The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutB16-0209 Special Inspections Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road TOWN O F 111111 ■ Vail, CO 81657 Tel: 970.479.2139 www.vailgov.com TRANSMITTAL FORM Use this form when submitting additional information, changes&inspection reports for building permits. This form is also used for requesting a revision to building permits. A two hour minimum building review fee of$110 will be charged upon reissuance of the permit. Submit this form only to: cdev_submittal@vailgov.com. Deliver paper plans to Community Develop- ment or upload your revised/corrected plans to the appropriate project in ProjectDox, when requested. Application/Permit#(s) information applies to: B16-0209 ( ) Revisions (5 Response to Correction Letter attached copy of correction letter ( ) Deferred Submittal .)Other Submit Additional Information Project Street Address: 2636 Davos Trail Description of Transmittal/List of Changes, Items Attached, Indicate changed plan pages: (Number) (Street) (Suite#) Building/Complex Name: Will upload ResCheck document and Special Inspections. Applicant Information (architect, contractor, owner/owner's rep) Contact Name: Paula Fischer Address: 2695 Davos Trail City VailState: CO Zip: 81657 (use additional sheet if necessary) Contact Name: Paula Fischer 970479-7350 Building Permits: - Contact Phone: Revised ADDITIONAL Valuations(Labor&Materials) Contact E-Mail: paula@divisionsixconst.com divisionsixconst.com (DO NOT include original valuation) Building: $ I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application,filled out in full the information required,completed an accurate plot plan, Plumbing: $ 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 Electrical: $ ordinances and state laws, and to build this structure according to the town's zoning and subdivision codes, design review ap- Mechanical: $ proved, International Building and Residential Codes and other ordinances of the Town applicable thereto. Total: $ X Pa. rscltie� Owner/Owner's Representative Signature(Required) Date Received: 21-Apr-2017 414* TOWN OF VAI. FINAL REPORT OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS Project: Qui/ 7 I L itscO (E Permit Number: 46/& ' 02 o9 Project Location: 2G-36 ,0441/©S TRAY/- Owner fa fi4v*/ R Address pC?,/` -2-Psa City: 1471 Zip: /6--VS Design Professional In Charge: 4404-6ac14 R o I/Pt . /weeit ;*,O-srix 'aled16 Cv6i)JUL, V /t%c-- Address: 02-'.3 U ' °KCL AV . , Sc" Yf a -co City: 6.1. J(,u 9O c/04,/1.04,7 State: CO Zip: e/619/ Phone: ,P70,99f--0320 Fax: E-mail: 4Ai f ,,> �AA10 0Ai -S7:4‘)“:2414 - To the best of my information, knowledge, and belief, the special inspections and/or testing required for this project, have been completed in accordance with the contract documents. Interim reports submitted prior to this Final Report of Special Inspections form a basis for, and are to be considered an integral part of this final report. Any discrepancies that were noted in all interim reports have been corrected. Prepared by: 4.,vo 0A/4,Noz czicywd 0 Q t Name /w44Type Prin 35436 Signature f Date Preparer's Seal and Signature Required rREScheck Software Version 4.6.2 ' nh Compliance Certificate Project Davos Trail Residence Energy Code: 2015 IECC Location: Vail, Colorado Construction Type: Single-family Project Type: Alteration Climate Zone: 6 (9248 HDD) Permit Date: Permit Number: B16-0209 Construction Site: Owner/Agent: Designer/Contractor: 2636 Davos Trail Randy Fischer Randy Fischer Vail, CO 81657 2695 Davos Trail Division Six Construction Vail, CO 81657 2695 Davos Trail 970-306-3030 Vail, CO 81657 randy@divisionsixconst.com 970-306-3030 randy@divisionsixconst.com Compliance: Passes using prescriptive requirements for alteration projects Envelope Assemblies Gross Area Cavity Cont. Assembly or R-Value R-Value U-Factor UA Perimeter Flat Roof- 2x12: Flat Ceiling or Scissor Truss 255 57.0 0.0 0.024 6 Sloped Roof Entry- 2x10: Cathedral Ceiling 125 49.0 0.0 0.022 3 Sloped Roof- 14"TJI: Cathedral Ceiling 1,043 57.0 0.0 0.019 20 Flat Roof- 2x12: Flat Ceiling or Scissor Truss 210 57.0 0.0 0.024 5 Sloped Roof- Kitchen 2x12: Cathedral Ceiling 218 60.0 0.0 0.018 4 South Elevation: Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 1,071 23.0 7.0 0.038 34 South Elevation -Windows- U.29: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 112 0.290 32 South Elevation Windows- U.30: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 12 0.300 4 South Elevation Windows- U.33: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 16 0.330 5 South Elevation Windows- U.35: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 21 0.350 7 South Elevation - Doors (Glass): Glass 21 0.290 6 East Elevation: Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 1,107 24.0 7.0 0.037 29 East Elevation-Windows- U.25: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 9 0.250 2 East Elevation-Windows- U.26: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 66 0.260 17 East Elevation-Windows- U.27: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 24 0.270 6 East Elevation-Windows- U.28: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 9 0.280 3 East Elevation-Windows- U.29: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 68 0.290 20 Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 1 of11 Gross Area Cavity Cont. Assembly or R-Value R-Value U-Factor UA Perimeter East Elevation-Windows- U.30: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 56 0.300 17 East Elevation-Windows- U.31: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 14 0.310 4 East Elevation-Windows- U.33: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 34 0.330 11 East Elevation-Windows- U.35: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 27 0.350 9 East Elevation- Door(Glass): Glass 20 0.290 6 North East Elevation: Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 1,169 24.0 7.0 0.037 37 North East Elevation -Windows- U.25: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 19 0.250 5 North East Elevation -Windows- U.26: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 12 0.260 3 North East Elevation -Windows- U.28: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 18 0.280 5 North East Elevation -Windows- U.33: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 20 0.330 7 North East Elevation - Doors: Glass 90 0.290 26 West Elevation: Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 546 24.0 7.0 0.037 15 West Elevation-Windows- U.27: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 5 0.270 1 West Elevation-Windows- U.29: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 60 0.290 17 West Elevation-Windows- U.33: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 40 0.330 13 West Elevation- Doors- U.29- Entry: Glass 13 0.290 4 West Elevation- Doors- U.33 - Elevator: Glass 15 0.330 5 South West Elevation (Garage/Front): Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 430 24.0 7.0 0.037 8 South West Elevation -Windows- U.31: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 9 0.310 3 South West Elevation -Windows- U.33: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 8 0.330 3 South West Elevation - Doors- U.33: Glass 14 0.330 5 South West Elevation -Garage Doors: Solid 150 0.080 12 South West Elevation - Doors- U.29: Glass 44 0.290 13 North West Elevation (Garage/Side): Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 330 24.0 7.0 0.037 11 North West Elevation -Windows- U: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 12 0.330 4 North West Elevation - Doors: Glass 12 0.290 3 South East Elevation (Garage/Side): Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 206 24.0 7.0 0.037 8 :Lower Level Existing SOG - Exposed Edge: Slab-On-Grade:Unheated 78 10.0 0.684 53 Insulation depth: 4.0' Main Level SOG - Exposed Edge: Slab-On-Grade:Heated 16 15.0 0.655 10 Insulation depth: 4.0' Main Level -Overhangs: All-Wood Joist/Truss:Over Outside Air 203 40.0 7.0 0.021 4 Basement Wall (50% below Grade): Solid Concrete or Masonry 915 13.0 10.0 0.036 33 Wall height: 7.5' Depth below grade: 7.0' Insulation depth: 7.5' Mechanical Equipment Description Fuel type Efficiency Gas-Fired Steam Gas 95 AFUE Air Source Electric 7.7 HSPF, 13 SEER Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 2 of11 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 2015 IECC requirements in REScheck Version 4.6.2 and to comply with the mandatory requirements listed in the REScheck Inspection Checklist. Name-Title Signature Date Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 3 of11 RInspectionEScheck Software VersionChecklist 4.6.2 Energy Code: 2015 IECC Requirements: 100.0% were addressed directly in the REScheck software Text in the "Comments/Assumptions" column is provided by the user in the REScheck Requirements screen. For each requirement, the user certifies that a code requirement will be met and how that is documented, or that an exception is being claimed. Where compliance is itemized in a separate table, a reference to that table is provided. Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Pre-Inspection/Plan Review Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 103.1, Construction drawings and Complies Requirement will be met. 103.2 documentation demonstrate ❑Does Not [PR1]1 energy code compliance for the V, building envelope.Thermal ❑Not Observable envelope represented on ❑Not Applicable construction documents. 103.1, Construction drawings and complies Requirement will be met. 103.2, documentation demonstrate ❑Does Not 403.7 energy code compliance for [PR3]1 lighting and mechanical systems. ['Not Observable Systems serving multiple ENot Applicable dwelling units must demonstrate compliance with the IECC Commercial Provisions. 302.1, Heating and cooling equipment is Heating: Heating: ❑Complies Requirement will be met. 403.7 sized per ACCA Manual S based Btu/hr Btu/hr EDoes Not [PR2]2 on loads calculated per ACOA Cooling: Cooling: Manual J or other methods ['Not Observable approved by the code official. Btu/hr Btu/hr ❑Not Applicable Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 4 of11 Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Foundation Inspection Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 402.1.2 Slab edge insulation R-value. R- R- ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies [Foil' ❑ Unheated ❑ Unheated ❑Does Not table for values. 0 ❑ Heated ❑ Heated [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.1.2 Slab edge insulation ft ft EComplies I See the Envelope Assemblies [F03]' depth/length. ❑Does Not table for values. a ['Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.1.1 Conditioned basement wall R- R- ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies [F04]' insulation R-value.Where interior R- R- ❑Does Not table for values. 40 insulation is used, verification ['Not Observable may need to occur during Insulation Inspection. Not ❑Not Applicable required in warm-humid locations in Climate Zone 3. 303.2 Conditioned basement wall ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F05]' insulation installed per ❑Does Not manufacturer's instructions. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.2.9 Conditioned basement wall ft ft ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 1[F06]' insulation depth of burial or El Does Not table for values. distance from top of wall. ['Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 303.2.1 A protective covering is installed ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F011]2 to protect exposed exterior ❑Does Not insulation and extends a minimum of 6 in. below grade. ['Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.9 Snow-and ice-melting system ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FO controls installed. ❑Does Not ['Not Observable ❑Not Applicable Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 5 ofil Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Framing/Rough-In Inspection Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 402.1.1, :Door U-factor. U- U- ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.3.4 ❑Does Not table for values. [FR1]1 , ❑Not Observable 1 ❑Not Applicable 402.1.1, 1 Glazing U-factor(area-weighted U- U- ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.3.1, average). I ❑Does Not table for values. 402.3.3, 402.3.6, [Not Observable 402.5 : ❑Not Applicable [FR2]1 303.1.3 1U-factors of fenestration products ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR4]1 are determined in accordance ❑Does Not fii, with the NFRC test procedure or taken from the default table. ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.4.1.1 ;Air barrier and thermal barrier ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR23]1 installed per manufacturer's ❑Does Not fii, ,instructions. ❑Not Observable ; ❑Not Applicable 402.4.3 ;Fenestration that is not site built ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR20]1 is listed and labeled as meeting ❑Does Not AAMA/WDMA/CSA 101/1.5.2/A440 or has infiltration rates per NFRC ❑Not Observable 400 that do not exceed code ❑Not Applicable limits. _ 402.4.5 :IC-rated recessed lighting fixtures ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR16]2 sealed at housing/interior finish ❑Does Not ;and labeled to indicate <_2.0 cfm ;leakage at 75 Pa. ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.2.1 Supply and return ducts in attics ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR12]1 insulated >= R-8 where duct is ❑Does Not Ca >= 3 inches in diameter and >_ R-6 where < 3 inches. Supply and [Not Observable return ducts in other portions of ❑Not Applicable the building insulated >= R-6 for diameter>= 3 inches and R-4.2 for< 3 inches in diameter. 403.3.3.5 Building cavities are not used as ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR15]3 ducts or plenums. ❑Does Not ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.4 HVAC piping conveying fluids R- R- ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR17] above 105 °F or chilled fluids ❑Does Not below 55 °F are insulated to >_R- 3 ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.4.1 :Protection insulation on HVAC I❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR24]1 piping. ❑Does Not fi ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.5.3 Hot water pipes are insulated to R- R- ElComplies Requirement will be met. [FR18]2 >_R-3. ❑Does Not ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.6Automatic or gravity dampers are ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR19] installed on all outdoor air ❑Does Not intakes and exhausts. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 6 ofll Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 7 ofll Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Insulation Inspection Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 303.1 ;All installed insulation is labeled '❑Complies Requirement will be met. [IN13]2 :or the installed R-values ❑Does Not ✓ :provided. IP [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.1.1, Floor insulation R-value. R- R- ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.2.6 ❑ Wood ❑ Wood ❑Does Not table for values. [IN1]1 ❑ Steel ❑ Steel [Not Observable O I ENot Applicable 303.2, Floor insulation installed per ❑Complies Requirement will be met. 402.2.7 manufacturer's instructions and ❑Does Not [IN2]1 in substantial contact with the underside of the subfloor, or floor ['Not Observable framing cavity insulation is in ❑Not Applicable contact with the top side of sheathing, or continuous insulation is installed on the underside of floor framing and extends from the bottom to the top of all perimeter floor framing members. 402.1.1, Wall insulation R-value. If this is a R- R- EComplies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.2.5, mass wall with at least 1/2 of the ❑ Wood ❑ Wood ❑Does Not table for values. 402.2.6 wall insulation on the wall ❑ Mass ❑ Mass ['Not Observable [IN3]1 exterior,the exterior insulation requirement applies(FR10). 111 Steel 111 Steel ❑Not Applicable 303.2 Wall insulation is installed per 1 ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [IN4]1 manufacturer's instructions. ❑Does Not ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 8 ofll Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Final Inspection Provisions Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 402.1.1, Ceiling insulation R-value. R- R- ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.2.1, ❑ Wood ❑ Wood EDoes Not table for values. 402.2.2, ❑ Steel ❑ Steel [Not Observable 402.2.6 [FI1]1 ENot Applicable 303.1.1.1, Ceiling insulation installed per ❑Complies Requirement will be met. 303.2 manufacturer's instructions. ❑Does Not [F12]1 Blown insulation marked every 300 ft2. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.2.3 :Vented attics with air permeable EComplies Requirement will be met. [F122]2 insulation include baffle adjacent ElDoes Not to soffit and eave vents that ;extends over insulation. [Not Observable ' ❑Not Applicable 402.2.4 Attic access hatch and door R- R- ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F13]1 insulation >_R-value of the ❑Does Not adjacent assembly. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.4.1.2 Blower door test @ 50 Pa. <=5 ACH 50 = ACH 50 = ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F117]1 ach in Climate Zones 1-2, and ❑Does Not <=3 ach in Climate Zones 3-8. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.2.3 Duct tightness test result of<=4 cfm/100 cfm/100 EComplies Exception: Requirement is [F14]1 cfm/100 ft2 across the system or ft2 ft2 ElDoes Not not applicable. <=3 cfm/100 ft2 without air handler @ 25 Pa. For rough-in ['Not Observable tests,verification may need to ENot Applicable occur during Framing Inspection. 403.3.2 Ducts are pressure tested to cfm/100 cfm/100 EComplies Exception: Requirement is [F127]1 determine air leakage with ft2 ft2 ❑Does Not not applicable. either: Rough-in test:Total leakage measured with a ['Not Observable pressure differential of 0.1 inch ENot Applicable w.g. across the system including the manufacturer's air handler enclosure if installed at time of test. Postconstruction test:Total leakage measured with a pressure differential of 0.1 inch w.g. across the entire system including the manufacturer's air handler enclosure. 403.3.2.1 Air handler leakage designated ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F124]1 by manufacturer at<=2%of ❑Does Not design air flow. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.1.1 :Programmable thermostats EComplies Requirement will be met. [F19]2 installed for control of primary ❑Does Not ;heating and cooling systems and :initially set by manufacturer to ['Not Observable :code specifications. 1 , ,ENot Applicable 403.1.2 'Heat pump thermostat installed ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F110]2 ion heat pumps. ElDoes Not ENot Observable ElNot Applicable 403.5.1 Circulating service hot water qElComPlies Requirement will be met. [F111]2 systems have automatic or ElDoes Not accessible manual controls. ['Not Observable ENot Applicable 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 9 ofll Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Final Inspection Provisions Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 403.6.1 ;All mechanical ventilation system '❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F125]2 fans not part of tested and listed ❑Does Not ail HVAC equipment meet efficacy and air flow limits. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.2 Hot water boilers supplying heat ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F126]2 through one-or two-pipe heating ❑Does Not 441 systems have outdoor setback control to lower boiler water [Not Observable temperature based on outdoor ❑Not Applicable temperature. 403.5.1.1 :Heated water circulation systems ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F128]2 have a circulation pump.The ❑Does Not system return pipe is a dedicated return pipe or a cold water supply [Not Observable pipe. Gravity and thermos- ❑Not Applicable syphon circulation systems are not present. Controls for circulating hot water system pumps start the pump with signal for hot water demand within the iii'occupancy. Controls automatically turn off the pump when water is in circulation loop is at set-point temperature and no demand for hot water exists. 403.5.1.2 ;Electric heat trace systems ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F129]2 comply with IEEE 515.1 or UL EDoes Not ill515. Controls automatically adjust the energy input to the ['Not Observable heat tracing to maintain the ❑Not Applicable desired water temperature in the , piping. 403.5.2 Water distribution systems that ;❑Complies Exception: Requirement is [F130]2 have recirculation pumps that ElDoes Not not applicable. pump water from a heated water supply pipe back to the heated ['Not Observable water source through a cold ❑Not Applicable water supply pipe have a demand recirculation water system. Pumps have controls that manage operation of the pump and limit the temperature of the water entering the cold water piping to 104°F. 403 .5.4 Drain water heat recovery units 1 ❑Complies Exception: Requirement is [F13tested tested in accordance with CSA ❑Does Not not applicable. B55.1. Potable water-side pressure loss of drain water heat ❑Not Observable recovery units < 3 psi for ;❑Not Applicable individual units connected to one or two showers. Potable water- side pressure loss of drain water heat recovery units < 2 psi for :individual units connected to :three or more showers. i 404.1 '75%of lamps in permanent ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F16]' fixtures or 75%of permanent ❑Does Not fixtures have high efficacy lamps. Does not apply to low-voltage [Not Observable lighting. ❑Not Applicable 404.1.1 Fuel gas lighting systems have ❑Complies Exception: Requirement is [F123]3 no continuous pilot light. ❑Does Not not applicable. [Not Observable , ❑Not Applicable 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 10 ofll Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Final Inspection Provisions Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 401.3 ;Compliance certificate posted. '❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F17F ❑Does Not [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 303.3 'Manufacturer manuals for ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F118P mechanical and water heating ❑Does Not systems have been provided. • [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 11 of11 ci. 2015 IECC Energy Efficiency Certificate Insulation Rating R-Value Above-Grade Wall 31.00 Below-Grade Wall 23.00 Floor 47.00 Ceiling / Roof 57.00 Ductwork (unconditioned spaces): Glass&Door Rating U-Factor SHGC Window 0.29 Door 0.08 Heating&Cooling Equipment Efficiency Gas-Fired Steam 95 AFUE Air Source 7.7 HSPF, Water Heater: Name: Date: Comments Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Drill and Epoxy Cover Report Date: September 7,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik As scheduled, a representative visited the project site to perform special inspections for drill and epoxy at locations requested. Comments or Photos: ? - -' •i�'• , -• i r.555 • • .e 1.•- y {, .:• i re' fid 1 I. i-'e jam'' '- -`� .. 1rz''' - . "ti•.•- 4 _j' 'i41' :f.r.,:{+; r 9, ill N. R ` ' 4.-. r Yes No Discrepancies Reported this Date? l- No. of Pages Attached: 1 Field Representative: Dennis Humphrey/Shane Sorensen www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Report Date: September 7,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Subcontractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Documents Used: Plans Drill and Epoxy Drilling Location: 1.) Dowels on S and E facing existing foundation for the SE lower level addition 2.) 3.) 4.) Orientation(vertical/horizontal): 1.) Horizontal 3.) 2.) 4.) Hole Diameter(inches): 1.) 3/4 Length(inches): 1.) 6 2.) 2.) 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) Hole Spacing(inches): 1.) 16 3.) 2.) 4.) Drilling Equipment: Hammer Drill Method to Clean Hole: Brush and compressed air Epoxy Epoxy Type: Quikcrete Anchor Epoxy Epoxy Expiration: 4/30/2017 Placement Method: Epoxy gun Reinforcement Type(rebar/bolt/anchor): 1.) Rebar Size: 1.) #5 Length(inches) 1.) 3/4 2.) 2.) 2.) 3.) 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) 4.) Placement Method: Hand/rotate Additional Reinforcing Steel: N/A Field Representative: Dennis Humphrey/Shane Sorensen Comments: www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Drill and Epoxy Cover Report Date: September 14,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik As scheduled, a representative visited the project site to perform special inspections for drill and epoxy at locations requested. Comments or Photos: ----.0 1,,.,.. „, ' 'c'filltr.4,.. vp.- fr.',:.'4- -n.,a,.L ' .. ' .'— it -_ -- _' : h,:'if ` lib:,'•.` . ti., 7 - _ %, ..,;+ , ,% fi:'. -%-/ ,., , ., - .4, • .),'"- ".- ;.:-.-- , -P •..,.i4,_'71-:la 1-, • . tY , ,,,.. - - '-- , -V . . ,.: '..4 '..'n...s4":'% { •e+l -� ;= f - ._` � - .� - . . `_ #, • 't ;' r t 11 1or :. ,1k:" Yes No Discrepancies Reported this Date? • No. of Pages Attached: 1 Field Representative: Jeremy Gilliam / Shane Sorensen www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Report Date: September 14,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Subcontractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Documents Used: Plans Drill and Epoxy Drilling Location: 1.) Bedroom 3/garage lower level 2.) SE lower level addition 3.) Wall at parking deck 4.) Orientation(vertical/horizontal): 1.) Horizontal 3.) Horizontal 2.) Horizontal 4.) Hole Diameter(inches): 1.) 3/4 Length(inches): 1.) 5 2.) 3/4 2.) 5 3.) 3/4 3.) 5 4.) 4.) Hole Spacing(inches): 1.) 16 3.) 16 2.) 16 4.) Drilling Equipment: Hammer Drill Method to Clean Hole: Brush and compressed air Epoxy Epoxy Type: Sitka AnchorFix-2 Por select Epoxy Expiration: 7/6/2017 Placement Method: Epoxy gun Reinforcement Type(rebar/bolt/anchor): 1.) Rebar Size: 1.) #5 Length(inches) 1.) 30 2.) Rebar 2.) #5 2.) 30 3.) Rebar 3.) #5 3.) 30 4.) 4.) 4.) Placement Method: Hand/rotate Additional Reinforcing Steel: N/A Field Representative: Jeremy Gilliam/Shane Sorensen Comments: www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Drill and Epoxy Cover Report Date: September 21,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik As scheduled, a representative visited the project site to perform special inspections for drill and epoxy at locations requested. Comments or Photos: Ar No. '1 i. w ,. q a A 4- / : %. ,. ,-,,, . • . \. , . . I\ i . 1 r ,,i *ft •• • d z, Yes No Discrepancies Reported this Date? • No. of Pages Attached: 2 Field Representative: Jeremy Gilliam/ Shane Sorensen www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Report Date: September 21,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Subcontractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Division Six Constuction Documents Used: Plans Drill and Epoxy Drilling Location: 1.) Existing grage footing west side lower 2.) Existing grage footing west side upper 3.) Existing grage footing west side lower 4.) Existing grage footing west side upper Orientation(vertical/horizontal): 1.) Vertical 3.) Vertical 2.) Horizontal 4.) Horizontal Hole Diameter(inches): 1.) 3/4 Length(inches): 1.) 6 2.) 3/4 2.) 6 3.) 3/4 3.) 6 4.) 3/4 4.) 6 Hole Spacing(inches): 1.) 9 3.) 9 2.) 9 4.) 9 Drilling Equipment: Hammer Drill Method to Clean Hole: Brush and compressed air Epoxy Epoxy Type: Sitka AnchorFix-2 Por select Epoxy Expiration: 7/6/2017 Placement Method: Epoxy gun Reinforcement Type(rebar/bolt/anchor): 1.) Rebar Size: 1.) #5 Length(inches) 1.) 72 2.) Rebar 2.) #5 2.) 19x19 90*bend 3.) Rebar 3.) #5 3.) 72 4.) Rebar 4.) #5 4.) 19x19 90*bend Placement Method: Hand set Additional Reinforcing Steel: N/A Field Representative: Jeremy Gilliam/Shane Sorensen Comments: www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Report Date: September 21,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Subcontractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Documents Used: Plans Drill and Epoxy Drilling Location: 1.) New grage footing lower 2.) New grage footing upper 3.) 4.) Orientation(vertical/horizontal): 1.) Vertical 3.) 2.) Horizontal 4.) Hole Diameter(inches): 1.) 3/4 Length(inches): 1.) 6 2.) 3/4 2.) 6 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) Hole Spacing(inches): 1.) 9 3.) 2.) 9 4.) Drilling Equipment: Hammer Drill Method to Clean Hole: Brush and compressed air Epoxy Epoxy Type: Sitka AnchorFix-2 Por select Epoxy Expiration: 7/6/2017 Placement Method: Epoxy gun Reinforcement Type(rebar/bolt/anchor): 1.) Rebar Size: 1.) #5 Length(inches) 1.) 72 2.) Rebar 2.) #5 2.) 19x19 90*bend 3.) 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) 4.) Placement Method: Hand set Additional Reinforcing Steel: N/A Field Representative: Jeremy Gilliam/Shane Sorensen Comments: www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Drill and Epoxy Cover Report Date: March 3,2017 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik As scheduled, a representative visited the project site to perform special inspections for drill and epoxy at locations requested. Comments or Photos: 0 ..iJ :r s r a. �� r g,-..J. i ' , t \. 4,4 X a 1. ` 1 .2. 'r. .O . i , 1 �a �ti ' II ,. ? L ,o- '3 1-7,-..-4,,,,:w, 's4 / y R l�f4%," . All '� L er4. a t .i, Ckt J. ! Tt . Yes No Discrepancies Reported this Date? r (iii No. of Pages Attached: 1 Field Representative: Chris Leeper/Shane Sorensen www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik SROUND Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Report Date: March 3,2017 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Constuction Rep.Notified: Ondrej Mertlik Subcontractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik Documents Used: Plans Drill and Epoxy Drilling Location: 1.)Anchor bolts for steel beams on east side of parking structure 2.) 3.) 4.) Orientation(vertical/horizontal): 1.) Horizontal 3.) 2.) 4.) Hole Diameter(inches): 1.) 7/8 Length (inches): 1.) 6 3/4 2.) 2.) 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) Hole Spacing(inches): 1.) 8 3.) 2.) 4.) Drilling Equipment: Hammer Drill Method to Clean Hole: Brush and compressed air Epoxy Epoxy Type: Sika Pro Select Anchoring Adhesive Epoxy Expiration: 7/6/2017 Placement Method: Epoxy gun Reinforcement Type(rebar/bolt/anchor): 1.) Bolt Size: 1.) 6 Length(inches) 1.) 8 2.) 2.) 2.) 3.) 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) 4.) Placement Method: Hand set Additional Reinforcing Steel: N/A Field Representative: Chris Leeper/Shane Sorensen Comments: www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Drill and Epoxy Cover Report Date: November 14,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik As scheduled, a representative visited the project site to perform special inspections for drill and epoxy at locations requested. Comments or Photos: �� ` . t • .. 3; ' r `' I I , \ -° . L .i • a' �. S` . .h•Ilk • 1' W. ti' _ I a:t 424,_ :., 2 t.:w.. y� • y it ....--iiid 441 _ . _ k._ .-4-, I '''i ' ) i p ' i Yes No Discrepancies Reported this Date? • No. of Pages Attached: 1 Field Representative: Shane Sorensen www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Report Date: November 14,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik Subcontractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik Documents Used: Plans Drill and Epoxy Drilling Location: 1.) Dowels into previously placed parking deck support wall for new wall section 2.) Anchor bolts into top of parking deck columns 3.) 4.) Orientation(vertical/horizontal): 1.) Horizontal 3.) 2.) Vertical 4.) Hole Diameter(inches): 1.) 3/4 Length(inches): 1.) 6 2.) 7/8 2.) 6 3/4 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) Hole Spacing(inches): 1.) 10 3.) 5 2.) 4.) Drilling Equipment: Hammer Drill Method to Clean Hole: Brush and compressed air Epoxy Epoxy Type: Sika Pro Select Anchoring Adhesive Epoxy Expiration: 7/28/17 Placement Method: Epoxy gun Reinforcement Type(rebar/bolt/anchor): 1.) Rebar Size: 1.) #5 Length(inches) 1.) 36 2.) Bolt 2.) 3/4 2.) 10 3.) 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) 4.) Placement Method: Hand set Additional Reinforcing Steel: N/A Field Representative: Shane Sorensen Comments: www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum H - P <u MAR5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs,CO 81601 aotechnical Engineerinc, .ngineering Geology Phone:(970)945-7988 Materials Testing i Environmental Fax: (970)945-8454 Email: hpkglenwood(a kumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker,Glenwood Springs,and Silverthorne, Colorado Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Wednesday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 10/26/16 P.O. Box 2952 Page: 1 of 1 Vail, CO 81658 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Weather: Clear, calm, dry Temperature: 49° at 10:30 am Earthwork Contractor: Division Six Construction Equipment Used: Not observed Description of Earthwork We performed compaction testing at base grade in the driveway. Both tests Tested: met minimum project compaction specifications. Sample(s) Obtained: Verbal Communication: Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our test results. Placement and Compaction Procedure: Not observed by H-PlKumar Lift Thickness: Max. Rock Size: 3/4" Moisture hose Conditioning: Compactor(s) Used: Number of Passes: Nuclear Gauge Moisture/Density Test Results Test Location Depth or Field Dry Moiield Min ture Field Comp. Proctor No. Elev. Density Content Cop. Req. Lab No. (pc) % (/o) (%) 1 10'W. of center base 134.8 5.4 99 95 est. grade 2 12' E. of center base 135.6 5.8 100 95 est. grade Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method Description Max. Dry Opt. Dens. (%) Moist. (%) Estimated ASTM D 698 3/4' Aggregate Base Course 136 7 THIS REPORT PRESENTS OPINIONS AS A RESULT OF OUR OBSERVATIONSOF FILL PLACEMENT WE HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTINUE APPLYING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTIVE EFFORT AND MOISTURE TO FILL DURING THE TIMES WHEN OUR OBSERVER IS NOT OBSERVING OPERATIONS THE NUCLEAR DENSOMETER METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 6938 Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randyAdivisionslxconst,comi Division Six Construction--Ondrej Mertlik torn r.EisigneIxcvnst.contl Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. /Ijt Field Technician Reviewed By H5020 mA County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Geotechnical engineering I Engineering GL Phone: (970)945-7988 Materials Testing I Environmental Fax: (970)945-8454 Email: hpkolenwoodAkumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker, Glenwood Springs,and Silverthome, Colorado Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Friday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 9116116 P.O. Box 2952 Page: 1 of 1 Vail, Colorado 81658 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Weather: Clear, calm, dry Temperature: 63° at 10:00 am Earthwork Contractor: Division Six Construction Equipment Used: not observed Description of Earthwork The contractor had completed backfill operations under the planned MSE wall. Tested: Both tests met minimum project compaction specifications. Sample(s) Obtained: Verbal Communication: Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our test result. Placement and Compaction Procedure: Reported by the Contractor. Lift Thickness: 1' Max. Rock Size: ,/" Moisture hose Conditioning: Compactor(s) Used: hand tamper Number of Passes: as requested Nuclear Gauge Moisture/Densi Test Results Location Field Dry Field Field Min. Test Depth or Moisture Camp. Proctor No. Elev. Density Content Comp. Req. Lab No. (pc0 °/o (%) (°% 1 'S.of column base 18137.6 4.5 100 95 212-16 grade 2 between columns base 139.0 4.7 100 95 212-16 grade Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method Description Max. Dry Opt. Dens. (%) Moist. (%) 212-16 ASTM t7 698 %'Aggregate Base Course 136.3 7.2 THIS REPORT PRESENTS OPINIONS AS A RESULT OF OUR OBSERVATIONSOF FILL PLACEMENT WE HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTINUE APPLYING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTIVE EFFORT AND MOISTURE TO FILL DURING THE TIMES WHEN OUR OBSERVER IS NOT OBSERVING OPERATIONS THE NUCLEAR OENSOMETER METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM O 6938 Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randYadivIsionsixGori t.Gom) Division Six Construction—ondrej Mertilk(om@dIvisionsixconst.coml nif Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By El - P I<U rtbR 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Geotechnical Engineering I Engineering Geology Phone: (970)945-7988 Materials Testing I Environmental Fax:(970)945-8454 Email: hpkaIenwoodc kumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker, Glenwood Springs,and Silverthome, Colorado Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Wednesday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 10/5116 P.O. Box 2952 Page: 1 of 1 Vail, Colorado 81658 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Weather: Cloudy, calm, dry Temperature: 61° at 10:00 am Earthwork Contractor: Division Six Construction Equipment Used: Trackhoe, Hand tamper Description of Earthwork The contractor had placed backfill at the MSE wall. Both tests met minimum Tested: project compaction specifications. Sample(s) Obtained: Verbal Communication: Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our test result. Placement and Compaction Procedure: Reported by the Contractor. Lift Thickness: 1' Max. Rock Size: 3/4" Moisture hose Conditioning: Compactor(s) Used: hand tamper Number of Passes: as requested Nuclear Gauge MoisturelDensity Test Results Location Field Dry Field Field Min. Test Depth or Moisture Comp. Proctor No. Elev. Density Content Comp. Req. Lab No. (pcf) (o) (%) o/ 1 south end 3rd course 130.6 6.5 96 95 212-16 2 north end 3rd course 132.0 6.8 97 95 212-16 Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method Description Max. Dry Opt. Dens. (%) Moist. (%) 212-16 ASTM D 698 3/4'Aggregate Base Course 136.3 7.2 THIS REPORT PRESENTS OPINIONS AS A RESULT OF OUR OBSERVATIONSOF FILL PLACEMENT WE HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTINUE APPLYING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTIVE EFFORT AND MOISTURE TO FILL DURING THE TIMES WHEN OUR OBSERVER IS NOT OBSERVING OPERATIONS. THE NUCLEAR DENSOMETER METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 6938. Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randy.±divlslonslxccnstcom) Division Six Construction—Ondrej Mertlik(pm adlvIsionsixoDnstc3m rljf Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By H.p Ku mAR 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs,CO 81601 Geotechnical Engineering I Engineering Geology Phone:(970)945-7988 Materials Testing 1 Environmental Fax (970)945-8454 Email: hpkulenwoodt kumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker,Glenwood Springs,and Silverthome, Colorado Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Thursday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 1016116 P.O. Box 2952 Page: 1 of 1 Vail, Colorado 81658 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Weather: Cloudy, calm, dry Temperature: 48° at 10:30 am Earthwork Contractor: Division Six Construction Equipment Used: Trackhoe, Hand tamper Description of Earthwork MSE wall backfill continues. Compaction was judged to be adequate based on Tested: our test results. Sample(s) Obtained: Verbal Communication: Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our test result. Placement and Compaction Procedure: Reported by the Contractor. Lift Thickness: 1' Max. Rock Size: 3/411 Moisture hose Conditioning: Compactor(s) Used: hand tamper Number of Passes: as requested Nuclear Gauge Moisture/Density Test Results Location Field Dry Field Field Min. Test Depth or Moisture Comp. Proctor No. Elev. DSP y Content Comp. Req. Lab No. (%) 1 at radius 6th course 134.8 6.8 99 95 212-16 Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method Description Max. Dry Opt. Dens. (%) s Moist. (%) 212-16 ASTM D 698 3/:'Aggregate Base Course 136.3 7.2 THIS REPORT PRESENTS OPINIONS AS A RESULT OF OUR OBSERVATIONSOF FILL PLACEMENT WE HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTINUE APPLYING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTIVE EFFORT AND MOISTURE TO FILL DURING THE TIMES WHEN OUR OBSERVER IS NOT OBSERVING OPERATIONS THE NUCLEAR DENSOMETER METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 6938 Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randv@divlsionsixconst.com) Division Six Construction—Ondrej Mertlik tom@dEwlslgnsixconst.coml lilt Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By H-p Ku MAR5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs,CO 81601 .�clttechnical Engineering I Engineering Geology Phone: (970)945-7988 Materials Testing I Environmental Fax: (970)945-8454 Email: hpkglenwood(&kumarusa,com Office Locations: Parker, Glenwood Springs,and Silverthome, Colorado Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Wednesday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 9/14/16 P.O. Box 2952 Page: 1 of 1 Vail, Colorado 81658 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Weather: Partly cloudy, calm, dry Temperature: 66° at 12:06 pm Earthwork Contractor: Division Six Construction Equipment Used: Hand tamp Description of Earthwork The contractor has reportedly placed about 3' of 3/4"aggregate base course Tested: around the elevated parking columns. Compaction testing indicated adequate compaction. Sample(s) Obtained: yes Verbal Communication: Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our test result. Placement and Compaction Procedure: Reported by the Contractor. Lift Thickness: 1' Max. Rock Size: 3/R„ Moisture hose Conditioning: Compactor(s) Used: hand tamper Number of Passes: as requested Nuclear Gauge MoisturelDensity Test Results Field Min. Test Location Depth or Field Dry Moisture Field Comp Proctor n No. Elev. D{p o sitY Content Cha/o} Req. Lab No. 4' below 1 between columns bottom of 134.8 5.8 98 95 212-16 wall Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method Description Max. Dry Opt. Dens. (%) Moist. (%) 212-16 ASTM El 698 W' Aggregate Base Course 136.3 7.2 THIS REPORT PRESENTS OPINIONS AS A RESULT of OUR OBSERVATIONSOF FILL PLACEMENT WE HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTINUE APPLYING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTIVE EFFORT AND MOISTURE TO FILL DURING THE TIMES WHEN OUR OBSERVER tS NOT OBSERVING OPERATIONS THE NUCLEAR DENSO$AETER METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 6938 Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randvedivisionsixconst.com) Division Six Construction—Ondrej Mertlik tom¢ divisionsixeonst.coml lijf Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By Laboratory Proctor Compaction Test Report 137.5 I i—— --— _ T i i 7 2°/Q, 136.3 pc I __ 136 — 1 -_ --,-1 ^l i i __ LL \i ! _- i 1 _ _ ____ ir _4%i34. I ! 134.5 i i —1 1 ,_ I r c I W a) a 133 i ! i I i i i 131.5 ik ! _ N\L ZAV for — --- i Sp.G. = 130 I i i 2.63 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Water content,% ---Rock Corrected >—-Uncorrected Test specification ASTM D 698-00a Method C Standard Oversize corr. applied to each test point Elev! Classification Nat. °/Q n % Depth USCS AASHTO Moist. Sp.G. LL PI 314 in. No.200 GP-GM A-1-a NV NP 10.0 8.3 ROCK CORRECTED TEST RESULTS UNCORRECTED MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Maximum dry density = 136.3 pcf 134.4 pcf Class 6 Aggregate I3ase Course Optimum moisture = 7.2°.a 7.9% Project No. 16.7-352 Client: Division Six Construction Remarks: Project: Lot 2,Block C,Vail Ridge 2636 Davos Trail,Vail,Colorado See Figure IA for classification results. o Location:On Site Stockpile Sample Number: 212-16 Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Glenwood Springs, Colorado Figure 1 Tested By: KO Checked By: SLP Particle Size Distribution Report c c c 6 S Sa 0 O g ❑ g a g co ea N . r : :t 1�1 R i A 7k ; ; i 100 I I 1k\ I I I I ' I ! ! 1 T- - 114"ABC Class 6 ' I . '\I I I I I I I I 1 1 90 I \ I I I . 4 1 I -I I 1 ' I 1 I k I \1 I I 1 I 1 I 1I 80 I I\ I I __ I I i ' ` I AI " 70 I Irl \\ I I ] f , _ ! I ! I Il I W 60I , I \ I I I t i `: E I \ I \ I I I I z 50 I t I \\ I , I I I W I ‘ • ti 1 I I I C I \ I �� I I I I Lu a 40 I 1 I • l-~ I • z . , All._ I I I iI I ' I I I I I I ` • I �\ I I 30 I I I I . I 'I 11 I I I I `� I • I I \ 1 I 20 I I I I ��i 1 `l 1---I` . I _ I I l 1 1 I h-. 1 ■ I I ' L 1 I 1 I I i-� I 10 4 I I I 1 I I I �I.j I I 0 1 I I l I 11 . : I 1 I I I I i 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. y.+3" • %Gravel 1 Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt _ Clay 0 10 42 9 18 13 8 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.. PASS? Material Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Class 6 Aggregate Base Course 1.5 100 .75 90 100- 100 .375 62 Atterberq Limits #4448 30-65 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP #8 40 25-55 #16 34 Coefficients_ #30 26 D85= 16.8322 D60= 8.6238 D50 5.2469 #50 16 030= 0.8414 D15= 0.2612 D10 0.1160 #100 11 Cu— 74.32 Cc= 0.71 #200 8.3 3 12 Classification USCS= GP-GM PASHTO= A-1-a Remarks See Figure 1 for standard Proctor compaction results. 3W"ABC Class 6 Location: On Site Stockpile Sample Number: 212.16 Date: 9/14/20 I 6 ____ Hepworth-Pawlak Client: Division Six Construction Project: Lot 2,Block C,Vail Ridge 2636 Davos Trail,Vail,Colorado Geotechnical, Inc. Glenwood Springs, Colorado Project No: 16-7-352 Figure IA Tested By: KO - Checked By: SLP H-p <U It\/I 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs,CO 81601 aoiechnical Engines igir. Phone: (970)945-7988 Iviaterials Testing I Environmental Fax:(970)945-8454 Email: hpkolenwoodekumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker,Glenwood Springs,and Silverthome,Colorado Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Tuesday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 10/11/16 P.O. Box 2952 Page: 1 of 1 Vail, CO 81658 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Weather: Partly cloudy, calm, dry Temperature: 51° at 10:30 am Earthwork Contractor: Division Six Construction Equipment Used: Trackhoe, Hand tamper Description of Earthwork We visited the site to observe MSE wall construction and to perform Tested: compaction testing. Sample(s) Obtained: Verbal Communication: Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our test results. Placement and Compaction Procedure: Observed by H-P/Kumar on part time basis. Lift Thickness: 6" Max. Rock Size: S/4" Moisture hose Conditioning: Compactor(s) Used: Hand tamper Number of Passes: as requested Nuclear Gauge Moisture/Density Test Results Location Field Dry Field Field Min. Test Depth or Moisture Comp. Proctor om No. Elev. Dip y Content C °0 p' Req. Lab No. ) (%) 1 10'S. of N.end 5'^course 131.6 7.6 97 95 est. 2 at radius 8th course 132.2 6.7 97 95 est. Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method Description Max. Dry Opt. _ Dens. (%) Moist. (%) estimated ASTM D 698 3/:'Aggregate Base Course 136 7 THIS REPORT PRESENTS OPINIONS AS A RESULT OF OUR OBSERVATIONSOF FILL PLACEMENT WE HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTINUE APPLYING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTIVE EFFORT AND MOISTURE TO FILL DURING THE TIMES WHEN OUR OBSERVER IS NOT OBSERVING OPERATIONS THE NUCLEAR DENSOMETER METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 6938 Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randy@divisionsixconst.com) Division Six Construction—Ondrej Mertlik(et m dlVJsiansixcanst.com} /Ijf Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Geotechnical Engineering I Engineering Geology Phone: (970)945-7988 Materials Testing I Environmental Fax: (970)945-8454 Email: hpkglenwoodekumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker,Glenwood Springs, and Silverthome, Colorado REINFORCEMENT STEEL INSPECTION REPORT Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Wednesday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 9/28/16 2636 Davos Trail Page: 1 of 1 Vail, Colorado 81657 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Area of Inspection: All new garage foundation walls, Lower level addition and one 12" pier. Reference Documents Sheet S1.1, Foundation Plan Dated 5-11-16 and Details 36 and 39 on Used: Sheet S2.5. Inspection Notes: Inspection Status: ❑ Preliminary ® Final ❑ Concrete reinforcement as noted above was judged to be in reasonable conformance with the referenced construction documents. ❑ Exceptions Noted: Verbal Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our inspection Communication: results. Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randydivisionsixconst.carnl Division Six Construction—Ondrej Mertlik(o mdivisionsixconst.com) ilii Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By 414* TOWN OF VAI. FINAL REPORT OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS Project: Qui/ 7 I L itscO (E Permit Number: 46/& ' 02 o9 Project Location: 2G-36 ,0441/©S TRAY/- Owner fa fi4v*/ R Address pC?,/` -2-Psa City: 1471 Zip: /6--VS Design Professional In Charge: 4404-6ac14 R o I/Pt . /weeit ;*,O-srix 'aled16 Cv6i)JUL, V /t%c-- Address: 02-'.3 U ' °KCL AV . , Sc" Yf a -co City: 6.1. J(,u 9O c/04,/1.04,7 State: CO Zip: e/619/ Phone: ,P70,99f--0320 Fax: E-mail: 4Ai f ,,> �AA10 0Ai -S7:4‘)“:2414 - To the best of my information, knowledge, and belief, the special inspections and/or testing required for this project, have been completed in accordance with the contract documents. Interim reports submitted prior to this Final Report of Special Inspections form a basis for, and are to be considered an integral part of this final report. Any discrepancies that were noted in all interim reports have been corrected. Prepared by: 4.,vo 0A/4,Noz czicywd 0 Q t Name /w44Type Prin 35436 Signature f Date Preparer's Seal and Signature Required rREScheck Software Version 4.6.2 ' nh Compliance Certificate Project Davos Trail Residence Energy Code: 2015 IECC Location: Vail, Colorado Construction Type: Single-family Project Type: Alteration Climate Zone: 6 (9248 HDD) Permit Date: Permit Number: B16-0209 Construction Site: Owner/Agent: Designer/Contractor: 2636 Davos Trail Randy Fischer Randy Fischer Vail, CO 81657 2695 Davos Trail Division Six Construction Vail, CO 81657 2695 Davos Trail 970-306-3030 Vail, CO 81657 randy@divisionsixconst.com 970-306-3030 randy@divisionsixconst.com Compliance: Passes using prescriptive requirements for alteration projects Envelope Assemblies Gross Area Cavity Cont. Assembly or R-Value R-Value U-Factor UA Perimeter Flat Roof- 2x12: Flat Ceiling or Scissor Truss 255 57.0 0.0 0.024 6 Sloped Roof Entry- 2x10: Cathedral Ceiling 125 49.0 0.0 0.022 3 Sloped Roof- 14"TJI: Cathedral Ceiling 1,043 57.0 0.0 0.019 20 Flat Roof- 2x12: Flat Ceiling or Scissor Truss 210 57.0 0.0 0.024 5 Sloped Roof- Kitchen 2x12: Cathedral Ceiling 218 60.0 0.0 0.018 4 South Elevation: Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 1,071 23.0 7.0 0.038 34 South Elevation -Windows- U.29: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 112 0.290 32 South Elevation Windows- U.30: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 12 0.300 4 South Elevation Windows- U.33: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 16 0.330 5 South Elevation Windows- U.35: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 21 0.350 7 South Elevation - Doors (Glass): Glass 21 0.290 6 East Elevation: Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 1,107 24.0 7.0 0.037 29 East Elevation-Windows- U.25: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 9 0.250 2 East Elevation-Windows- U.26: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 66 0.260 17 East Elevation-Windows- U.27: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 24 0.270 6 East Elevation-Windows- U.28: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 9 0.280 3 East Elevation-Windows- U.29: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 68 0.290 20 Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 1 of11 Gross Area Cavity Cont. Assembly or R-Value R-Value U-Factor UA Perimeter East Elevation-Windows- U.30: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 56 0.300 17 East Elevation-Windows- U.31: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 14 0.310 4 East Elevation-Windows- U.33: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 34 0.330 11 East Elevation-Windows- U.35: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 27 0.350 9 East Elevation- Door(Glass): Glass 20 0.290 6 North East Elevation: Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 1,169 24.0 7.0 0.037 37 North East Elevation -Windows- U.25: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 19 0.250 5 North East Elevation -Windows- U.26: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 12 0.260 3 North East Elevation -Windows- U.28: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 18 0.280 5 North East Elevation -Windows- U.33: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 20 0.330 7 North East Elevation - Doors: Glass 90 0.290 26 West Elevation: Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 546 24.0 7.0 0.037 15 West Elevation-Windows- U.27: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 5 0.270 1 West Elevation-Windows- U.29: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 60 0.290 17 West Elevation-Windows- U.33: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 40 0.330 13 West Elevation- Doors- U.29- Entry: Glass 13 0.290 4 West Elevation- Doors- U.33 - Elevator: Glass 15 0.330 5 South West Elevation (Garage/Front): Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 430 24.0 7.0 0.037 8 South West Elevation -Windows- U.31: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 9 0.310 3 South West Elevation -Windows- U.33: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 8 0.330 3 South West Elevation - Doors- U.33: Glass 14 0.330 5 South West Elevation -Garage Doors: Solid 150 0.080 12 South West Elevation - Doors- U.29: Glass 44 0.290 13 North West Elevation (Garage/Side): Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 330 24.0 7.0 0.037 11 North West Elevation -Windows- U: Wood Frame:Double Pane with Low-E 12 0.330 4 North West Elevation - Doors: Glass 12 0.290 3 South East Elevation (Garage/Side): Wood Frame, 16" o.c. 206 24.0 7.0 0.037 8 :Lower Level Existing SOG - Exposed Edge: Slab-On-Grade:Unheated 78 10.0 0.684 53 Insulation depth: 4.0' Main Level SOG - Exposed Edge: Slab-On-Grade:Heated 16 15.0 0.655 10 Insulation depth: 4.0' Main Level -Overhangs: All-Wood Joist/Truss:Over Outside Air 203 40.0 7.0 0.021 4 Basement Wall (50% below Grade): Solid Concrete or Masonry 915 13.0 10.0 0.036 33 Wall height: 7.5' Depth below grade: 7.0' Insulation depth: 7.5' Mechanical Equipment Description Fuel type Efficiency Gas-Fired Steam Gas 95 AFUE Air Source Electric 7.7 HSPF, 13 SEER Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 2 of11 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 2015 IECC requirements in REScheck Version 4.6.2 and to comply with the mandatory requirements listed in the REScheck Inspection Checklist. Name-Title Signature Date Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 3 of11 RInspectionEScheck Software VersionChecklist 4.6.2 Energy Code: 2015 IECC Requirements: 100.0% were addressed directly in the REScheck software Text in the "Comments/Assumptions" column is provided by the user in the REScheck Requirements screen. For each requirement, the user certifies that a code requirement will be met and how that is documented, or that an exception is being claimed. Where compliance is itemized in a separate table, a reference to that table is provided. Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Pre-Inspection/Plan Review Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 103.1, Construction drawings and Complies Requirement will be met. 103.2 documentation demonstrate ❑Does Not [PR1]1 energy code compliance for the V, building envelope.Thermal ❑Not Observable envelope represented on ❑Not Applicable construction documents. 103.1, Construction drawings and complies Requirement will be met. 103.2, documentation demonstrate ❑Does Not 403.7 energy code compliance for [PR3]1 lighting and mechanical systems. ['Not Observable Systems serving multiple ENot Applicable dwelling units must demonstrate compliance with the IECC Commercial Provisions. 302.1, Heating and cooling equipment is Heating: Heating: ❑Complies Requirement will be met. 403.7 sized per ACCA Manual S based Btu/hr Btu/hr EDoes Not [PR2]2 on loads calculated per ACOA Cooling: Cooling: Manual J or other methods ['Not Observable approved by the code official. Btu/hr Btu/hr ❑Not Applicable Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 4 of11 Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Foundation Inspection Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 402.1.2 Slab edge insulation R-value. R- R- ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies [Foil' ❑ Unheated ❑ Unheated ❑Does Not table for values. 0 ❑ Heated ❑ Heated [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.1.2 Slab edge insulation ft ft EComplies I See the Envelope Assemblies [F03]' depth/length. ❑Does Not table for values. a ['Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.1.1 Conditioned basement wall R- R- ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies [F04]' insulation R-value.Where interior R- R- ❑Does Not table for values. 40 insulation is used, verification ['Not Observable may need to occur during Insulation Inspection. Not ❑Not Applicable required in warm-humid locations in Climate Zone 3. 303.2 Conditioned basement wall ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F05]' insulation installed per ❑Does Not manufacturer's instructions. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.2.9 Conditioned basement wall ft ft ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 1[F06]' insulation depth of burial or El Does Not table for values. distance from top of wall. ['Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 303.2.1 A protective covering is installed ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F011]2 to protect exposed exterior ❑Does Not insulation and extends a minimum of 6 in. below grade. ['Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.9 Snow-and ice-melting system ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FO controls installed. ❑Does Not ['Not Observable ❑Not Applicable Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 5 ofil Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Framing/Rough-In Inspection Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 402.1.1, :Door U-factor. U- U- ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.3.4 ❑Does Not table for values. [FR1]1 , ❑Not Observable 1 ❑Not Applicable 402.1.1, 1 Glazing U-factor(area-weighted U- U- ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.3.1, average). I ❑Does Not table for values. 402.3.3, 402.3.6, [Not Observable 402.5 : ❑Not Applicable [FR2]1 303.1.3 1U-factors of fenestration products ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR4]1 are determined in accordance ❑Does Not fii, with the NFRC test procedure or taken from the default table. ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.4.1.1 ;Air barrier and thermal barrier ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR23]1 installed per manufacturer's ❑Does Not fii, ,instructions. ❑Not Observable ; ❑Not Applicable 402.4.3 ;Fenestration that is not site built ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR20]1 is listed and labeled as meeting ❑Does Not AAMA/WDMA/CSA 101/1.5.2/A440 or has infiltration rates per NFRC ❑Not Observable 400 that do not exceed code ❑Not Applicable limits. _ 402.4.5 :IC-rated recessed lighting fixtures ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR16]2 sealed at housing/interior finish ❑Does Not ;and labeled to indicate <_2.0 cfm ;leakage at 75 Pa. ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.2.1 Supply and return ducts in attics ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR12]1 insulated >= R-8 where duct is ❑Does Not Ca >= 3 inches in diameter and >_ R-6 where < 3 inches. Supply and [Not Observable return ducts in other portions of ❑Not Applicable the building insulated >= R-6 for diameter>= 3 inches and R-4.2 for< 3 inches in diameter. 403.3.3.5 Building cavities are not used as ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR15]3 ducts or plenums. ❑Does Not ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.4 HVAC piping conveying fluids R- R- ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR17] above 105 °F or chilled fluids ❑Does Not below 55 °F are insulated to >_R- 3 ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.4.1 :Protection insulation on HVAC I❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR24]1 piping. ❑Does Not fi ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.5.3 Hot water pipes are insulated to R- R- ElComplies Requirement will be met. [FR18]2 >_R-3. ❑Does Not ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.6Automatic or gravity dampers are ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [FR19] installed on all outdoor air ❑Does Not intakes and exhausts. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 6 ofll Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 7 ofll Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Insulation Inspection Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 303.1 ;All installed insulation is labeled '❑Complies Requirement will be met. [IN13]2 :or the installed R-values ❑Does Not ✓ :provided. IP [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.1.1, Floor insulation R-value. R- R- ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.2.6 ❑ Wood ❑ Wood ❑Does Not table for values. [IN1]1 ❑ Steel ❑ Steel [Not Observable O I ENot Applicable 303.2, Floor insulation installed per ❑Complies Requirement will be met. 402.2.7 manufacturer's instructions and ❑Does Not [IN2]1 in substantial contact with the underside of the subfloor, or floor ['Not Observable framing cavity insulation is in ❑Not Applicable contact with the top side of sheathing, or continuous insulation is installed on the underside of floor framing and extends from the bottom to the top of all perimeter floor framing members. 402.1.1, Wall insulation R-value. If this is a R- R- EComplies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.2.5, mass wall with at least 1/2 of the ❑ Wood ❑ Wood ❑Does Not table for values. 402.2.6 wall insulation on the wall ❑ Mass ❑ Mass ['Not Observable [IN3]1 exterior,the exterior insulation requirement applies(FR10). 111 Steel 111 Steel ❑Not Applicable 303.2 Wall insulation is installed per 1 ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [IN4]1 manufacturer's instructions. ❑Does Not ❑Not Observable ❑Not Applicable Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 8 ofll Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Final Inspection Provisions Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 402.1.1, Ceiling insulation R-value. R- R- ❑Complies See the Envelope Assemblies 402.2.1, ❑ Wood ❑ Wood EDoes Not table for values. 402.2.2, ❑ Steel ❑ Steel [Not Observable 402.2.6 [FI1]1 ENot Applicable 303.1.1.1, Ceiling insulation installed per ❑Complies Requirement will be met. 303.2 manufacturer's instructions. ❑Does Not [F12]1 Blown insulation marked every 300 ft2. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.2.3 :Vented attics with air permeable EComplies Requirement will be met. [F122]2 insulation include baffle adjacent ElDoes Not to soffit and eave vents that ;extends over insulation. [Not Observable ' ❑Not Applicable 402.2.4 Attic access hatch and door R- R- ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F13]1 insulation >_R-value of the ❑Does Not adjacent assembly. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 402.4.1.2 Blower door test @ 50 Pa. <=5 ACH 50 = ACH 50 = ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F117]1 ach in Climate Zones 1-2, and ❑Does Not <=3 ach in Climate Zones 3-8. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.2.3 Duct tightness test result of<=4 cfm/100 cfm/100 EComplies Exception: Requirement is [F14]1 cfm/100 ft2 across the system or ft2 ft2 ElDoes Not not applicable. <=3 cfm/100 ft2 without air handler @ 25 Pa. For rough-in ['Not Observable tests,verification may need to ENot Applicable occur during Framing Inspection. 403.3.2 Ducts are pressure tested to cfm/100 cfm/100 EComplies Exception: Requirement is [F127]1 determine air leakage with ft2 ft2 ❑Does Not not applicable. either: Rough-in test:Total leakage measured with a ['Not Observable pressure differential of 0.1 inch ENot Applicable w.g. across the system including the manufacturer's air handler enclosure if installed at time of test. Postconstruction test:Total leakage measured with a pressure differential of 0.1 inch w.g. across the entire system including the manufacturer's air handler enclosure. 403.3.2.1 Air handler leakage designated ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F124]1 by manufacturer at<=2%of ❑Does Not design air flow. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.1.1 :Programmable thermostats EComplies Requirement will be met. [F19]2 installed for control of primary ❑Does Not ;heating and cooling systems and :initially set by manufacturer to ['Not Observable :code specifications. 1 , ,ENot Applicable 403.1.2 'Heat pump thermostat installed ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F110]2 ion heat pumps. ElDoes Not ENot Observable ElNot Applicable 403.5.1 Circulating service hot water qElComPlies Requirement will be met. [F111]2 systems have automatic or ElDoes Not accessible manual controls. ['Not Observable ENot Applicable 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 9 ofll Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Final Inspection Provisions Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 403.6.1 ;All mechanical ventilation system '❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F125]2 fans not part of tested and listed ❑Does Not ail HVAC equipment meet efficacy and air flow limits. [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 403.2 Hot water boilers supplying heat ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F126]2 through one-or two-pipe heating ❑Does Not 441 systems have outdoor setback control to lower boiler water [Not Observable temperature based on outdoor ❑Not Applicable temperature. 403.5.1.1 :Heated water circulation systems ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F128]2 have a circulation pump.The ❑Does Not system return pipe is a dedicated return pipe or a cold water supply [Not Observable pipe. Gravity and thermos- ❑Not Applicable syphon circulation systems are not present. Controls for circulating hot water system pumps start the pump with signal for hot water demand within the iii'occupancy. Controls automatically turn off the pump when water is in circulation loop is at set-point temperature and no demand for hot water exists. 403.5.1.2 ;Electric heat trace systems ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F129]2 comply with IEEE 515.1 or UL EDoes Not ill515. Controls automatically adjust the energy input to the ['Not Observable heat tracing to maintain the ❑Not Applicable desired water temperature in the , piping. 403.5.2 Water distribution systems that ;❑Complies Exception: Requirement is [F130]2 have recirculation pumps that ElDoes Not not applicable. pump water from a heated water supply pipe back to the heated ['Not Observable water source through a cold ❑Not Applicable water supply pipe have a demand recirculation water system. Pumps have controls that manage operation of the pump and limit the temperature of the water entering the cold water piping to 104°F. 403 .5.4 Drain water heat recovery units 1 ❑Complies Exception: Requirement is [F13tested tested in accordance with CSA ❑Does Not not applicable. B55.1. Potable water-side pressure loss of drain water heat ❑Not Observable recovery units < 3 psi for ;❑Not Applicable individual units connected to one or two showers. Potable water- side pressure loss of drain water heat recovery units < 2 psi for :individual units connected to :three or more showers. i 404.1 '75%of lamps in permanent ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F16]' fixtures or 75%of permanent ❑Does Not fixtures have high efficacy lamps. Does not apply to low-voltage [Not Observable lighting. ❑Not Applicable 404.1.1 Fuel gas lighting systems have ❑Complies Exception: Requirement is [F123]3 no continuous pilot light. ❑Does Not not applicable. [Not Observable , ❑Not Applicable 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 10 ofll Section Plans Verified Field Verified # Final Inspection Provisions Value Value Complies? Comments/Assumptions & Req.ID 401.3 ;Compliance certificate posted. '❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F17F ❑Does Not [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable 303.3 'Manufacturer manuals for ❑Complies Requirement will be met. [F118P mechanical and water heating ❑Does Not systems have been provided. • [Not Observable ❑Not Applicable Additional Comments/Assumptions: 1 High Impact(Tier 1) 2 Medium Impact(Tier 2) 3 Low Impact(Tier 3) Project Title: Davos Trail Residence Report date: 11/10/17 Data filename: C:\Users\user\Documents\Ondra\Work\DAVOS\06 - ResCheck\2636 Davos Trail.rck Page 11 of11 ci. 2015 IECC Energy Efficiency Certificate Insulation Rating R-Value Above-Grade Wall 31.00 Below-Grade Wall 23.00 Floor 47.00 Ceiling / Roof 57.00 Ductwork (unconditioned spaces): Glass&Door Rating U-Factor SHGC Window 0.29 Door 0.08 Heating&Cooling Equipment Efficiency Gas-Fired Steam 95 AFUE Air Source 7.7 HSPF, Water Heater: Name: Date: Comments Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road TOWN O F 111111 ■ Vail, CO 81657 Tel: 970.479.2139 www.vailgov.com TRANSMITTAL FORM Use this form when submitting additional information, changes&inspection reports for building permits. This form is also used for requesting a revision to building permits. A two hour minimum building review fee of$110 will be charged upon reissuance of the permit. Submit this form only to: cdev_submittal@vailgov.com. Deliver paper plans to Community Develop- ment or upload your revised/corrected plans to the appropriate project in ProjectDox, when requested. Application/Permit#(s) information applies to: B16-0209 ( ) Revisions (5 Response to Correction Letter attached copy of correction letter ( ) Deferred Submittal n Other Submit Additional Information Project Street Address: 2636 Davos Trail Description of Transmittal/List of Changes, Items Attached, Indicate changed plan pages: (Number) (Street) (Suite#) Building/Complex Name: Will upload ResCheck document and Special Inspections. Applicant Information (architect, contractor, owner/owner's rep) Contact Name: Paula Fischer Address: 2695 Davos Trail City VailState: CO Zip: 81657 (use additional sheet if necessary) Contact Name: Paula Fischer 970479-7350 Building Permits: - Contact Phone: Revised ADDITIONAL Valuations(Labor&Materials) Contact E-Mail: paula@divisionsixconst.com divisionsixconst.com (DO NOT include original valuation) Building: $ I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application,filled out in full the information required,completed an accurate plot plan, Plumbing: $ 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 Electrical: $ ordinances and state laws, and to build this structure according to the town's zoning and subdivision codes, design review ap- Mechanical: $ proved, International Building and Residential Codes and other ordinances of the Town applicable thereto. Total: $ X Pa. rscltie� Owner/Owner's Representative Signature(Required) Date Received: 21-Apr-2017 Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Drill and Epoxy Cover Report Date: September 7,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik As scheduled, a representative visited the project site to perform special inspections for drill and epoxy at locations requested. Comments or Photos: ? - -' •i�'• , -• i r.555 • • .e 1.•- y {, .:• i re' fid 1 I. i-'e jam'' '- -`� .. 1rz''' - . "ti•.•- 4 _j' 'i41' :f.r.,:{+; r 9, ill N. R ` ' 4.-. r Yes No Discrepancies Reported this Date? l- No. of Pages Attached: 1 Field Representative: Dennis Humphrey/Shane Sorensen www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Report Date: September 7,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Subcontractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Documents Used: Plans Drill and Epoxy Drilling Location: 1.) Dowels on S and E facing existing foundation for the SE lower level addition 2.) 3.) 4.) Orientation(vertical/horizontal): 1.) Horizontal 3.) 2.) 4.) Hole Diameter(inches): 1.) 3/4 Length(inches): 1.) 6 2.) 2.) 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) Hole Spacing(inches): 1.) 16 3.) 2.) 4.) Drilling Equipment: Hammer Drill Method to Clean Hole: Brush and compressed air Epoxy Epoxy Type: Quikcrete Anchor Epoxy Epoxy Expiration: 4/30/2017 Placement Method: Epoxy gun Reinforcement Type(rebar/bolt/anchor): 1.) Rebar Size: 1.) #5 Length(inches) 1.) 3/4 2.) 2.) 2.) 3.) 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) 4.) Placement Method: Hand/rotate Additional Reinforcing Steel: N/A Field Representative: Dennis Humphrey/Shane Sorensen Comments: www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Drill and Epoxy Cover Report Date: September 14,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik As scheduled, a representative visited the project site to perform special inspections for drill and epoxy at locations requested. Comments or Photos: ----.0 1,,.,.. „, ' 'c'filltr.4,.. vp.- fr.',:.'4- -n.,a,.L ' .. ' .'— it -_ -- _' : h,:'if ` lib:,'•.` . ti., 7 - _ %, ..,;+ , ,% fi:'. -%-/ ,., , ., - .4, • .),'"- ".- ;.:-.-- , -P •..,.i4,_'71-:la 1-, • . tY , ,,,.. - - '-- , -V . . ,.: '..4 '..'n...s4":'% { •e+l -� ;= f - ._` � - .� - . . `_ #, • 't ;' r t 11 1or :. ,1k:" Yes No Discrepancies Reported this Date? • No. of Pages Attached: 1 Field Representative: Jeremy Gilliam / Shane Sorensen www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Report Date: September 14,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Subcontractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Documents Used: Plans Drill and Epoxy Drilling Location: 1.) Bedroom 3/garage lower level 2.) SE lower level addition 3.) Wall at parking deck 4.) Orientation(vertical/horizontal): 1.) Horizontal 3.) Horizontal 2.) Horizontal 4.) Hole Diameter(inches): 1.) 3/4 Length(inches): 1.) 5 2.) 3/4 2.) 5 3.) 3/4 3.) 5 4.) 4.) Hole Spacing(inches): 1.) 16 3.) 16 2.) 16 4.) Drilling Equipment: Hammer Drill Method to Clean Hole: Brush and compressed air Epoxy Epoxy Type: Sitka AnchorFix-2 Por select Epoxy Expiration: 7/6/2017 Placement Method: Epoxy gun Reinforcement Type(rebar/bolt/anchor): 1.) Rebar Size: 1.) #5 Length(inches) 1.) 30 2.) Rebar 2.) #5 2.) 30 3.) Rebar 3.) #5 3.) 30 4.) 4.) 4.) Placement Method: Hand/rotate Additional Reinforcing Steel: N/A Field Representative: Jeremy Gilliam/Shane Sorensen Comments: www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Drill and Epoxy Cover Report Date: September 21,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik As scheduled, a representative visited the project site to perform special inspections for drill and epoxy at locations requested. Comments or Photos: Ar No. '1 i. w ,. q a A 4- / : %. ,. ,-,,, . • . \. , . . I\ i . 1 r ,,i *ft •• • d z, Yes No Discrepancies Reported this Date? • No. of Pages Attached: 2 Field Representative: Jeremy Gilliam/ Shane Sorensen www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Report Date: September 21,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Subcontractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Division Six Constuction Documents Used: Plans Drill and Epoxy Drilling Location: 1.) Existing grage footing west side lower 2.) Existing grage footing west side upper 3.) Existing grage footing west side lower 4.) Existing grage footing west side upper Orientation(vertical/horizontal): 1.) Vertical 3.) Vertical 2.) Horizontal 4.) Horizontal Hole Diameter(inches): 1.) 3/4 Length(inches): 1.) 6 2.) 3/4 2.) 6 3.) 3/4 3.) 6 4.) 3/4 4.) 6 Hole Spacing(inches): 1.) 9 3.) 9 2.) 9 4.) 9 Drilling Equipment: Hammer Drill Method to Clean Hole: Brush and compressed air Epoxy Epoxy Type: Sitka AnchorFix-2 Por select Epoxy Expiration: 7/6/2017 Placement Method: Epoxy gun Reinforcement Type(rebar/bolt/anchor): 1.) Rebar Size: 1.) #5 Length(inches) 1.) 72 2.) Rebar 2.) #5 2.) 19x19 90*bend 3.) Rebar 3.) #5 3.) 72 4.) Rebar 4.) #5 4.) 19x19 90*bend Placement Method: Hand set Additional Reinforcing Steel: N/A Field Representative: Jeremy Gilliam/Shane Sorensen Comments: www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Report Date: September 21,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Subcontractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Merktlik Documents Used: Plans Drill and Epoxy Drilling Location: 1.) New grage footing lower 2.) New grage footing upper 3.) 4.) Orientation(vertical/horizontal): 1.) Vertical 3.) 2.) Horizontal 4.) Hole Diameter(inches): 1.) 3/4 Length(inches): 1.) 6 2.) 3/4 2.) 6 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) Hole Spacing(inches): 1.) 9 3.) 2.) 9 4.) Drilling Equipment: Hammer Drill Method to Clean Hole: Brush and compressed air Epoxy Epoxy Type: Sitka AnchorFix-2 Por select Epoxy Expiration: 7/6/2017 Placement Method: Epoxy gun Reinforcement Type(rebar/bolt/anchor): 1.) Rebar Size: 1.) #5 Length(inches) 1.) 72 2.) Rebar 2.) #5 2.) 19x19 90*bend 3.) 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) 4.) Placement Method: Hand set Additional Reinforcing Steel: N/A Field Representative: Jeremy Gilliam/Shane Sorensen Comments: www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Drill and Epoxy Cover Report Date: March 3,2017 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik As scheduled, a representative visited the project site to perform special inspections for drill and epoxy at locations requested. Comments or Photos: 0 ..iJ :r s r a. �� r g,-..J. i ' , t \. 4,4 X a 1. ` 1 .2. 'r. .O . i , 1 �a �ti ' II ,. ? L ,o- '3 1-7,-..-4,,,,:w, 's4 / y R l�f4%," . All '� L er4. a t .i, Ckt J. ! Tt . Yes No Discrepancies Reported this Date? r (iii No. of Pages Attached: 1 Field Representative: Chris Leeper/Shane Sorensen www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik SROUND Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Report Date: March 3,2017 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Constuction Rep.Notified: Ondrej Mertlik Subcontractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik Documents Used: Plans Drill and Epoxy Drilling Location: 1.)Anchor bolts for steel beams on east side of parking structure 2.) 3.) 4.) Orientation(vertical/horizontal): 1.) Horizontal 3.) 2.) 4.) Hole Diameter(inches): 1.) 7/8 Length (inches): 1.) 6 3/4 2.) 2.) 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) Hole Spacing(inches): 1.) 8 3.) 2.) 4.) Drilling Equipment: Hammer Drill Method to Clean Hole: Brush and compressed air Epoxy Epoxy Type: Sika Pro Select Anchoring Adhesive Epoxy Expiration: 7/6/2017 Placement Method: Epoxy gun Reinforcement Type(rebar/bolt/anchor): 1.) Bolt Size: 1.) 6 Length(inches) 1.) 8 2.) 2.) 2.) 3.) 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) 4.) Placement Method: Hand set Additional Reinforcing Steel: N/A Field Representative: Chris Leeper/Shane Sorensen Comments: www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Drill and Epoxy Cover Report Date: November 14,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Construction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik As scheduled, a representative visited the project site to perform special inspections for drill and epoxy at locations requested. Comments or Photos: �� ` . t • .. 3; ' r `' I I , \ -° . L .i • a' �. S` . .h•Ilk • 1' W. ti' _ I a:t 424,_ :., 2 t.:w.. y� • y it ....--iiid 441 _ . _ k._ .-4-, I '''i ' ) i p ' i Yes No Discrepancies Reported this Date? • No. of Pages Attached: 1 Field Representative: Shane Sorensen www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum Client: Ondrej Mertlik RD11t4D Division Six Construction PO Box 5115 Vail, CO 81658 ENGINEERING Davos Trail Residence Report Date: November 14,2016 Job Number: 16-6581 General Contractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik Subcontractor: Division Six Constuction Rep. Notified: Ondrej Mertlik Documents Used: Plans Drill and Epoxy Drilling Location: 1.) Dowels into previously placed parking deck support wall for new wall section 2.) Anchor bolts into top of parking deck columns 3.) 4.) Orientation(vertical/horizontal): 1.) Horizontal 3.) 2.) Vertical 4.) Hole Diameter(inches): 1.) 3/4 Length(inches): 1.) 6 2.) 7/8 2.) 6 3/4 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) Hole Spacing(inches): 1.) 10 3.) 5 2.) 4.) Drilling Equipment: Hammer Drill Method to Clean Hole: Brush and compressed air Epoxy Epoxy Type: Sika Pro Select Anchoring Adhesive Epoxy Expiration: 7/28/17 Placement Method: Epoxy gun Reinforcement Type(rebar/bolt/anchor): 1.) Rebar Size: 1.) #5 Length(inches) 1.) 36 2.) Bolt 2.) 3/4 2.) 10 3.) 3.) 3.) 4.) 4.) 4.) Placement Method: Hand set Additional Reinforcing Steel: N/A Field Representative: Shane Sorensen Comments: www.groundeng.com Englewood, Commerce City, Loveland, Granby, Gypsum H - P <u MAR5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs,CO 81601 aotechnical Engineerinc, .ngineering Geology Phone:(970)945-7988 Materials Testing i Environmental Fax: (970)945-8454 Email: hpkglenwood(a kumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker,Glenwood Springs,and Silverthorne, Colorado Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Wednesday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 10/26/16 P.O. Box 2952 Page: 1 of 1 Vail, CO 81658 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Weather: Clear, calm, dry Temperature: 49° at 10:30 am Earthwork Contractor: Division Six Construction Equipment Used: Not observed Description of Earthwork We performed compaction testing at base grade in the driveway. Both tests Tested: met minimum project compaction specifications. Sample(s) Obtained: Verbal Communication: Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our test results. Placement and Compaction Procedure: Not observed by H-PlKumar Lift Thickness: Max. Rock Size: 3/4" Moisture hose Conditioning: Compactor(s) Used: Number of Passes: Nuclear Gauge Moisture/Density Test Results Test Location Depth or Field Dry Moiield Min ture Field Comp. Proctor No. Elev. Density Content Cop. Req. Lab No. (pc) % (/o) (%) 1 10'W. of center base 134.8 5.4 99 95 est. grade 2 12' E. of center base 135.6 5.8 100 95 est. grade Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method Description Max. Dry Opt. Dens. (%) Moist. (%) Estimated ASTM D 698 3/4' Aggregate Base Course 136 7 THIS REPORT PRESENTS OPINIONS AS A RESULT OF OUR OBSERVATIONSOF FILL PLACEMENT WE HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTINUE APPLYING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTIVE EFFORT AND MOISTURE TO FILL DURING THE TIMES WHEN OUR OBSERVER IS NOT OBSERVING OPERATIONS THE NUCLEAR DENSOMETER METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 6938 Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randyAdivisionslxconst,comi Division Six Construction--Ondrej Mertlik torn r.EisigneIxcvnst.contl Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. /Ijt Field Technician Reviewed By H5020 mA County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Geotechnical engineering I Engineering GL Phone: (970)945-7988 Materials Testing I Environmental Fax: (970)945-8454 Email: hpkolenwoodAkumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker, Glenwood Springs,and Silverthome, Colorado Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Friday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 9116116 P.O. Box 2952 Page: 1 of 1 Vail, Colorado 81658 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Weather: Clear, calm, dry Temperature: 63° at 10:00 am Earthwork Contractor: Division Six Construction Equipment Used: not observed Description of Earthwork The contractor had completed backfill operations under the planned MSE wall. Tested: Both tests met minimum project compaction specifications. Sample(s) Obtained: Verbal Communication: Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our test result. Placement and Compaction Procedure: Reported by the Contractor. Lift Thickness: 1' Max. Rock Size: ,/" Moisture hose Conditioning: Compactor(s) Used: hand tamper Number of Passes: as requested Nuclear Gauge Moisture/Densi Test Results Location Field Dry Field Field Min. Test Depth or Moisture Camp. Proctor No. Elev. Density Content Comp. Req. Lab No. (pc0 °/o (%) (°% 1 'S.of column base 18137.6 4.5 100 95 212-16 grade 2 between columns base 139.0 4.7 100 95 212-16 grade Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method Description Max. Dry Opt. Dens. (%) Moist. (%) 212-16 ASTM t7 698 %'Aggregate Base Course 136.3 7.2 THIS REPORT PRESENTS OPINIONS AS A RESULT OF OUR OBSERVATIONSOF FILL PLACEMENT WE HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTINUE APPLYING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTIVE EFFORT AND MOISTURE TO FILL DURING THE TIMES WHEN OUR OBSERVER IS NOT OBSERVING OPERATIONS THE NUCLEAR OENSOMETER METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM O 6938 Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randYadivIsionsixGori t.Gom) Division Six Construction—ondrej Mertilk(om@dIvisionsixconst.coml nif Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By El - P I<U rtbR 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Geotechnical Engineering I Engineering Geology Phone: (970)945-7988 Materials Testing I Environmental Fax:(970)945-8454 Email: hpkaIenwoodc kumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker, Glenwood Springs,and Silverthome, Colorado Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Wednesday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 10/5116 P.O. Box 2952 Page: 1 of 1 Vail, Colorado 81658 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Weather: Cloudy, calm, dry Temperature: 61° at 10:00 am Earthwork Contractor: Division Six Construction Equipment Used: Trackhoe, Hand tamper Description of Earthwork The contractor had placed backfill at the MSE wall. Both tests met minimum Tested: project compaction specifications. Sample(s) Obtained: Verbal Communication: Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our test result. Placement and Compaction Procedure: Reported by the Contractor. Lift Thickness: 1' Max. Rock Size: 3/4" Moisture hose Conditioning: Compactor(s) Used: hand tamper Number of Passes: as requested Nuclear Gauge MoisturelDensity Test Results Location Field Dry Field Field Min. Test Depth or Moisture Comp. Proctor No. Elev. Density Content Comp. Req. Lab No. (pcf) (o) (%) o/ 1 south end 3rd course 130.6 6.5 96 95 212-16 2 north end 3rd course 132.0 6.8 97 95 212-16 Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method Description Max. Dry Opt. Dens. (%) Moist. (%) 212-16 ASTM D 698 3/4'Aggregate Base Course 136.3 7.2 THIS REPORT PRESENTS OPINIONS AS A RESULT OF OUR OBSERVATIONSOF FILL PLACEMENT WE HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTINUE APPLYING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTIVE EFFORT AND MOISTURE TO FILL DURING THE TIMES WHEN OUR OBSERVER IS NOT OBSERVING OPERATIONS. THE NUCLEAR DENSOMETER METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 6938. Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randy.±divlslonslxccnstcom) Division Six Construction—Ondrej Mertlik(pm adlvIsionsixoDnstc3m rljf Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By H.p Ku mAR 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs,CO 81601 Geotechnical Engineering I Engineering Geology Phone:(970)945-7988 Materials Testing 1 Environmental Fax (970)945-8454 Email: hpkulenwoodt kumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker,Glenwood Springs,and Silverthome, Colorado Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Thursday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 1016116 P.O. Box 2952 Page: 1 of 1 Vail, Colorado 81658 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Weather: Cloudy, calm, dry Temperature: 48° at 10:30 am Earthwork Contractor: Division Six Construction Equipment Used: Trackhoe, Hand tamper Description of Earthwork MSE wall backfill continues. Compaction was judged to be adequate based on Tested: our test results. Sample(s) Obtained: Verbal Communication: Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our test result. Placement and Compaction Procedure: Reported by the Contractor. Lift Thickness: 1' Max. Rock Size: 3/411 Moisture hose Conditioning: Compactor(s) Used: hand tamper Number of Passes: as requested Nuclear Gauge Moisture/Density Test Results Location Field Dry Field Field Min. Test Depth or Moisture Comp. Proctor No. Elev. DSP y Content Comp. Req. Lab No. (%) 1 at radius 6th course 134.8 6.8 99 95 212-16 Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method Description Max. Dry Opt. Dens. (%) s Moist. (%) 212-16 ASTM D 698 3/:'Aggregate Base Course 136.3 7.2 THIS REPORT PRESENTS OPINIONS AS A RESULT OF OUR OBSERVATIONSOF FILL PLACEMENT WE HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTINUE APPLYING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTIVE EFFORT AND MOISTURE TO FILL DURING THE TIMES WHEN OUR OBSERVER IS NOT OBSERVING OPERATIONS THE NUCLEAR DENSOMETER METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 6938 Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randv@divlsionsixconst.com) Division Six Construction—Ondrej Mertlik tom@dEwlslgnsixconst.coml lilt Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By H-p Ku MAR5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs,CO 81601 .�clttechnical Engineering I Engineering Geology Phone: (970)945-7988 Materials Testing I Environmental Fax: (970)945-8454 Email: hpkglenwood(&kumarusa,com Office Locations: Parker, Glenwood Springs,and Silverthome, Colorado Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Wednesday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 9/14/16 P.O. Box 2952 Page: 1 of 1 Vail, Colorado 81658 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Weather: Partly cloudy, calm, dry Temperature: 66° at 12:06 pm Earthwork Contractor: Division Six Construction Equipment Used: Hand tamp Description of Earthwork The contractor has reportedly placed about 3' of 3/4"aggregate base course Tested: around the elevated parking columns. Compaction testing indicated adequate compaction. Sample(s) Obtained: yes Verbal Communication: Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our test result. Placement and Compaction Procedure: Reported by the Contractor. Lift Thickness: 1' Max. Rock Size: 3/R„ Moisture hose Conditioning: Compactor(s) Used: hand tamper Number of Passes: as requested Nuclear Gauge MoisturelDensity Test Results Field Min. Test Location Depth or Field Dry Moisture Field Comp Proctor n No. Elev. D{p o sitY Content Cha/o} Req. Lab No. 4' below 1 between columns bottom of 134.8 5.8 98 95 212-16 wall Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method Description Max. Dry Opt. Dens. (%) Moist. (%) 212-16 ASTM El 698 W' Aggregate Base Course 136.3 7.2 THIS REPORT PRESENTS OPINIONS AS A RESULT of OUR OBSERVATIONSOF FILL PLACEMENT WE HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTINUE APPLYING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTIVE EFFORT AND MOISTURE TO FILL DURING THE TIMES WHEN OUR OBSERVER tS NOT OBSERVING OPERATIONS THE NUCLEAR DENSO$AETER METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 6938 Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randvedivisionsixconst.com) Division Six Construction—Ondrej Mertlik tom¢ divisionsixeonst.coml lijf Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By Laboratory Proctor Compaction Test Report 137.5 I i—— --— _ T i i 7 2°/Q, 136.3 pc I __ 136 — 1 -_ --,-1 ^l i i __ LL \i ! _- i 1 _ _ ____ ir _4%i34. I ! 134.5 i i —1 1 ,_ I r c I W a) a 133 i ! i I i i i 131.5 ik ! _ N\L ZAV for — --- i Sp.G. = 130 I i i 2.63 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Water content,% ---Rock Corrected >—-Uncorrected Test specification ASTM D 698-00a Method C Standard Oversize corr. applied to each test point Elev! Classification Nat. °/Q n % Depth USCS AASHTO Moist. Sp.G. LL PI 314 in. No.200 GP-GM A-1-a NV NP 10.0 8.3 ROCK CORRECTED TEST RESULTS UNCORRECTED MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Maximum dry density = 136.3 pcf 134.4 pcf Class 6 Aggregate I3ase Course Optimum moisture = 7.2°.a 7.9% Project No. 16.7-352 Client: Division Six Construction Remarks: Project: Lot 2,Block C,Vail Ridge 2636 Davos Trail,Vail,Colorado See Figure IA for classification results. o Location:On Site Stockpile Sample Number: 212-16 Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Glenwood Springs, Colorado Figure 1 Tested By: KO Checked By: SLP Particle Size Distribution Report c c c 6 S Sa 0 O g ❑ g a g co ea N . r : :t 1�1 R i A 7k ; ; i 100 I I 1k\ I I I I ' I ! ! 1 T- - 114"ABC Class 6 ' I . '\I I I I I I I I 1 1 90 I \ I I I . 4 1 I -I I 1 ' I 1 I k I \1 I I 1 I 1 I 1I 80 I I\ I I __ I I i ' ` I AI " 70 I Irl \\ I I ] f , _ ! I ! I Il I W 60I , I \ I I I t i `: E I \ I \ I I I I z 50 I t I \\ I , I I I W I ‘ • ti 1 I I I C I \ I �� I I I I Lu a 40 I 1 I • l-~ I • z . , All._ I I I iI I ' I I I I I I ` • I �\ I I 30 I I I I . I 'I 11 I I I I `� I • I I \ 1 I 20 I I I I ��i 1 `l 1---I` . I _ I I l 1 1 I h-. 1 ■ I I ' L 1 I 1 I I i-� I 10 4 I I I 1 I I I �I.j I I 0 1 I I l I 11 . : I 1 I I I I i 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE-mm. y.+3" • %Gravel 1 Sand %Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt _ Clay 0 10 42 9 18 13 8 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.. PASS? Material Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Class 6 Aggregate Base Course 1.5 100 .75 90 100- 100 .375 62 Atterberq Limits #4448 30-65 PL= NP LL= NV PI= NP #8 40 25-55 #16 34 Coefficients_ #30 26 D85= 16.8322 D60= 8.6238 D50 5.2469 #50 16 030= 0.8414 D15= 0.2612 D10 0.1160 #100 11 Cu— 74.32 Cc= 0.71 #200 8.3 3 12 Classification USCS= GP-GM PASHTO= A-1-a Remarks See Figure 1 for standard Proctor compaction results. 3W"ABC Class 6 Location: On Site Stockpile Sample Number: 212.16 Date: 9/14/20 I 6 ____ Hepworth-Pawlak Client: Division Six Construction Project: Lot 2,Block C,Vail Ridge 2636 Davos Trail,Vail,Colorado Geotechnical, Inc. Glenwood Springs, Colorado Project No: 16-7-352 Figure IA Tested By: KO - Checked By: SLP H-p <U It\/I 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs,CO 81601 aoiechnical Engines igir. Phone: (970)945-7988 Iviaterials Testing I Environmental Fax:(970)945-8454 Email: hpkolenwoodekumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker,Glenwood Springs,and Silverthome,Colorado Earthwork Compaction Testing Report Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Tuesday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 10/11/16 P.O. Box 2952 Page: 1 of 1 Vail, CO 81658 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Weather: Partly cloudy, calm, dry Temperature: 51° at 10:30 am Earthwork Contractor: Division Six Construction Equipment Used: Trackhoe, Hand tamper Description of Earthwork We visited the site to observe MSE wall construction and to perform Tested: compaction testing. Sample(s) Obtained: Verbal Communication: Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our test results. Placement and Compaction Procedure: Observed by H-P/Kumar on part time basis. Lift Thickness: 6" Max. Rock Size: S/4" Moisture hose Conditioning: Compactor(s) Used: Hand tamper Number of Passes: as requested Nuclear Gauge Moisture/Density Test Results Location Field Dry Field Field Min. Test Depth or Moisture Comp. Proctor om No. Elev. Dip y Content C °0 p' Req. Lab No. ) (%) 1 10'S. of N.end 5'^course 131.6 7.6 97 95 est. 2 at radius 8th course 132.2 6.7 97 95 est. Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method Description Max. Dry Opt. _ Dens. (%) Moist. (%) estimated ASTM D 698 3/:'Aggregate Base Course 136 7 THIS REPORT PRESENTS OPINIONS AS A RESULT OF OUR OBSERVATIONSOF FILL PLACEMENT WE HAVE RELIED ON THE CONTRACTOR TO CONTINUE APPLYING THE RECOMMENDED COMPACTIVE EFFORT AND MOISTURE TO FILL DURING THE TIMES WHEN OUR OBSERVER IS NOT OBSERVING OPERATIONS THE NUCLEAR DENSOMETER METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 6938 Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randy@divisionsixconst.com) Division Six Construction—Ondrej Mertlik(et m dlVJsiansixcanst.com} /Ijf Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Geotechnical Engineering I Engineering Geology Phone: (970)945-7988 Materials Testing I Environmental Fax: (970)945-8454 Email: hpkglenwoodekumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker,Glenwood Springs, and Silverthome, Colorado REINFORCEMENT STEEL INSPECTION REPORT Client: Division Six Construction Project No.: 16-7-352 Day: Wednesday Attn: Randy Fischer Date: 9/28/16 2636 Davos Trail Page: 1 of 1 Vail, Colorado 81657 Project: Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Area of Inspection: All new garage foundation walls, Lower level addition and one 12" pier. Reference Documents Sheet S1.1, Foundation Plan Dated 5-11-16 and Details 36 and 39 on Used: Sheet S2.5. Inspection Notes: Inspection Status: ❑ Preliminary ® Final ❑ Concrete reinforcement as noted above was judged to be in reasonable conformance with the referenced construction documents. ❑ Exceptions Noted: Verbal Ondrej with Division Six Construction was informed of our inspection Communication: results. Distribution: Division Six Construction-Randy Fischer(randydivisionsixconst.carnl Division Six Construction—Ondrej Mertlik(o mdivisionsixconst.com) ilii Philip Orgill Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By Hepworth-Paw•lak Geotechnical, IncGL26-4St . 5020 County Road 154 �� Gime: Springs,Colorado 81601 Phone:970-945-7983 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL Fax:970-945.8454 email:hpgeo' hpgeorech.com June 13, 2016 Division Six Construction Attn: Randy Fischer 2636 Davos Trail Vail, Colorado 81657 randy@divisionsixconst.com Job No.116 205A Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Retaining Wall, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, 2636 Davos Trial, Vail, Colorado Gentlemen: As requested, Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. performed a subsoil study for design of the retaining wall foundations at the subject site. The study was conducted in general accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to you dated May 23, 2016. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this report. Proposed Construction: The existing residence is being renovated and a retaining wall is proposed for outside parking at the northwest corner of the property as shown on Figure 1. The driveway and parking area will have hard surfaced pavement. Cut and fill depths are expected to range between about 5 to 10 feet and the wall will extend out beyond the existing driveway edge. Foundation loadings for the residence construction are assumed to be relatively light and typical of the proposed type of construction. If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report. Site Conditions: The lot is occupied by tan existing 3-story residence with a walkout lower level located approximately as shown on Figure 1. The ground surface is moderately steep sloping down to the south with roughly 20 feet of elevation difference across the building footprint. Vegetation around the building mainly consists of grass. Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by drilling one exploratory boring at the approximate location shown on Figure 1. The log of the boring is presented on Figure 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 101/2 feet of silty sandy clay and organics mixed fill,consist of inter-layered medium dense/stiff sand and clay and medium dense silty sand and gravel to the boring depth of 49 feet. Results of a gradation analysis performed on a sample of silty sand and gravel (minus 11/2 inch fraction) obtained from the boring are presented on Figure 3. We also observed pits dug down to the existing building foundation at the locations shown on Figure 1 on May 24, 2016. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on a sample of clay taken from Parker 303-841-7119 • Colorado Springs 719-633-5562 • Silverthome 970-468-1989 _ ., - Pit 1, presented on Figure 4, indicate moderate to high compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. It appears the relatively high compressibility may have been partly due to sample disturbance. The laboratory test results are summarized in Table 1. No free water was encountered in the boring or observed in the pits at the time of excavation and the soils were generally moist. Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory boring and the nature of the proposed construction, the retaining wall can be founded on a spread footing placed on the undisturbed natural sand and clay soil designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. The soils tend to compress after wetting and there could be post-construction foundation settlement depending on the loading and depth of wetting. Footings should be a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. The existing fill, topsoil and loose disturbed soils encountered at the retaining wall area should be removed down to the undisturbed natural soils. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate cover above their bearing elevations for frost protection. Placement of footings at least 42 inches below the exterior grade is typically used in this area. We should observe the completed excavation prior to footing or wall construction. Foundation Walls and Retaining Structures: Building foundation walls which are laterally restrained 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 soils. Cantilevered or site retaining walls which are separate from the residence and can deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 40 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site soils. All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind walls, Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density at near optimum moisture content. Backfill placed 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 granular structural fill, such as road base, and compaction to at least 98% of standard Proctor density can be used to limit 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 Job Nor.116 205A Gtech - 3 - 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 0.40. Passive pressure of compacted backfill against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 350 pcf. The coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in the area and where there are clay soils that local perched groundwater can also develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below-grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawlspace and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free-draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1% to a suitable gravity outlet. Free-draining granular 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 11/feet deep. 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. 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. Free-draining wall backfill should be covered with filter fabric and capped with about 2 feet of the on-site, finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in pavement and walkway areas. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. 5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least 5 feet from the building. 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 Job No.116 205A Gtech -4 - this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory boring and pits located as shown on Figure 1 and to the boring depth shown on Figure 2, 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 boring and pits 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 at once so re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the 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. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please let us know. Respectfully Submitted, HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GE• .NICAL, INC. • , . 16222 .*, Steven L. Pawlak, P.E , ' Reviewed by: ' y ��J; Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. SLP/ksw Attachments: Figure 1 -Location of Exploratory Boring Figure 2- Log of Exploratory Boring Figure 3 - Legend and Notes Figure 4-Gradation Test Results Figure 5-Swell-Consolidation Test Results Table 1 - Summary of Laboratory Test Results lob No,116 205A Gtech APPROXIMATE SCALE 1 20' irN. 8000 s - _ 1 0 � — \ F______ , --, \ , .\ \ -----i \ I PIT 1 \ \ (8 1/2 DEEP) ■ PIT 2 ` (5 1/2' DEEP)\ I X • 000 \I 1 I LOT 1 EXISTING RESIDENCE _ 1 L.L. = 8011.9' 1 SOO \ LOT 3 I \ GARAGE PIT 3 \ `ADDITION 51/2'DEE8 F.F. = 8029.0' 070 .--.. ( in PROPOSED RETAINING \� I WALL PIT 4 8 pR/VF BORING 1 1/2'DEE` 602 o LOT 2 x'41' BLOCK C --. --. —. — — — — —. -- / — , EXISTING \ BLOCK 1 WALL 1 DAVOS TRAIL t 116 205A gr h LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING Figure 1 Hepworth—Pawlak Geotechnical BORING 1 ELEV.= 8020' 0 0 1/12 — .■ 2/12 189 — Owl DD 106 10 -200 71 WC-13 5— — ■ -20 2 10 -200==42 UC 1,500 15/12 WC=79 — _ DD 109 +4 41 20 — fon 25/12 200 24 20 _ - a) U- 9112 — ■ WC1 201 — -� DD 103 — 30 -200 78 30 ❑ 10/12 11 WC=19,1 40 DD=104 — 20084 40 UC-2,300 ■ 54/12 50 50 NOTE: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 3. 116 205A GHch LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING Figure 2 Hepworth—Pawlak Geotechnical LEGEND: FILL; mixed silty sandy clay and organics, wood debris, loose/soft,very moist, dark brown. !:: SAND AND CLAY(SC-CL); silty, scattered gravel to gravely, medium dense/stiff, moist, brown, low plant city SAND AND GRAVEL (SM-GM); silty, medium dense, moist, brown, 61 11 Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-inch I.D. Caifornia liner sample, 5/12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 5 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California sampler 12 inches. NOTES: 1. The exploratory boring was drilled on June 3, 2016 with a 4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 2. The exploratory boring location was measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided 3. The exploratory boring elevation was obtained by interpolation between contours on the site plan provided. 4. The exploratory boring location and elevation should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used, 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring log represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the boring at the time of drilling . Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content (%) DD = Dry Density(pct) +4 = Percent retained on the No. 4 sieve -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve UC = Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf) 116 205AGe~ rC@ch LEGEND AND NOTES Figure 3 Hepworth—Par/10k Geotechnical IHYDROMETER ANALYSIS I SIEVE ANALYSIS 24 HR. 7 HR TIME READINGS U S STANDARD SERIESSIEVE CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 0 45 MIN 15 MIN 60MIN19MIN.4 MIN 1 MIN #200 #100 #50 #30 #16 #8 #4 3/8' 3/4 1 1/2 3 5 6 8 i fir_— r.—irr.- ir-- 100 ii.— a-^ai—a—aaa--- +. .a r'r ai--- aaaaa-aai— i—i—•--- Ell iaa—i—MINI--- raaaaa i —ai,---- iai— i rii---- — a1--- 90 10 ili ce— .---- aaaaa-.-i— r --- - — --i'a---- .-rte.- -- MM — MI MI it-.-a-- IMO aaIMI—Iii-- - i aa—S. i--aaa— i�i _—ii-- -- iaa—r—i--a ill r....i Baa—iii-- 80 20 ` 4ia�i--..r , M111=11=NII il—a i i i-i r�i-i Mr -raaa1ii-- aa-- --i aaaai i-- rte--i i rasa—i--- iraiii-- IMMI— IMI i--- iri i--MEN a—rte- MINI —i —,IM MI I ai•--- Mil .r •w— -/IMM iMINI r1-- 70 30 a.la. - _� ` a_ --- r .a ---- limm— .—aa—arii--- aa �— i.ms ii--- aa—III=— aa—rri..—=IN— --- .a-1 •1=— Ssis amIMI--- • s__—ir ,-- Q IMa a-iii i--- fR �aai i—i ir1-- 60 Z W40 --.— ai—iii-- Z ice— '`ii ri-- iaarr�i ilii--- V1 Q ice— aaaa►_i iaa—ii rail.— aaa►iiiaaaaii--- V) r ids a�—ii—iiaaa--- Q �. -_iara .ii-rs-.-a— 0.. --.,�— imi mil r—Iii iri iirs— 50 H 50I— Ilai�� ai ilii^i-- —�— . NO Z Z il — —rerM---- -a la! LL'a s. — -M.,'• . ---a—rte---- W 0. r—�— r..r --Kiri--.—rte— 40 0_ iw--- Sr—i --ii i i r•—.moi--.-- iwI M M M I— --iii rII—i—ii IMI-- i MINI— r— --- — . - - - - a- - i ra-aa—i Marr-— i MINI—i rasa—iiaaaa►- i_aa—r---IMI iaai—aa—i--Maar_ --- i —MINI—aa—rasa—as--_a i—MIN t---=NM M. 70 —it—a.i•— iii_ i i•— _ i MINI—aa--aa--S ri—all= i MINI—i—i aa—rWAAR i_i i—r i i MINI—a --aa—_a --- III MINII II Ii iia i ar—i ME i rI M — 10.1Iml ii rasa—aa—•s i—ii--- lil la IM i i i Maar r--- i�a i ra-- -- Illt— i—er -- i�— —1i-.i i Mari`-- ■� EMI --- la — iMr MI MI. IIN arill MI iaaaa-- --- ^— -- — M!—Ma Mal I .i i--- • go —�—Nows i—moi--- mi s-- i—aaaai i--- a —as— i IN iari-- -- --- ~irl_i---- a --- i—i i--- -i --- iaaii iari-- 0 100 a.... . iaa—i--- 001 002 005 009 019 037 074 150 300 600 1 18 2 36 4 75 9.5 19 0 37 5 76 2 152 203 1.• 5 127 D AMETER OF PARTICLES!N MI IMETERS C LAY;Oa I ( SANa GiUYFI COC E3t.E5 NE I MED'JM I COARSE F W1 COARSE GRAVEL 41 % SAND 35 % SILT AND CLAY 24 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX % SAMPLE OF: Silty Sand and Gravel FROM:Baring 1 at 15 Feet Gg116 205A GRADATION TEST RESULTS Figure 4 Hepworth—Pawlak Geotechnical Moisture Content = 13.6 percent Dry Density = 102 pcf Sample of: Silty Sandy Clay From: Pit 3 at 4 Feet 0 1 Compression upon 2 -wetting 92 92 3 • 4 5 7 • 8 9 10 • 11 _ 0 1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE-ksf 116 205A � _~per_ C.7B`��Ch SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 5 Hepworth—Pawlak Geotechnical 2 = 2 « § > § o CL C 0 . 2 D G G_ § 2 CZ 0 k CC CI) 2 -N U U 00 z ci � � >1 rj .0 ID k k CS § 2 § ® � U 2 00 U k rrr, k 7 m > D rn cn � q 00 \ W / q q R q 0§ 2 § q •-4 Du LiLn _ . _ \2 Y -§ k�« 2 UcC - Z §- U Lu § § / >- < / Z 1-1-1 / 9 eC % a, § § k c U Z — N 00 7 — en CL m § § I « CC 2 3 0 / q o > § a en 2 LU 2 . . . .. 4 _ § k LI 1- § -1 _4 - en k 2 -4 of 2 0c 4 D Lu 2 D In D _ _ « vo 400 E - N - � -4 z 2 u I 2 - in co m « o _ N en § al g _ . k - — . H-P ICU MAR 5020 County Road 154 1- Glenwood Springs,CO 81601 Geotechnical Engineering l Engineering Geology Phone: (970)945-7988 Materials Testing ti Environmental Fax: (970)945-8454 Email: hpkglenwood@kumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker,Glenwood Springs, and Silverthorne, Colorado September 16, 2016 Division Six Construction Attn: Randy Fischer 2636 Davos Trail Vail, Colorado 81657 randy@divisionsixconst.com Project No. 16-7-352 Subject: Observation of Excavation, Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Gentlemen: As requested, a representative of H-P/Kumar observed the excavation at the subject site on September 9, 2016 to evaluate the soils exposed for foundation support. The findings of our observations and recommendations for the foundation design are presented in this report. Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical (now H-P/Kumar) previously conducted a subsoil study for design of a retaining wall foundation at the site and presented our findings in a report dated June 13, 2016, Job No. 116 205A. The garage addition will be attached to the uphill, northeast corner of the residence. Spread footings placed on the natural soils and sized for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf were designed for the garage foundation support. At the time of our visit to the site, the perimeter trench foundation excavation had been cut in 3 levels from 4 to 8 feet below the adjacent ground surface. The steps in grade were between about 2 to 5 feet and generally down to the southeast with the slope of the adjacent ground surface. The soils exposed in the bottom of the excavation consisted of stiff, sandy silty clay with gravel. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on a sample taken from the site, shown on Figure 1, indicate the soils are slightly to moderately compressible under conditions of loading and wetting. No free water was encountered in the excavation and the soils were moist. The soil conditions exposed in the excavation are generally consistent with those previously encountered on the site and suitable for support of spread footings designed for the recommended allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Loose disturbed soils in the footing areas should be compacted or removed to expose the undisturbed natural soils. Other recommendations presented in our previous report which are applicable should also be observed. The recommendations submitted in this letter are based on our observation of the soils exposed within the foundation excavation and the previous limited subsurface exploration at the site. Variations in the subsurface conditions below the excavation could increase the risk of Division Six Construction September 16, 2016 Page 2 foundation movement. We should be advised of any variations encountered in the excavation conditions for possible changes to recommendations contained in this letter. 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. If you have any questions or need further assistance,please call our office. Sincerely, H-P: KUMAR i�j�i �4 a-4 t. Steven L. Pawlak, P.-. s di 5 2 2 2 SLP/ksw te • � Attachment: Figure 1 —Sw- ., -- •tion Test Results H-P KUMAR Project No. 16-7-352 Moisture Content = 15.5 percent Dry Density = 106 pcf Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay From: Bottom of Excavation. Garage Area 9/9/16 0 1 No movement 0 • upon wetting c 2 0 0 3 4 • • 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE-ksf 16-7-352 H-P` KU MAR SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 1 Hepworth-Paw•lak Geotechnical, IncGL26-4St . 5020 County Road 154 �� Gime: Springs,Colorado 81601 Phone:970-945-7983 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL Fax:970-945.8454 email:hpgeo' hpgeorech.com June 13, 2016 Division Six Construction Attn: Randy Fischer 2636 Davos Trail Vail, Colorado 81657 randy@divisionsixconst.com Job No.116 205A Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Retaining Wall, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, 2636 Davos Trial, Vail, Colorado Gentlemen: As requested, Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. performed a subsoil study for design of the retaining wall foundations at the subject site. The study was conducted in general accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to you dated May 23, 2016. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this report. Proposed Construction: The existing residence is being renovated and a retaining wall is proposed for outside parking at the northwest corner of the property as shown on Figure 1. The driveway and parking area will have hard surfaced pavement. Cut and fill depths are expected to range between about 5 to 10 feet and the wall will extend out beyond the existing driveway edge. Foundation loadings for the residence construction are assumed to be relatively light and typical of the proposed type of construction. If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report. Site Conditions: The lot is occupied by tan existing 3-story residence with a walkout lower level located approximately as shown on Figure 1. The ground surface is moderately steep sloping down to the south with roughly 20 feet of elevation difference across the building footprint. Vegetation around the building mainly consists of grass. Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by drilling one exploratory boring at the approximate location shown on Figure 1. The log of the boring is presented on Figure 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 101/2 feet of silty sandy clay and organics mixed fill,consist of inter-layered medium dense/stiff sand and clay and medium dense silty sand and gravel to the boring depth of 49 feet. Results of a gradation analysis performed on a sample of silty sand and gravel (minus 11/2 inch fraction) obtained from the boring are presented on Figure 3. We also observed pits dug down to the existing building foundation at the locations shown on Figure 1 on May 24, 2016. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on a sample of clay taken from Parker 303-841-7119 • Colorado Springs 719-633-5562 • Silverthome 970-468-1989 _ ., - Pit 1, presented on Figure 4, indicate moderate to high compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. It appears the relatively high compressibility may have been partly due to sample disturbance. The laboratory test results are summarized in Table 1. No free water was encountered in the boring or observed in the pits at the time of excavation and the soils were generally moist. Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory boring and the nature of the proposed construction, the retaining wall can be founded on a spread footing placed on the undisturbed natural sand and clay soil designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. The soils tend to compress after wetting and there could be post-construction foundation settlement depending on the loading and depth of wetting. Footings should be a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. The existing fill, topsoil and loose disturbed soils encountered at the retaining wall area should be removed down to the undisturbed natural soils. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate cover above their bearing elevations for frost protection. Placement of footings at least 42 inches below the exterior grade is typically used in this area. We should observe the completed excavation prior to footing or wall construction. Foundation Walls and Retaining Structures: Building foundation walls which are laterally restrained 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 soils. Cantilevered or site retaining walls which are separate from the residence and can deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 40 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site soils. All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind walls, Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density at near optimum moisture content. Backfill placed 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 granular structural fill, such as road base, and compaction to at least 98% of standard Proctor density can be used to limit 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 Job Nor.116 205A Gtech - 3 - 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 0.40. Passive pressure of compacted backfill against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 350 pcf. The coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in the area and where there are clay soils that local perched groundwater can also develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below-grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawlspace and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free-draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1% to a suitable gravity outlet. Free-draining granular 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 11/feet deep. 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. 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. Free-draining wall backfill should be covered with filter fabric and capped with about 2 feet of the on-site, finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in pavement and walkway areas. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. 5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least 5 feet from the building. 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 Job No.116 205A Gtech -4 - this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory boring and pits located as shown on Figure 1 and to the boring depth shown on Figure 2, 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 boring and pits 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 at once so re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the 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. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please let us know. Respectfully Submitted, HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GE• .NICAL, INC. • , . 16222 .*, Steven L. Pawlak, P.E , ' Reviewed by: ' y ��J; Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. SLP/ksw Attachments: Figure 1 -Location of Exploratory Boring Figure 2- Log of Exploratory Boring Figure 3 - Legend and Notes Figure 4-Gradation Test Results Figure 5-Swell-Consolidation Test Results Table 1 - Summary of Laboratory Test Results lob No,116 205A Gtech APPROXIMATE SCALE 1 20' irN. 8000 s - _ 1 0 � — \ F______ , --, \ , .\ \ -----i \ I PIT 1 \ \ (8 1/2 DEEP) ■ PIT 2 ` (5 1/2' DEEP)\ I X • 000 \I 1 I LOT 1 EXISTING RESIDENCE _ 1 L.L. = 8011.9' 1 SOO \ LOT 3 I \ GARAGE PIT 3 \ `ADDITION 51/2'DEE8 F.F. = 8029.0' 070 .--.. ( in PROPOSED RETAINING \� I WALL PIT 4 8 pR/VF BORING 1 1/2'DEE` 602 o LOT 2 x'41' BLOCK C --. --. —. — — — — —. -- / — , EXISTING \ BLOCK 1 WALL 1 DAVOS TRAIL t 116 205A gr h LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING Figure 1 Hepworth—Pawlak Geotechnical BORING 1 ELEV.= 8020' 0 0 1/12 — .■ 2/12 189 — Owl DD 106 10 -200 71 WC-13 5— — ■ -20 2 10 -200==42 UC 1,500 15/12 WC=79 — _ DD 109 +4 41 20 — fon 25/12 200 24 20 _ - a) U- 9112 — ■ WC1 201 — -� DD 103 — 30 -200 78 30 ❑ 10/12 11 WC=19,1 40 DD=104 — 20084 40 UC-2,300 ■ 54/12 50 50 NOTE: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 3. 116 205A GHch LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING Figure 2 Hepworth—Pawlak Geotechnical LEGEND: FILL; mixed silty sandy clay and organics, wood debris, loose/soft,very moist, dark brown. !:: SAND AND CLAY(SC-CL); silty, scattered gravel to gravely, medium dense/stiff, moist, brown, low plant city SAND AND GRAVEL (SM-GM); silty, medium dense, moist, brown, 61 11 Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-inch I.D. Caifornia liner sample, 5/12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 5 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California sampler 12 inches. NOTES: 1. The exploratory boring was drilled on June 3, 2016 with a 4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 2. The exploratory boring location was measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided 3. The exploratory boring elevation was obtained by interpolation between contours on the site plan provided. 4. The exploratory boring location and elevation should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used, 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring log represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the boring at the time of drilling . Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content (%) DD = Dry Density(pct) +4 = Percent retained on the No. 4 sieve -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve UC = Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf) 116 205AGe~ rC@ch LEGEND AND NOTES Figure 3 Hepworth—Par/10k Geotechnical IHYDROMETER ANALYSIS I SIEVE ANALYSIS 24 HR. 7 HR TIME READINGS U S STANDARD SERIESSIEVE CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 0 45 MIN 15 MIN 60MIN19MIN.4 MIN 1 MIN #200 #100 #50 #30 #16 #8 #4 3/8' 3/4 1 1/2 3 5 6 8 i fir_— r.—irr.- ir-- 100 ii.— a-^ai—a—aaa--- +. .a r'r ai--- aaaaa-aai— i—i—•--- Ell iaa—i—MINI--- raaaaa i —ai,---- iai— i rii---- — a1--- 90 10 ili ce— .---- aaaaa-.-i— r --- - — --i'a---- .-rte.- -- MM — MI MI it-.-a-- IMO aaIMI—Iii-- - i aa—S. i--aaa— i�i _—ii-- -- iaa—r—i--a ill r....i Baa—iii-- 80 20 ` 4ia�i--..r , M111=11=NII il—a i i i-i r�i-i Mr -raaa1ii-- aa-- --i aaaai i-- rte--i i rasa—i--- iraiii-- IMMI— IMI i--- iri i--MEN a—rte- MINI —i —,IM MI I ai•--- Mil .r •w— -/IMM iMINI r1-- 70 30 a.la. - _� ` a_ --- r .a ---- limm— .—aa—arii--- aa �— i.ms ii--- aa—III=— aa—rri..—=IN— --- .a-1 •1=— Ssis amIMI--- • s__—ir ,-- Q IMa a-iii i--- fR �aai i—i ir1-- 60 Z W40 --.— ai—iii-- Z ice— '`ii ri-- iaarr�i ilii--- V1 Q ice— aaaa►_i iaa—ii rail.— aaa►iiiaaaaii--- V) r ids a�—ii—iiaaa--- Q �. -_iara .ii-rs-.-a— 0.. --.,�— imi mil r—Iii iri iirs— 50 H 50I— Ilai�� ai ilii^i-- —�— . NO Z Z il — —rerM---- -a la! LL'a s. — -M.,'• . ---a—rte---- W 0. r—�— r..r --Kiri--.—rte— 40 0_ iw--- Sr—i --ii i i r•—.moi--.-- iwI M M M I— --iii rII—i—ii IMI-- i MINI— r— --- — . - - - - a- - i ra-aa—i Marr-— i MINI—i rasa—iiaaaa►- i_aa—r---IMI iaai—aa—i--Maar_ --- i —MINI—aa—rasa—as--_a i—MIN t---=NM M. 70 —it—a.i•— iii_ i i•— _ i MINI—aa--aa--S ri—all= i MINI—i—i aa—rWAAR i_i i—r i i MINI—a --aa—_a --- III MINII II Ii iia i ar—i ME i rI M — 10.1Iml ii rasa—aa—•s i—ii--- lil la IM i i i Maar r--- i�a i ra-- -- Illt— i—er -- i�— —1i-.i i Mari`-- ■� EMI --- la — iMr MI MI. IIN arill MI iaaaa-- --- ^— -- — M!—Ma Mal I .i i--- • go —�—Nows i—moi--- mi s-- i—aaaai i--- a —as— i IN iari-- -- --- ~irl_i---- a --- i—i i--- -i --- iaaii iari-- 0 100 a.... . iaa—i--- 001 002 005 009 019 037 074 150 300 600 1 18 2 36 4 75 9.5 19 0 37 5 76 2 152 203 1.• 5 127 D AMETER OF PARTICLES!N MI IMETERS C LAY;Oa I ( SANa GiUYFI COC E3t.E5 NE I MED'JM I COARSE F W1 COARSE GRAVEL 41 % SAND 35 % SILT AND CLAY 24 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX % SAMPLE OF: Silty Sand and Gravel FROM:Baring 1 at 15 Feet Gg116 205A GRADATION TEST RESULTS Figure 4 Hepworth—Pawlak Geotechnical Moisture Content = 13.6 percent Dry Density = 102 pcf Sample of: Silty Sandy Clay From: Pit 3 at 4 Feet 0 1 Compression upon 2 -wetting 92 92 3 • 4 5 7 • 8 9 10 • 11 _ 0 1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE-ksf 116 205A � _~per_ C.7B`��Ch SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 5 Hepworth—Pawlak Geotechnical 2 = 2 « § > § o CL C 0 . 2 D G G_ § 2 CZ 0 k CC CI) 2 -N U U 00 z ci � � >1 rj .0 ID k k CS § 2 § ® � U 2 00 U k rrr, k 7 m > D rn cn � q 00 \ W / q q R q 0§ 2 § q •-4 Du LiLn _ . _ \2 Y -§ k�« 2 UcC - Z §- U Lu § § / >- < / Z 1-1-1 / 9 eC % a, § § k c U Z — N 00 7 — en CL m § § I « CC 2 3 0 / q o > § a en 2 LU 2 . . . .. 4 _ § k LI 1- § -1 _4 - en k 2 -4 of 2 0c 4 D Lu 2 D In D _ _ « vo 400 E - N - � -4 z 2 u I 2 - in co m « o _ N en § al g _ . k - — . H-P ICU MAR 5020 County Road 154 1- Glenwood Springs,CO 81601 Geotechnical Engineering l Engineering Geology Phone: (970)945-7988 Materials Testing ti Environmental Fax: (970)945-8454 Email: hpkglenwood@kumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker,Glenwood Springs, and Silverthorne, Colorado September 16, 2016 Division Six Construction Attn: Randy Fischer 2636 Davos Trail Vail, Colorado 81657 randy@divisionsixconst.com Project No. 16-7-352 Subject: Observation of Excavation, Proposed Garage Addition, 2636 Davos Trail, Lot 2, Block C, Vail Ridge, Vail, Colorado Gentlemen: As requested, a representative of H-P/Kumar observed the excavation at the subject site on September 9, 2016 to evaluate the soils exposed for foundation support. The findings of our observations and recommendations for the foundation design are presented in this report. Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical (now H-P/Kumar) previously conducted a subsoil study for design of a retaining wall foundation at the site and presented our findings in a report dated June 13, 2016, Job No. 116 205A. The garage addition will be attached to the uphill, northeast corner of the residence. Spread footings placed on the natural soils and sized for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf were designed for the garage foundation support. At the time of our visit to the site, the perimeter trench foundation excavation had been cut in 3 levels from 4 to 8 feet below the adjacent ground surface. The steps in grade were between about 2 to 5 feet and generally down to the southeast with the slope of the adjacent ground surface. The soils exposed in the bottom of the excavation consisted of stiff, sandy silty clay with gravel. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on a sample taken from the site, shown on Figure 1, indicate the soils are slightly to moderately compressible under conditions of loading and wetting. No free water was encountered in the excavation and the soils were moist. The soil conditions exposed in the excavation are generally consistent with those previously encountered on the site and suitable for support of spread footings designed for the recommended allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Loose disturbed soils in the footing areas should be compacted or removed to expose the undisturbed natural soils. Other recommendations presented in our previous report which are applicable should also be observed. The recommendations submitted in this letter are based on our observation of the soils exposed within the foundation excavation and the previous limited subsurface exploration at the site. Variations in the subsurface conditions below the excavation could increase the risk of Division Six Construction September 16, 2016 Page 2 foundation movement. We should be advised of any variations encountered in the excavation conditions for possible changes to recommendations contained in this letter. 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. If you have any questions or need further assistance,please call our office. Sincerely, H-P: KUMAR i�j�i �4 a-4 t. Steven L. Pawlak, P.-. s di 5 2 2 2 SLP/ksw te • � Attachment: Figure 1 —Sw- ., -- •tion Test Results H-P KUMAR Project No. 16-7-352 Moisture Content = 15.5 percent Dry Density = 106 pcf Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay From: Bottom of Excavation. Garage Area 9/9/16 0 1 No movement 0 • upon wetting c 2 0 0 3 4 • • 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE-ksf 16-7-352 H-P` KU MAR SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 1