connection to a chimney suitable for venting building heating appliances. The temperature is controlled by a thermostat that controls the gas burner. The units may be employed witr. a single or double burner assembly. *The units may employ 1, 2, or 3 electrical heating elements beneath the stove floor. See Figs. 11 and 12 for details. RATINGS: The ovens are rated as follows: Gas Firincr Rates (Btu%h) Model Natural ~+) Propane (++~~ Wood (+++; 300, 311 Series 37,000 D1/A 2 pieces 400, 411 Series 47,000 N/A 2 pieces 500, 511 Series 57,000 i~I/A 2 pieces 600, 7G0 Series 65,000 53,000 3 pieces Electrical Rating - All units are rar_ed 120 B, ' 5 A, 60 Hz 1 phase. , (+) - Inlet gas pressure - 7.0 in. ;,1C. !t+) - Inlet gas pressure - 11.0 i::. WC. +tT) - Size of each piFce is ~appro,:imat~ly 16 in. long, 4 in. in diameter. TE';~lR~' lew File MH14521 Vol. 1 Sec. 1 Page 2 and Report Issued: 5-9-90 Revised: 12-13-95 *When provided with the alternate electric heating elements s'rown in Figs. 11 and 12, additional electrical ratings are: No. of Elements Provided Volts An1DS Phase 1 240 9.6 1 2 240 9.2 1 3 240 13.8 1 INSTALLATION: These units are intended for installation on noncombustible flooring with minimum clearances to combustibles as follows: Sides, top, and back -0, front -48 in., chimney connector -18 in., smoke extractor chimney connector -18 inches. ~1.~MEPLATE ILL. 1 is a copy of the format giving nameplate, rating, and installation clearance information. The marking is done on aluminum plate at least 0.015 in. thick, secured by rivets to a piece of the oven not likely to be. removed and visible after installation. INSTALLATION AND OPERATING INSTRUCTIONS: ILL. 2 is a copy of the installation instructions that accompany each unit. ILL. 2A is a copy of the operating instructions that accompany each u:Zit. i~!ODEL D I FF ERENCES All models are similar except for firing rate and overall dimensions. Model Series AR and PR are not provided with an outer enclosure. Model Series ARS and PRS are provided with a stainless steel or stucco enclosure. PACKING FOR SHIPMENT: Each shipment shall be prepared in a manner to avoid damage during transit and shall consist of a complete assembly unless otherwise specified. The control boat and gas component bo:< may be installed on the unit in the field. TE;!WR.C: few NKpLS a ~ . q P.OBox725 Awn, Cokarado 81620 Phone (970)569-3102 Fay (970)569-3103 Nov 30, 2005 To: Chris Gunion I.C.C. Plans Examiner Town of Vail Building Safety and Inspection Services (970) 479-2369 Dear Chris: This letter is to follow up on the building permit for Lot 4 Forest Place. This is permit number B05-0086. The following list responds to each item listed in your plan review comments dated 11/16/2005. Building Department comments: 1. Three sets of revised drawings are submitted with this letter. Revisions to the original drawing set are clouded and dated on this new issue set. 2. The pizza oven specified is the Renato gas fired oven. It is a zero clearance with manufacturer insulation. The flue chase shall be lined with type x sheet rock and terminated at a new chimney on the roof. Structural drawings are revised for the new chimney and the roof plan (A4) and elevations (A5 A6) are revised and Gouded. A spec sheet is submitted with this letter. 3. Mechanical venting note is added to sheet A3 and is also called out on sheet A2. 4. Deck detail 13A/A11 is revised with 2" rigid insulation under 4" of stone deck finish assembly. 5. Three sets of new stamped structural drawings are submitted to clarify building details. Thank you for your attention in expediting the building permit for Lot 4 Forest Place. Please let me know if additional information is needed. Thank you, ,~,. Larry A. Deckard A.I.A. Architect "WpOp-GAS FIREQ" BRICK EVEN fIM WIDE: ___._....34" I~EIGHT:..._... 72" .w__ ~ ^~..~" eoolcl~l~ M~-: 25" Weight: 2,900 lbs. Air OVEN FEAUTURES: c~p+~~> Grotrtless Seams -Insulation Easy Replaceable Fbar Stones FDA-MSF Bake Safe Material Choice of Granite Manties(d8"x12"x1"~ 16ga. Black Steel Finish Large Pizza Paddle (Wood Handle) Small Stiff Metal Pizza ~ Wood Paddle Oren Deck Brush Built in "Brick Arch Eye Brow Hoad" S!S Fire Grate Wood Stand Fire up 8~ Testing an Locatiart" Pizza Baking Demo" Easy Installation Instructions Cld World Recipes & Formulations USA Patents: 5.184.560 X5.974.952 (Also Protected in Canada 8. Mexico "UL"Listed-Classfied... Mechanical 8- Sanitation as per: "NSF Standard all4" ~ I~t~TS: Elestrical - +21Y-iY-+-2~AmP. 3 Wires - wed Gramd ~~ "Nat. Gam' ~ 3 5"-5"VMC - MaK Btu ~ 371I, "LP. Gas" ~ +~.5" WIC - Mwt Btu ~ 2~4 Gas Soppy Bfadc pine ~ +x'- .75"-.~" a~TM q.A tFIED Eat ~ see c.F~. Mas tGrsa~I mot) Zero clearance to "Non com buat~le Material" wrdn ~ Rion, or 6'vKRteorrt trBUleNon Orawi~g is the property of ReraRo. Inc. K rrw!- nd tee copied a reproduced in whole a in part rritl~otR P A ~ nsglrt ctwege wiBeo~R notice. ALLItiGHTS MIS: ~VED Renatalnc_ Bridcovens are: Z~stea--= ~ermea v..+^^v ... a W` •••"••°..~ ..._...~ ~..._~------ "UL"_'11L-SANITATION" IAs ver NSF Standard i14L "ULC_ "MEA"_"FDA" ONLY USA CONPANYWITH PATENTS: 5,413,033 -5,606,092 (Neon Canada A Mesic°) RENATO OVENS, INC. wbod-Gas~rered fYed:'Sr"*°*e'es-r~-~bfO~~ 3612 Diridertd • Cyar]aai,Tcoa 75042 (972j272-pM •0)976-+1731 Fu: (!72)272-si4i • E Mail Addreaa; ra~os~er~aRos~m Mr~r6er: NaAiawl Aroaociatton aif Food Eq~ipnaiR Mararfsdrrers, A ~~ f Chris Gunion - Re: Renat© Ovens, Inc. ° page From: rsp1@airmail.net To: <renatos@renatos.com> Date: 12/15/2005 8:23:23 AM Subject: Re: Renato Ovens, Inc. rsp1 wrote: > Chris Gunion wrote: >I did not receive any attachment with you email. Was there supposed to >be some information attached? * NO.* > - - >If you have updated UL listing information, please forward information to >our office and Larry Deckard for coordination with his plans. >*_We do not have an updated "UL" Listing... and Even though the Ovens do comply with all residential codes AS ALSO CONFIRMED RECENTLY BY THE STATE OF Massachusetts,,, It would cost several Thousands of $$$ to get it in writing from "UL" and the Business of SELLING ONE SINGLE Oven does not warrant it.... > Larry is proposing to use the ARS/300 model in a residential kitchen application > on a wood frame floor, with a wood frame wall surround. > '"THAT IS A NO! NO! ... AND MR. DEKART HAS BEEN MADE AWARE OF THAT... > HE HAS BEEN TOLD BY ME PERSONALLY HE HAS TO "FIRE-PROOF" THE AREA OF > THE OVEN INSTALLATION TO: "NON COMBUSTIBLE" AS PER YOUR LOCAL > CODES... IN ABSENCE OF LOCAL CODES TO THE FOLLOWING:* > *1) **NATIONAL FUEL GAS CODE ANSI 223.1** > 2) **NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE ANSI/NFPA NO. 70* *NATIONAL FIRE > PROTECTION STANDARD FOR CHIMNEYS, FIREPLACE VENTS, NFPA N0.211 OR > NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION STANDARD FOR VAPOR REMOVAL FROM > COOKING EQUIPMENT NFPA NO. 96.*** > ** >Thanks, >Chris Gunion >I.C.C. Plans Examiner >Town of Vail Building Safety and Inspection Services >970.479.2369 >cgunion@vailgov.com Chris Gunton, Re: Renato Ovens, Inc. _ ~ ~ ~ Page 2 > Chris Gunton, I.C.C. Plans Examiner > Town of Vail Colorado Safety And Inspection Services > Dear Mr. Gunton, > Here is some recent documentation & "* APPROVAL FOR BOTH RESIDENTIAL > AND COMMERCIAL APPLICATIONS" *for the appliances manufactured by > Renato Ovens, Inc. > _*Thank you for your cordial attention to these documents.....*_ > Also I would like to bring to your attention that our company is been > selling Brick ovens in Colorado for the past 20 years and in the Vail > Area since: 5/27/1999.. > *Ship to Address: 1350 Green Hill*, *Vail Co. 81658, and... > **Ship to Address: 3712 Daybreak Ridge, Bachelor Gulch Subdivision, > Avon Co. 81620 ...Delivered 2/1/2002. > ** > ... Also in the town of Snowmass Village, Ship to Address: 820 > Pincrest Ln. Snowmass Village , Co. 81615 ... Since 2003 and many more... > ... In Parker, Co. , ...Hygiene, Co., ...Aspen Co., 308 S. Galena St. > 81611, ... Woody Creek, Co., ... Dolores, Co., ... and many more in > the State of Colorado.... > *I will follow up with a phone call shortly. > Warmest personal regards, > Renato S. Riccio, President* > ** > *5 CC: <cgunion@vailgov.com> - - - ~ __ ,. Chris Gunion - Re: Renato Ovens, Inc. Pa e 1 From: rsp1@airmail.net To: <renatos@renatos.com> Date: 12/15/2005 8:23:23 AM Subject: Re: Renato Ovens, Inc. rsp1 wrote: > Chris Gunion wrote: >I did not receive any attachment with you email. Was there supposed to >be some information attached? _* NO.*_ >If you have updated UL listing information, please forward information to >our office and Larry Deckard for coordination with his plans. >* We do not have an updated "UL" Listing... and Even though the Ovens do comply with all residential codes AS ALSO CONFIRMED RECENTLY BY THE STATE OF Massachusetts,,, It would cost several Thousands of $$$ to get it in writing from "UL" and the Business of SELLING ONE SINGLE Oven does not warrant it.... * > - > Larry is proposing to use the ARS/300 model in a residential kitchen application > on a wood frame floor, with a wood frame wall surround. > *THAT IS A NO! NO! ... AND MR. DEKART HAS BEEN MADE AWARE OF THAT... > HE HAS BEEN TOLD BY ME PERSONALLY HE HAS TO "FIRE-PROOF" THE AREA OF > THE OVEN INSTALLATION TO: "NON COMBUSTIBLE" AS PER YOUR LOCAL > CODES... IN ABSENCE OF LOCAL CODES TO THE FOLLOWING:* > *1) **NATIONAL FUEL GAS CODE ANSI 223.1** > 2) **NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE ANSI/NFPA N0.70* *NATIONAL FIRE > PROTECTION STANDARD FOR CHIMNEYS, FIREPLACE VENTS, NFPA NO. 211 OR *~ATrnNAI_ FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION STANDARD FOR VAPOR REMOVAL FpnM > CUt~KINv CtlUtljtv~tl~"I itiFr=H tom. ~~."." > ** ,, '~C:~s:s C~unio~. ?I.~,~. PI$rts =x2r;11"1ef >~' of Val Building S e't)+ ar,;,, '-~. _ _ _;:,,~s '~uguramgov.com .~ . c~pN