HomeMy WebLinkAbout12000 Ridge Roadi CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
Building Inspection Division
(303) 234-5933 Inspection line
(303) 235-2855 Office • (303) 237-8929 Fax
INSPECTION NOTICE
Inspection Type: M I f 7CJ,.JT- / AJ /V CM°!'V
Job Address: _122-000 YIb(-,r- 1
Permit Number: Z<�,I 01 oo--) I-)
❑ No one available for inspection: Time A PM
Re -Inspection required: Yes rNo
When corrections have been made, call four re-' ection at 303-234-5 3
Date: �` L�� Inspector:
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE
IE ?
❑ No one available for inspection: Time A PM
Re -Inspection required: Yes rNo
When corrections have been made, call four re-' ection at 303-234-5 3
Date: �` L�� Inspector:
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE
City of Wheat Ridge
�r
. Commercial Miscellan PERMIT - 201900717
PERMIT NO: 201900717 ISSUED: 04/18/2019
JOB ADDRESS: 12000 Ridge Rd EXPIRES: 04/27/2019
JOB DESCRIPTION: Temporary tent set-up for G -Line opening event April 22 (Event dates April
25-27); 6 tents total, 1 - 40 ft x 100 ft, 1 - 66 ft x 114 ft, 2 - 15 ft x
25 ft, 2 - 15 ft x 15 ft
*** CONTACTS ***
OWNER (303)297-7555 RTD
CON (303)781-1111 Doug Schroeder Colorado Party Rentals
*** PARCEL INFO ***
ZONE CODE: UA / Unassigned USE: UA / Unassigned
SUBDIVISION CODE: 500 / Government/Church/Library BLOCK/LOT#: /
*** FEE SUMMARY *** ESTIMATED PROJECT VALUATION: 40,000.00
FEES
Total Valuation 0.00
Permit Fee 120.00
** TOTAL ** 120.00
*** COMMENTS ***
*** CONDITIONS ***
All work shall comply 2012 International Codes, 2017 NEC (if applicable), and ordinances
adopted by the City of Wheat Ridge. Work is subject to field inspections.
I, byy my signature, do hereby attest that the work to be performed shall comply with all accompanying approved plans and specifications,
applicable building codes, and all applicable municipal codes, policies and procedures, and that I , the legal owner or have been authorized
by the 1 al owner of the property and am authorized to obtain this permit and perform the work described and approved in conjunction with
thi a it. I further attest that I am le ally authorized to include all entities named within this document as parties to the work to be
pe[for 'd and that all work to be performed is disclosed in this document and/or its' accompanying approved plans and specifications.
yr t
Sig&tli rA of OWNER or CONTRACTOR (Circle one) !Date
1. This permit was issued based on the information provided in the permit application and accompanying plans and specifications and is
subject to the compliance with those documents, and all applicable statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies and procedures.
2. This permit shall expire 365 days after the date of issuance regardless of activity. Requests for extension must be made in writing and
received prior to the date of expiration. An extension of no more than 180 days made be granted at the discretion of the Chief Building
Official and may be subject to a fee equal to one-half of the originalpermit fee.
3. If this permit expires, a new permit may be required to be obtained. Issuance of a new permit shall be subject to the standard
requirements, fees androcedures for approval of any new permit. Re -issuance or extension of expired permits is at the sole discretion of
the Chief Building Official and is not guaranteed.
4. No work of any manner shall be performed that shall results in a changeof the natural flow of water without prior and specific approval.
5. The permit holder shall notify the Building and Inspection Services Division in accordance with established policy of all required
inspections and shall not proceed or conceal work without written approval of such work from the Building and Inspection Services
Division.
6. The issuance or granting of a permit shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, anviolation of any provision of any
applicable code or any ordinance or regulation of this jurisdiction. Approval of work is subject to field inspection.
Signature of Chief Building Official Date
REQUESTS MUST BE MADE BY 11:59PM ANY BUSINESS DAY FOR INSPECTION THE FOLLOWING BUSINESS DAY.
City of
Wheat Midge
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Building & Inspection Services
7500 W. 291' Ave., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Office: 303-235-2855 " Fax: 303-237-8929
Inspection Line: 303-234-5933
Email: permits(a-)-ci.wheatridge.co.us
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Date: YJ //�//
Plan/Permit # Lkc/
Plan Review Fee:
Building Permit Application
*** Complete all applicable highlighted areas on both sides of this form.
Incomplete applications may not be processed. ***
�Zo00 }� � d� 12� �� T'o)
Property Address: ��iJ
Property Owner (please print): L44,21,yf 70Iyf4L1_212L=✓�� S; �P�Z� Phone:
Property Owner Email:
Tenant Name (Commercial Projects Only)
Property Owner Mailing Address: (if different than property address)
Address:
Citv. State
Architect/Engineer E-mail:
Contractor Name: co�omb ?,+
City of Wheat Ridge License #:
Phone:
.SSS iedA1'7Z)JJ s
�b 2'
Phone:
Contractor E-mail Address: L� 4 r0<y'J0_
For Plan Review Questions & Comments (please print):�-
CONTACT NAME (please print): WLf� SGS b -yam. Phone: 3d J- hg( - (( ( l �Z
CONTACT EMAIL(p/ease print):
Sub Contractors (Must provide Wheat Ridge License No & Signed Subcontractor Authorization form):
Electrical: Plumbing: Mechanical:
W.R. City License # W.R. City License # W.R. City License #
Other City Licensed Sub: Other City Licensed Sub:
City License # City License #
Complete all highlighted fields, if applicable.
O COMMERCIAL ! F-1RESIDENTIAL
Provide description of work: For ALL projects, provide a detailed description of work to be
performed, including current use of areas, proposed uses, square footage, existing condition and
proposed new condition, appliance size and efficiency, type and amount of materials to be used, etc.
evt`? raa v P e� 4s cv; it 3e .5 -e -i" c1,o Tertfins jorLAe- 'Z7
-l•U ����h �C Cvw � fav � � p rj l �Z %X alt 5V,14T c 4p,:1 25-1 2 � t; 2 �� ;4�) c 5.
–T—r - S— fie? - (/) �fvx�oa �1� bro';crcy' �z�iS><z�
,Iqt6 14 13)
Sq. Ft./LF (2-1124 BTUs
7 k ivy.%04; C2- If
62-( (5-K t S-
lG,m M,q,nA-J Cbli�l)w(
Gallons
Amps Squares For Solar: KW # of Panels Requires Structural
For Commercial Projects Only: Occupancy Type: Construction Type:
Occupancy Load: Square Footage:
Project Value: (Contract value or the cost of all materials and labor included in the entire project)
OWNER/CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE OF UNDERSTANDING AND AGREEMENT
I hereby certify that the setback distances proposed by this permit application are accurate and do not violate applicable ordinances, rules or
regulations of the City of Wheat Ridge or covenants, easements or restrictions of record: that all measurements shown and allegations made are
accurate; that I have read and agree to abide by all conditions printed on this application and that I assume full responsibility for compliance
with applicable City of Wheat Ridge codes and ordinances for work under any permit issued based on this application; that I am the legal owner'
or have been authorized by the legal owner of the property to perform the described work and am also authorized by the legal owner of any
entity included on this application to list that entity on this application. 1, the applicant for this building permit application, warrant the
truthfulness of the information provided on the application.
CIRCLE ONE: (OWNER) 4 ONTRACTO or (AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE) of (OWNER) (CONTRACTOR)
Signature (first and last name): f, DATE: ( f
Printed Name:
Z
DEPARTMENT USE ONLY
ZONING COMMMENTS: R PprCV ed . L-1 I IS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:
R'm 5no-rtle 5AU\J1(.p 0�,P o-nyk vein -0i) tL�
Lk)
i t r) QCt-(-Y-)1 CONSTRUCTION TYPE: Vr�
Reviewer: .SS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT OMME TS:
Reviewer:
PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
Reviewer:
Building Division 1
�, C 1� 0111
k
14 11j) I I ZS
15-2
a
D41,4vwA
city of
Wheat Ridge
0
*A
Mackintosh U Mackintosh, Inc.
LQNSULTING STfWCTL'RAL EN,,I1qEER5 SINCE 1941
M&M Fite No.
Data
Client
Structure Type
User or Site Location
Span
Overall Length
Say Width
Column Height
Applicable Code
Wind Speed
Additional Loads;
Snow Load
Seismic Load
Suspended Equipment
Occupancy Category
Wall Configuration
Anchor Loads
Special Features
2009-0209
March 4. 2009
Anchor Industries
1100 Burch Dr.
Evansville, IN 47733
Navi Trac
i0300 E. Golfers Wav
Aurora, CO 80010
40 Feet
40 Feet
20 Feet
10 Feet.
ASCE 7-05 modified for
use per Appendix A
00 mph Exposure "C;Wind Zones
Ione
l+lot Significant, Available on Re -quest
100 Pound Point Loads Per Sh. 13
Temporary
Closed Four Sides
See Reactions. Sheet 54
13uvs, Knee and Ridge Braces Rer Sheet 7
TOTE: THESE CALCULATIONS AND/OR DRAWINGS ARE ONLY AUTHORIZED FOR USE; IF THEY HAVE BEEN REVIEWED FOI
SPECIFIC SITE CONDITIONS AND HAVE A WET STAMP AND SIGNITURE IN RED INK BY A LICENSED ENGINEER WHO 1
EMPLOYED BY MACKINTOSH & MACKINTOSH, INC. IF THESE CALCULATIONS AND/OR DRAWINGS ARE USED WrrHOU'
THE KNOWLEDGE OF MACKINTOSH & MACKINTOSH THE USER ASSUMES ALL RESPONSIBILTY AND LIABILITY FOl
THEIR USE. MACKINTOSH & MACKINTOSH, INC. CANNOT MAKE ANY REPRESENTATIONS AS TO THE ACCURACY OI
ANY PHOTOCOPIED DOCUMENTS WITHOUT OUR REVIEW.
ENGINEER: SWEEP No. �v -\
Cary Rapoport C"
of 83 i�fJ yof
3838 Om nm AVENE . Lrs AIcr,cs.CALIrcRNIA 9Qg84 . TEL, (323)662-1184 . FME (323)662-754/ 0
e`1//a
1
C> O OO C=>O% M �, O r
N
O O O O
ry
0
m
i
0
N
L
0
C3.
x
w
m
cn
a
D
L-
4 4
Q1
C
ry
L
�.a
C> O OO C=>O% M �, O r
N
O O O O
ry
0
m
i
0
N
L
0
C3.
x
w
m
cn
a
I
ui
oc
Itz r
w
cc
w
c
CL
ca0
cE
4-0
�7 <
0 Sam
en
gay
owmw
mom
4—
co
as"
cn
I
r�tl��cicl�cic.f7cJ`�Pc�rlr�cPc.nr.Pcicl�t�r�rli�PclcicJ7rJJc�r�r�c.ic�c..�cJ�cic1� c�1'�c1�r�rlr�r�rJ�c3� cfcPLPr�r1"�.PPr_i3r�cl� c1t�rl7r�e.it,tt�
r
s
! 0 Z
Mw W
i �cn_
n Z
a �0
Q w
m
Q U�
� o Z, LU
co 0
. �Kcn
_j w�TJ >>
1--a 0
C Q =LL
W Q Z
tt w
•
IR
I�
z z
00
aQw
M
CL Z 7
Z
��_
Wcc Q
J
Q
z
w
J Q
Z EL cfl
0 aN
�Sa co
T) W- p
=) LL U
UJQ Of
Q u (D LLJ
}
U
mC) w
s°l<aCV fl
a to
� C
O
=Q Q
M °_
CLtic
c � �
i c CL
m U
E t-
'�— C r
0
c a
ami o z
a �
c t°
CL
Cc
e�
> 0 v
Q1 T3 QNi
V N �
O di
r .�
�U2�o
CD U �?
ea r CL
E O to w
U
ii
_ 03
r (D d 4
U.
I
r�
a 7
G
n�n��ncrGn�n�n�nr n�Ln�nE nnn�n�n� n� nn��n�n�n � nn n�nn4n nr nennz nn� r� �n�r �n�nner��nLncnr sn�n�'In�.n'' uI ��ncn�nnrn�n
Q
Z
W
r
J C[
Z u�
O 0 O
co
tI) w UJ Q
0
Ci _j
dU0 a
(a MN w
r- Q b
c
r
ri
a
-r
rz
r .-
11
6
z
tu
N
M
a
Z
0
x
Q
E C;
CL
C>
V i [meq!
r ",.
rt
c
d
Q
Z
W
r
J C[
Z u�
O 0 O
co
tI) w UJ Q
0
Ci _j
dU0 a
(a MN w
r- Q b
c
r
ri
a
-r
rz
r .-
11
6
z
tu
N
M
a
Z
0
x
Q
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY and FIRE PROTECTION
OFFICE OF THE STATE FIRE MARSHAL
REGISTERED FLAME RESISTANT PRODUCT
Product:
DURASKIN
Product marketed By:
VERSEIDAG INDUTEX GMBH
INDUSTRIESTR 56
47803 KREFELD GERMANY
Reqistration No.
F-53001
This product meets the inininjun, requirements ot flanic resistance established by the California
State Fire Marshal for products identified in Section 13115, California Heal1h and Safety Code.
The scope of the approved use of this product is provided in the current edition of the
CALIFORNIA APPROVED LIST OF FLAME RETARDANT CHEMICALS AND
FABRICS, GENERAL AIND LIMITED APPLICATIONS CONCERNS published by the
California State Fire Marshal,
Expire: 6/
Deputy State Fire Marsha,
�L
2018
0-
m
m
0 z 0
w M
m
0 0
0 z
0
(D
■
(D
cr
■
U) rn
W CL z
CD --i Z
C>
0 m z
* =. 0;�
cr
(D an Cl)
CD
tp •
CL C0 m r
U) = -4 M r- ca
a a) cn M M a ■
'a < m
s m m o -Z M o ONO'
U) a w 0 (
rr 'n f"Imm
mg
>
(D = ,
M 4-
o M -n >
-4
M cn -4
M X
M M Wto
CD
w
co
1-0
CL
M4
a
-4
0
i9
to
::r
=r
0
4 cn
cu
3
0
C7
w
U)
0
CL
0
o
cl
030
m
JA
CD
r"=.
-.t
CD Cr
Cr,t
Cr
CL
0
Q
0
z
IW
=
>
C)
0
2)
Cr
o
rm
M
Z-7
0
:r
CD
CD
cr
sv
o
CL
cr
V
a,
cn
(0)
CL
0
CD
z
=
OL
11
(D
:E
0
0
W
-A
CD0
"
3
3
co
0
w
>
(D
rL
w
zr
0
n)
03
7t)
0
0
CD
r.L
m
m
0 z 0
w M
m
0 0
0 z
0
(D
■
(D
cr
■
U) rn
W CL z
CD --i Z
C>
0 m z
* =. 0;�
cr
(D an Cl)
CD
tp •
CL C0 m r
U) = -4 M r- ca
a a) cn M M a ■
'a < m
s m m o -Z M o ONO'
U) a w 0 (
rr 'n f"Imm
mg
>
(D = ,
M 4-
o M -n >
-4
M cn -4
M X
M M Wto
CD
w
co
1-0
CL
M4
o
o0
cx
0
4 cn
cu
3
0
City of
WheatVE�idge
COMMUNITY DELOPMENT
Escrow/Letter of Credit
Transmittal Sheet
An escrow has been submitted for the property located at 12000 Ridge Road. The
escrow is in the amount of Twenty thousand dollars and zero cents
($20,000.00).
The above amount is to be held in escrow (in G/L Account 01-356) for:
® Planning & Development: [completion of landscape improvements at the
Wheat Ridge -Ward Station
❑ Public Works:
® Other: Work to be performed by City of Wheat Ridge and contractors. The
escrow shall be held by the City as reimbursement to pay for cost to City for
installation of outstanding improvements.
Notes:
Name
Date
'F-2-2 —/ 7
w ` A t
City of
Wheat k dge
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Landscaping Escrow Agreement
This agreement made by and between the City of Wheat Ridge and Denver Transit
Constructors for escrow in the amount of Twenty thousand dollars and zero cents
($20,000.00) is being provided to the City of Wheat Ridge for performance of
outstanding landscape improvements to be completed at the Wheat Ridge -Ward Station
at 12000 Ridge Road. The outstanding improvements include the following:
• Scrape the surface of rocks and weeds including the roots - may
necessitate handpicking construction debris and rocks three inches and
larger - take away
• With tractor, remove approximately 1500 sf of recycled asphalt and take
away
• Mow all weedy areas to 4" tall — do not mow any area where grass is
already growing — take away
• Cut all kochia to the ground - approximately 1.3 acres and take away
• Possible treatment with herbicide
• Amend the soil
• Drill seed approximately one (1) acre
• Seed by hand approximately one-half (112) acre
• Install erosion control blankets/seed mats
• Water to establish and maintain seed growth, including during the
winter
• Possible reseeding in the spring if the seed doesn't establish
By execution of this agreement, the contractor (Denver Transit Constructors) hereby
waives the opportunity to perform the outstanding work. The City of Wheat Ridge will
utilize the escrowed funds to arrange for the work to be performed.
The City of Wheat Ridge or its designee shall have the right to enter upon said property
to construct and/or install such improvements or do other such work to accomplish the
purpose as may be necessary.
Approved and Agreed:
Denver Transit Constructors:
Signature
Print Name
Title
s8lL�-, 2-1, Al 9
Date
-5151 VbV, STRUT, ` Ri V E , Co 9bZ16
Business Address
q7I- zag-�d2�
Phone
City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado
Signature
Print Name
S ,e , lit.
Title
Date
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
Permit #: 201401405 `� `'. city of
Wheat ,dge
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
7500 W 29TH AVE
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033-8001
*Stipulations: Driver relief station - 384 sa It total
Date: 09/25/2018
This certificate verifies that the building constructed and/or the use proposed of the building and/or premises, under the above
permit number and on property described below, does comply with the Wheat Ridge Building Code, Zoning and other related
land use and development laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, and may be occupied for the use specified.
OWNER: 2220 RAND LLC ADDRESS: Po Box 3007, La Vergne, TN 37086-1987
CONTRACTOR/ADDRESS: Denver Transit Constructors 1670 Broadway Ste 2700 Denver CO 80202
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 12000 Ridge Rd, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
PARCEL #: 39-161-00-007 ZONING: I -E OCCUPANCY: B TYPE OF CONST: V -B OCC LOAD:4
FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSE: Commercial New Structure
Code Editions:
2012 ICC / 2014 NEC
No change shall be made in the Use of this building without
prior notice and a new CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
from the City of Wheat Ridge
Certificate MUST be
posted by front door of
commercial occupancies
Chief Building Official
Zoning Administrator
Sorinklered•
No
i CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
Building Inspection Division
(303) 234-5933 Inspection line
(303) 235-2855 Office • (503) •237-8929 Fax
INSPECTION NOTICE
4 I j- au►(di t yk6j
Inspection Type: LI c N- 1 n�'�ec Com
Job Address: l a 0 a 0
Permit Number: 'off 0 l& 0 0 3 S
zo-( L(c)(
®
f
❑ No one available for inspection: Time tu AM/PM
Re -Inspection required: Yes
When corrections have been made, cal for rd -inspection at -303 234-933
D�fe: t ` (EAnspector:
DO NOT REMOafE THIS NOTICE
2�1� q0,57
BACKFLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLY TEST AND MAINTENANCE REPORT
Customer must retain a copy of this report for a minimum of three years
Water District/Authority: `4) Meter/Account No.: Test No.:
Service Name: ay
Service Address: i 2. 12-1 4 � t2 d
Contact Person: tL Title: Iq JA Phone:
Owner/Mgmt Co/Contractor: /� =
Mailing Address:,s `�
Contact Person:L '� C •_ Title:'t Phone:
Ne Existing❑
Rep acement for:
Use: Containment Isolation❑ Domesticge FireD Irrigation0 Pfocess0
Assembly T p : Reduced Pressure �cDouble Check El Pressure Vacuum Breaker❑ Other:
Mfg,; lis Model No.: -- Size: Serial No.: 034 2 -5,
Date Installed: -22--1 Last Inspection:Ei 1 -- Line Pressure: �� PSI
Location: tp CL • `, •'Y�—
Repairs/Comments:
Assembly Mechanical Test: Passed❑ Failed El
If mechanical test fails the Water Purveyor/Authority must be notified immediately and repairs made as soon as possible.
Alarm CompanylFire Department notification:
Turn Off Date:' Time: Tum On Date: Time:
Technician certifies to 11 bl h s b en tested in accordance with ASSE Procedures: 5010 -
Tester Name: " - e,Certification No.` Expires: �I
Tester Signature: _ Test Date: Time:
Tester Phone:"' -2L5� i- c.3 Test Gauge: +:. ' ' Gauge Re -Cert Date: '719
Owner or Agent Signature: X
Signature indicates verification by Signer that isolation valves were returne� A:!st orientation.
City of
Wheat Ridge
Initial Test Results
Comments
Re -test Results
Ti htness Differential
Ti htness Differential
Check No 1
Leak
Leak
(RP, DC, PVB)
Tight.
Leak ;
Ti ht 1..
Chec NO 2
��
Leak i
(RP, DC)
'right i" .i
G
Tight t.:'
Relief Valve
RP
G�
Buffer
�v
RP
Air Inlet
(PVB)
Shut-off valve No. 1 Leak[] Tight
Shut-off valve No. 2 LeakO TiqlAo
Repairs/Comments:
Assembly Mechanical Test: Passed❑ Failed El
If mechanical test fails the Water Purveyor/Authority must be notified immediately and repairs made as soon as possible.
Alarm CompanylFire Department notification:
Turn Off Date:' Time: Tum On Date: Time:
Technician certifies to 11 bl h s b en tested in accordance with ASSE Procedures: 5010 -
Tester Name: " - e,Certification No.` Expires: �I
Tester Signature: _ Test Date: Time:
Tester Phone:"' -2L5� i- c.3 Test Gauge: +:. ' ' Gauge Re -Cert Date: '719
Owner or Agent Signature: X
Signature indicates verification by Signer that isolation valves were returne� A:!st orientation.
City of
Wheat Ridge
ODlq ojq05
BACKFLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLY TEST AND MAINTENANCE REPORT
Customer must retain a copy of this report for a minimum of three years
Water Distdct/Authority: �I Meter/Account No.: Test Na.:
Service Name: I j'—"h! �I (!A ACVe—
Service Address: i ZCOi CI '-
Contact Person: dA Title: /,:n,, Phone: :A
OwnerlMgmt ColContractor: G� 3, 1 �& F-
Mailing Address:
Contact Person: Title: �Z Phone:�i
Ne Existing❑
Rep acement for:
Use: Containment❑ isolatio Domestic❑ Fire❑ Irrigatio Process[
Assembly Type• Reduced Pressure , Dou le Check [3Pressure Vacuum Breaker[]Other:
Mfg.: I Model No.: Size: 1 Serial No.: 0 S-(—, C2`"
Date Installed: �5 —/ (� Last Inspection:_ Line Pressure: PSI
Location: li (Z- `7- 44c=�n
Repairs/Comments:
Assembly Mechanical Test: Passed❑ Failed F-1
If mechanical test fails. the Water PurveyortAuthority must be notified immediately and repairs made as soon as possible.
Alarm Company/Fire Department notification:
Turn Off Date:' Time: Tum On Date: Time:
Technician certifies t 's assembl h s een tested in accordance with ASSE Procedures: 5010- _
Name: � i =' Certification No.: �4-( Expires -
Tester
Tester Signature: Test Date: S^C= / 6' Time*
Tester Phone3 "2C 3 -`?'7 Z=_3Test Gauge: 0pC-fT_ Gauge Re -Cert Date: 6—
Owner or Agent Signature: X
Signature indicates verification by Signer that isolation valves Nvere re est orientation.
"of
Wheat Ridge
wilding Qivi
Initial Test Results Comments
Re -test Results
Ti htness Differential
In htness Differential
Check No 1Leak
/]
Leak'
(RP, DC, PVB)
Tight
Leak i
`T r
Ti ht (...
Check No 2
2
Leak
(RP, DC)
Ti ht .
/, •
Ti ht i.: !;
Relief Valve
(RP)i�
Buffer
(RP)»
Air Inlet
(PVB)
Shut-off valve No. 1 Leak❑ Tigh
Shut-off valve No. 2 Leak❑ Tigh
Repairs/Comments:
Assembly Mechanical Test: Passed❑ Failed F-1
If mechanical test fails. the Water PurveyortAuthority must be notified immediately and repairs made as soon as possible.
Alarm Company/Fire Department notification:
Turn Off Date:' Time: Tum On Date: Time:
Technician certifies t 's assembl h s een tested in accordance with ASSE Procedures: 5010- _
Name: � i =' Certification No.: �4-( Expires -
Tester
Tester Signature: Test Date: S^C= / 6' Time*
Tester Phone3 "2C 3 -`?'7 Z=_3Test Gauge: 0pC-fT_ Gauge Re -Cert Date: 6—
Owner or Agent Signature: X
Signature indicates verification by Signer that isolation valves Nvere re est orientation.
"of
Wheat Ridge
wilding Qivi
Contract Data Requirements
Submittal
Eagle Project
Contract 18FHO12
Item
Contract Data
Contract Data Information
i
Date of Submittal
10/26/16
ii
CDRL Identification Number
713-09.09A
iii
Agreement Title & Number
Eagle Project — Contract 18FH012
iv
Submitting Organization
Denver Transit Partners
v
Description
CDRL 7B -09.09A: Station Design Documentation -
GL3A Ward Road Station Redesign - As -Built Set
vi
Status
For Information Only
vii
Category
Final Design
viii
Signature
- 10/26/2016
Department Manager Signature Date
Brian Donohue
Department Manager Printed Name
"Having checked this item of Contract Data, I hereby
certify that it conforms to the requirements of the
Concession Agreement in all respects, except as
specifically indicated."
Ldo"I
INF'jEL DAER
Bright People Right Solutions.
Certificate of Inspection Letter
;rian Donahue
Denver Transit Constructors
10065 E 40thAve. Suite 400
Denver, CO 80202
K' E: Certificate of Inspection for:
Denver Transit Constructors
1, Gordon Dillon a registered Professional Engineer in the State of Colorado, PE No 46966 in
accordance with Sections 5.3 of the Bylaws and Rules of the State Board of Registration for
Professional Engineers and Professional land Surveyors, do hereby certify that I supervised
construction observations, on a Quality Assurance basis, during construction operations for the
following:
Items shown in CDRL 713-09.09A As-Builts
Based on our field observation reports, review of Requests For Information and Non -Conformance
Reports, it is my professional opinion that all work observed by Kleinfelder, has been installed and
is in substantial compliance with Commuter Rail Train (CRT) Specifications and approved
Construction Drawings. We believe the As—Built drawings included, accurately depict the final
installation of the referenced structures. Kleinfelder was not involved in the preparation of these
As -Built drawings, and is not responsible for the design of any portion of the items shown.
9=
Gordon Dillon, P.E.
Project Manager 11
Amber Richardson, E.I.T.
Project Professional
FLUOR -',HOR `'
GLQfl DESIGN GIX SULTANTS
RTD EAGLE P3
AS -BUILT DRAWING SET TRANSMITTAL
TO: DTC DOCUMENT CONTROL
FROM: JOHN KALVELAGE
SUBJECT: CDRL# 7B -09.09A AS -BUILT DRAWING SET TRANSMITTAL
DATE: 9/22/2016
CC: MICHAEL HOITINK, MICHAEL SCHWAB, MICHAEL BALASH, FHDR DOCUMENT
CONTROL
The As -Built Drawing Set under this cover represents the as -constructed conditions as
documented by the As -Built Mark-ups provided by Denver Transit Constructors.
Sheets included in this transmittal are as follows:
US -501 to US -511, SDS -501 to SDS -503, SDS -517 to SDS -522, CS -500 to CS -501, CS -510 to
CS -512, CS -520, CS -530 to CS -535, CS -540 to CS -548, CS -550 to CS -553, CS -560 to CS -567,
AS -002, AS -500, AS -510, AS -520 to AS -527, AS -530, AS -540, AS -550 to AS -555, AS -570 to AS -
571, AS -590, AS -600 to AS -603, AS -700, SS -010 to SS -013, SS -500 to SS -501, SS -510 to SS -
517, SS -530, SS -800, SS -810 to SS -812, SS -890, MS -000, MS -500, MS -550, MS -580, MS -590,
ES -001 to ES -002, ES -500 to ES -504, ES -506 to ES -508, ES -520 to ES -522, ES -530 to ES -532,
ES -540, ES -550, ES -560 to ES -561, ES -570 to ES -571, ES -580 to ES -581, ES -583, ES -590 to
ES -594, PS -000, PS -500, PS -520, PS -521, PS -522, PS -550, PS -580 to PS -581, PS -590, LS -
001, LS -500 to LS -501, LP -500 to LP -502, IS -001, IS -500 to IS -503.
Sincerely, �1'
�&j 1,,J�'��"I'11Te_
John Kalvelage
F/HDR DSDC Manager
Location: 1200 Ridge Rd.
DOMESTIC
BACKFLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLY TEST AND MAINTENANCE REPORT
Customer must retain a copy of this report for a minimum of three years
Water DisidctfAuthority: l(t) VL rr a-14 10c'� Meter/Account No.: Test No.:
Service Name: r Pty 'IrnAW I l -A illixi ST�Tr
Service Address: (Ll c!i bf A Tiit2a- ))
Contact Person: lie, Phone: n /fa
OwnerlMgmt ColConVa to
Mailing Address:
Contact Person: �b Title: Phone:��3'37�^40
Replacement for:
Use: Containment Isolation❑ DomestitW Fire❑ Irrigation❑ Process❑
Assembly T Reduced Pressure (— Doubler Check ❑ Pressure Vacuum Breaker❑ Other.
Mfg.: Model No.: C�X�' Size: I ' Serial No.* 0344 by 3
Date Installed: Sf (-- Last Inspection: Line Pressure: PSI
D (LS m«g R
.ocatlon:
Re -test Results
Initial Test Results Comments
hotess Differential
11 hiness I
Leak
Check No 1
Leak
�.
Ti h11.
(RP, DC, PVB)
Tight
ec 02
Leak
2 0
Leak
TI ht
(RP, DC)
Mehl
Relief Valve
��g
RP
Buffer
3
RP
Air Inlet
(PVB)
Shut-off valve No. 1 Leaky Tight
Shut-off valve No. 2 Leakl� Tig
Repairs/Comments:
Assembly Mechanical Test: Passed[] Failed❑ _ A
Alarm CompanylFire Department
Tum Off Date! Time:
Tum On Date: Time:
Technician cerfifies bbl h s b e tested in accordance with ASSE Procedures: 5010-
Tester Name: Certification No..`dt 6- 1 EXPir�' `
Tester Sig lure: Test Date: ��L' I Time: t� C) Advii
Tester Phone Test Gauge: to 1o;,( --1L Gauge Re -Cert Date: 67—/ ig-
Owner or Agent Signature: X
Signature Indicates verigcadon by Signer that Isolation valves were returned to pre-test orientation.
Location : 1200 Ridge Rd
IRRIGATION
BACKFLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLY TEST AND MAINTENANCE REPORT
Customer must retain a copy of this report for a minimum of three years
Water District/Authority:(J fLIdc4c7- Meter/AccountNo.: TestNo.:
Service Name:—T�:,t I�t1ACtL L --lin
ServiceAddress: I'ZCCI ,
Contact Persor
Owner/Mgmt Co/Contra tor. �7r —
Mailing Address: 4`1�%
/-� nn
Contact Person: LH lv Title:
Use: Containment❑ Isolatiorrt:� Domestic❑ Fire[] Irdgatio Process[]
Assembly 7 pe• Reduced Pressure Dou le Check ❑ Pressure Vacuum Breaker[] Other:
Mfg.:Model No.:_ Size: Serial No.
Date Installed: 3 / (9 Last Inspection:=__--&�—A Line Pressure: PSI
Repairs/Comments:
Assembly Mechanical Test: Passed ❑ Failed❑
f mach Tim test fatls."water puny W/Authority must be notifled immediately and mitaks made as soon as pmible
Alarm CompanylFire Department notification:
Tum Off Date: Time: Tum On Date: Time:
Technician certifies t assembl h s ben tested in accordance with ASSE Proce4res: 5010 -
Tester Name: f Certification No.: i�`-1 Expires fv
Tester Signature:_ Test Dale: lL Time: `7 iii
Tester Phone �---?? z3Test Gauge: iYt rt7• Q-)— Gauge Re -Cert Date: �.s
Owner or Agent Signature: X
Signature Indiaales vedrimuon by sinner that MIMInn ........
Initial Test
T htness
Results
i I
Comments
Re -test Results
heteas DllrarenNal
Check No 1
Leak
RP, DC, PVB)
Tight
Leek
ht
2
Leak r i
L
Check No
(RP, DC)
Tight
Leak: --I
Relief Valve
ht
`�
YRRP
")
'�
er
RP
Air Inlet
(PVB)
Shutoff valve No. 1 Leak ❑ Ttg
Shut-off valve No. 2 Leek❑ TightEf
Repairs/Comments:
Assembly Mechanical Test: Passed ❑ Failed❑
f mach Tim test fatls."water puny W/Authority must be notifled immediately and mitaks made as soon as pmible
Alarm CompanylFire Department notification:
Tum Off Date: Time: Tum On Date: Time:
Technician certifies t assembl h s ben tested in accordance with ASSE Proce4res: 5010 -
Tester Name: f Certification No.: i�`-1 Expires fv
Tester Signature:_ Test Dale: lL Time: `7 iii
Tester Phone �---?? z3Test Gauge: iYt rt7• Q-)— Gauge Re -Cert Date: �.s
Owner or Agent Signature: X
Signature Indiaales vedrimuon by sinner that MIMInn ........
10/14/16 16:34 City of Wheat Ridge Page 1 of 1
bp435_wr_pg.php/Job No: 57598 Print Inspection Cards USER: TODEAN
Permit #: 201401405 Requested Date/Time: 10/14/16 12:00
Inspector #: MR Actual Date/Time: BY:
Address: 12000 Ridge RD, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Parcel: 39-161-00-007
Description: Driver relief station. Lot: Block: Location: B#!0001899
Subdivision: Unassigned
Contact: Jacob Gilmore (303)371-5700
Company: Gilmore Construction Cc
Inspection Type: F . dscapi
CIRCLE O C P INCOMPLETE PARTIAL CANCEL
REQD: 10/1 6 12:00 B MR TYPE: LFI
Please call Troy - -1906 or Perry Lopez 303-995-2278 at Denver Transit 30 minutes
before you go. They would like to meet you and the call will give them a heads up.
QR OFFICE USE ONLY
City
of para:
"12P'Wh6at, idle
COn tt i O PrN"T� plawponnit#
Building & Inspection Services Division 2 -(DI l., . -
7500 W. 2e Ave., Wheat Ridge CO 80033 Plan Review
Office: 303-2352855 * Fax: 303-237-8929
Inspection Line: 303-234-5933
---------
Building Permit AppliCation
Pleas$ Complete all ighlighted s s on berthsidiss of this form. incomplete applications may not be processed.
Prc�p�rty �tnir p% prvr�ix�: p'hran�:���a��" ��
Property Owner Email: ewe'."" coal
Mailing Address. (if different than properly address
Address. CI
City, Mate, i
rchitectlEn me r E-mail. hone., f
-LA-
Contractor: C�L LA C-+ 01.�, 60- L
Contractors City License #-. Phone. 22 Q.2.L i
ContractorE-mail Addr $. 7 C, P-
Sub Contractors:
Electrical Plumbing: Mechanical:
W.k City License ## W.k City License # W.R. City License i#
Other City Licensed Sub: Other City Licensed Sub:
City License # City License ##
Complete all information on BOTH sides of this form
SCti t +l n of work: (Check all that apply)
Q NEW COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE ELECTRICAL SERVICE UPGRADE
NEW RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE COMMERCIAL ROOFING
COMMERCIAL ADDITION RESIDENTIAL ROOFING
RE DEN `IAL ADDITION WINDOW REPLACEMENT
COMMERCIAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURE (Garage, shed, deck, etc.)
RESIDENTIAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURE (Garage, shed, deck, etc.)
MECHANICAL ANICAL SY'STEMIAPPLIANCE REPAIR or REPLACEMENT
PLUMBING SYSTEM/APPLIANCE REPAIR or REPLACMENT
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM PPLIANCE REPTR or REPLACEMENT
OTHER (Describe.
(For ALL projects, please rc��rld a d� crl tl rt cif rk tie erfc rt�ted, I Ing current use of areas,
proposed uses, s fere fejt tem r ira cc dltl r er►d; dat ed r e r dl lar , e Allance size and efficiency, type and
amount of materiels to be used, etc.
3
ULF Btu's Gallons
Amps squam Other
Fr
e
wwt
.................... ......
WHEAT RIDGE WARD STATION SPECIAL USE PERMIT SITE PLAN APPROVAL
SITUATED IN THE NORTH f THE SOUTHEAST OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP SOUTH, RANGE 69WEST" OF
THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, JEFFERSON COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO
4 NOT S..
a 3 1 LANOWING PLANS SHOWTHE
, w
LOCATIONS SCREEN PLANTINGS,
y
LL ETAt�Y�l+#'# � � AND THE COVERAGE OFF OPEN SPACES,
"� . ' t`t E i STREET E:ET LIGHTINGG �M I.L SE �' BY
. , WALL (" '') i, _ SE
CITY Of, WHEAT RIDGE AND XCEt-
AVYS TRACK
y
w
t"
i s
i , t `TOTAL �� �7�EiTY; 8.9a
ACRES
3 iED AREAS.5,SaAC6�:255,1E $f i'
EXIST
i gg
P,
w
d,
„ } . �
TF3saw., .,.. .. � L�aSSA�E AREAS: ,s� AES, =a�SO FT
" v 't.9'tV , t'Y .. ,w, .. t t t A ` '?'4.L , • .� �1� .. , .ro. arro w...
(34%)
xl, , ., • ie.,. .,.m, ._..,..w..�,.,n».. OF #iVILOINGS'
ti a" ?" SiEV!tALi v
a �3 a S i �.. �� a. _ �. ,�,".�.,, , @LDING COVERAGE:384 $0, E€..
NT ZONING CLASSIFICATION' t d, NO
p yw
i,Clift ANC
� tq€ PARKING
SPACES PROVI290
DED� 288
k SPACES REQUIRED BY T1
!A ET PAfiC3� SPACES
6
{ \i .. E: „, .,rc ..> .� ^`" ` w., .w ten,?� i ,• ` 6».ro+,....,..... 0. r > n"^v, ""ti,„„.., �,« �...,
'i
3
A AEE :E5tPCAND PFC
!Et
,,t REQUIRED AND PROVIDEDS
SCREEN AL
s
d
w
\
.
SIDEWOt„ ,,, � •-- � ;, F _"\, � ti ' � i ,
q i
SOEBOUNDAR4
LARGE DRIVER1C1 � �_: V
' }4Ei,8E� STA
p
AT
d m
}
$CROSSSTA PS
4 a „
C,
4pJq. k •\. < ,: i i, t .,(F ' wY' ..., ? « :. g y wi„� ' ,,, ah .JUN ..,,.., x �\: e c ”" y �,.;' n � S � ,wmr••
PS.:..,...a*m
�-. # >. % ;,. �� •, 1p S. A+ ,. d, .„ ,,. ._.,w., »�r.•. "««r« `w"..a'.,... y..«e",, a „,n. '' .� �_� ,.»,� 'a"x\ , �"1.
i a
S. �,t is � �, , � w; ,„., a>+w* ,,.,- .. ,,, \ a M '� ~,.a , .. ✓`t
r..
it�AY P 0.PPAOXiMiATE
A9iTS CAS :?b3C t
.;v v` L#
,,<t Tsc»1` �, Ai€uExPAEtsa , ...,
Yff 6 OAD STA s 9 ;.
f36rFAg , as
: r PLATFC1FtMrt S Pi,:AA
SEEARCHP S `'
ae ,.
PLATFORM
a ,rt
D
1
i
t
... s u '""`w tw. "'.- •,,t ,""e,.." @ _ „"1.; 0. #:
s+
` �r DRYS PIPE TO' 4 , t\ u. e/ I �... L # .« y.:.: ...
F
. n
k
4
t
i
t
i
}
11'
`. „ S
E CONNECTION YC€t \, a
k x ttS L
iiCKiCCICX CAP
P� tCE.l�MAL$C i ^^GUTTER STREET
E` a�St
.. .,
4
A� 18�L�','�� � �
MJ " ,
ART=LATED 84SiAY � t S"S n � .. ` .� w t , ,.•, +� �„ � ,..m.
f �yy�.]�.
.n. 9"+.'�
k rURT
+yy k
TICKET K' OSK
w e
EXTENDED \
,
t gg
i ENTION BASIN
W
n
x , '
JF"
. „
.1f2 Y STA DPCPE , S
ICON � STC'3 SIGN � � , � � ,
HOSE CIC. t "�
n
{: # .
L Kip x CAi # i
y s^ sig
,,I
IA
M
x , •,ic '-4 Sp��C�Eq"..°'. z
,
„ t
«
a
OLE FE I ° E ` n 100 V50
'.. t
#
Li
' IN ET
SCALE
w �
"q G
Y §
�a }
c
SHEET. , G�EFE : E
OLD L
CMCJMSER:
ARD ROAD STATION SDS-50
.,.. 1 _...
SITE PLAN SHEET SHEET
NUMBER
1 t t1Cr-Fi�aTri1ETEt a sr#ar etc .rF wn 07tlT oa
sagle P.7
uj
iEvasiaiw t3ATE
PRQJECT DESCRIPTION
L Project consists of a series of free standing public art pieces ranging in height from 15
feet to 18 feet. Each is composed of stainless steel pipes and base plates on a
continuous cast in place concrete footing.
2. This description is for general orientation only, The General Contractor is responsible
for all scope items described in the drawings and project specifications as well as for
all material and labor that can reasonably be inferred there from.
GENERALAPPLILATION
1. These drawings must be used in conjunction with the artists drawings on the proje
to clearly define all requirements for construction.
2. No Contractor should attempt to bid nor construct any portion of this project
without consulting the project architectural, mechanical, and electrical documents.
3, All things which, in the opinion of the Contractor, appear to be deficiencies,
omissions, contradictions or ambiguities in the drawings shall be brought to the
attention of the Structural Engineer, Corrections or written interpretations shall b
issued before affected work may proceed.
4. The Contractor shall inform the Structural Engineer, clearly and explicitly in writing
of any deviation or substitution from requirements of the contract documents.
Contractor shall not be relieved of any requirement of the contract documents by
virtue of the Structural Engineer's review of shop drawings, project data, etc., unle
the Contractor has clearly and explicitly informed the Structural Engineer in wrifin
of any deviations or substitutions at time of submission.
MISCELLANEOUS NOTE
L The Contractor is solely responsible for all safety regulations, programs and
precautions related to all work on this project.
2The Contractor is solely responsible for the protection of persons and property either
on or adjacent to the project and shall protect it against injury, damage, or loss.
1 Means and methods of construction and erection of structural materials are solely
the Contractor's responsibility,
4. The structure is designed to function as a unit upon completion of construction of the
project and then, only to support the design loads indicated. The contractor is
responsible for means, methods and sequence of construction and the adequacy of
the structure to support loads occurring during construction of the project. Furnish all
temporary bracing, shoring, and/or support as may be required,
5, No openings, nor any change in size, dimension or location shall be made in any
structural element without written approval of the Structural Engineer.
6Do not scale these drawings, use the dimensions shown. In case of conflict, request
clarification from architect and structural engineer.
7. No structural modifications, alterations, or repairs shall be made without prior review
by Structural Engineer, Submit details and calculations prepared by a professional
engineer registered in state where project is located and employed by contractor,
QUALITY CONIROL
L The Contractor is responsible for quality control, including workmanship and materials
furnished by subcontractors and suppliers.
2, Inspection or testing by the Owner does not relieve the Contractor of his responsibility
to perform the work in accordance with the Contract Documents.
1 Workmanship: The Contractor is responsible and shall bear the cost of correcting
work which does not conform to the specified requirements,
4. Correct deficient work by means acceptable to the Architect. The cost of extra work
incurred by the Architect to approve corrective work shall be borne by the Contractor.
KL&A, Inc.
Structural Engineers and Budders
1717 WaO—glm A—., S.W 10D
Gd4m CA4�,.do W01
P (303) 3S4 99ic F M13! 384 9915
Gofdu . L -0 ,,d . Rw sf7wk . R.UcWY
FOUNDATIONS
GENERAL:
1. The foundations have been designed based on the design criteria and the Geotechnical
Report referenced in the Structural Design Criteria section. Earthwork and foundation
soil preparation shall be performed to provide soil properties meeting the design
criteria.
2, Bottom of exterior footings, grade beams, and walls shall bear below final exterior
grade for frost protection - see structural design criteria section of the general notes.
3. Contractor shall provide continuous site drainage by a mechanical method to control
surface and underground water as required to maintain a dry working site.
=Nna WIT41:9401 Z [Oita 14
1. All concrete work shall conform to AC1318 and ACI 301 and tolerances shall conform
to ACI 117 unless noted otherwise, Contractor shall keep a copy of these references
RMEMMEnmunsm
REINFORCING AND EMBEDDED ITEMS:
1, Welding of reinforcing is prohibited, unless noted otherwise and shall conform to
ASTM 706.
STRUCTURAL STEEL
GENERAL:
1. All structural steelwork shall conform to AISC 360 and tolerances shall conform to
AISC 303 unless noted otherwise. Contractor shall keep a copy of these references on
site at all times.
2. Materials —See Steel Materials Table
WELDS:
1. Fillet Welds: Size as indicated, but not less than AISC minimum size.
ERECTION:
1. No final bolting or welding shall be performed until as much of the structure which
will be stiffened thereby has been properly aligned.
2. Field correction of fabrication or other errors will be permitted only when approved
by the EOR. Finish gas -cut sections in accordance with AWS D1.1.
KL &A, Inc.
Structural Engineers and Bustlers
1717 Wastqlw Aww, We 100
God�' colod. "01
P (371W Wo r (30-3) 1849965
G
oWm . L9 d . R..-9 Fi, . Fwff.,., WY
Z=
I
FOUNDATION PLAN
KL&A, Inc.
Structural Engineers and Builders
V117 W'10-gtW Av�.w o. SWO 100
GOh, CoS,Xodo 80401
Mll� r84 9910 F poaY 3eA 9,q
E''
, .15
ckgd� . L0.6", Ek Wo,
pq
I *
TYABS AT\
118
(4) C 114x3xO'-8- STIFFENER, CLIP
:e- AT BOTTOM CORNER FOR PIPE WELD,
f- MAY BE RECTANGULAR IF DESIRED
ryA T__!�118 LEVELING NUTS WITH WASHER
p \ N
STIFFENERS/ _ 17
NON -SHRINK GROUT
CII CONC FOOTING W1 150
18" OC TRANSVERSE AND
(4)15xCONTINUOUS LONG
I
'7 v
- -JI-0.
--------- . ........ . ---------------_
Vol q i I rel I rola
ffgflzg��
lilili 0
IN T
�M
KL&A, Inc.
Structural Enqjneers and BuMers
1717 W8shMqjm Am S.W WW
Gofdh , 090'a6o 80401
P 1103 384 9')10 F pol�,w q9ts
Gs'dw . LnvNad . Rwq F.* . SOW., wy
�.,I 112'
TYP
N
I
SCULPTURAL PIPE - PIPE ,STD
4,11*
4f,
We
BASE PIPE PIPE 2 112 XS
'0
----------
A
(o
118
AT
I 1121TYP-1, 6 \PIPE
4 112'
3
TYP AT
BAST`
118 1
(J) 114 STIFFENER, CLIP AT
---------- BOTTOM CORNER FOR PIPE WELD,
MAY BE RECTANGULAR IF DESIRED
C11412xVARIES AS REQUIRED
. ..... . .....
ct
RE: IIS4 FOR ADDITIONAL
[!NI!ORMATIDN NOT SHOWN
JI -o#
KL &A, Inc.
Structural Engineers and Builders
IMWashm,
,$w A--, $w10 1W
C60'.00 $0401
P 53037 384 9910 F Nal 384 9916
GdW . LaAqand . R - -g Foek . %fto WY
um
k tw a
0
B uilding & Inspection Serv Division
7500 W. 29 �,,° ., Wheat Ridge, CO 8003
Offi 303-235-2855 * Fax; 303 - 237 -8929
Inspection Request Lim 303-234-5
Mailing Address. if different to rt property ad )
0 ._
n, (Fidly describe work to be, performed - Attache additional sheet it necessary)
FC1r O Napes f l work.
._
R eview Fee £swats at tare of subrrntrjbfi
Ems "t'fti`f` t "f f k "t" NDING AN ,s f; ; ENT c °et 8y t r.at ttau taaa a t act a l aliaation re arccur<at� and o not %'Jokita° aapphwaaNe a nfirsaarace"
a¢hztaaasa ca@ ttt� ats mai a aa.amt t l s rar r�e^atriclions- o rc'a'c >a that all tIMISaarr�v Hasa" w��raa xn '.asst
maamatle. ,ate s a ace atc : tla,at #s roc r all a..a nditaraaas I'sti stet area this application ,and thw l aaas;asat v t'O
aBrB t`saa' ,a,txtahuasac as sell .alalallsesh'd aaschr,wtata °s for ara:aak, sander zany tsaas" 6i issu d haas'ed aria °satlon€ slant d aria the is aal amoral ~r o hat v das cn zaaathorinxi b the ��g "'O aaweasm tat tear prop em to pc61rraa the do s rit d s car
and yam aalaaa taaathorared her the lqg al vas <atexa Ofany vnfio, orterlude si tads tlas« ctgataljraertacasa to Sl t this caaslt) on al,is ;atrol S aaatiaaa#,.
M1t tstst tat
SAM
Melissa Mackex
I I I III$ 1 11 1 11 111, 11,, 1
From: Dennis McGrath <Dennis, McGrath@dtpjv,com >
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 9:02 AM
To: Melissa Mackey
Subject: RE: 12000 Ridge Rd (Driver relief station)
Masonry:
Phoenix Masonry Inc
Plumbing:
Strait Plumbing Vl-
HVAC:
Finalizing with Troutman & Shreve
Electrical:
Dynalectric
Roofing:
.1Blanco Enterprises*
•=
Eamon=
Jason Buechler, PE LEED AP
HOR
10035 East 4W Avenue, Suite 400
Denver, CO 80239
From: Melissa Mackey [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 12: 10 PM
To: Buechler, Jason
Cc: John Schumacher
Subject: 12000 Ridge Rd (Driver relief station)
611M
Melissa Macke
NO OPINION 1111 11 11 NMI -Ic�- IIII I OPINION
31EMZ•��
From: Melissa Mackey mailto:mmackev(&ci.wheatridoe.cous
Sent* Wednesday, December 17, 2014 2:18 PM
To Dennis McGrath
Subject: RE: 12000 Ridge Rd (Driver relief station)
1 1 1 1 !111 1 1111 1 1111111 , !1 11:111111111
I Hsi 1 7,
H=
ffim
City of
3�'I&L a l - m t m p t� 49 e�o
From: Dennis McGrath [maji tq-Dennis.MgGrath2dtpv.corn]
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 9:02 AM
To Melissa Mackey
Subiect: RE: 12000 Ridge Rd (Driver relief station)
Lk�
CITE' (A W111AT RIDGE (I AND INSPECTION SERVI US D$1 iSIO
75M W 29th Ave Wheat ridge, CO 80033-8001 p 303135,2$55J 303,23" ,8929
Date: t
Project Address:
Signature of Firm
by
acknowledge receipt of documents necessary
a We be ow, here
iect ind icated
* Wheat Ridge Sanitation District
* Clear Creek Sanitation District
Sa nitation
Westri Sanitation District
* Other
Agency deltas;
M
Date: Jt tJ
(Agency Representative)
City of
a t 1� �
PUBLIC WORKS
City of' Wheat Ridge Municipal Building 7500 W. 29' Ave, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 P. 303.235. 2861 F. 303,2351857
Location of Construction:
1 Z-40 o
Purpose of Construction:
bk-iuop9—
P-4*b ��41-ApA)
Single 'at mily
Commercial ->—'
MEGM
Devel2Rment Review Procegigg Fee ., ...... $100.00
(Required of all projects for document processing)
Sin le Familx��.!RictsEi!dqetuncste/LyDulex Review $50.00
Commercial/Multi-Fat mitv Review Fees:
0 0 & M Manual Review & SMA Recording Fee- $100A0
$ t.
$
' Fach Application will be reviewed by staff'once and returned for changes. If after review of the second submittal changes have
not been made to the civil documents or the Traffic Study as requested bystaff, further reviews of the Application will be subject
to the following Resubmittal Fees:
4 ' t ' submittal (full initial review ........ $600.00
All subsequent submittals:,, ..................... $600.00
(Full initial review fee)
TOTAL REVIEW FEES (due at time of Building Permit issuance,): $L����
PLEASE NOTETHAT IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE FEES, THERE WILL 13E ADDITIONAL LICENSING
AND PERMITTING FEES REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY.
www.ci.wheatridgexo.us
Rev 1212
City of COMMERCIALIMULTI-FAMILY
WhI6 e BUILDING PERMITAPPLICA TION REVIEW
PUBLIC WORKS
Date: — it ) �-, �
Location: I.:
ATTENTION: BUILDING DEPARTMENT
I have reviewed the submitted application documents to construct a 2);uVoo-
located at the above referenced address. Please note the comments cliecked below.
1. V" Site Survey: OK Not OK; refer to stipulations,
2. t Drainage:
a. Final Drainage Report and Plan required
Yes
No
b. Drainage Letter and Plan required
Yes
ie-Nlo
c. Site drainage/grading have been reviewed and area
- , e !�'01(
— Not OK; see stipulations
3, -V"' CDPS Permit & SWMP Approved: Yes
— No
— N/A
4 omjLcted: l
_ Public Improvements to be c - —
a, street pavin g/pat ching: Yes
— No
b, curb & gutteri'drivecut: U-' Yes
— No
C. sidewalk: ue' Yes
No
d. standard street lights-, Yes
No
e. pedestrian lights: Yes
No
f storm sewer: - J"'f Yes
No
9r Letter of Credit (LOQ required: Yes
No
11, Funds in lieu of construction: Yes
v"' No
If an LOC or funds in lieu of are required, for what improvements','
9, APPROVEW The Public Works Department has reviewed the submitted material and hereby approves this
Permit Application, subject to the stated or attached stipulations,
Signature David F. Grossman, P.L.S.
DATE: 10/22/14
0
mm
Probable Engineers Cost Estimate
Exhibit C
For
RTD FasTracks Northwest Corridor - Ward Road Station including Taft Street and 50th Place Roadways
Building Permit
DUgapfio Amount
UNIUMEM
M "A U "",A,
111��111 0 . 11111111 , 111 111111111111111111111 1, 1111 r1l 11
I , . -11 all" 111111 0 - 1!
A
I slot W&I Lei I'Ll *MJI 1 * 0 01
Rev. 1
Date of Submittal-. 11/13/2012
Submitting Organization:
Concessionaire: Denver Transit Partners (DTP)
Subcontractors Denver Transit Constructors (DTC) & Fluor/HDR
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Ward Road Station
(Submitted as part of CDRL 7B-09.09A)
Status. Submitted for Information Only
Category.- Final
-
•
--------------
Design Package No. • Description
issued for Constructio n, CDRL #7B-09.09A
Signature
FHD R Design Manager
Signature:
DTP Engineering Manager
Own- WMIA' M
indicated.
01171
1111111
0
w
♦ WTIOMMO Will 11111 119
Rev I
Date: 7/19/11
Preoared for:
Concessionaire Denver Transit Partners (DTP)
Subcontractors: Denver Transit Contractors (DTC) & Fluor /HDR
Pregared by:
GROUND Engineering Consultants, Inc.
Document No. GLO-GEO-RPOI
#
Document No. GLO-GEO-RPOI
#
Page
Purpose and Scope of Study . » ........... ...........,..,,,..
,.......,.,........ .,,.,,..,,...,.. »..,.........,. 1
ProposedConstruction .. .............„,....,......,....,..... ,.......
»... »...,,......,....., ....,.,,...,,.,,., 1
SiteConditions .. » .............................. ..»..,....,...,..,,..,..,.......,.,..,
........,,,..,.,.,,,....,......
Regional Geology ........ .........
......... ................. ...................
SubsurfaceExploration .....,... », ,.. „ ..... ...........................
...... ...............................
Laboratory ........................... ....................................
................ »..,,....,,..,. 4
Subsurface Conditions ». ,. » ............................
EngineeringSeismicity .....,. »,.........,. _ ............................
......... ............................
Foundation System Overview.— ,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,...,...,,..........,.....,..,.,
,.,,,,.,..,..,..,,............. 7
Station Platform 1 bail 1 Ballast Foundation System
......... ...... ............................... 7
ExteriorFlatwork ................... ................... ».........,.
,...,,,..,, ..... ............................... 113
Dater Soluble Sulfates,
............................. ................. 1
SoilCorrosivity ... ,. ....... ......... ».... .....,.., ......... ,......,.
.,,.,,,.,...,,,.. »............. 13
ProjectEarthwork .. ........ ........ »..,................... »,...... ».......
».,................,... ,.,.,,,,.,...... 16
Excavation Considerations .................. »...,.,. ,..,.,.....,.,,...
,....,... ,.,..,.., ».,. ,...........
Utility Pipe Installation and Backfilling .............................
..... ............................... 21
Surface Drainage ............
.............. ...............................
Limitations .............................. .................
........ 25
Location of Test Holes ............. ...............................
.................... Figures 1 through
Summary of Laboratory Test results , ,..........» ..... ...............................
Tables 1 and
Logs, Legend, and Test Hole Survey Locations.
...... ....................... Appendix A
Gradation Test results .......
.................. ....... „..... Appendix
BSAL20 Calculations „ ..... ......... ......... ......... .........
......... ......... ............ Appendix C
Supplemental Test Hole Logs (by others) .... .........
......... ......... ............ Appendix U
RTD Eagle P3 Project - Gold Line - Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0-GE0-RP01 Rev I
FINAL (100% submiftal) 7119111
�* • # a,
GROUND Job No, 10-9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page I
RTD Eagle P3 Project - Gold Line - Ward Road Station {Platform Only)
Document No. GL0-GEO-RP01 Rev I
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19111
Parking areas with associated drives, a retaining wall, a detention pond and additional
areas of hardscaping are also proposed to be located north of the station platform.
Property access (Right of Entry) to these areas was unavailable at the time of the
preparation of this report, Therefore geotechnical recommendations for these
2111111111! 1 il 11111 ''! I! I'MIRP 119215151111 SEE=
GROUND Job No, 10-9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 2
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
u`as - 1C
oK
et
r Ward Road Ridge Road
o � _�,•', �
Project Site ,
I �,, ;� Tabor Street
Ka
Kdw
of
of ...
Interstate 70
r ' t
Published maps, e.g. Van Horn (1972'), depict the site as underlain by Upper
Pleistocene Louviers Alluvium. Louviers Alluvium typically consists of silty sand with
occasional gravel. Subsequent weathering commonly results in alteration of feldspars in
these materials to clays. The surficial soils are mapped as underlain by interbedded
strata of the upper Cretaceous / lower Tertiary Denver and Arapahoe Formations. In the
northwest Denver metropolitan area, the Denver and Arapahoe Formations consist
largely of claystones and sandstones interbedded on various scales with local lignite
beds. The claystones typically are moderately to highly expansive. Well cemented,
resistant sandstones are encountered locally, as well as over - consolidated, but
uncemented and friable sandstones.
' Van Horn, R., 1972. Surficial and bedrock geologic map of the Golden quadrangle. Jefferson County,
Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey. Miscellaneous Geologic Investigations Map 1- 761 -A. scale 1:24000.
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 3
RTD Eagle P3 Project - Gold Line - Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GLO- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
The subsurface exploration program for the project was conducted on October 25,
2010. A total of two (2) test holes were drilled with a truck - mounted, continuous flight
auger rig within the proposed platform footprint to evaluate the subsurface conditions as
well as to retrieve soil and bedrock samples for laboratory testing and analysis. The test
holes were advanced to depths ranging from approximately 35 to 40 feet. Remaining
test holes could not be drilled due to unavailable property access. A representative of
GROUND directed the subsurface exploration, logged the test holes in the field, and
prepared the soil and bedrock samples for transport to our laboratory. In addition,
borings from previous studies provided in the project documents were also reviewed,
specifically; boring logs S -1 and S -2. These boring logs were provided from a previous
study by RockSol and are attached in Appendix D.
Samples of the subsurface materials were retrieved with a 2 -inch I.D. California liner
sampler. The sampler was driven into the substrata with blows from a 140 -pound
hammer falling 30 inches. This procedure is similar to the Standard Penetration Test
described by ASTM Method D1586. Penetration resistance values, when properly
evaluated, indicate the relative density or consistency of soils. Depths at which the
samples were obtained and associated penetration resistance values are shown on the
test hole logs.
The approximate locations of the test holes are shown in Figures 1, 2 and 3. Logs,
explanatory notes, and a legend of the exploratory test holes are presented in Appendix
A.
LABORATORY TESTING
Samples retrieved from our test holes were examined and visually classified in the
laboratory by the project engineer. Laboratory testing of soil and bedrock samples
obtained from the subject site included standard property tests, such as natural moisture
contents, dry unit weights, grain size analyses, and liquid and plastic limits. Swell -
consolidation potential, water - soluble sulfate and corrosivity tests were completed on
select samples as well. Laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with
applicable ASTM and AASHTO protocols. Results of the laboratory testing program are
summarized on Tables 1 and 2, and in Appendix B.
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 4
RTD Eagle P3 Project - Gold Line - Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The subsurface conditions encountered in the platform test holes generally consisted of
sands and clays that extended to depths of approximately 9 to 11 feet below existing
grades. These materials were underlain by sands and gravels that extended to depths
of approximately 32 to 33 feet below existing grades. These were underlain by claystone
bedrock, which extended to the test hole termination depths of approximately 35 to 40
feet below existing grades. Although fill materials were not recognized in GROUND's
test holes, they exist on site and were encountered in Rocksol Test Holes S -1 and S -2.
The exact extents, limits, and composition of any man -made fill were not determined as
part of the scope of work addressed by this study, and should be expected to exist at
varying depths and locations across the site.
Graphic logs, legend, and location summary of the test holes are included in Appendix
A.
Sand and Clay was low to medium plastic, fine to coarse grained, very soft or very
loose to stiff or medium dense, moist to wet, and pale brown to brown in color. Shallow
man -made fill of similar consistency is also likely present near the surface.
Sand and Gravel was occasionally clayey, non to low plastic, fine to coarse grained
with gravels and cobbles, loose to very dense, moist to wet, and brown to gray to yellow
to red to tan to black in color.
Claystone Bedrock was highly plastic, fine grained, hard, dry to moist, and blue -gray in
color.
Groundwater was observed in both test holes at depths of 15 to 16 feet below existing
grades at the time of drilling. Groundwater levels can fluctuate, however, in response to
annual and longer -term cycles of precipitation, irrigation, surface drainage and land use,
and the development and drainage of transient, perched water conditions.
Swell- Consolidation Testing of samples of the overburden materials encountered in
the project test holes indicated no potential for heave. Consolidation values ranging
from 0.3 to 0.9 percent were measured against a 1,000 -psf surcharge pressure.
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 5
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
ENGINEERING SEISMICITY
According to the 2006/2009 International Building Code (Section 1613 Earthquake
Loads), "Every structure, and portion thereof, including nonstructural components that
are permanently attached to structures and their supports and attachments, shall be
designed and constructed to resist the effects of earthquake motions in accordance with
ASCE 7, excluding Chapter 14 and Appendix 11A. The seismic design category for a
structure is permitted to be determined in accordance with Section 1613 (2006/2009
IBC) or ASCE 7." Exceptions to this are further noted in Section 1613.
Utilizing the USGS's Earthquake Ground Motion Tool v.5.0.9a and site latitude /longitude
coordinates of 39.787859 and — 105.133263 (obtained from Google Earth) respectively,
the project area is indicated to possess an SDs value of 0.245 and an SDi value of
0.093. In accordance with the 2006/2009 International Building Code, it is GROUND's
opinion that Seismic Design Category B would be applicable for seismic foundation
design, based on an Occupancy Category of I, II, or III. For Occupancy Category IV, a
Seismic Design Category C would be applicable. The Project Structural Engineer
should ultimately determine the Seismic Design Category. Compared with other regions
of the Western United States, recorded earthquake frequency in the project vicinity is
relatively low.
Per 2006/2009 IBC, Section 1613.5.2 Site class definitions, `Based on the site soil
properties, the site shall be classified as either Site Class A, B, C, D, E or F in
accordance with Table 1613.5.2. When the soil properties are not known in sufficient
detail to determine the site class, Site Class D shall be used unless the building official
or geotechnical data determines that Site Class E or F soil is likely to be present at the
site ".
Based on the soil conditions encountered in the test holes drilled on the site, our review
of applicable geologic maps, as well as our experience within the Project site vicinity, a
Site Class D according to the 2006/2009 IBC classification (Table 1613.5.2) is
anticipated for seismic foundation design. This parameter was estimated utilizing the
above - referenced table as well as extrapolation of data beyond the deepest depth
explored.
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 6
RTD Eagle P3 Project - Gold Line - Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
FOUNDATION SYSTEM OVERVIEW
Based on our field and laboratory analysis within the footprint limits of the proposed
platform, the materials in the upper 9 to 11 feet consist of relatively loose soils. Shallow
foundations placed directly on soils, such as those encountered at the project site, could
experience post- construction structural movements as a result of settlement. In order to
reduce the potential for post- construction movement, sub - excavation /overexcavation is
often used in the Denver area to reduce potential post- construction movements and
allow the use of a shallow foundation system. The proposed platform may be founded
on a shallow foundation system consisting of spread footings or a reinforced mat
foundation bearing on a minimum depth of 5 feet of properly moisture - density treated
on -site generated soils and /or approved import fill material. Given that the allowable
differential movement between the tracks and the platform is low, the fill prism should be
uniform in depth beneath the platform and the rail lines and extend at least 5 feet
beyond the foundations of the platform. At the approaches to the platform, the over-
excavation and re- compaction zone should be tapered from the 5 -foot depth within 5
feet of the platform a distance of 25 feet to the standard subgrade preparation depth for
the track. To reduce differential movements, two (2) layers of geogrid reinforcement
should be incorporated within the fill prism below the spread footing foundation and rail
areas as described below.
Final grading plans were not available at the time this report was prepared. The
overexcavation recommendations provided within this report are based on a finish grade
elevation of approximately 5466 feet in the platform area. If final finish grade elevation
is at a variance from this assumption, GROUND should be contacted to re- evaluate the
provided recommendations.
STATION PLATFORM / RAIL / BALLAST FOUNDATION SYSTEM
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread
footing foundation system. The construction details should be considered when
preparing project documents. The precautions and recommendations provided below
will not prevent movement of the footings if the underlying materials are subjected to
alternate wetting and drying cycles. However, the recommended measures will tend to
GROUND Job No 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 7
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
make the movement more uniform, and reduce resultant damage if such movement
occurs.
1) Footings should bear on a minimum of 5 feet of properly moisture - conditioned
and compacted fill materials. The fill material could be generated from the on-
site derived granular overburden soils and /or approved imported granular fill
material. All fill should be placed in accordance with the criteria provided in the
Project Earthwork section of this report. Excavation and replacement of the fill
prism should take place directly beneath the platform footings and rail sub -
ballast as well as at least 5 feet beyond the platform foundations. At the
approaches to the platform, the over - excavation and re- compaction zone should
be tapered from the 5 -foot depth, beneath the footings, within 5 feet of the
platform a distance of 25 feet to the standard subgrade preparation depth for the
track. The bottom of the excavation prism should be at a uniform elevation.
It may be necessary to improve the fill platform base of the overexcavation area
(5 to 6 feet below subballast elevation) by densification and /or other means to
increase the stability of the overlying backfill zone. The recommendations in the
Soft and Wet Subgrade Conditions subsection should be considered, as
necessary.
2) Two layers of geogrid (TenCate Mirafi® and /or Tensar(D products or equivalent)
should be placed within the fill prism. These layers should be placed at
elevations coinciding with 0 feet and 2.5 feet above the bottom of the
overexcavation elevation. Geogrid reinforcement is not required in the tapered
zones at each platform approach outside the platform area.
The subgrade should be leveled prior to the placement of the geogrid. Geogrid
placement should be performed according to the manufacturers'
recommendations.
Geogrid should be overlapped in accordance with manufacturers'
recommendations.
Geogrid may be disturbed under the wheel loads of heavy construction
equipment, especially track type vehicles, therefore no vehicle traffic should be
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 8
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GLO- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
allowed over the geogrid reinforcement until 8 or more inches of soil has been
placed over the geogrid.
3) Footings bearing on properly placed and compacted fill prism, as described
herein, may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure (Q) of 3,000 psf.
The recommended allowable bearing pressure was based on an assumption of
drained conditions and a potential total settlement of 1 inch or less. If foundation
materials are subjected to an increase /fluctuation in moisture content, the
effective bearing capacity will be reduced and greater post- construction
movements than those estimated above may result.
4) Footing excavation bottoms may expose loose, organic or otherwise deleterious
materials, including debris. Firm materials may become disturbed by the
excavation process. All such unsuitable materials should be excavated and
replaced with properly compacted fill.
5) In order to reduce differential settlements between footings or along continuous
footings, footing loads should be as uniform as possible. Differentially loaded
footings will settle differentially.
Similarly, differential fill thicknesses beneath footings will result in increased
differential settlements.
5) Spread footings should have a minimum footing dimension of 16 or more inches.
Actual footing dimensions, however, should be determined by the Structural
Engineer, based on the design loads.
6) Footings should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing
elevation for frost protection. Footings should be placed at a bearing elevation 3
or more feet below the lowest adjacent exterior finish grades.
7) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span an
unsupported length of at least 10 feet.
8) The lateral resistance of spread footings will be developed as sliding resistance
of the footing bottoms on the foundation materials and by passive soil pressure
GROUND Job No 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 9
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GLO- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
against the sides of the footings. Sliding friction at the bottom of footings may be
taken as 0.33 times the vertical dead load.
9) Compacted fill placed against the sides of the footings should be compacted in
accordance with the recommendations in the Project Earthwork section of this
report.
10) Care should be taken when excavating the foundations to avoid disturbing the
supporting materials. Hand excavation or careful backhoe soil removal may be
required in excavating the last few inches.
11) Foundation soils may be disturbed or deform excessively under the wheel loads
of heavy construction vehicles as the excavations approach footing levels.
Construction equipment should be as light as possible to limit development of
this condition. The use of track - mounted vehicles is recommended since they
exert lower contact pressures. The movement of vehicles over proposed
foundation areas should be restricted.
12) All footing areas should be compacted with a vibratory plate compactor prior to
placement of concrete.
13) A Geotechnical Engineer should be retained to observe and test (if necessary)
footing bearing areas prior to placement of reinforcing steel or concrete.
EXTERIOR FLATWORK
Exterior flatwork and other hardscaping placed on the soils encountered on -site may
experience post- construction movements due to volume change of the subsurface soils.
Both vertical and lateral soil movements can be anticipated as the soils experience
volume change as the moisture content varies. Distress to rigid hardscaping likely will
result. The following measures will help to reduce damages to these improvements.
Subgrade under exterior flatwork or other (non building or station platform) site
improvements should be excavated and /or processed to a minimum depth of 24 or more
inches. The excavated soil should be replaced as properly moisture - conditioned and
compacted fill as outlined in the Project Earthwork section of this report. It may be
GROUND Job No 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 10
RTD Eagle P3 Project - Gold Line - Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GLO- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
necessary to increase the depth of subgrade preparation in localized areas depending
on the conditions encountered.
Prior to placement of flatwork, a proof roll should be performed to identify areas that
exhibit instability and deflection. The soils in these areas should be removed and
replaced with properly compacted fill or stabilized.
Flatwork should be provided with effective control joints. Increasing the frequency of
joints may improve performance. ACI recommendations should be followed regarding
construction and /or control joints.
Exterior flatwork should not extend to under any portion a structure where there is less
than 2 inches of clearance between the flatwork and any element of the structure.
Exterior flatwork in contact with brick, rock facades, or any other element of the
structure can cause damage to the structure if the flatwork or building move differentially
with respect to each other.
As discussed in the Surface Drainage section of this report, proper drainage also should
be maintained after completion of the project, and re- established as necessary. Water
should not be allowed to pond on or near any of the site improvements.
Concrete Scaling: Climatic conditions in the project area including relatively low
humidity, large temperature changes and repeated freeze — thaw cycles, make it likely
that project sidewalks and other exterior concrete will experience surficial scaling or
spalling. The likelihood of concrete scaling can be increased by poor workmanship
during construction such as 'over- finishing' the surfaces. In addition, the use of de -icing
salts on exterior concrete flatwork, particularly during the first winter after construction,
will increase the likelihood of scaling. Even use of de -icing salts on nearby roadways,
from where vehicle traffic can transfer them to newly placed concrete, can be sufficient
to induce scaling. Typical quality control / quality assurance tests that are performed
during construction for concrete strength, air content, etc., do not provide information
with regard to the properties and conditions that give rise to scaling.
In GROUND's experience the measures below can be beneficial for reducing the
likelihood of concrete scaling. It must be understood, however, that because of the
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 11
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
other factors involved, including weather conditions and workmanship, surface damage
to concrete can develop, even where all of these measures were followed.
1) Maintaining a maximum water /cement ratio of 0.45 by weight for exterior
concrete mixes.
2) Include Type F fly ash in exterior concrete mixes as 20 percent of the
cementitious material.
3) Specify a minimum, 28 -day, compressive strength of 4,200 psi for all exterior
concrete.
4) Including 'fibermesh' in the concrete mix may be beneficial for reducing surficial
scaling. RTD design guidelines require fibermesh in exterior walkways.
5) Cure the concrete effectively at uniform temperature and humidity. This
commonly will require fogging, blanketing and /or tenting, depending on the
weather conditions.
6) Avoid placement of concrete during cold weather so that it is not exposed to
freeze -thaw cycling before it is fully cured.
7) Avoid the use of de -icing salts on given reaches of flatwork through the first
winter after construction.
We understand that commonly it may not be practical to implement some of these
measures for reducing scaling due to safety considerations, project scheduling, etc. In
such cases, additional costs for flatwork maintenance or reconstruction should be
considered in project budgets.
WATER - SOLUBLE SULFATES
The concentration of water - soluble sulfates measured in a selected sample obtained
from the test holes was 0.02 percent (see Table 2). This concentration of water - soluble
sulfates represents a negligible degree of sulfate attack on concrete exposed to these
materials. Degrees of attack are based on the scale of 'negligible,' 'moderate,' 'severe'
and 'very severe' as described in the "Design and Control of Concrete Mixtures,"
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 12
RTD Eagle P3 Project - Gold Line - Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
published by the Portland Cement Association. Based on these data GROUND, makes
no recommendation for use of a special, sulfate- resistant cement in project concrete.
SOIL CORROSIVITY
The degree of risk for corrosion of metals in soils commonly is considered to be in two
categories: corrosion in undisturbed soils and corrosion in disturbed soils. The potential
for corrosion in undisturbed soil is generally low, regardless of soil types and conditions,
because it is limited by the amount of oxygen that is available to create an electrolytic
cell. In disturbed soils, the potential for corrosion typically is higher, but is strongly
affected by soil conditions for a variety of reasons but primarily soil chemistry.
A corrosivity analysis was performed to provide a general assessment of the potential
for corrosion of ferrous metals installed in contact with earth materials at the site, based
on the conditions existing at the time of GROUND's evaluation. Soil chemistry and
physical property data including pH, oxidation - reduction (redox) potential, sulfides, and
moisture content were obtained. Test results are summarized on Table 2.
Reduction - Oxidation: testing indicated a red -ox potential of 18 millivolts. A low
potential typically creates a more corrosive environment.
Sulfide Reactivity: testing indicated a result of "positive" in the soil tested. The
presence of sulfides in the alignment soils suggests a more corrosive environment.
Soil Resistivity: In order to assess the "worst case" for mitigation planning, samples of
materials retrieved from the test holes were tested for resistivity in the laboratory, after
being saturated with water, rather than in the field. Resistivity also varies inversely with
temperature. Therefore, the laboratory measurement was made at a controlled
temperature.
Measurement of electrical resistivity indicated a value of approximately 3,120 ohm -
centimeters in a selected sample of retrieved soil. The following table presents the
relationship between resistivity and a qualitative corrosivity rating':
2 ASM International, 2003, Corrosion: Fundamentals, Testing and Protection, ASM Handbook, Volume 13A.
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 13
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
Corrosivity Ratings Based on Soil Resistivity
Soil Resistivity
Corrosivity Rating
(ohm -cm)
>20,000
10,000 — 20,000
5,000 — 10,000
3.000 — 5.000
1,000 — 3,000
I
Essentially
non- corrosive
Mildly corrosive
Moderately corrosive
Corrosive
Highly corrosive
<1,000 Extremely corrosive
pH: Where pH is less than 4.0, soil serves as an electrolyte; the pH range of about 6.5
to 7.5 indicates soil conditions that are optimum for sulfate reduction. In the pH range
above 8.5, soils are generally high in dissolved salts, yielding a low soil resistivity
Testing indicated a pH value of approximately 7.3.
The American Water Works Association (AWWA) has developed a point system scale
used to predict corrosivity. The scale is intended for protection of ductile iron pipe but is
valuable for project steel selection. When the scale equals 10 points or higher,
protective measures for ductile iron pipe are recommended. The AWWA scale is
presented below. The soil characteristics refer to the conditions at and above pipe
installation depth.
3 American Water Works Association ANSI /AWWA C105/A21.5 -05 Standard.
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 14
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GLO- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
0 to +50 mV
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
+50 to +100 mV .............................. .........................
Table A.1 Soil -test Evaluation 3
> +100 mV
Soil Characteristic / Value
Points
Resistivity
Positive
<1,500 ohm -cm
10
1,500 to 1,800 ohm-cm .................................................................................
8
1,800 to 2,100 ohm -cm
5
2,100 to 2,500 ohm -cm
2
2,500 to 3,000 ohm-cm ------
1
>3,000 ohm -cm
0
pH
0 to 2.0
5
2.0 to 4.0
3
4.0 to 6.5 .......................... ..............
0
6.5 to 7.5
0 `
7.5 to 8.5
0
>8.5
3
Redox Potential
< 0 (negative values) .....................................................................................
0 to +50 mV
4
+50 to +100 mV .............................. .........................
. . .• --------------------------- - - -... 3'/2
> +100 mV
0
Sulfide Content
Positive
3'/z
Trace
2
Negative ............ ...............................
...........................0
Moisture
Poor drainage, continuously wet .................................................................... 2
Fair drainage, generally moist ....................................................................... 1
Good drainage, generally dry ...................••-----------.....---- •- •-- •- •- •-- ........--- .......0
* If sulfides are present and low or negative redox - potential results (< 50 mV) are obtained,
add three points for this range.
We anticipate that drainage at the site after construction will be good. Based on the
values obtained for the soil parameters, the overburden soils appear to comprise a
moderately corrosive environment for metals.
If additional information or recommendations are needed regarding soil corrosivity,
GROUND recommends contacting the American Water Works Association or a
Corrosion Engineer. It should be noted, however, that changes to the site conditions
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 15
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
during construction, such as the import of other soils, or the intended or unintended
introduction of off -site water, may alter corrosion potentials significantly.
PROJECT EARTHWORK
The following information is provided for private (RTD station) improvements; public
roadways or utilities should be constructed in accordance with applicable municipal /
agency standards.
General Considerations: Site grading should be performed as early as possible in the
construction sequence to allow settlement of fills and surcharged ground to be realized
to the extent practical prior to subsequent construction.
Prior to earthwork construction, existing structures. vegetation and other deleterious
materials should be removed and disposed of off -site. Relic underground utilities should
be abandoned in accordance with applicable regulations, removed as necessary, and
properly capped.
Where newly proposed structures will be constructed within the limits of the demolition
of existing structures, care should be taken ensure that all remaining foundation
elements and associated structures are entirely removed and a properly placed fill of
uniform depth is placed beneath the proposed structure.
Topsoil present on -site should not be incorporated into ordinary fills. Instead, topsoil
should be stockpiled during initial grading operations for placement in areas to be
landscaped or for other approved uses.
Existing Fill Soils: Existing fill soils may be present on -site. Although some fill soils
may be suitable for replacement as backfill, many may not. In any case, the
Geotechnical Engineer should observe the excavated fill materials and provide
recommendations for its suitability for reuse.
Use of Existing Native Soils: Overburden soils that are free of trash, organic material,
construction debris, and other deleterious materials are suitable, in general, for
placement as compacted fill. Organic materials should not be incorporated into project
fills. On site granular materials are suitable for use in the fill prism beneath the platform.
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 16
RTD Eagle P3 Project - Gold Line - Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GLO- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
Fragments of rock, cobbles, and inert construction debris (e.g., concrete or asphalt)
larger than 3 inches in maximum dimension will require special handling and /or
placement to be incorporated into project fills. In general, such materials should be
placed as deeply as possible in the project fills. The Geotechnical Engineer should be
consulted regarding appropriate recommendations for usage of such materials on a
case -by -case basis when such materials have been identified during earthwork.
Standard recommendations that will be generally applicable can be found in Section 203
of the current CDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction.
Imported Fill Materials: If it is necessary to import material to the site, the imported
soils should be free of organic material, and other deleterious materials. Imported
material should consist of soils that have less than 70 percent passing the No. 200
Sieve and should have a plasticity index of less than 15. Representative samples of the
materials proposed for import should be tested and approved by the Geotechnical
Engineer prior to transport to the site.
Fill Platform Preparation: Prior to filling, the top 8 to 12 inches of in -place materials on
which fill soils will be placed should be scarified, moisture conditioned and properly
compacted in accordance with the recommendations below to provide a uniform base
for fill placement. If over - excavation is to be performed, then these recommendations
for subgrade preparation are for the subgrade below the bottom of the recommended
over - excavation depth.
If surfaces to receive fill expose loose, wet, soft or otherwise deleterious material,
additional material should be excavated, or other measures taken to establish a firm
platform for filling. The surfaces to receive fill must be effectively stable prior to
placement of fill.
Fill Placement: Fill materials should be thoroughly mixed to achieve a uniform moisture
content, placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness, and properly
compacted.
Soils that classify as A -1, A -3 A -2 -4 or A -2 -5 in accordance with the AASHTO
classification system (granular materials) should be compacted to 95 or more percent of
the maximum modified Proctor dry density at moisture contents within 2 percent of
optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D1557, or 100 or more percent of
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 17
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
the maximum standard Proctor dry density at moisture contents within 2 percent of
optimum moisture as determined by ASTM D698.
Soils that classify as A -2 -6, A -2 -7, A -4, and A -6 through A -7 should be compacted to 95
or more percent of the maximum standard Proctor density at moisture contents from 1
percent below to 3 percent above the optimum moisture content as determined by
ASTM D698. Where these soil types are approved for use beneath building, platform,
or other foundation elements (excluding flatwork, pavements, curbs), the minimum
compaction level should be increased to 98 percent of the maximum standard Proctor
density as determined by ASTM D698.
No fill materials should be placed, worked, or rolled while they are frozen, thawing, or
during poor /inclement weather conditions that adversely affect the placement and
compaction effort.
Care should be taken with regard to achieving and maintaining proper moisture contents
during placement and compaction. Materials that are not properly moisture conditioned
may exhibit significant pumping, rutting, and deflection at moisture contents near
optimum and above, particularly for silty soils.
Settlements: Settlements will occur in filled ground, typically on the order of 1 to 2
percent of the fill depth. If fill placement is performed properly and is tightly controlled,
in GROUND's experience the majority of that settlement will typically take place during
earthwork construction, provided the contractor achieves the compaction levels
recommended herein. The remaining potential settlements likely will take several
months or longer to be realized.
Cut and Filled Slopes: Permanent site slopes supported by on -site soils up to 10 feet
in height may be constructed no steeper than 2.5 : 1 (horizontal : vertical). Minor
raveling or surficial sloughing should be anticipated on slopes cut at this angle until
vegetation is well re- established. Surface drainage should be designed to direct water
away from slope faces.
Soft and Wet Subgrade Conditions: The following recommendations should be
considered where soft, wet, and unstable subgrade conditions are encountered:
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 18
RTD Eagle P3 Project - Gold Line - Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
a. In areas where apparently stable conditions are found, the subgrade should be
proof - rolled or evaluated by a Geotechnical Engineer.
b. Pockets of weak or pumping soils or fill should be excavated to a depth of 2 or
more feet, as necessary, below culvert bottom and to at least 2 feet beyond its
lateral limits. The excavated soil should be replaced with open graded material
such as 1 -inch crushed rock up to foundation grade. A geotextile separator
fabric should be placed between the crushed rock and native soils. The use of
recycled concrete aggregate may be a cost effective alternative in this
application.
C. In cases where placement of coarse aggregate fill does not result in stable
conditions, it will be necessary to place a woven geotextile, Mirafi` HP370 or
equivalent fabric placed below the coarse aggregate fill.
d. The surface of the subgrade should be leveled prior to geosynthetic
reinforcement placement. Very weak or pumping soils should be excavated and
replaced with granular fill or road base for best performance. The geosynthetic
reinforcement should be placed directly on the prepared subgrade. Placement
should be performed according to manufacturer's recommendations.
e. Rolls should be overlapped according to the manufacturers' recommendations.
f. Geosythetic reinforcement will be disturbed under the wheel loads of heavy
construction vehicles, especially track type vehicles, therefore no vehicle traffic
should be allowed over the geosynthetic reinforcement until 8 or more inches of
soil has been placed over.
Fill materials should be thoroughly mixed to achieve a uniform moisture content, placed
in uniform lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness, and properly compacted. (For
very weak subgrades, an 18- to 24 -inch "pioneer" or 'first" lift may be required to
stabilize the subgrade.)
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 19
RTD Eagle P3 Project - Gold Line - Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
EXCAVATION CONSIDERATIONS
The test holes for the subsurface exploration were excavated to the depths indicated by
means of truck - mounted, continuous flight auger drilling equipment. Based on assumed
relatively shallow excavations, we anticipate no significant excavation difficulties in the
majority of the site with conventional heavy -duty excavation equipment in good working
condition.
We recommend that temporary, un- shored excavation slopes up to 10 feet in height be
cut no steeper than 1.5 : 1 (horizontal : vertical) in the site soils in the absence of
seepage. Sloughing on the slope faces should be anticipated at this angle. Local
conditions encountered during construction, such as groundwater seepage and loose
sand, will require flatter slopes. Stockpiling of materials should not be permitted closer
to the tops of temporary slopes than 5 feet or a distance equal to the depth of the
excavation, which ever is greater.
Should site constraints prohibit the use of the recommended temporary slope angles,
temporary shoring should be used. The shoring should be designed to resist the lateral
earth pressure exerted by building, traffic, equipment, and stockpiles. GROUND can
provide shoring design upon request.
Groundwater was encountered in the test holes within the depths explored below
existing grades at the time of drilling. However, based on the likely depths of earthwork
construction, groundwater is not anticipated to be a factor for shallow earthworks during
construction of this project. If seepage or groundwater is encountered in shallow project
excavations, the Geotechnical Engineer should evaluate the conditions and provided
additional recommendations, as appropriate.
Good surface drainage should be provided around temporary excavation slopes to direct
surface runoff away from the slope faces. A properly designed drainage swale should
be provided at the top of the excavations. In no case should water be allowed to pond
at the site. Slopes should also be protected against erosion. Erosion along the slopes
will result in sloughing and could lead to a slope failure.
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 20
RTD Eagle P3 Project - Gold Line - Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
Excavations in which personnel will be working must comply with all OSHA Standards
and Regulations. The Contractor's "responsible person" should evaluate the soil
exposed in the excavations as part of the Contractor's safety procedures.
UTILITY PIPE INSTALLATION AND BACKFILLING
Pipe Support: The bearing capacity of the site soils appeared adequate, in general, for
support of the proposed utility lines. The pipe + water are less dense than the soils
which will be displaced for installation. Therefore, GROUND anticipates no significant
pipe settlements in these materials where properly bedded.
Excavation bottoms may expose soft, loose or otherwise deleterious materials, including
debris. Firm materials may be disturbed by the excavation process. All such unsuitable
materials should be excavated and replaced with properly compacted fill. Areas allowed
to pond water will require excavation and replacement with properly compacted fill. The
contractor should take particular care to ensure adequate support near pipe joints which
are less tolerant of extensional strains.
Where thrust blocks are needed, they may be designed for an allowable passive soil
pressure of 310 psf per foot of embedment to a maximum of 3,100 psf. Sliding friction
at the bottom of thrust blocks may be taken as 0.33 times the vertical dead load.
Trench Backfilling: Some settlement of compacted soil trench backfill materials should
be anticipated, even where all the backfill is placed and compacted correctly. Typical
settlements are on the order of 1 to 2 percent of fill thickness. However, the need to
compact to the lowest portion of the backfill must be balanced against the need to
protect the pipe from damage from the compaction process. Some thickness of backfill
may need to be placed at compaction levels lower than recommended or specified (or
smaller compaction equipment used together with thinner lifts) to avoid damaging the
pipe. Protecting the pipe in this manner can result in somewhat greater surface
settlements. Therefore, although other alternatives may be available, the following
options are presented for consideration:
Controlled Low Strength Material: Because of these limitations, backfilling the entire
depth of the trench (both bedding and common backfill zones) with 'controlled low
strength material" (CLSM), i.e., a lean, sand - cement slurry, "flowable fill," or similar
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 21
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
material along all trench alignment reaches with low tolerances for surface settlements
will provide the most positive means of limiting post- construction settlements in trench
backfill materials. If utilized, we recommend that CLSM used as pipe bedding and
trench backfill exhibit a 28 -day unconfined compressive strength between 50 to 200 psi
so that re- excavation is not unusually difficult.
Placement of the CLSM in several lifts or other measures likely will be necessary to
avoid `floating' the pipe. Measures also should be taken to maintain pipe alignment
during CLSM placement.
Compacted Soil Backfillinq: Where compacted soil backfilling is employed, we
anticipate that the on -site soils excavated from trenches will be suitable, in general, for
use as common trench backfill within the above - described limitations. Backfill soils
should be free of vegetation, organic debris and other deleterious materials. Fragments
of rock, cobbles, and inert construction debris (e.g., concrete or asphalt) coarser than 3
inches in maximum dimension should not be incorporated into trench backfills.
If it is necessary to import material for use as backfill, the imported soils should be free
of vegetation, organic debris, and other deleterious materials. Representative samples
of the materials proposed for import should be tested and approved prior to transport to
the site.
Soils placed for compaction as trench backfill should be conditioned to a relatively
uniform moisture content, placed and compacted in accordance with the
recommendations in the Project Earthwork section of this report. Again, care must be
taken to avoid damage to the pipe while achieving recommended compaction levels in
the lower portions of the trench.
Pipe Bedding: Pipe bedding materials, placement and compaction should meet the
specifications of the pipe manufacturer and applicable municipal standards. Bedding
should be brought up uniformly on both sides of the pipe to reduce differential loadings.
As discussed above, the use of CLSM or similar material in lieu of granular bedding and
compacted soil backfill where the tolerance for surface settlement is low should be
considered. (Placement of CLSM as bedding to at least 12 inches above the pipe can
GROUND Job No 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 22
RTD Eagle P3 Project - Gold Line - Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GLO- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
protect the pipe and assist construction of a well- compacted conventional backfill,
although possibly at an increased cost relative to the use of conventional bedding.)
If a granular bedding material is specified, GROUND recommends that with regard to
potential migration of fines into the pipe bedding, design and installation follow ASTM
D2321. If the granular bedding does not meet filter criteria for the enclosing soils, then
non -woven filter fabric (e.g., MiraWi 140N, or the equivalent) should be placed around
the bedding to reduce migration of fines into the bedding which can result in severe,
local surface settlements. Where this protection is not provided, settlements can
develop /continue several months or years after completion of the project. In addition,
clay or concrete cut -off walls should be installed to interrupt the granular bedding
section to reduce the rates and volumes of water transmitted along the sewer alignment
which can contribute to migration of fines.
If granular bedding is specified, the contractor should not anticipate that significant
volumes of on -site soils will be suitable for that use. Materials proposed for use as pipe
bedding should be tested by a geotechnical engineer for suitability prior to use.
Imported materials should be tested and approved by a geotechnical engineer prior to
transport to the site.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The following drainage measures are recommended for design, construction, and
should be maintained at all times after the project has been completed:
1) Wetting or drying of the foundation excavations should be avoided during and
after construction as well as throughout the improvements' design life of the
improvements. Permitting increases /variations in moisture to the adjacent or
supporting soils may result in a decrease in bearing capacity and an increase in
volume change of the underlying soils and /or differential movement.
2) Positive surface drainage measures should be provided and maintained to
reduce water infiltration into foundation soils. The ground surface surrounding
the exterior of each structure 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 the areas not covered with pavement or concrete slabs, or a minimum 3
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 23
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GL0- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19/11
percent in the first 10 feet in the areas covered with pavement or concrete slabs.
Reducing the slopes to comply with ADA requirements will be necessary but may
result in an increased potential for moisture infiltration and subsequent volume
change of the underling soils. In no case should water be allowed to pond near
or adjacent to foundation elements. However, if positive surface drainage is
implemented and maintained directing moisture away from the structures, lesser
slopes can be utilized.
3) Where the final site configuration includes graded or retained slopes descending
toward the structures or flatwork, interceptor drains may be necessary between
the structure and the slope. In addition, where irrigation is applied on or above
slopes, drainage improvements commonly are needed near the toe -of -slope to
prevent on -going or recurrent wet conditions. The need for edge and interceptor
drains should be reviewed once site grades and landscaping plans are
developed.
4) Water should not be permitted to pond adjacent to or on sidewalks, hardscaping,
or other improvements as well as utility trench alignments, which are likely to be
adversely affected by moisture - volume changes in the underlying soils or flow of
infiltrating water.
5) Roof /Canopy downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the
perimeters of the structure foundations, or be provided with positive conveyance
off -site for collected waters.
6) Vegetation that may require watering should ideally be located 10 or more feet
from structure perimeters, flatwork, or other site improvements. As a minimum,
vegetation requiring irrigation should not be located within 10 -feet of structure
perimeters. However, we understand that local municipalities often require
landscaping within 10 feet of structure perimeters. As a result, we recommend
that landscape irrigation should be kept to a minimum and surface drainage
should be directed away from structure perimeters. Ideally, drip irrigation and
water -tight planters should be utilized. In no case should water be introduced
into the foundation elements. Irrigation sprinkler heads should be deployed so
that applied water is not introduced near or into foundation /subgrade soils. The
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 24
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No, GLO- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7/19111
risk of post- construction movement increases should landscape irrigation be
located within 10 feet of structure perimeters
7) Use of drip irrigation systems can be beneficial for reducing over -spray beyond
planters. Drip irrigation can also be beneficial for reducing the amounts of water
introduced to foundation /subgrade soils, but only if the total volumes of applied
water are controlled with regard to limiting that introduction. Controlling rates of
moisture increase in foundation /subgrade soils should take higher priority than
minimizing landscape plant losses.
8) Where plantings are desired within 10 feet of a structure, ideally GROUND
recommends that the plants be placed in water -tight planters, constructed either
in- ground or above - grade, to reduce moisture infiltration in the surrounding
subgrade soils. Planters should be provided with positive drainage away from
structures.
9) Plastic membranes should not be used to cover the ground surface adjacent to
foundation walls. Perforated "weed barrier' membranes that allow ready
evaporation from the underlying soils may be used.
Imo► ILIVITeri' m
This report has been prepared for Fluor /HDR as it pertains to the RTD FasTracks, Gold
Line, Ward Road Station (Platform Only) project as described herein. It may not contain
sufficient information for other parties or other purposes.
The geotechnical conclusions and recommendations in this report relied upon
subsurface exploration at a limited number of exploration points, as shown in Figures 1
through 3 as well as the means and methods described herein. Subsurface conditions
were interpolated between and extrapolated beyond these locations. It is not possible to
guarantee the subsurface conditions are as indicated in this report. Actual conditions
exposed during construction may differ from those encountered during site exploration.
If during construction, surface, soil. bedrock, or groundwater conditions appear to be at
variance with those described herein, the Geotechnical Engineer should be advised, so
that re- evaluation of the recommendations may be made in a timely manner. We
GROUND Job No. 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 25
RTD Eagle P3 Project — Gold Line — Ward Road Station (Platform Only)
Document No. GLO- GEO -RP01 Rev 1
FINAL (100% submittal) 7119111
recommend that the Geotechnical Engineer of Record or his representative be retained
to provide on -site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata.
Performance of the proposed structures and pavement will depend on implementation of
the recommendations in this report and on proper maintenance after construction is
completed. Because water is a significant cause of volume change in soils and rock,
allowing moisture infiltration may result in movements, some of which will exceed
estimates provided herein.
Todd Roberts. P.G.
Reviewed by James B. Kowalsky, P.E.
GROUND Job No 10 -9300 Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 26
I 1
.e t
I
i
D
o'
WINE
=L®EL
Y
II
I
I
/ t
I
I
119
1 f
I�
r) GL-S- WARD -P6
\ /7 N \ t
\ ` GL -S- WARD -P3
GL- S- Ward -F -2
GL -S- WARD -P5
�—
GL- S- wA ^D -Nq
GL- S- WARD -RW1
G L- S.•WARID -F 1
GL -S- WARD -P2
uj
GL-S- W -St1 �
1 GI. -S•�%'VARD -Pi
AM
l `\
— o
O
A7 ,FA�7�RACKS ■ FLUDR❑HDRS"
eagle Al GLOBAL DESIGN CDNSULTA4T9
DENVER
TRA14
PARTNER
r
LEGEND
1 INDICATES GROUND TEST HOLE NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION.
INDICATES GROUND TEST NUMBER PERFORMED UNDER SEPARATE SCOPE & REPORT.
INDICATES TEST HOLE BY OTHERS UNDER SEPARATE SCOPE. AVAILABLE LOGS ARE
PRESENTED IN APPENDIX D.
�j INDICATES GROUND TEST HOLE NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
INACCESSIBLE TEST HOLES.
•
.I
I
(I
I
t
I'
II
,I
I I
�I
I I
I `
j
r —�
i
i r
GROUND
ENGINEERING CONSULTI INTS
WARD ROAD STATION
EXISTING SITE PLAN
LOCATION OF TEST HOLES
JOB NO.: 10 -9300 1 FIGURE: 1
DOCUMENT NO.: GLO- GEO -RP01
NTS
CADFILE NAME: 10 -9300 ward figure exist.dwg
�N V
GL
so
W
Q
N
R
FAMSYrAtacKs
FLUOR74HDR
eagle P3 —. L ... L DMI,. D .N LUA 1.
DENVER
TRANSI
PARTNER
mp ,('�!
,
GL-S- WARD -PI
U I
w
Q
r
1
O 4 \
O
LS-Ward-F-2
1
• .
:•,;.•
+I
- A
\
GL-S W \ D-P2
GL- S- WARDSt1
LEGEND
4 j INDICATES GROUND TEST HOLE NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION.
INDICATES GROUND TEST NUMBER PERFORMED UNDER SEPARATE SCOPE S REPORT.
INDICATES TEST HOLE BY OTHERS UNDER SEPARATE SCOPE. AVAILABLE LOGS ARE
PRESENTED IN APPENDIX D.
1 INDICATES GROUND TEST HOLE NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
INACCESSIBLE TEST HOLES.
► II 'I i�
• I I I
0
6 I 0 \
W
•1
11
1
1 \ ,
A A
NTS
r � ii 9u
i�
i r
N
PB
d'k
GLS- WARD -P3 LS Ward -F
GL -S- WARD -PS �
GL -S- WARD -P4 ci)
qv
6
6:
r
GL-S-WARD-RW1 `-r!"' -
F
GL .S-WARD-Fl �� F
Y 1W i
GL- S- WARD-P2
LU A T
>
Q
GL- S-WARDSt1
GL�S WARD -P1
u7
dk
0
FLUDRIHDRS"
DENVER
eagle Pw
G LOBAL DESIGN CJNSULTnV'S PARTNER
�/ PARTNER
LEGEND
A,
INDICATES GROUND TEST HOLE NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION.
GROUND
INDICATES GROUND TEST NUMBER PERFORMED UNDER SEPARATE SCOPE & REPORT.
ENSINEEFIING CONSULTANTS
INDICATES TEST HOLE BY OTHERS UNDER SEPARATE SCOPE. AVAILABLE LOGS ARE
PRESENTED IN APPENDIX D.
WARD ROAD STATION
AERIAL SITE PLAN
M
INDICATES GROUND TEST HOLE NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
LOCATION OF TEST HOLES
INACCESSIBLE TEST HOLES.
�+
JOB NO.: 10 -9300 1 FIGURE: 3
DOCUMENT NO.: GLO- GEO -RP01
NTS
CADFILE NAME: 10 -9300 ward figure aerial.dwi
U C
O
10
y
m m
N
a-0
'
O
O
o y
y
Li
Z
3
J
r
�
Q
Z
Q
Z
Q
0
>`
Z
Z
W
U
N
(n
to
D
�
T
m
�
'O
(n
m
C U
O 8
!n
?.
N
T
N
N
U r
N
N
N
m
>,
0'a
C
d
m
>
T
Q1
�j
N
T
T
N
O
T
O
T
Y
N
N •-
N
1
m
U
U
T
_m
U
-
m
C
m
N
T
U
O
o
O
o
C O
O � W
6
T
C >
Z ;
CL
N 0
'O O
N
U
>
O N=
= C�
M
in
N
O
c
O
m
N
M
O
v
v
O
If
W C C
¢ U v
Q
Q
N
7
Q
Q
Q
N
N
Q
> J O
¢
Q
Q
Q
Q
N
o
u
u
to
w
' U
cn
cn
V
�� 4
Z OJ
U U
9 `'0 v
I
W W
-
a
cr w
v
O
a a
0 a c
cEw
�U
0
C)
O
p
O
o
O
a, IM s
C
Cl
O
O
0
T
C
d _ m O7
EZ
W
V) 12 �
co
O)
04
N
I�
a
o
0
0
/y
W
om 'e
N
.E
U
'w x
O
n
N
1—
O
O
Z
Z
Z
J
a_c
rn
c —
c
cn
N
cl)
�
m
z
z
z
¢
�E
J
O
V I N D
oo
v
C
N
M
N
M
co
a z
v
c
o
C
O
m e
(n
N
A
C9
>
0
m Z
�rN 17
oc)
O
N
m
[7
v
M
v
n
C a
O
-
O
v
co
m
O
M
co
Ln
Q
M
W
O
(O
co
O
N
J
p
m N 0 o
m'� O'-'
O
N
O
N
M
N
N
M
V
Z m O,
o
0 r"
O.
M
N
O
M
N
V
p
O
N
O L7 Ir
O
[� U
V
UJ
r
r
r
r
N
N
N
N
N
N
W -0
J
it
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
Ll Z LL Z a
wo
a
E
o
s
m
m
3
m
3
3
3
3
3
Z z>>
d
N
t/j
to
N
U?
I?
Nt
N
N
w W U O
O
O
c7
o
C7
(D
C7
C9
0 1 0 ,
J O X
U O t7
fdO C18VM NOUVIS 100 S311d 1O3fO8d\V1VO i2JOd)(3 81NIO \0006 1"3N3O 0006 \SOOT OLOZ\ I - CELL LUOLI£ - 100 31V1d4431 ONl 38E) - S1V1S38 9V1 L 319V1
rdO
0
m
in
y
0
p
y
a
C)
U
c
U
C~
m
N
o v
a
N C
fn �
C
J O
Q1
N
m
O
F
LU
U
2 O
U U
w w
O O
w x
CL a
V) N
U H
(n —°
J
U
N
Lij
J
>E
� Y
N
W
.0 E
O
�
~ N «
� y
>
�= C
N
rn cg
a
x m
_
.0 c >
m::E
co
0 —
a
=
Cl)
a
d N
dm mo
N
f0 7� e
O
O
L
N
_
q a j .i
R
Q
A
N
D
x J
to a M
_o0
Z 0
a �
O O -
_
U
N
O
0 O
it
li
O l7 x o
y
a
y
Z oJ�
O
E
Q = W
n
in
y
w
w
w n
O? z a
2 zz
Z z > >
w W U O
J O m
UC3 C7
(38VM
NOIIVIS l9\S31IJ 103rO8d
\VIVO
180dX3
8 LNID \0006 1V2l3N39 0006'Ol \SNZ)"ISV3\S9Or OIOZ\ - I - L9 :9t l l/L/£ - iG9 91V1dW31 ONnm4o - SllllS38 9Vl Z 319V1
rdO
APPENDIX A
Logs, Legend, and Test Hole Survey Locations
NUMBER GL- S- Ward -F -1
GROUND
PAGE
PAGE 1 OF 2
ENGINEERING CONSULTRNTS
CLIENT Fluor / HDR Global
— PROJECT NAME Gold Line Ward Road Station
DOCUMENT #: GL0- GEO -RP01
GROUND PROJECT #: 10 -9300 PROJECT LOCATION Denver, CO
DATE STARTED 10/25/10 COMPLETED 10/25/10 GROUND ELEVATION 5465 ft HOLE SIZE 4 inch
DRILLING CONTRACTOR Vine Laboratories NORTHING 458929.22 _
DRILLING METHOD 4 -Inch CFA EASTING 603987.76
LOGGED BY DLH CHECKED BY TMR GROUND WATER LEVELS:
AT TIME OF DRILLING 15.00 ft / Elev 5450.00 ft
NOTES Survey provided by Project Team AFTER DRILLING N/ A - -- N/A
i
ATTERBERG
C
as
��F
`ao
a
c >
N m
LIMITS
y
c °
N
a)
m
>
"
r
°x
y
"
r
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
a�
UN 20
m>
r
c
°� i
2 m
c
o �c
E
a�
o
-
E
J
x
m rn
3
a
C--
`c t
a�
a
T
a
E
3n �
I I
O J
C
5.N
6 C
m
a- U
a)N
0-
c
N
W
U
�o
m
� L
om
V C
11J
O
(n
00 v ( n
;v
zp°'
a�Z
fn C
a c
`
C N
cn
z
o
5465
0
(Native) SAND & CLAY. low to medium plastic,
fine to coarse grained, medium to stiff or loose
to medium dense, moist, pale brown to brown
i
i
CAL
7/12
20.5
101.8
48
35
11
5460
5
-0.93
CAL
11/12
19.4
107.5
48
32
9
@
1,000
CAL
6/12
12.3
114.8
24
27
7
o '
(Native) SAND & GRAVEL, occasionally clayey.
non to low plastic, fine to coarse grained with
5455
10
°
gravel and cobbles, loose to very dense, moist
to wet, red to tan to black to brown
o {j
b'o
.
4.
D
o� �a
4Je:
CAL
50/7
4.8
77
20
3
18
2
o.? .
O� O
O. O.
5450
15
A
ffl
b o
A
�d
9 9.
CAL
50/10
or o 0
0
5445
20
(Continued Next Page)
NUMBER GL- S- Ward -F -1
GROUND
PAGE 2 OF 2
PAGE
ENGINEERING CONSULTRNTS
CLIENT Fluor / HDR Global
PROJECT NAME Gold Line Ward Road Station
DOCUMENT #: GL0- GEO -RP01
GROUND PROJECT #: 10 -9300 PROJECT LOCATION Denver, CO
N
ATTERBERG
c
o
a)
°
CL Q
:3
^
-�
c a)
Na)
LIMITS
N
^
m
a
L)
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
°—'
U
Z c
°�
_T 4'
2'
o o
E
—'
a ' 2
`c
O
a
T
a
E
3 11 it
o -1
N
m:
a�
o 0
m
o
c o
(U
�
`—' a)
na
m
o
ca
w
C7
U)
mv�
'6
z m
a
aZ
J
5445
20
(Native) SAND & GRAVEL, occasionally clayey,
b
non to low plastic, fine to coarse grained with
SD
d o
gravel and cobbles, loose to very dense. moist
20 -25
.
to wet, red to tan to black to brown (continued)
��ll
ft
a:.
0
b .
I
D .
I
e� a
P F:
5440
25
d:. o
D
S
'
25 -30
D. v.
ft
fl;
4
D
o • o
P.b'.
5435
30
o; . o
O
p, c.
(Bedrock) CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, high
plastic, fine grained. hard, dry to moist.
blue -gray
J,
5430
35
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Bottom of borehole at 35.0 feet.
I-
c
c
LL
r
a
n
LL
H
C
2
C
C
L
NUMBER GL- S- Ward -F -2
GROUND
PAGE
PAGE 1 OF 2
ENGINEERING CONSULTRNTS
CLIENT Fluor / HDR Global
PROJECT NAME Gold Line Ward Road Station
DOCUMENT #: GL0- GEO -RP01
GROUND PROJECT #: 10 -9300 PROJECT LOCATION Denver, CO
DATE STARTED 10/25/10 COMPLETED 10/25/10 GROUND ELEVATION 5463.96 ft HOLE SIZE 4 inch
DRILLING CONTRACTOR Vine Laboratories NORTHING 459001.06
DRILLING METHOD 4 -inch CFA EASTING 604218.83
LOGGED BY DLH CHECKED BY TM GROUND WATER LEVELS: R
AT TIME OF DRILLING 16.00 ft / Elev 5447.96 ft
NOTES Survey provided by Project Team AFTER DRILLING N /A - -- N/A
i
ATTERBERG
J
n~
CL
^,
N o
Q Q
Cf N
y N
LIMITS
N Q
N
r
L
E
v
FT
U �' �_
m
C —
m
C
@
n C U
o
E
a
G
0 =
y
N
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
a
3 J
N
7 C
�(:�
��
C O
J
x
U�
3°
L
U m
W
C7
E
II
m Q(n
j U
Z
d
d
U NI
-�
M C
a
N
cn
U
m
z
a� Z
a
5464
0
(Native) SAND & CLAY. low to medium plastic,
fine to coarse grained. very soft to medium or
very loose to loose, moist to wet, brown
I
i
CAL
6/12
32.0
84.2
53
30
7
-0.27
CAL
5/12
21.6
96.9
54
32
10
@
5459
5
1.000
-0.71
CAL
1/12
21.4
104.5
44
18
6
@
5454
10
1,000
o.'..
(Native) SAND & GRAVEL, occasionally clayey,
A
non to low plastic, fine to coarse grained with
�•
o:. o
gravel and cobbles, very dense. moist to wet,
gray to yellow to brown
o..
b. e.
O a
CAL
50/3
3.8
3
NV
NP
o..
5449
15
°
b� b
O.Q'.
a. 'v'.
�
O
A ( Q-w
O� O
A >.
tfl_
b'
� a .
v
CAL
50/7
4.6
134.3
4
NV
NP
5444
20
(Continued Next Page)
N
N
0
Q
U)
J
Q
z
Q
w
w
U5
U
z
Cl
�x]
z
U
O z
Z
� E
W
L z
W
L7
z
W
0
o a
o of
M /'�
V
Lu
0
J
O
Z
y
n
i
7 4
J w 4
C'7 C
; T2
n
L
� a �
� y c
E J o
Z CL 0.
.o E E
O R R
-
)to Y�
eau
�i�u
wit
I
I
'
1
1
�Igll
■,�
t
.i
wow
■
n
.r
u■■�
�
n■e�n
0
o a
o of
M /'�
V
Lu
0
J
O
Z
y
n
i
7 4
J w 4
C'7 C
; T2
n
L
� a �
� y c
E J o
Z CL 0.
.o E E
O R R
-
)to Y�
BORING: S- 2
PAGE 1 OF 2
RockSol
Consulting Group, Inc
CLIENT RT PROJECT NAME Gold Line
PROJECT NUMBER RS- 176.01 PROJECT LOCATION Ward Road to Denver Union Station
DATE STARTED 9/3/08 COMPLETED 9/3/08 GROUND ELEVATION 5464.9 ft
DRILLING CONTRACTOR Dakota Drilling NORTH 459015.0 EAST 604249.3
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger HOLE SIZE 8" BORING LOCATION: Approximately Station 591 station
LOGGED BY S. Birney GROUND WATER LEVELS:
NOTES 1 WATER DEPTH 13.0 ft on 9/3/08
ATTERBERG
z
L
Uj
o
r
W o
LIMITS
w
H
O
~•--.
F ,-.
= U'
}�
W
rn w
?
w
JQ
-
W
F-�
j~
r
z
>
w
Q O
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
w Co
O j Q
w t-
�z
Q
z a
Ln w
_9 �_
t
U x
0
Uo
w
o
�
0
a
m0>
Uz
��
w
:D
i.-
0O
Z)
C7
Q
w
ai0
w
Q z
0
U
0
J
d
Q
w
z
5465
0
<
0
Q
a-
W
(Fill) SAND. slightly gravelly, angular gravel, slightly moist, light
to dark brown. medium dense
MC
29/12
5460
5
(Native) CLAY. sandy, strong reaction to HCL acid. slightly
moist. light brown to white, medium dense
MC
14112
0.33
0.03
102
21
32
16
16
60
(Native) SAND, gravelly with cobbles, subrounded, saturated to
tJ
slightly moist, light brown- red - white, very dense
5455
10
@ 8.5 feet: 4 inch layer of gravel
MC
50/10
@ 15 feet: mica flecks, predominantly fine sand
X ft
@ 20 feet: cobbles, gravelly sand, rounded
D'
5450
15
•'•'7h�'
:tJ
MC
50/4
ct:
5445
20
L' '
Q
121
8
NP
NP
NP
8
MC
50/5.5
5440
25
MC
50/3 No
q:
recove
� z
ct:
5435
30
,•' '
°
MC
50/11
(Bedrock) CLAYSTONE, blocky, high to medium plasticity,
slightly moist, dark gray. very hard
@ 38 feet: sandstone interbedded with claystone
5430
35
(Continued Next Page)
BORING: S- 2
PAGE 2 OF 2
RockSol
Consulting Group, Inc
CLIENT RTD PROJECT NAME Gold Line
PROJECT NUMBER RS- 176.01 PROJECT LOCATION Ward Road to Denver Union Station
ATTERBERG
z
U
LU
a
o
w o
LIMITS
w
U
O
F
��
=C7
} tY
rw
u) w
�F
J
-1Q
w
j�
z
Q—
W
a
wp
a 0
�
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
w Co
dj
O z J
m0>
w-
Z-z
< LL
z U
a
r w
Ln
0
��
�_
O x
O
U°
U
Qz
UZ
N f
dJ
Q�
Hw
in
w
D
a
O
�O
U
a
w
5430
35
a
a
1
(Bedrock) CLAYSTONE, blocky, high to medium plasticity,
k1k MC
50/5
slightly moist, dark gray. very hard
@ 38 feet: sandstone interbedded with claystone (continued)
5425
40
MC
50/4
MC
50/4
Bottom of hole at 44.4 feet.
'*
City of
.e
8P
7500 W 29th Ave Wbtd Ridge, CO 80033 -8001 ; p. 303.231 343.237.8929
• 0 ■► " �"" .
♦ • " w t rc:: w & r
,•'< • •
Signature: Date:
( @rn y Rep nt tive)
lFC 06 105. L I
177T
FFC 06 901.5.
, 0 ,
TUT i g ns staung TTj79rr,=731 013470ful"t III U I'Miurr jun 171 one incn onj
contrasting background.
lFC 06 605.3.1.2. Amended.
lFC 06 605.3. 1.
Mechanical and Elevator Rooms:
minimum of one inch letters on a contrasting background.
lFC 06 509. L
Fire Extinguishers:
Fire extinguishers having a 4-A rating or I O-lb. ABC dry chemical units shall be provided on
each floor of structures under construction.
1FC 06 906.1 (4).
IQ
Key Box;
9