No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout190 Gore Trl - 210716306001 - Summit Halfway HouseINDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION P.O. Box 179 - 500 Broadway • Eagle, CO 81631 Telephone: (970) 328-8755 COPY OF PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT INSTALLATION SITE. PERMIT NO. 2016-00 BP NO. 13258 OWNER: KENSINGTON PARTNERS PHONE: 970-390-5030 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 988, EDWARDS, CO 81632 APPLICANT: CHRIS WILLIAMS, JOHNSON, KUNKLE & ASSOCIATES, INC. PHONE: 970-328-6368 EXT. 223 SYSTEM LOCATION: 290 WEBB PEAK, CORDILLERA GOLF COURSE, EDWARDS TAX PARCEL NO. 2107-163-016001 LICENSED INSTALLER: SPIEGEL CONSTRUCTION, CHRIS SPIEGEL LICENSE NO. 20-00 PHONE: 970-524-7148 DESIGN ENGINEER: JOHNSON, KUNKLE & ASSOCIATES, INC., CHRIS WILLIAMS PHONE NO. 970-328-6368 INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THE GOLF COURSE HALFWAY HOUSE RESTAURANT 1250 GALLON CONCRETE SEPTIC TANK, 4495 SQUARE FEET OF ABSORPTION AREA, VIA 145 INFILTRATOR UNITS AS PER ENGINEER'S DESIGN. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: INSTALL AS PER ENGINEER'S DESIGN REVISIONS DATED 8/16/00. BE SURE TO MAINTAIN ALL APPLICABLE SET BACK REQUIREMENTS. AN ENGINEER OR SOIL SCIENTIST NEEDS TO SUPERVISE THE INSTALLATION OF THE TRENCHES IN THE SOIL BELOW THE CLAY LAYER FOR BETTER INFILTRATION. RAKE ALL TRENCH SURFACES TO PREVENT THE SMEARING OF SOILS. AND DO NOT INSTALL IN WET WEATH- ER. ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FINAL INSPECTION. DO NOT BACK FILL ANY PART OF THE INSTALLATION UNTIL THE ENGINEER HAS INSPECTED AND APPROVED IT. THE BUILDING CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL THE SEPTIC SYSTEM HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND APPROVED. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: a DATE: AUGUST 17, 2000 CONDITIONS: 1. ALL INSTALLATIONS MUST COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE EAGLE COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GRANTED IN 25-10-104, 1973, AS AMENDED. 2. THIS PERMIT IS VALID ONLY FOR CONNECTION TO STRUCTURES WHICH HAVE FULLY COMPLIED WITH COUNTY ZONING AND BUILDING REQUIREMENTS. CONNECTION TO, OR USE WITH ANY DWELLING OR STRUCTURE NOT APPROVED BY THE ZONING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS SHALL AUTOMATICALLY BE A VIOLATION OF A REQUIREMENT OF THE PERMIT, AND WILL RESULT IN BOTH LEGAL ACTION AND REVOCATION OF THE PERMIT. 3. CHAPTER IV, SECTION 4,03.29 REQUIRES ANY PERSON WHO CONSTRUCTS, ALTERS OR INSTALLS AN INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM TO BE LICENSED. FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM (TO BE COMPLETED BY INSPECTOR): NO SYSTEM SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EAGLE COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS UNTIL THE SYSTEM IS APPROVED PRIOR TO COVERING ANY PORTION OF THE SYSTEM. INSTALLED ABSORPTION OR DISPERSAL AREA: 4495 SQUAREFEET(VIA 145 INFILTRATOR UNITS. AS PER DESIGN ) INSTALLED CONCRETE SEPTIC TANK: 1250 GALLONS IS LOCATED DEGREES AND 40 FEET INCHES FROM THE CLEANOUT ON THE EAST SIDF. OF THE BUTL.DTNG- COMMENTS: THIS DEPARTMENT ACKNOWLEDGES THAT TH • SYSTEM INSTALLED WILL F N TTON, BUT IS NOT WHAT WAS PERMITTED AND IS NOT IDEAL. THE ORIGINAL DESIGN CALLED FOR THE 2 SECTIONS OF THE LEACH FTF.LD TO BE CONNECTED SERTAT,T.Y FROM THE T,AST TRENCH nF THE FAST FIEP,,D(THF. SMALLER OF THE 9), _ TO THE 1ST TRENCH OF THE NORTH FIELD. INSTEAD, THE FLOW IS DIVIDED WITH A SPLITTER TEE TO BOTH FIELDS, IF THE TEE CONNECTION AT THE OUTLET OF THE TANK BECOMES UN—LEVFT, THE SYSTEM COULD FAIL AT THAT POINT A REPAIR WOULD HAVE TO.BE DONE. THE ENGINEER HAS CERTIFIED THE''INSTALLATION'.- ANY ITEM NOT MEETING REQUIREMENTS WILL BE CORRECTED BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM IS MADE. ARRANGE A RE -INSPECTION WHEN WORK IS COMPLETED. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL // IGtiw[ Q DATE: JULY 27, 2001 „ In^omplete Applications Will NOT Be Accepted (Site Plan MUST be attached) ISDS Permit # aC.KJ Building Permit ## APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICE - EAGLE COUNTY P. 0. BOX 179 EAGLE, CO 81631. 328-8755/927-3823 (El Jebel) ************************************************************************** * FEE SCHEDULE * PERMIT APPLICATION FEE $150.00 PERCOLATION.TEST FEE $200.00 * SIZING AND SITE VISIT FEE $85.00 (WHEN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SIZES THE * SYSTEM USING YOUR SOILS REPORT) * MAKE ALL REMITTANCE PAYABLE TO: 'EAGLE COUNTY TREASURER" ************************************************************************** PRnPF.RTY nWT\TFR MAILING ADDRESS: box- C?e c3 cis ►C�_ rSl.�3'L PHONE: ` %0-YQ -b0 APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON: CHR-,-3 U3\LLIAM") PHONE: 3'L9 -b3i E-ICA� LICENSED SYSTEMS CONTRACTOR: SQosz� C �N.Q�: PHONE: 54y-"7jyg COMPANY/DBA: ADDRESS: �2105 NP,1Zn Scr��h�so *************************************************************************** PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR: ()0 NEW INSTALLATION ( ) ALTERATION ( ) REPAIR LOCATION OF PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM: Legal Description: C� da ���cc. U.►�lUr Ll 40 / Tax Parcel Number: R(AtC \ k.�'"y 163 -6/Sot Size: NA Physical Address: ac(o U,)O b% BUILDING TYPE: (Check applicable category) ( ) Residential/Single Family Number of Bedrooms ( ) Residential/Multi-Family* Number of Bedrooms 04 Commercial/Industrial* Type *These systems require design by a Registered Professional Engineer TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: (Check applicable category) ( ) Well ( ) Spring ( ) Surface (ICJ Public Name of Supplier: C�__c�:��. Mb.an��;.� il.0-�ro APPLICANT SIGNATURE: (22 , 1�/,.XX Date: 1/ 2112-t� *************************************************************************** AMOUNT PAID: RECEI PT # : DATE: CHECK # : 00(062 CASHIER: Community Development Department (970)328-8730 FAX (970) 328-7185 TDD (970) 328-8797 Email: eccmdeva@vail.net http: //www.eagle-county.com EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO Date: August 17, 2000 TO: Spiegel Construction FROM: Environmental Health Division Eagle County Building P.O. Box 179 500 Broadway Eagle, Colorado 81631-0179 RE: Issuance of Individual Sewage Disposal System Permit No.2016-00. Property Location: 290 Webb Peak, Cordillera Golf Course, Edwards, Kensington Partners property. Enclosed is your ISDS Permit No. 2016-00. It is valid for 120 days. The enclosed copy of the permit must be posted at the installation site. Any changes in plans or specifications invalidates the permit unless otherwise approved. Please note any special requirements that may have been added to the design by this department. Systems designed by a Registered Professional Engineer must be certified by the Engineer indicating that the system was installed as specified. Eagle County does not perform final inspections on engineer designed systems. Your TCO will not be issued until our office receives this certification. Permit specifications are minimum requirements only, and should be brought to the property owner's attention. This permit does not indicate conformance with other Eagle County requirements. Please notify this office if you have not been contracted to perform this installation. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the Environmental Health Division at 328- 8755. cc: files Johnson, Kunkle & Associates, Inc., Chris Williams Community Development Department (970) 328-8730 FAX (970) 328-7185 TDD (970) 328-8797 Email: eccmdeva@vail.net http: //www.eagle-county.com July 27, 2001 Kensington Partners Attn: Dennis Stoner P.O. Box 988 Edwards, CO 81632 EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO Eagle County Building P.O. Box 179 500 Broadway Eagle, Colorado 81631-0179 RE: Final of ISDS Permit 92016-00, Tax Parcel #2107-163-01-001. Property location: Cordillera Golf Course Halfway House, 290 Web Peak, Edwards, CO. Dear Mr. Stoner: This letter is to inform you that the above referenced ISDS Permit has been inspected and finalized. Enclosed is a copy to retain for your records. This permit does not indicate compliance with any other Eagle County requirements. Also enclosed is a brochure regarding the care of your septic system. Be aware that later changes to your building may require appropriate alterations of your septic system. If you have any questions regarding this permit, please contact the Eagle County Environmental Health Division at (970) 328-8755. Sincerely, f Janet Kohl Environmental Health Department Eagle County Community Development ENCL: Informational Brochure Final ISDS Permit cc: files Johnson, Kunkel & Associates, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • MAPPING July 24, 2001 Eagle County Environmental Health 500 Broadway Eagle, CO 81631 Attn: Ray Merry Subject: Septic System As -Built, ISDS Permit No. 2016-00 Cordillera Summit Golf Course Half Way House at Hole 9 Property Location: 290 Webb Peak, Cordillera Dear Mr. Merry: As per our phone conservation on the 23rd of July, I went to the site and took some updated pictures. The cart path does not encroach on either of the leach areas nor does it effect any of the portholes. The east leach field area is in compliance with the design plans. The north leach field was modified to accommodate the main cart path. The design was modified in the field from having the two fields being connected, to both fields being separated through the use of a tee connection at the outlet of the septic tank. The lower trench of the east leach field was too deep to allow a gravity connection with the first trench of the north field. Thus the as -built drawings, along with the pictures, show the system being different from what was approved. The approved design was very conservative and the system should perform to the design as it was intended. It would not be beneficial to dig up any of the cart path crossing to redo the system as originally designed. The gravity connection will not work due to the infiltrators being buried in the sandy layer of the soil which are approximately 4'-7' deeper thannatural ground level. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at 328-6368, ext. 223. Sincerely, Chris Williams Production Administrator Johnson Kunkel and Associates. Inc. pc: Denny Stoner, Cordillera P.O. Box 409 • 1286 Chambers Ave. • Suite 200 Eagle, Colorado 81631 • Phone (970) 328-6368 • Fax: (970) 328-1035 P.O. Box 771 196 • 1 120 So. Lincoln Ave. • Suite 202 Steamboat Springs, CO 80477 • Phone: (970) 879-4676 • Fax: (970) 879-4870 Johnson, Kunkel &Associates, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • MAPPING July 20, 2001 Eagle County Environmental Health 500 Broadway Eagle, CO 81631 Attn: Ray Merry Subject: Septic System As -Built, ISDS Permit No. 2016-00 Cordillera Summit Golf Course Half Way House at Hole 9 Property Location: 290 Webb Peak, Cordillera Dear Mr. Merry: Please find enclosed the septic system as -built drawing and field photos for the Half Way House at Hole 9. The as -built drawing shows the surveyed information, or actual location of the infiltrator runs and septic tank. Field reports were done on two different days, and the construction was being completed in conformance with the design drawings. Also enclosed is a field report from HP Geotech. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at 328-6368, ext. 223. Sincerely, 6&{-� Chris Williams Production Administrator Johnson Kunkel and Associates. Inc. pc: Denny Stoner, Cordillera \\JKASVRE1\PROJECTS-N\EA00127\EC-Site Inspection.doc RECEIVED JUL202U01 EAGLE COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT P.O. Box 409 • 1286 Chambers Ave. • Suite 200 Eagle, Colorado 81631 • Phone (970) 328-6368 • Fax: (970) 328-1035 P.O. Box 771 196 • 1 120 So. Lincoln Ave. • Suite 202 Steamboat Springs, CO 80477 • Phone: (970) 879-4676 • Fax: (970) 879-4870 Johnson, Kunkel, and Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 409 Eagle, CO 81631 Phone: 328-6368 TO: Eagle County Environmental Health Laura Fawcett THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED: Date: ! 29-Aug-00 Job No.: EA00127 Project: Summl C Half Way House, Hole 9 Location: 290 Webb Peak, Edwards, CO Contractor: Spiegel Owner: Cordillera Weather: Sunny Temp: 80 F Present at Site: Chris Spiegel (contractor), and Kathy Scott (J&K) 1) This inspection took place before backfilling operations. 2) The sides of the trenches were raked to ensure absorption. 3) The trench under the pipe was smooth and level, and free of rocks. 4) The bends and joints of the pvc pipe were connected well. 5) The tee just outside of the septic tank was level. The concrete pad underneath the tee was formed, but not poured. 6) The trenches were approximately 7-8 feet deep, due to the position of the sandy soil layer. The infiltrators were in the sandy soil, as specified by the geotechnical engineer. COPIES TO: MELD ; FU U SIGNED: REA0012700CUMENTSTIELD REPORT-2.xis 8129l00 Johnson, Kunkel, and Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 409 Eagle, CO 81631 Phone: 328-6368 TO: Eagle County Laura Fawcett Environmental Health THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED: Date: 23-Aug-00 JJob No.: EA00127 Project: Summit GC Half Way House, Hole 9 Location: 290 Webb Peak, Edwards, CO Contractor: Spiegel Owner: Cordillera Weather: Sunnv Tema: 80 F Present at Site: Chris Spiegel (contractor), and Kathy Scott (J&K) 1) This inspection took place before backfilling operations. 2) The sides of the trenches were raked to ensure absorption. 3) The trench under the pipe was smooth and level, and free of rocks. 4) The bends and joints of the pvc pipe were connected well. 5) Clean -out was placed within three feet of the building foundation. COPIES TO: VDCEdD NIEP U SIGNED: REA0012700CUMENTS\FIELD REPORT-1.xls 8129/00 JUL-20-2001 11:34 H—P GEOTECH P.02/04 C�tech August 31, 2000 Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. $020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone:970-945-7988 Fax: 970-94$-8454 hpgeo@hpgeotech.com Kensington Partners Attu: Denny Stoner P.O. Box 988 Edwards, Colorado 81632 Job No. 199 834 Subject: Observation of Excavation, Proposed Comfort Station No. 2, Halfway House; Golf Course, The Summit at Cordillera, 290 Webb Peak Road, Eagle County, Colorado. Dear Mr. Stoner: As requested by Darryl Lundholm with R.A. Nelson, a representative of Hepworth- Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. observed the excavation at the subject site on August 17, 2000 to evaluate the soils exposed for foundation support. The findings of our work and recommendations for the foundation design are presented in this report. We previously conducted a preliminary geotechnical study and percolation testing for the proposed comfort stations and presented our findings in a report dated January 17, 2000, Job No: 199 834. Proposed comfort station No. 2 will consist of a single story wood. frame structure with a slab -on -grade floor. The structure will have a footprint of about 24 by 35 feet. An allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf was assumed in the design based on the preliminary study. The ground surface slope is moderate down to the north. At the time of our visit to the site, the foundation excavation had been cut in multiple level from 2 to 12 feet below the adjacent ground surface. The soils exposed in the bottom, of the excavation consisted of stiff sandy clay to clayey sand. Results of swell - consolidation testing performed on a sample of the clay taken from the site, shown on Fig. 1, indicate the -soils have low compressibility under existing moisture conditions and light loading and a low expansion potential when wetted under a constant light surcharge. A sample of the clayey sand was tested and found to have a moisture content of 15.7 %, a dry density of 98 pcf and 37 % passing the Nei. 200 sieve (silt and clay fraction). No free water was encountered in the excavation and the soils were moist. The soil conditions exposed in the excavation are consistent with those previously encomtered on the site. Spread footings designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf can be used with some risk of potential heave if the bearing soils become JUL-20-2001 11:35 H-P GEOTECH F v , ,,, Kensington Partners August 31, 2000 Page 2 wetted. A minimum dead load pressure of 600 psf could be used on the footings to limit the potential heave. Loose and disturbed soils should be removed in the footing areas 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 foundation movement. We should be advised of any variations encountered in the excavation conditions for possible changes to recommendations contained in this letter. If there are any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely; HEPWORTH - PAWLAK . 1 rordy Z. Adamson, 7 ., P E. Rev. by: -SLP TZAIksw attachment MCHNICAL, INC. 297 fir. cc: R.A. Nelson •- Atta: Darryl Lundholm 0 H-P GEOTECH JUL-20-2001 11:35 H-P GEOTECH V P.04/04 to 1 r 0 fl. x w t 0 c 0 a 0 C� 2 Moisture, Content = 23.7 percent Dry Density = 102 pcf Sample of. Sandy Clay From: Bottom of Excavation at Expansion upon 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE -- ksf 100 199 834 I HE0 ORTH C PA NC SWELL— CONSOUDATiON TEST RESULTS Fig. 1 TOTAL P.04 i.F7: _1,i H—r >>c 1-E�7H P.011. '- ,iiv9%vQrth-Pws'1jk Gpi'A^C# nical, ine. 500 County Road 154 G99 f.:6e�1SsnOd 4prinatechv, Cnit,rurio S(bf►! Phone: 970-94g•7935 Fax- 970.935•84i4 Aualst 14, 2iM 21pg.tSce';� gtntce9S.^orre Cordillera Construction Corporation 'ltrru Denny Stoner P.O. Box 988 Edwards, Coluradc 81632 Jo , No. 199 834 Subject; Percolation Testing, Proposed Halfway House:, The Summit Golf Course at Cordillera, Eagle Cowuty, Cptorade. Clear Mr. Stoner: As requested by you., Hepworth PawJak Geotecbxical, .Inc. perfom ed percolm on testing at the subject sire. The work was done in accordaace with our Agreement for Professiunai Sefvices it) you, dated October 15, 1999. W-c FrLvic'usly performed pe%olatiun testing :or comfort Stations i ;nrougb 4 at the Su nrnit Golf Course and reported our fwdir.gs January 17, 2000, Job Number 199 834. J� A Profile Pit and two percolation test holy, were excavated on Augwt 7, 2000 at the 13� locadons shown on Fig 1 The testing was conducted at the location of Comfort its 3 and 4). The subsoils exposed in the ProfLlC pit onnsisfed of about l V2 fee? of topsoil overlying clayey sand with gravel co 4 feet .aiid samly clay to the bottom ` L, pi: depth of ilia feet. No free Nvarer was observed in the pit and the soils were slightly �^1 moistFo moist, Percolatiun test holes were land dui; in the i ottom of shaflow backhoe ''V l�itss and soaked with, water on August 7. LOOO. Percolation testing was conducted can August 8, 20CC1, by a I eprl scat -*LVC of Hepworth Pawiak Geotechrical, Inc. The percolation test result, are surnrua ized oil- Table I. Based on the subsurfw;e conditions encountered and the percolation test results, a prcfessicnaI civil eagineer should design the septic disposal systern.. If you have any ques'lio is or deed ftlirtbei assistance, please call our off -cc, Sincerely, HEPWORTH •- P.AWLAK GEOTECRNICAL. PNrC. Louis E. Eller Reviewed by, , b. Daniel E. 3H,.ardin, P.E. � c LEE!rsolkl. attachments cc. Johnson, Kunkc-1 & ,- W11 24`sw,4 Mai Dr!A n: C;hri�; Williams H--F GEDTECH APPROX4ATE SCALE 1" - 60C' Rr;PIN-. I A n BORING I (PITS 3 & 4), a 199 834 � HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTLCHNICAL, INC. LESEND- al PROF;IE P'T ANC PER'Cl; - All0'q TEST HOLES FOR �ZRRiNT TEST. PROPO.SEnw COMFORT S7ATiQN • clORIING LAL.ED FOR J,,^)S 440. 199 473 0 ElORING CPI --CD FOR JOS NO. 1197 407 LUCATION QF PER""'CLATICN 7;'AT HOL'S I Pig, I „ k_i3-14-:2000 16; K ' HEPWORTH-PAW LAK GEOT'ECHN{CAL, INC.. TABLE I PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO.199 834 HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH f_ZNGTH OF WATER DEPTR � WATER DEPTH CROP IN AVERAGE {INCHES! INTERVAL AT START OF AT END OF WATER PERCOLATION (MINI INTERVAL INTERVAL LEVEL RATE (INCHES) ONCHE& {INCHES} MIN.1 NcW 47 15 7 1,4 7 114 7 114 0 7 Its 11$ 7 VS 7 118 7 6 7/8 i rg- 6 718 6 314 1i8 1 6 314 6 516 its Oslo- 6 112 120 11i3 is 7 114 1 P-r b i 67 7 1.14 078 r i 5 3/4 Ifs { 6 314 6 618 s 518 6 112 i!8 I M fi 112 B 3i8 11s 63,18 1 61,)4 Now Last MfO readings used to determine average percnlaticn rate. IOTA- .0- A h M-1 G4'0f'1tech Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical. Inc. 9020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970-945-7988 Fax: 970-945-845 4 hpgeo@hpgeotech.com 'JAB 2 5 �0 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL STUDY AND PERCOLATION TESTING PROPOSED COMFORT STATIONS GOLF COURSE THE SUMMIT AT CORDILLERA EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO 0 JOB NO. 199 834 JAN[TARY 17, 2000 PREPARED FOR: KENSINGTON PARTNERS ATTN: DENNY STONER P.O. BOX 988 EDjti ARDS. COLORADO 81632 LZI HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. January 17, 2000 Kensington Partners Attn: Denny Stoner P.O. Box 988 Edwards, Colorado 81632 Job No. 199 834 Subject: Report Transmittal, Preliminary Geotechnical Study and Percolation Testing, Proposed Comfort Stations, Golf Course, The Summit at Cordillera, Eagle County, Colorado Dear Mr. Stoner: As requested, we have conducted a preliminary geotechnical study for the proposed comfort stations. Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory pits excavated in the proposed building areas generally consist of between 2 to 3 feet of topsoil overlying sandy clay and clayey sand with varying amounts of basalt fragments from gravel to cobble size. A low to moderate expansion potential was indicated for the clay soils. Groundwater was not encountered in the pits and the soils were slightly to moist to moist. Spread footings placed on the natural subsoils and designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf to 3,000 psf appear suitable for building support. The footings should also impose a minimum dead load due to the expansive clays. The expansion potential of the subgrade should be eYaluated at the time of construction. The report which follows describes our exploration, summarizes our findings, and presents our recommendations suitable for planning and preliminary design. It is important that we provide consultation during design, and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of the geotechnical recommendations. If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us. Sincerely, HE-PWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. i Jorly Z.JAd son, Jr. P. Rev. By: SLP JZ A/ksm TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ............................... 1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................... 1 SITE CONDITIONS ........................................... FIELD EXPLORATION ....................................... 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................... 2 PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ..................... 3 FOUNDATIONS ........................................ FLOOR SLABS ........................................ 4 UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM .................................. 4 SITE GRADING ........................................ 4 SURFACE DRAINAGE ................................... 5 PERCOLATION TESTING ................................. 5 LIMITATIONS .............................................. 6 FIGURE I - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURES 4 through 7 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 8 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TALE II - PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical study for the proposed comfort stations to be located on the golf course at The Summit at Cordillera, Eagle County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the subsurface conditions and their impact on the project. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement. for geotechnical engineering services to Cordillera Construction Corporation, dated October 15, 1999. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory pits and percolation tests was conducted to obtain information on the site and subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or swell and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for project planning and preliminary design. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed development and subsurface conditions encountered. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed comfort stations will consist of single story wood frame structures with slab -on -grade floors at the locations shown on Fig. 1 Comfort Stations 1 and 3 will have.a footprint of about 15 by 20 feet. Comfort Station 2 will be a halfway house and have a footprint of about 40 by 50 feet. Comfort Station 4 will be for the driving range and have a footprint of about 24 by 40 feet. The development will be serviced with municipal water and individual septic disposal systems. If development -plans change significantly from those described, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report. -2- SITE CONDITIONS The comfort station sites were vacant at the time of our field work. The ground surface in the areas of the proposed construction varies from slightly sloping at Station 4 and strongly to moderately steep sloping at Stations 1, 2 and 3. Up to 10 feet of fill is located in the area of Station 4. Vegetation consists of brush, grass and weeds. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on October 19 and 20, 1999 An exploratory pit and profile pit were excavated at the comfort station locations shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The its were dug with a trackhoe. The pits were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with relatively undisturbed and disturbed sampling methods. Depths at which the samples were taken are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Pits, Fig. 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SLBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Fig. 2. The subsoils generally consist of between about 2 to 3 feet of topsoil overlying sandy clay to clayey sand with varying amount of basalt fragments from gravel to cobble size. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the pits included natural moisture content, density, Atterberg limits and gradation analyses. Results of swell - consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples, presented on Figs. 4 through 7, indicate low compressibility under existing moisture conditions and light loading. �1ost of the samples showed a low to moderate expansion potential when wetted under a constant light surcharge. The sample from Pit 6 at a depth. of 3 feet at H-P G_OTEC- -3- Comfort Station 3 showed a minor collapse potential (settlement under constant load) when wetted and high compressibility upon increased loading after wetting. Results of a gradation analysis performed on a disturbed bulk sample of the gravelly sand soils (minus 5 inch fraction) from Pit 1 are shown on Fig. S. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavation and the subsoils were slightly moist to moist. PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOM'MENDATIONS The conclusions and recommendations presented below are based on the proposed development, subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory pits, and our experience in the area. The recommendations are suitable for planning and preliminary design but site specific studies should be conducted for individual building development. FOUNDATIONS Bearing conditions will vary depending on the specific location of the building on the property. Based on the nature of the proposed construction, spread footings placed on the natural subsoils should be suitable for building support. We expect the footings can be sized for an allowable bearing pressure in the range of 2,000 psf to 3,000 psf. Expansive clays encountered in building areas may need to be removed or the footings designed to impose a minimum dead load pressure to limit potential heave. The expansion potential of the subgrade should be evaluated at the time of construction. Foundation walls should be designed to span local anomalies and to resist lateral earth loadings when acting as retaining structures. Below grade areas and retaining walls should be protected from wetting and hydrostatic loading by use of an underdrain system. The footings should have a minimum depth of 48 inches for frost protection. M FLOOR SLABS Slab -on -grade construction should be feasible for bearing on the natural soils. There could be some post construction slab movement at sites with collapsible matrix{ or expansive clays. To reduce the effects of some differential movement; floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. A minimum 4 inch thick layer of free -draining gravel should underlie slabs to facilitate drainage. UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM Although free water was not encountered in the exploratory pits, it has been our experience in the area and where clayey soils are present that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. An underdrain system should be provided to protect below -grade construction, such as retaining walls, cra::-lspace and basement areas from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup. The drains should consist of drainpipe surrounded above the invert level with free -draining F 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. SITE GRADING The risk of construction -induced slope instability at the sites appears low provided cut and fill depths are limited. Cut depths for the building pads should not exceed about 10 to 12 feet. Fills should be limited to about 10 feet deep, especially where they encroach steep downhill sloping areas. Structural fills should be compacted to at least 95 o of the maximum standard Proctor density near optimum moisture content. Prior to fill placement, the subgrade should be carefully prepared by removing all vegetation and topsoil.. The fill should be benched into the portions of the hillside exceeding 20 o grade. The on -site soils excluding oversized rock and topsoil should be suitable for use in embankment fills. P GE , SIB Permanent unretained cut and fill slopes should be graded at 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter and protected against erosion by revegetation, or other means. This office should review site grading plans for each building prior to construction. SURFACE DRAINAGE The grading plan for the building sites should consider runoff from steep uphill slopes through the project and at individual sites. Water should not be allowed to pond which could impact foundations. To limit infiltration into the bearing soils nest to the buildings, exterior backfill should be well compacted and have a positive slope away from the building for a distance of 10 feet. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill and landscape irrigation should be restricted. PERCOLATION TESTING Percolation tests were conducted on October 20 and 21, 1999 to evaluate the feasibility of an infiltration septic disposal system at each site. One profile pit and three x percolation holes were dug at each of the comfort station locations shown on Fia. 1. The test holes (nominal 12 inch diameter by 12 inch deep) were hand dug at the bottom of shallow, backhoe pits and were soaked with water -one day prior to testing. The soils exposed in the percolation holes are similar to those exposed in the profile pits shown on Fig. 2 and typically consist of about 2 to 3,feet of topsoil overlying sandy clay -to clayey and.with.varying amounts of.basalt fragments-from;gravel to cobbles. ske. The percolation test results are presented in Table II. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered and the percolation test results, the tested areas at Comfort Stations 1, 3 and 4 should be suitable for conventional infiltration septic disposal systems. Testing at the Comfort Station 2 aoc'ation showed very low to no percolation. Based on` These$ results, we =recommend •the ­septic system=for °this area b& designed by -a civil engineer. r-P G=01- M LIMITATIONS This study has been conducted according to generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warrantv either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the exploratory pits and percolation tests located as shown on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory 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 so that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for planning and preliminary design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation, conduct additional evaluations and review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on -site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. Respectfully Submitted, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK _.ram Jordv Z. Adamson, Jr. P. Reviewed By: Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. JZ A: ksm C. APPROXIMATE SCALE LEGEND: 1"=600' ® PROPOSED COMFORT STATION ® BORING DRILLED FOR JOB NO. 199 4-73 O BORING DRILLED FOR JOB NO. 197 407 BORING 16 O 9 8 10 7 80 ING 6 11 • ■ 12 • ORIN 8 13 STATION 3 (PITS 5 & s) BLOCK 1 5 16 14 BORING • t-I 4. TO 17 1 S 15 GORE 2 TRAIL 19 3 J� 1 / 20 BORING 21 O BORING 5 22 21 23 ■ 24 STATION 4 (PIT 7) 25 4 3 5 2 6 B ING 3 • RING 9 BORING 17 �`� 7 ® 1 O 8 (PITS 1 & 2) 9 18 .1O BORIN 1 • gp �bL� • S BLOCK 2 11 13 17 14 15 16 pp BORING 1 STA"'2' (PITS='3 ego 83� HEPWORTH — PAWLAK LOCATIC�, — 0� EXPLORATORY PIT PITS F ic. '•. GEOTECHNICAL, INC. PI-1PIT .2 , ►' 0 WC=21.7 QJ WC=22.6 DO=100 DD=100 LL- WC=12.1 DD=101 200=33 CU LL=35 m WC-1 9.4 DD=100 5 v WC=23.4 L DD=101 I L CL ID PI=15 C 10 i t4=t4 10 - J -200=7 NP; l l ) STATION 1 15 STATION 2 15 PIT 5 PITS 6 0 0 --, wC=16.4 ',-V ' WC=26.4 DD=95 5 ;'• OD=94 -200=37 O4 5 '•o a t y WC=11.4 CJ DD=105 e �•;:� � 1 • A� L � CD 10 �. 10 c 0 STATION 4 STATION 3 15 15 NOTE: Explanation of symbols shown on Fig. 3. 199 834 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 2 G`OTE CHNICAL, INC. LEGEND: TOPSOIL; sandy silty clay, scattered gravel, organic, firm, slightly moist, dark brown. CLAY (CL); silty, sandy, scattered basalt gravel and cobbles, stiff to very stiff, slightly moist to moist, reddish brown, high plasticity. SAND AND CLAY (SC); silty, scattered basalt gravel and cobbles, dense to very stiff, slightly moist to moist, light brown to white, calcareous. SAND (SC); clayey, silty, scattered basalt gravel and cobbles, medium dense to dense, slightly moist to moist, light brown, calcareous. M SAND AND GRAVEL (SC —GC); clayey, scattered cobbles, dense, slightly moist, light brown. 2" Diameter hand driven liner sample. Disturbed bulk sample. _J NOTES: 1. Exploratory pits were excavated on October 19, 1999 with a backhoe. 2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from features on the site plan provided. 3. Elevations of exploratory pits were not measured ,and logs of exploratory pits are drawn to depth. 4. The exploratory pit locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavating. Fluctuations in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content ( % ) DD = Dry Density ( pcf ) +4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve —200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve LL = Liquid Limit ( % ) PI = Plasticity Index (� ) NP = Nonplastic 199 874 HEPWOR TH — PAWLAK LEGEND AND NOTES G`OTECHNICAL, INC. Fig. 2 0] 7 bt Moisture Content = 21.7 percent Dry Density = 100 pcf Sample of: Sandy Clay From: Pit 1 at 3 Feet (station 1) Expansion upon wetting 0.1 1.0 . . 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 Moisture Content = 22.6 percent Dry Density = 100 pcf Sample of: Sandy Clay From: Pit 3 at 3 Feet (station 2) Expansion upon wettina 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 199 834 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK qwc-' L—CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Pig- c GEOTECHNICAL. INC. b\ C 0 1 .N C O O_ X W 0 I C 0 En1 a� o_ E U 2 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf C:_o .N C 1 O n. X W 0 C O N aNi 1 n E 0 U 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 199 834 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 5 GEOTEC='LAICAL, INC. Moisture Content = 19.4 percent Dry Density = 100 pcf Sample of: Sandy Clay From: Pit 4 at 3 Feet (station 2) i I Expansion upon wetting Moisture Content = 23.4 percent Dry Density = 101 pcf Sample of: Sandy Clay From: Pit 4 at 6 Feet (station 2) Expansion upon wetting 0 0 c 0 .y 0 1 x W I 2 c o_ 'N N F n 3 E 0 U Moisture Content = 26.4 percent Dry Density = 94 pcf Sample of: Sandy Clay From: Pit 5 at 4 Feet (station 3) Expansion upon wetting 0.1 0 ON L 7 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 Moisture Content = 16.4 percent Dry Density = 95 pcf Sample of: Clayey Sand From: Pit 6 at 3 Feet (station 3) Compression upon wetting 8 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 199 83d HEP4VORTH — PAV�lLAFC SWEL L—CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 6 GECTECHNICAL, INC. Moisture 0 c 1 0 IN N m n 2 ti E 0 U 3 4 0. i 100 1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE — 10 ksf 199 834 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SWELL —CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 7 Content = 11.4 percent Dry Density = 105 pcf, Sample of: Clayey Sand From: Pit 6 at 6 Feet (station 3) No movement upon wetting U Z J a U7_ Y 2 U w F- �LU O V Y a J a t"MM' cc: O a W 2 M 00 W 1 .a.M Q U) F- J W w LL O } CC CQ CG G D *� .3 I W a C > CO o r Cn J O p O �• © :6 '^ C3 cc ca m CO co ca U U U U U Cn Cn >. >.. >- CD >, >• >, a m > a� C (mc C:c ca c c >' c� >- co cn cn 0 cn U cn to cc U U W W > _ F d Oz a c — z N � U v N CL LO H � 2 a Z r O W Q O J - LO M ~Z.. 0 n W a uW-i M C) a L Z °z OY z m r O H C G O > Q cZ - .- ¢ ¢'~ O O O O O Lo O z W x W CD i� y Z N N d7 M CD CD r z 2 v r N N r r N N r r _ C M r r C)ce) CD C'M Cfl M CD z a - 4- c � Q U C L O C O C O C H 'O r •O M G`' •� LfJ C:: t UJ1 Uco U� HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 11 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 199 834 r atinn 'i Dnm- I _-; n HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH (INCHES) LENGTH OF INTERVAL (MIN) WATER DEPTH AT START OF INTERVAL (INCHES) WATER DEPTH AT END OF INTERVAL (INCHES) DROP IN WATER LEVEL (INCHES) AVERAGE PERCOLATION RATE (MINJINCH) P-1 31 15 ' 10114 8 1 /2 1 3/4 24 8 1/2 7 1/4 1 1/4 7 1/4 6 1/4 6 1/4 5 1/2 3/4 5 1/2 4 314 3/4 4 3/4 4 1/ 1/2 4 1/4 1/2 3/4 1/2 3 112 P-2 43 30 11 3/ 11 114 112 80 11 1/4 10 1/2 314 10 l2 118 ` 318 10 118 9 3/ 3/8 P-3 42 15 10 1/2 9 1/2 1 30 9 1/2 9 1/2 9 8 1/4 314 81/4 71/2 4 7 1/2 7 1/ 7 6 112 1/2 6 5 1 /2 1/2 NOTE: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on October 19, 1999. The holes were covered with rigid foam insulation to protect against freezing overnight. Percolation tests were conducted on October 20, 1999. The average percolation rates were based on the last two readings of each test. HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE II PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 199 834 C0*rrif6"tation ;2,xv Paoe 2 of 4 HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH (INCHES) LENGTH OF INTERVAL (MIN) WATER DEPTH AT START OF INTERVAL (INCHES) WATER DEPTH AT END OF INTERVAL (INCHES) DROP IN WATER LEVEL (INCHES) AVERAGE PERCOLATION RATE (MIN./INCH) P-1 33 15 11 114 9112 1 3/4 60. 9 1/2 8 3/4 3/4 8 3/4 8 5/16 7/16 85116 7 15/16 3/8 7 15/16 7 518 5116 7 5/8 7 7/16 3/16 P-2 35 15 30 8 3/8 8 5 /16 1/16 ? Z iJ 8 5/16 85116 0 8 5/16 8 1 /4 1116 8 1/4 8 1/4 0 P-3 44 15 30 813/16 813/16 0 f Ze> 8 13116 8 13/16 0 8 13/16 8 13116 0 813/16 813/16 0 NOTE Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on October 20, 1999. The holes were covered with rigid foam insulation to protect against freezing overnight. Percolation tests were conducted on October 21, 1999. The average percolation rates were based on the last two readings of each test. HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE II PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 199 834 Comfort Station 3 Panc% I „f d HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH (INCHES) LENGTH OF INTERVAL (MIN) WATER DEPTH AT START OF INTERVAL (INCHES) WATER DEPTH AT END OF INTERVAL (INCHES) DROP IN WATER LEVEL (INCHES) AVERAGE PERCOLATION RAT (MIN./INCH) P-1 15 30 101/8 91/16 1 16 19 91/16 81/8 1 5/16 8 1 /8 6 911 1 9/16 6 9/16 5 1 9/16 P-2 51 30 11 9/16 10 314 13116 31 10 3/ 10 1 /8 5/8 0118 91/16 1 1/16 9 1/1 8 3/16 7/8 P-3 33 30 81/4 711/16 9116 28 7 11/16 7 11/16 7 5 718 1 1 /8 5 7/8 4 7/8 1 NOTE: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on October 20, 1999. The holes were covered with rigid foam insulation to protect against freezing overnight. Percolation tests were conducted on October 21, 1999. The average percolation rates were based on the last two readings of each test. HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 11 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 199 834 rnrnfnrt Ctatinn A n_ _ _ A HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH (INCHES) LENGTH OF INTERVAL (MIN) WATER DEPTH AT START OF INTERVAL (INCHES) WATER DEPTH AT END OF INTERVAL (INCHES) DROP IN WATER LEVEL (INCHES) AVERAGE PERCOLATION RATE (MIN./INCH) P-1 36 15 water added 7 1/2 6 1/2 1 20 6 1/2 5 1/2 1 5 1/2 4 3/4 314 4 3/4 4 314 4 3 1/4 314 7 6 1 6 5 1/4 3/4 5 1/4 4 1/2 3/4 P-2 39 15 water added 8 1 /4 6 314 1 1/2 20 6 3/4 5 114 1 1/2 5 1/4 4 112 314 4 1/2 3 3/4 3/4 3 3/4 3 3/4 9 8 1 8 7 1/4 3/4 7 1/4 6 1/2 3/4 P-3 34 15 water added 10 1 /2 5 1 /2 5 15 5 1/2 3 114 2 114 10 71/2 21/2 7 112 5 3/4 1 3/4 5 314 4 1/4 •1 1/2 4 114 3 1 1/4 3 2 1 2 1 1 NOTE: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on October 19, 1999. The holes were covered with rigid foam insulation to protect against freezing overnight. Percolation tests were conducted on October 20, 1999. The average percolation rates were based on the last two readings of each test. 2016-00 Tax #2107-163-0f&-001 JOB NAME_ Filing 41, KENSINGTON PARTNERS l (�J V ©®? JOB NO. �" �a'� Cordillera Halfway House (ASS c l�l3hoc>S2 �� Golf Course at the Summit i - IAQ 1 1117117. BILL TO DATE STARTED DATE COMPLETED DATE BILLED Woo q- no �2a /1� -c( e�cu , .(� sue" wo�- wt/�pu z5`,ta — ' co- a w.,✓ I _ ` O-D GLO Ae& jeq �� )QCGyP Q 1 r Z JOB COST SUMMARY TOTAL SELLING PRICE bz D O etv - oo a TOTAL LABOR o , �iy rL�" Ii , w 2 INSURANCE 6 SALES TAX J Ott ° " ti. ����;�_ ��t_'`� L' ' " s 3--,�-! �� MISC. COSTS 0AW 1/? Ac C�IGD Z =`DSO " �6� �tCAzz 3 zldZ '%�=` �3 0, /;i`Ir:TOTAL JOB COST �J 7 �' Wrij a GROSS PROFIT ti F� v L J LESS OVERHEAD COSTS % OF SELLING PRICE aW �7e r. - NET PROFIT JOB FOLDER Product ZM ti U JOB FOLDER Pfted In U.S.A. pet"', bz� P)7 3 "- cat- wA"-* Gt'aA : L a,41-J o f . 2 3 l FrL �c4 R� 2 L 7t/ta eC�c. G u� ctJ l E CTl i U J)" C2'l�e� �t J Cz• �, C�z z+ . (,t C O- Recycled Content 10% Post -Consumer . frAw Al 4 -Ar A.2 At Woo Nk , C l�. r, , ff- .,�. - 4? -IJL- -- - - s __- � � - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _. _ ._ f.: - _ - - -- e -- - _ - - - - - - _ __ _ .. �, .� - - - - -� .3 - � �- �- �� - ,_ � __ _ - - -. - - - - - _, r_ -. _ _ _� y. _--. a - _ _ - _ _ _ � - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -- _ _ - _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _. � .. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ __ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ a _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Y _ - _ _ _ � _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ �� ` - ��- - � _ .," � --�- ____ _-.9. '. �. .�-.. -- _-'. t__ _. � __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ - _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ - _ a _ .. �- -._ � __ -_t _ - - - - � - _ - - � --� - � _ - -' - � _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ _ _ __ _ - _ __ _� - _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ -._ -:t - - _.. � � .. ._ __. _ _ -3 -:: .. _ _ _ __._�� _ _ _ __ _ _ � _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ -- _ _ _ _ __ _ _ - _ - �- _ _ _ _ _ - � _ _ _ _ _. _ a .� .-, � ._ ,� - - � - - - _ - - _ - - - __ - -- _ - _. _ _ ,-_. ..; _. -t. ._ _. ___� ._ �... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ �: i- _ -._ _. � - _�. .. .. _ _. _. _. _ --- .::. �s -- - - � - - - � - - _ � - - - _ _ - _ - - -- _ _� _ _y J - - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ � _ � _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ � _ _ _ --_ --.Y _� � -< - .� _�- - __ _ _ _ _ _ - _- _ _ _ - ��_ _-_ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ ___ __ _ - _ -_- __ _ - ___ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ �_ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ �. -�- �' ". _ _ C_ _ _ � t _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - ate- _� - .__ - � _. _._ _ _ _ - -..2 . . .- �.� _ - _ � - __ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - � _ _ _ _ _ - _ __ _ _ _ _ v � -.r .r _. J _ _. ._ _ _ _-� _, .._ _.. _ � -. _. _. .. _____._ � ,._ _ __ _- _ _. __ -_" _ _ 2 _ _ _ � � - - -. _ _ __ - _ - _ _ t !- - � _ �._ _ _ _ �- _: -a - 3. ._. cam. -. _ �,:. _ �._ .- .. __ ��_ "_�--- _ �._� - - - - _ _ _ _ - - -t �. _.� .t- _�. ..�_--._LL._ - � - -_. c �-T.� -sue _.. _..__ _ _e i-�.-�- -.. - ,.._ w_ _.. _ _ _ _ � _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ -- _.. _� _ .. R- __ _. _ � .. --.� _ __ - _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ -. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ._ s �. _. - _. _ _ - �. , - _. � _ _ - _ � i _ _ - _ -> _ _- _ _ _ i _ _ - - _ -