Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication-PermitGARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION 108 8"" Street, Suite 401, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Pennit No: Phone: !170·945·8212 I Fu:: !170-384-3470 lnspecUon Line: 970·384·5003 1 (){;;,Bb ) . Parcel/Schedule No: Zn7 zt) I co 47(p 'f;u,JtaJI)~ .JI()bO 0375 Cour\t Road 352 t-.f-{ Cc ~l c..-\l) Job Address: Garfield, Count Lot No: Parcel 3FL Owner:Board of Countv Comrn~ss~oners or GARCO Contractor: CMC Group, Inc. Architflc.t/Engj_neer: Knaa~os p.c. Sq. Ft. of Building: 18 495 Block No: Sq. Ft. of Lot: 45150 3-741-4500 . -956-0300 Height: 18' 5" Lie . No. Lie. No . No . of Floors: 1 Use of Building: Office I Low Hazard Storage 7 Describe Work: New Metal Building Office Storage (5 ,213) Class of Work: )«X New Alteration Remove Addition Move Garage: 0 N/A 0 Single Carport: N/A 0 Single Double Double 10 r-----------~D-ri~v-ew--ay~P~e -rm~it--------------~O~~O~n--S~it-e ~S~e-w-a-ge--1------S-it_e_P_Ia-n----------------~~~----__, N/A 11 Valuation of Work: $ 2,235,869 12 Special Conditions: NOTICE A SEPARATE ELECfRICAL PERMIT IS REQUIRED AND MUST BE ISSUED BY THE STATE OF COWRADO. ; i THE ST CfURE AS DETAILE ON P IN CON D TION OF THE ISS UA No Disposal Attached Adjusted Valuations: S 2,235,869 Plan Check Fee: Permit Fee: Total Fee: OCC Group: Const. Type: Zoning: Setbacks: anu. Home: ISDS No . & Fee: PERMIS~N IS HEREBY GRAN ED TO USE RE LATIONS ADOPTED BY FIELD COU PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GNEN LN 30.28.201 CRS AS AMENDED. THE SIGNER FURTHER AGREES THAT IF T ~ABOVE SAID ORD!Jll N'-"'"-'1.1~""'' FULLY COMPILED WITH IN THE LCOATION , ERECfiON, CONSTRUCfiON, AND USE OF THE ABOVE DES~~ORE, THE PERMIT MAY BE REVOKED BY NOTICE FROM THE COUNTY AND THAT THEN AND THERE IT SHALL BECOME NULL AND VOID. THE ISSUANCE OF A PERMT BASED UPON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA SHALL NOT PREVENT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL FROM THEREAFTER REQUIRING THE CORRECfiON OF ERRORS IN SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER DATA OR FROM PREVENTING BUILDING OPERATION BEING CARRIED ON THEREUNDER WHEN IN VIOLATION OFTHS CODE OR ANY OTHER ORDINANCE OR REGULATION OF THIS JURISDICTION. THE REVIEW OF SUBMITTED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND INSPECfiONS CONDUCfED THEREAFTER DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ACCEPTANCE OF ANY RESPONSIBIL!TlES OR LIABLITIES BY GARFIELD COUNTY FOR ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR DISCREPENCIES. THE RESPONSI BILITY FOR THESE ITEMS AND IMPLEMENTATION DURING CONSTRUCTION RESTS SPECIFIC!ALLY WITH THE ARTICfECf, DESIGNER, BUILDER, AND OWNER. COMMENTS ARE INTENDED TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND IN SUPPORT OF THE OWNERS LNTEREST. The following items are required by Garfield County for a final inspection: 1. A fmal Electrical Inspection from the Colorado State Electrical Inspector; 2. Pennanent address assigned by Garfield County Building Department posted where readily visible from access road; 3. A finished roof, a lockable house, complete exterior siding, exterior doors and windows installed, a complete kitchen with cabinets, a sink with hot & cold running water, non-absorbent kitchen floor coverings, counter tops and fmished walls, ready for stove and refrigerator, all necessary plumbing; 4. All bathrooms must be complete, with washbowl, tub or shower, toilet stool, hot and cold running water, non-absorbent floors and walls finished and a privacy door; 5. All steps outside or inside over three (3) steps must have handrails, guard rails on balconies or decks over 30" high constructed to all IBC and IRC requirements; 6. Outside grading done to where water will detour away from the building; 7. Exceptions to the outside steps, decks and grading may be made upon the demonstration of extenuating circumstances, i.e. weather, but a Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until all the required items are completed and a fmal inspection made; 8. A fmal inspection sign off by the Garfield County Road & Bridge Department for driveway installation, where applicable; as well as any fmal sign off by the Fire District, and/or State Agencies where applicable. 9. If you will be connecting to a public water and/or sewer system, proof of the tap fees have been paid and the connections inspected by the service provider prior to issuance of a C.O. A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL THE ABOVE ITEMS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. ****A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY TAKE UP TO 5 BUSINESS DAYS TO BE PROCESSED AND ISSUED. ****CANNOT OCCUPY OR USE DWELLING UNTIL A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY (C.O.) IS ISSUED. OCCUPANCY OR USE OF DWELLING WITHOUT A C.O. WILL BE CONSIDERED AN ILLEGAL OCCUPANCY AND MAY BE GROUNDS FOR VACATING PREMISES UNTIL ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE MET. I understand and agree to abide by the above conditions for occupanc=-=e and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the dwelling under building permit# it.:p<$6 ALfll GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING 970-945-8212 MINIMUM APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF COMMERCIAL OR MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS Including NEW CONSTRUCTION ADDITIONS ALTERATIONS And MOVED BUILDINGS In order to understand the scope of the work intended under a permit application and expedite the issuance of a permit it is important that complete information be provided. When reviewing a plan and it's discovered that required information has not been provided by the applicant, this will result in the delay of the permit issuance and in proceeding with building construction. The owner or contractor shall be required to provide this information before the plan review can proceed. Other plans that are in line for review may be given attention before the new information may be reviewed after it has been provided to the Building Department. Please review this document to determine if you have enough information to design your project and provide adequate information to facilitate a plan review. Also, please consider using a design professional for assistance in your design and a construction professional for construction of your project. Any project with more than ten (10) occupants requires the plans to be sealed by a Colorado Registered Design Professional. To provide for a more understandable plan and in order to determine compliance with the building, plumbing and mechanical codes, applicants are requested to review the following checklist prior to and during design. Plans to be included for a Building Permit must be on draft paper at least 18"x 24"" and drawn to scale. Plans must include a floor plan, a concrete footing and foundation plan , elevations all sides with decks, balcony steps, hand rail s and guard rail s , windows and doors, including the fini sh grade and original grade line. A section showing in detail, from th e bottom of the footing to th e t op of the roof, including re-bar, anchor bolts , pressure treated plates , floor joists, wall studs and spacing, insulation , sheeting, house-rap , (which is required), s iding or any approved building material. Engineered foundations may be required. Check with the Building Department. A window sc hedule . A door schedule. A floor framing plan, a roofing framing plan, roof must be designed to withstand a 40 pound per s quare foot up to 7,000 feet in elevation , a 90 M.P.H. windspeed, wind exposure B or C, and a 36 inch frost depth . All s heets need to be identified by number and indexed. All of the above requirements must be met or your plans will be returned. All plans submitted mu st b e incompliance with the 2003 lBC, IPC, IMC and IFGC. Applicants are required to indicate appropriately and to submit completed checklist at time of application for a permit: I. Is a site plan included that identifies th e location of the proposed structure, additions or other buildings , setback easements, and utility easements showing dis tances to th e property lines from each corner of the proposed structure prepared by a lice nsed surveyor and has the surveyor s s ignature and professional stamp on the drawing ? Sl opes of 30% or more on propertie s mus t be show on site plan. (NOTE: Section 106.2) Any site plan for th e placement of any portion of a structure within 50 ft. of a property line and not within a previously surveye d building envelope on a subdivi sion final plat shall be prepared by a licen sed surveyor and have th e surveyors signature and professional s tamp on the drawing. Any s tructure to be built within a building envelope of a l ot shown on a recorded s ubdivis ion plat, s hall include a copy of the building e nvelope as it is shown on the final plat with the proposed s tructure located within th e envelope. Yes ~ 2. Does the site plan when applicable include th e location of the I.S.D.S . (Indi vidual Sewage Di sposal Sys te m) and distances to th e property lines, wells (on subject propeity and adjacent properties), s treams or water courses? This information must be certified b y a licensed surveyor with their signature and professional stamp on the des ign . Yes No Not necessary for this project ..LX-1--_ 3. Does the site plan indicate the l oc ation and direction of the State , County or private road accessing the property ? Yes _lL_ 2 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Is the I.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) designed, stamped and signed by a Colorado Registered Engineer? Yes No__ Not necessary for this project X Are the plans submitted for application review construction drawings and not drawings that are stamped or marked identifying them as "Not for construction, for permit is suance only", "Approval drawings only", "For permit issuance only" or similar lan guage? Yes No~ Not necessary for thi s project __ .... A/,-fr.: 1/,. .. ,, n~P fi.Jr c .,nsfre.e.lt,h.J·c,',;·,r, >l,.c-c.lc-r-~1 ~r p-rr,..,f Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all reinforcing steel in accordance with the uniform building code or per stamped engineered design? Yes "')<. No__ Not necessary for this proj ect __ If the building is a pre-engineered structure, is there a stamped, signed engineered foundation plan for thi s building? Yes ~ No__ Not necessary for thi s project __ -f6v ndc.. -l,o,. 6r 6: e~te Do the plans indicate the location and size of ventilation openings for under floor crawl spaces and the clearances required between wood and earth? Yes No__ Not necessary for project~ Do th e plans indicate the size and location of the ventilation openings for the attic , roof joist spaces and soffits? Yes No__ Not necessary for thi s project ~ Do the plans include design loads as required under the IBC or IRC for roof snowloads, (a minimum of 40 pounds per square foot in Garfield County)? Ye s~ No_· __ Not necessary for thi s project_· __ Do the plans include design loads as required for floor loads under the IBC or IRC? Yes__ No__ Not necessary for thi s project_"'_ FIPor :: S"k..5 on G~~ .> /'t'~~~~ c/..:s?~ref bo/ G"oR Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall , floor, and roof construction? Yes~ No__ Not necessary for this project __ Is the wind speed and exposure design included in the plan? Yes~ No__ Not necessary for this project __ Does th e building section drawing include size and spacing of fl oor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof rafters or joists or trusses? Ye s ~ No__ Not necessary for this project __ 3 15 . D oes th e buildin g section drawin g or o th e r deta il include the me th o d of p os itive co nn ect io n of all columns and beam s? Ye s ~ No__ Not necessary for thi s project __ 16 . Does th e e le vati o n plan in d i cate th e he ight of th e building or pro posed additi on from th e undisturbed grade to the midpoint . be tw een th e rid ge and ea ve of a gabl e or shed roof or th e to p, of a flat roof? (Check ap pli cab le zone di s tri c t for buil din g he ig ht max imum ) Ye s___.1_ N o__ No t necess ary for thi s proj ect __ 17 . Does th e p lan in clud e an y s tove or zero c learan ce fi replace plann ed fo r in stallati on includin g make a nd model a nd Colorad o Phase IT certi fi cations or Phas e IT EP A certifica ti on ? Yes__ No__ Not nece ssary for thi s proj ec t~ 18. Does th e pl an include a m aso nry fir epl ace includin g a firepl ace secti o n indi ca tin g de s ign to c ompl y with the IB C or IRC ? Yes__ No__ No t necessary for thi s proj ect~ 19. Does th e p lan include a w indow schedule or oth e r ve rifi cati o n th at egress/resc ue wind ows fro m sleepin g rooms and/or b asemen ts compl y with th e require ments of the IB C or IRC? Yes __ No__ No t necessary for thi s proj ec t:2{__ 20 . Does th e plan incl ude a wind ow sched ul e or oth er v erif i cat ion that wi nd ows prov ide natural li ght a nd ven til a ti on fo r a ll habi ta ble roo ms? Yes ~ N o__ No t necessary f or thi s proj ec t __ 2 1. Do th e pl a ns indicate th e locati on of glaz in g subject to human imp act s uc h as glass d oors, gla zin g imme di ate ly a dj acent to such door s ; g laz in g adjacent to an y s urface normally use d as a w alking s urfa ce ; slidin g glass doo r s; fixe d glass pa nel s; sho we r door s and tu b e ncl os ures a nd specify safe ty glazing for th ese areas? Yes __ No_k_ Not necessary fo r thi s proj ect __ 22 . D o th e plan s include a comple te des ign for all m echani cal sys tems pl anned for ins talla~o n i n thi s building? Yes__ N o Not necessary fo r thi s proj ~c t __ _ 23. H ave all a reas in th e buildin g bee n acc urate ly iden ti fied for th e inte nd e d u se? (Occup ancy as ide nti f ied in th e IBC Chapter 3) Yes __l$ N o__ Not necessary for thi s project __ _ 24 . D oes th e pl an indi cate th e quantit y, form, use and storage of a ny hazard ou s materi al s that may b e i n use in thi s bu ildin g? Yes ----A-N o__ No t necessary f or thi s proj ect __ 4 35. Are you aware that the Permit Application must be signed by the Owner or a written authority be given for an Agent and that the party responsible for the project must comply with the Uniform Codes? Yes_d:_ No __ 36. Are you aware that you must call in for an inspection by 3 :30 the business day before the requested inspection in order to receive it the following business day? Inspections wilJ be made between 7:30a.m. and 3:30p.m. Monday through Friday. Inspections are to be called in to 384-5003. 37 . Are you aware that requesting inspections on work that i s not ready or not accessible will result in a $50.00 re-inspection fee? Yes _X__ .No ___ _ 38. Are you aware that prior to issuance of a building permit you are required to show proof of a driveway access permit or obtain a statement from the Garfield County Road & Bridge Department stating one is not necess ary? You can contact the Road & Bridge Department at 625-8601. Ye s X No ___ _ 39. Do you understand that. you will be required to hire a State of Colorado Licensed Electrician and Plumber to perform installation s and hookups? The license number will be required at time of inspection. Yes X No ___ _ 40. Are you aware, that on the front of the building permit application you will need to fill in th e Parcel/ Schedule Number for the lot you are appl ying for thi s pe rmit on prior to submit!V of the building permit application? Your attention in thi s i s appreciated. Yes ~ No ______ __ 41 . Do you know that th e local fire distrkt may re quire you to submit plans for their review of fire sa fety iss ues ? Yes )( No ·(Please check with the building department about thi s requirement) 42 . Do you understand that if you are planning on d oing any excavating or grading to the property prior to i ss uance of a building permit that yo u will be required to obta in a grading permit? Yes X' 43. Did an Architect seal the plans for your commercial project? State Law requires any commercial project with occupancy of more than 10 persons as per Section 1004 of the IBC t o pre pare the plans and specifications for the project. Yes X No Not Necessary for this project _____ _ 6 I hereby acknowled ge that I have read, und erstand , and a nswered these questions to the best of my ability. ~L D ate Phone: ::1t:J3(7~.tt-£~ Cell (~) Project Address: t?'37.s-c..~fy R..l . 35A . 1{,.~-rl 3Ft-. Note : R, l"k J CC7 'B"r c s-o If yo u a n swered "N o " on any of th ese qu esti o n s yo u may b e required t o provide thi s informa tion at the reques t o f th e Building O fficial prior to beginning th e plan re vi ew process. Delays in is suing the permit are to be expected. Work may n o t proceed witho ut th e i ssuance of the p ermit. *If yo u have an s we red "N ot necessary fo r thi s proj ect" o n a ny of th e ques ti ons and it is determined by th e Building Offic ial that th e information i s n ecessary to revi ew the appli cat ion and pl an s t o determine minimum c o mpliance with th e adopted codes , pl ease expect the foll o wing: A. The a ppli c ati on m ay b e pl aced behind m or e rec ent a ppli cation s for building pe rmits in th e review process and not revie w ed until require d informati o n ha s been provide d and th e a pplication rotates again to firs t positi o n for r e vi ew. B . D el ay in iss uance of th e pe rmit. C. D elay in proceeding with c on struc ti o n . *If yo u answere d "N o" to thi s questi on the circ ums ta nces described i n the qu esti on co uld res ult in a "Sto p W ork Order" being issued o r a "Certific ate of O ccup ancy" n ot bein g issued. Bpcomm April 2006 7 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING REQUIREMENTS Codes: 2003 IRC, IBC, IFGC, IMC, IPC, Setbacks: Check subdivisions and zone district for setback requirements. Snowload (measured at the roof): 40PSF up to 7000ft. elevation. 50PSF 700 I to 8000ft. 75PSF 8001 to 9000ft. lOOP SF 900 I to 1 OOOOft. Seismic design category: B Weathering probability for concrete: Severe Termite infestation probability: None to slight Wind speed: 90mph Decay probability: None to slight Wind Exposure: B or C (see section R301.2.1.4) Frost Depth: 36in. to 8000ft. elevation. 42in. 8001 and above. Winter Design Temperature: Minus 2 to 7000ft.; minus 16 over 7000ft. elevation. Air Freezing Index: 2500deg F-days to 7000ft.; over 7000ft. to be determined by Building Official. Ice shield under-laymen! required. Mean Annual temp.: Variable Insulation: Maximum glazing U factor: 0.50 Minimum R-Values: • Ceilings/roofs R values are: R-30 stick built structures. R-38 log construction and steel rafter construction. • Walls R values are R-19 wood frame; R-19 cavity R-3 sheathing steel studs. • Floors R-values are R-19. • Basement wall R-values are R-10 befow grade, R-19 above grade. • Slab perimeter R-value and depth is R- 10/36in. • Crawl space wall R-values are R-IO below grade and R -19 above grade If floors over crawl spaces are not insulated, the crawl space walls must be insulated. Basement wall must be insulated to frost depth. Common walls garage to house must have R-19 insulation. Common ceiling/floor garage to house must have R-19. Take precautions to protect plumbing in these areas. PLAN REVIE~7 CHECKLIST Applicant c'!..t41Z C 0 Date 7 -11 -o 2 /Buildin g _/ __ E ~nng•ineered Foundation ~Driveway Permit /surveyed Site Plan ~Septic Perrnit and Setbacks i:4L Gradeffopography 30 % .t:ja_Attach Residential Plan Review List ~inimum Application Questionnaire ~Subdivi s ion Plat Notes L Fire Department Review ~ uation Determination/Fees ~Red Line Plans/Stamps/Sticker ~Attach Conditions ~Application Signed 0 lan Reviewer To Sign Appli~ation -l,L_Parcel/Schedule No. _l1tY7 Snowload Letter-Manf. Hms. L Soils Report GENERAL NOTES: Planning/Zoning _brop erty Line Setbacks ~Oft Stre am Setbacks _0lood Plain V'Build ing Hei ght ~oning Sign -off r~ l . ~oad Impact Fees V HOAJDRC Approval . ~adeffopography 40 % V Planning Issues ~di vis ion Plat Notes Page I of2 Dave Mead From: Kevin Whelan [kewhelan@riflefiredept.org] Sent: Friday, April18, 2008 1:12PM To: thopkins@cmc-group.com Cc: KeAivey@riflefiredept.org; 'Mike Morgan'; gcurtis@cinnco.com; clint@acmealarm.com; Dave Mead Subject: Airport Admin Mechanical room Todd, I received your e-mail with the attached design criteria used by your architect for the mechanical room. I also spoke with Dave Mead, Garfield County Building Inspector. Dave agrees with your architect's design and that the mechanical room currently meets the requirements of the IBC. Thanks for your help with this clarification for me. The other day you asked for some NFPA code references that might apply to this mechanical room. The following is some sections to look at and in bold are my comments: NFPA 13 Automatic Sprinkler Handbook (2002): • 8.1.1 (3) Sprinklers shall be positioned and located so as to provide satisfactory performance with respect to activation time and distribution. Fire sprinklers require heat build up to activate properly. To activate the sprinkler head in the mechanical room, heat would have to build up throughout the entire concealed space. The mechanical room is required to have a sprinkler head and it has to perform satisfactorily . • A8.1-"where buildings or portions of the buildings are of combustible construction or contain combustible material, standard fire barriers should be provided to separate the areas that are sprinkler protected from the adjoining unsprinklered areas." Proof would need to be provided that there is nothing in the concealed space that is combustible. This would include duct work, wiring ,insulation ... • 8.14.1.2.1-Noncombustible and limited combustible concealed spaces with no combustible loading having no access shall not require sprinkler protection. Since there is no ceiling on the mechanical room , there is access to this area. Section 8.1.1 (1) indicates that sprinklers are required throughout the premise and thus could be required throughout the concealed space NFPA 72-National Fire Alarm Code Handbook (1999): 4/18/2008 • 1-5.6-States that only one smoke detector is required at the control unit even if the room would required more detectors. The fire alarm company indicated that additional smokes detector may be required if the detector was moved to the roof area. I do not see where this would be required . • 2-3.4.3.1 Smoke detectors shall be located on the ceiling not less than 4 "from the sidewall or, if on the sidewall, between 4" and 12" down from the ceiling. The location of the detector does not meet these requirements. The alarm company is doing more research on the 1999 edition but directed me to the 2007 edition. The 2007 edition ( 4.4.5 exception #2 ; A4.4.5 (1) & (2) )has some additions to the 1999 edition that may clarifiy this situation with Page 2 of2 relation to ceiling height. •• What is the height to the underside of the roof insulation? I'm a little uncomfortable with using the 2007 edition to eliminate a 1999 edition requirement without looking at what, if any additional requirements the 2007 edition has from the 1999. This would take more research but we could discuss this option. You mentioned to me that in Denver they allow this type of room. If you have more information and any fire marshal contacts, I would be glad to contact them and get their opinion. At this time, it appears that there are two solutions primarily being driven by the sprinkler code: 1) install a drop ceiling in the mechanical room 2) extend the walls to the roof line I am open to other alternatives and input. Kevin C. Whelan Division Chief/Fire Marshal Rifle Fire Protection District 1850 Railroad Ave Rifle, CO 81650 kewhela~n@riflefiredp~et.org Office 970-625-1243 Cell970-618-7388 Fax 970-625-2963 4/18/2008 Page 1 of 1 Dave Mead From: Kevin Whelan [kewhelan@riflefiredept.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 1:06 PM To: Dave Mead Cc: Andy Schwaller; 'Mike Morgan'; clint@acmealarm.com; gcurtis@cinnco.com Subject: Garfiled county Airport Admin building Dave, Thanks for meeting with me today. I just wanted to e-mail you the issue that came up over there to get your opinion. The mechanical room that contains the fire alarm panel and riser for the fire sprinkler system does not have a ceiling on it. This room also has gas fired appliances in it. This is also the only room in the building that does not have some sort of ceiling in it. My understanding is the void space that is open above this room extends through the whole building. The fire issues that are associated with this room are: 1. The fire detector, as currently located will not protect the space adequately because there is no ceiling in place to hold the smoke. At the very least this detector needs to be moved to the highest point in order to adequately protect the fire alarm panel but this may also require additional devices in the void space. 2. The fire sprinkler that protects the room may not activate because there in no ceiling in place. Since the void space is exposed, adequate heat build up in order to activate the sprinkler system may not be possible. If the ceiling is not installed, the space in the void area may require additional sprinkler coverage throughout the entire void space. 3. If a fire generates smoke in another area of the building, the smoke from this fire may enter this room where the main fire alarm panel and fire sprinkler controls are located. In looking at the building plans with the GC, the wall structure for this room indicates that the walls should extend to 6 " above the ceiling . Obviously this does not happen since there is no ceiling and the walls do not extend to the roof line. The GC pointed out that the plumbing, lighting, electrical ... plans do not indicate a ceiling in this room. I am entering into your realm and would like your opinion per the IBC. 1. Should this room have a ceiling in it? , , 2. Should this ceiling be rated the same as the walls? cJaR)A atu ~ "rOce..J I'm checking on the requirements for the fire alarm and fire sprinkler systems but would appreciate your insight on the IBC requirements. As always, thanks for your help! Kevin C. Whelan Division Chief/Fire Marshal Rifle Fire Protection District 1850 Railroad Ave Rifle, CO 81650 kewhelan@riflefirecjp_et.org Office 970-625-1243 Cell970-618-7388 Fax 970-625-2963 4/16/2008 Dave Mead From: Sent: Todd Hopkins [thopkins@cmc-group.com] Wednesday, April16, 2008 12:21 PM To: Dave Mead Cc: kewhelan@rifiefiredept.org Subject: Garee Airport Admin-Mech Room Attachments: S08041611550.pdf Dave- Page 1 of 1 Given the discussion yesterday concerning the mechanical room at the airport project I asked the architect to research and explain the design criteria they utilized. I hope the attached statement from the architect sheds some light on at least the methodology used and helps explain why the mechanical room does not have a ceiling in it. I would like to speak with you and get your thoughts on this question. Thank you for your time and efforts, Todd Hopkins Project Manager CMC-Group, Inc. From: scanner45cl@cmcgroup.local [mailto:scanner45cl@cmcgroup.local] Sent: Wednesday, April16, 2008 6:26AM To: Todd Hopkins Subject: Message from 4/16/2008 rhadius an architectural corporation To: Todd Hopkins CMCGroup From: Stephen Keitel RHadius p.c. p.c. Re: Garfield County Airport Offices mechanical room rating requirements. Dear Sir/Madam, April 15, 2008 TI1e Garfield County Airport Office project at the Garfield County Airport is a new construction project for administrative offices for Garfield County and vehicle storage for the airport. The building is a mixed use of office (Group B) and low-hazard storage (Group S-2). It is type V-B non-rated construction and fully sprinkled. The mechanical room (Mech/Fire 134) is a non-rated room that is open to structure. The room contains the fire riser system and three (3) gas furnaces with a total input of 340 MBTUH (340,000 Btu's). The HVAC system for the building is a ducted system and the area above the room is a non-plenum space. The mechanical room does not need to be a rated room nor does it require a ceiling capable of resisting the passage of smoke. Section 302.1.1 of the 2003 IBC states that this room is considered an Incidental Use Area. Table 302.1.1 states that a furnace room where any piece of equipment is over 400,000 Btu per hour input is required to have a 1 hour separation or provide an automatic fire-extinguishing system. If, and only if, a 1 hour separation is required then appropriate fire barriers and dampers are required (please see Section 302.1.1.1 for an explanation of barriers/partitions). Room 134 not only has no single piece of equipment with a 400,000 Btu input but all three furnaces combined are well below the 400,000 Btu level. Additionally, Section 302.2 says in part "Any other accessory use area shall not be required to be separated by a fire barrier provided the accessory use area occupies an area not more then 10 percent of the area of the story in which it is located and does not exceed the tabular values in Table 503 for the allowable height or area for such use." Room 134 is 114.4 square feet or less than one percent (.0062) of the total area of the building. RHadius p.c. respectfully requests that the Garfield County Airport Office project be allowed to pass inspection as is and not be required to rate the mechanical room or in any other way modify the room from the existing design. Respectfully, Stephen Keitel Job Captain RHadius p.c. 1615 California Street, Suite 411 Denver, Colorado 80202 720.956.0300 720.956.0402 fax WEST SLOPE TESTING & INSPECTION 3177 Glendam Dr Grand Junction, CO 81504 Phone: 970-434-6988 Cell: 970-260-2844 2-12-08 Andrew Schwaller Garfield County Building Official 108 8th St., Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Page 1 of 1 Please find enclosed copies of special inspection reports for Garfield County Airport Office & Storage Building, and Thrun Residence Barn. 1 ' .!..D FEf3 1 4 2008 I y , , '"' .. ,! ,JG Thank you; Doug Young West Slope Testing & Inspection 3177 Glendam Dr. Report#2 Grand Junction, CO 81504 Phone:970-434-6988 Page 1 of 1 Cell: 970-260-2844 Final Inspection Report Date: 1-18-08 Client: HP Geotech (Job #HP 107-0503) Project: Garfield County Airport Office & Storage Building Address: 0375 County Rd. 352 Rifle CO Building Permit No.: 10686 General Contractor: CMC Group Inspection of shop fabrication or field work at job site: Field Report: Visually inspected/reinspected the high strength bolting at the main frame & end wall frame column, rafter, and double angle bracing connections. Also randomly tested some of the bolts for proper bolt tightness. Visually inspected the welding at a double angle brace connection plate (that had been cut off and rewelded) grid A/5. The high strength bolting inspected as outlined above appeared to be in conformance with the drawings for bolt size & grade, and the A325 high strength bolts appeared to be tightened to a minimum of snug tight as called out for on the drawing notes. It also appeared that the flange & cable bracing was installed. The welding at the connection plate appeared to be of acceptable quality per the requirements of the A WS Dl.l Structural Welding Code. To the best of my knowledge this completes the special inspection of the high strength bolting & steel frame details as outlined above. Inspector/Technician: Douglas E Young West Slope Testing & Inspection 3177 Glendam Dr. Report#1 Grand Junction, CO 81504 Phone: 970-434-6988 Cell: 970-260-2844 Page I of 1 Inspection Report Date: 1-10-08 Client: HP Geotech (Job #HP 107-0503) Project: Garfield County Airport Office & Storage Building Address: 0375 County Rd. 352 Rifle CO Building Permit No.: 10686 General Contractor: CMC Group Inspection of shop fabrication or field work at job site: Field Report: Started the inspection of the high strength bolting & field welding at the steel frame. Noticed some bolts that needed tightened, a weld that needed completed, and some bracing to install. The inspection was stop & will be rescheduled for a later date after the above items are completed and/or corrected. COUNTY OF GARFIELD -BUILDING DEPARTMENT CORRECTION NOTICE 108 8th St., Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado Phone (970) 945-8212 Job located at 0 '3/) {_jL 3,5:7_ Permit No. J Olf--£ I have this day inspected this structure and these premises and found the following corrections needed: 0 Call for Re-lnspection 0 $50.00 Re-lnspection Fee must be paid prior to Re-lnspection You are hereby notified that the above correction must be inspected before covering. When correction(s) have been made, call for inspection at 970-384-5003. Date __ Lj_.___-_q+-----20 o:c- Building Inspector ________ <L"F'-S..w...-l _________ _ Phone (970) 945-8212 V ?i;fRO Assessor's Parcel Nooa fH-~lj l-CO-Y tq Date 10-<Jq-Ol- BUILDINO PERMIT CARD Job Address 637-'S Cf 3Z:l6-R1Ue Owner fi)(C ~CC! Address IC.O ce,+li~. -(J,\.1..):) Phone #:03-}li\-4'2l)C) Contractor rHctiW:p Jnc Address ~DC:O :s 0 b~nw Phone # wt>C\'~C-ci~C() SetQ,ap~s: Front Rear ____ RH LH o?P.ningo -=-:-r..---- tfl,etot, C!iFFICe t 'StafOC{t3 INSPECTIONS 5~_, ·ST'/ ~'19Yf/ Soils Test 0 Footing£' /Pd..M b /Oo~i/.o1FJ1,\_ Foundation _______ _ Grout -------,;-::--"""'--.--rr:r Underground Plumbing /0 -$-o7 kfi\ Rougoh Plumbin_g Qk.C?J?.; ~ Frammg f.!-2::P.' ~ Ad1JLl_ Insulation _,DJ?=-------- Roofi ng -----..---f+--=----=--,----- Drywall 3-ifoof3 ~ Gas Piping /· Jf-t>jJ--n, ci OA'f)L; J.? -og7f_ Ot{ /(JriL Weatherproofing ________ _ Mechanical _________ _ Electrical Rough (State) -,~,~>---rr--,.,,.----- EiectrigaLFin!IJAState) '1!::-lf--t>fi --T'b. Final Y-:2'-oti /Checklist Com_p,leted? pfl/ Certificate Occupancy# ...--<.5+'9:u.m~~~=<'i.--- Date \~":>\)~4-~-0~ Septic System #--"f;:l.>'l't"'\e....._.!mj"-t------ Date ---------Final ________ _ Other------------ NOTES (continue on back) 24 HOURS NOTICE REQUIRED FOR INSPECTIONS '1>,1.v\ ~ N\<;A)) BUILDING PERMIT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Date lssued ... /P..~zoned Area ............................... Permit No ... /{)g;i. ...... . AGREEMENT In consideration of the issuance ofthis permit, the applicant hereby agrees to comply with all laws and regulations related to the zoning, location; construction and erection of the proposed structure for which this permit is granted, and further agrees that if the above said regulations are not fully complied with in the zoning, location, erection and construction of the above described structure, the permit may then be revoked by notice from the County Building Inspector and IMMEDIATELY BECOME NULL AND VOID. Use /Jew mfliiG {j/clq t'JF"Ficef ~e Address or Legal Description C)"S "tS D' "5 S2.-Rtf /c Owner JfiOcG "/ti(ltCO Contractor (?Me-9/lt11J{J Setbacks Front Sjde Sjde Rear This Card Must Be Posted So It is Plainly Visible From The Street Until Final Inspection. INSPECTION RECORD FootingiO·;);I-01~ qpo4'\ S~l-l 8kJ<. Driveway Foundation~_M \1•'e·b/ ~ ~ Underground Plumbing(o-J)-01 ~ Insulation Of.. Rough Plumbing ~ A _$ Drywall .~-'/4.l!~ Chimney & Vent ..0-~ Electric Final (by State Inspector) ~ Gas Piping1f-'n;ol(~ j/?erl"·~ ,,.,~ Final !f-21-o 8 1 rlAI Electric Rough (By State Inspector) iUk Septic Final ~ Framing ,X:~-o9 )9nA. Notes: (To include Roof in place and Windows and Doors installed). ALL LISTED ITEMS MUST BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BEFORE COVERING - WHETHER INTERIOR OR EXTERIOR, UNDERGROUND OR ABOVE GROUND. THIS PERMIT IS NOT TRANSFERABLE For Inspections Call384-5003 108 8th Street Glenwood Springs, Colorado APPROVEDDO NOT DESTROY THIS CARD Date /0 .lf-('R By 0.: 'i IF PLACED U IDE -COVER WITH CLEAR PLASTIC ~ 2 -2 '2. ~of-E.L-P<Lsf\'-ft.~,..J JJ w~~'l-Pfl. 3-L. 'i o l.l... 8-~~-o1J (1~::: f~u., Ul~ o);1 k/io/s ti.,l/~;;1"":1 &4~d: Parcel Detail Page I of2 Garfield County Assessor/Treasurer Parcel Detail Information A>s~ssm/I!·casl.lr~t·PropertySe<~rch I Assessor Subset Qllm I Assessor Sales Se;:trch Clerk_& Re<:9rderRe_crption Search Basic Building Characteristics I Tax Information Parcel Detail I Value Detail I Sales Detail I Residential/Commercial Improvement Detail Land Detail I Photographs I Tax Area II Account Number I 024 II R005347 II Parcel Number II Mill Levy I II 217724100476 II 44.867 I Owner Name and Mailing Address jBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS I jGARFIELD COUNTY I j108 8TH ST STE 213 I jGLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 I Legal Description jsECT,TWN,RNG:24-6-93 DESC: A TR IN I jTHE NE4 CONT 43.63 A C. ROAD & I jBRIDGE BUILDING PRE:R247253 BK:755 I jPG:542 BK:453 PG:501 BK:1028 PG:S I jBK:1028 PG: 19 BK:1154 PG:798 I jRECPT:553480 BK: 1154 PG:796 I jRECPT:553479 I Location I Physical Address: JJ333 COUNTY RD RIFLE I Subdivision: J Land Acres: Jlo Land Sq Ft: Jlo Section II Township II Range I II II http://www .garcoact.com/assessor/parcel.asp ?Parce!Number=2177241 004 76 10/8/2007 Parcel Detail II 24 II 6 II 93 Property Tax Valuation Information Jl Actual Value II Assessed Value I Land: II oil I Improvements: II 26011 I Total: II 26oll III~=====S:=a=le==D=at==le: I .· Sale Price: I Basic Building Characteristics Number of Residential lo Buildings: Number of Commllnd lo Buildings: No Building Records Found Tax Information No Tax Records Found Top of Page II I ol sol sol I I Assessor Database Search Options I Treasurer Database Search Options Clerk & Recorder Database Search Options Garfield County Home Page Page 2 of2 The Garfield County Assessor and Treasurer's Offices make every effort to collect and maintain accurate data. However, Good Turns Software and the Garfield County Assessor and Treasurer's Offices are unable to warrant any of the information herein contained. Copyright © 2005 -2006 Good Turns Software. All Rights Reserved. Database & Web Design by Good Turns Softwart<. http://www .garcoact.com/assessor/parcel.asp?Parce1Number=2177241 004 76 10/S/2007 AUG-20-2007 09:28 Ft·om:HP-GEOTECH 9709458454 ~tech HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL August 17, 2007 CMC Group, Inc. Attn: Chuck Swanson Colorado Center, Tower I 2000 South Colorado Blvd, Ste. 10500 Denver, Colorado 80222 To: 13037414549 llep,mrth P,m],lk Geurt:chn~e,ll. Inc. S020 Cnullt\• Rued I 'l4 Glenwoc,d Sp11ng~. Ccl]oradt' t5J60 I Phone: 970.CNS·79~Fl h1xo 970-945-8454 t'lll<lil: h~',!.(t'u@hpJ::t'Olt'C]!.(Oill Job No. 107 0503 Subject: Recommendations for Floor Slab Section and Pavement Section Designs, Proposed Office and Shop Building, West ofRitle Jet Center, County Road 352, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. Swanson: As requested, we are providing additional recommendations for the floor slab section and pavement thickness designs. Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical,lnc. previously conducted a subsoil study for the project design and presented our findings in a report dated August 13,2007, Job No. 107 0503. Floor Slab Section: We understand that a concrete floor slab is proposed in the vehicle storage part of the building. The slab will support HS-20 loading. The sub grade soils consist mainly of low plasticity, sandy clay and silt. A minimum 4-inch thick layer of relatively well graded sand and gravel (road base) was recommended below the interior slabs. We estimate a subgrade modulus of 80 pci for the nah1ral fine grained soils. Based on pavement section design analysis, the proposed floor slab design section should consist of at least 6 inches of concrete on 4 inches of road base. The concrete should have a minimum design compressive strength of 4,000 psi. The slab section could also be analyzed as a structural beam supported by a sub grade modulus of 80 pci. Pavement Section: We understand that a concrete drive is proposed to the vehicle storage part of the building and asphalt will be used in the adjacent parking areas. The sub grade soils consist mainly of low plasticity, sandy clay and silt. The traffic loadings are not known, but we assume that the concrete drive will be subjected to heavy tnJCks and equipment, and the parking areas will be restricted to passenger cars and light trucks. For the purpose of ouraiJ.alysis, we assume ED LAs of 30 and 5 for the concrete drive and parking areas, respectively. Parker 303-841-7119 • Colorado Springs 719-633-5562 • Silverthorne 970-468-1989 AUG-20-2007 09:28 Ft'om: HP-GEOTECH CMC Group, Inc. August I 7, 2007 Page 2 9709458454 To: 13037414549 Based on the assumed traffic loadings, we recommend a minimum pavement section of 3 inches of hot bituminous asphalt over 8 inches ofCDOT Class 6 road base in the parking areas. We recommend the concrete drive thickness be at least 6 inches. A 4-inch thick layer of CDOT Class 6 road base should be provided below the concrete pavement. The concrete should have a minimum design compressive strength of 4,000 psi. We can review the pavement section design when traffic loadings have been determined. Other recommendations provided in our previous report for the pavement and grading designs that are applicable should also be observed. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call our office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH -PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Trevor L. Knell, Rev. By: SLP TLK/cay cc: Westar Engineers-Attn: Stephen Kesler Job No. !07 0503 AUG-20-2007 09:28 From:HP-GEOTECH 9709458454 G&btech FAX TRANSMITTAL FORM DATE:S-70-0"] TO: C-h\ )(ik ~,\IYbOY) Pete Totli n FRoM: Tr-m« tneA I Number of Pages: ___ '2.---,---,---- fincluding this page} MESSAGE: To: 13037414549 HEPWORTH • PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL. INC. 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970·945· 7988 Fax: 970·945-8454 e-mail: hpgeo@hpgeotech.com PROJECT NO.: IOJ OW3 FAX NO: 303 -/41-4tYfC1 3o3-l]CO --14-lts RrcJ\WnrJOdtt:b6YlS fu Floor 5\ctb fxr±iro orvJ The original of this transmittal will be sent by; Ordinary Mail "i9J Fax Only ';EO Overnight ';EO Other ';EO The information contained in this facsimile message is confidential and intended for the sole use of the individual named above. If you are not the intended recipient, received this communication in error, or if problems occur with traosmission, please notify us at 970-945-7988. ) • J ~tech HEPWORTH -PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL SUBSOIL STUDY llc p\\'nrth -Pa whlk Gl!otcc h nl ..:n l, Inc. 5020 Cu um y Rn;~d !54 G ll!ll ll'lllld Spri ng,, Co l ur;~d o 8 !60 l Ph one: 970-94 5-791{8 Fm;: 970-9 45-8 454 ema il: hpgeo@ hpgcotcc h .com FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED OFFICE AND SHOP BUILDING WEST OF RIFLE JET CENTER GARFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT COUNTY ROAD 352 GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO. 107 0503 AUGUST 13, 2007 PREPARED FOR: CMCGROUP ATTN: CHUCK SWANSON COLORADO CENTER, TOWER 1 2000 S. COLORADO BOULEY ARD DENVER, COLORADO 80222 Pa rk e r 303 -841 -7 l l 9 • Colorad o S prin gs 7 19-633 -5562 • S ilv e rt ho rne 970-468-1989 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ............................................................................ - I - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ..................................................................................... -1- SITE CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................... -2- FIELD EXPLORATION ................................................................................................. -2- SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...................................................................................... -2- DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................. -3- FOUNDATIONS ......................................................................................................... -3- FLOOR SLABS .......................................................................................................... - 4 - SURF ACE DRAINAGE ............................................................................................. - 5 - LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................... -5- FIGURE I -LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2 and 3-LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 4-LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURES 5 and 6 -SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1-SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed office and shop building to be located west of the Rifle Jet Center at the Garfield County Airport, County Road 352, Garfield County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to CMC Group dated June 20, 2007. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain information on the subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or swell and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed office and shop building will be a single story structure approximately 18,500 square feet in size located as shown on Figure I. Ground floor will be slab-on- grade. Grading for the structure is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 2 to 3 feet. We assume relatively light to moderate foundation loadings carried by a combination of perimeter walls and interior columns. If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report. Job No. 107 0503 -2- SITE CONDITIONS The site is located in the main part of the Garfield County Airport facility between the Rifle Jet Center building and an existing aircraft hangar as shown on Figure I. An aircraft was parked in roughly the center of the proposed building area at the time of our field exploration and a small storage building is located at the southeast corner of the site. The ground surface in the proposed building area is relatively flat with a gentle slope down to the west. There is up to about 2 feet of elevation difference across the site. Scattered cobbles are visible on the ground surface. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on July 25, 2007. Six exploratory borings were drilled as requested at the locations shown on Figure I to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a truck-mounted CME-45B drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 2 inch I.D. spoon sampler. The sampler was driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figures 2 and 3. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. The subsoils, below about I foot of topsoil (or possible fill), consist of stiff to hard, slightly sandy to sandy clay and silt down to the maximum explored depth of21 feet. Job No. 107 0503 -3 - Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content, density and percent finer than No. 200 sieve (silt and clay fraction) gradation analyses. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples, presented on Figures 5 and 6, generally indicate low to moderate compressibility under conditions ofloading and wetting. The sample from Boring I at 2 feet showed a low collapse potential (settlement under a constant load) after wetting. The sample from Boring 3 at 5 feet showed a low expansion potential after wetting. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were slightly moist to moist. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural soils. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. I) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural soils should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Based on experience, we expect initial settlement offootings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be about I inch or less. There could be additional differential settlement if the bearing soils are wetted. The magnitude of settlement will depend on the depth and extent of wetting. 2) The footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. Job No. 107 0503 ~ -4- 3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of foundations at least 36 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this area. 4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures, if any, should also be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure corresponding to an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 55 pcf for the on-site soil as backfill. 5) Any existing fill, topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to undisturbed natural soils. 6) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions. FLOOR SLABS The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab- on-grade construction. The soils are compressible when wetted and precautions should be taken to keep the sub grade soils dry. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4 inch layer of relatively well graded sand and gravel (road base) should be placed beneath interior slabs for subgrade support. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with at least 50% retained on the No.4 sieve and less than 12% passing the No. 200 sieve. All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95% of maximum standard Proctor density at near optimum moisture content. Required fill can Job No. 107 0503 - 5 - consist of the on-site soils or imported granular soil (such as road base) devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the building has been completed: I) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. 2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. 3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 6 inches in the first I 0 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 2 Yz inches in the first I 0 feet in paved areas. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. 5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least 5 feet from foundation walls. LIMITATIONS This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled at the locations indicated on Figure I, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our services do not include determining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If the client is Job No. 107 0503 1 ) -6- concerned about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified so that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. Respectfully Submitted, HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TLK/cay cc: Job No . 107 0503 I l BENCH MARK: TOP OF SLAB; ELEV.=100.0', ASS UMED. EXISllNG BUIUliNG N 6 AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON r--------------100~------------~ • BORING3 BOR IN G 4 • BORIN G 1 L 32'-4"-' -Jo-----448'-7"---Jo.-------'16'-7' I I "8'-2~ ~2 '-4'r--" l Jo-------------------e1 8.'-' -----------------1- EXISTING ROAD ACCESS 107 0503 ~tech LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 1 HEPWORTH-PAWlAK GEOTECHN ICAL ) 105 100 95 1-w w u. z 90 0 ~ .....1 w 85 80 75 107 0503 BORING 1 E LEV. = 1 02.2' 32/1 2 WC =8.9 00=106 -200 =84 28/1 2 WC =9.3 00=119 -200 =92 23/12 50/12 46/12 BORING 2 ELEV. = 1 0 0.8' 26/12 15/12 28/12 WC =5.4 00=1 07 38/12 37/12 BOR ING3 ELEV.=100.5' 23/12 17/12 WC =8.4 00 =108 -200=92 12/12 32/12 26/12 Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 4. ~tech LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL 105 100 95 1-w w u. I 90 z 0 ~ > ~ w 85 80 7 5 FIGURE 2 ) 105 100 9 5 1- UJ UJ Ll.. z 90 0 t= ~ UJ _. UJ 85 80 75 107 0503 BORI NG 4 ELEV .=100.3' 13/12 WC=6.2 DD =98 21/12 WC=5 .9 DD =107 -200=85 23/12 64/12 44/12 BORI NG 5 ELEV.=10 0.9' 14/12 17/1 2 WC=8.3 DD =106 21/12 37/12 36/12 BORING6 ELEV.=102.1' 13/12 16/12 WC =14 .6 DD =11 3 -200=87 10/12 WC =14.2 DD =11 3 14/12 15/12 Note: Explanation of symbo ls is shown on Figure 4. ~tech LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS HEPWORTH -PAWLAK GEOTECH NICAL 105 100 95 tu w Ll.. 90 z 0 ~ > ~ w 8 5 8 0 7 5 FIGURE 3 ) LEGEND: ~ tJ p 32/12 NOTES: TOPSOIL; sandy silty clay with scattered gravel, firm, slightly moist, brown, possible fill. CLAY AND SILT (CL-ML); slightly sandy to sandy , stiff to hard , slightly moist to moist, brown, slightly calcareous and porous . Relatively undisturbed drive sample ; 2-inch I.D . California liner sample. Drive sample blow count; indicates that 32 blows of 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the California sampler 12 inches . 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on July 25, 2007 with 4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided. 3. Elevations of exploratory borings were measured by instrument level and refer to the Bench Mark shown on Figure 1. 4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used . 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the appro ximate boundari es between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. Fluctuation in water level may occur with time . ) 7. Laboratory Testing Results : WC = Water Content ( % ) DO = Dry Densi ty ( pcf) -200 = Percent pa ss ing No . 200 si eve 107 0503 ~tech HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL LEGEN D AND NOTES FIGU RE 4 L Moistu re Content = 8.9 percent Dry Density = 106 pet Sample of : Sandy Clay and Sil t From: Bori ng 1 at 2 Feet 0 ~--1 -r--TL [ ---:-I rc 4T --~ 1 :--I z I < ~ (_- p 0 (j) 2 C/) l ~ ~ r--.p Co mpress ion r-T UJ a: r--. up on a.. ~ 3 wetti ng 0 l {) 4 - & --I U1 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE ( ksf) ) Mo isture Content = 5.4 percent Dry Den sity = 107 pet Sample of: Sandy Clay From : Bo rin g 2 at 10 Feet -~ 0 ---~ ;( z I ~ 0 (j) 1 C/) "1 --r-r-UJ I~ ......_ No movemen t a: a.. 1'--t upo n we tt ing ~ 2 I) 0 {) 0 .1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE ( ksf) 107 0503 ~tech SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 5 HEPWORTH·PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL Moisture Content = 8.4 percent Dry Dens ity = 108 pcf Sample of: Slightly Sa ndy Clay From : Boring 3 at 5 Fee t 1 -?fi. -0 ~ z I -~'-~ 0 Ci5 1-r-z "' <t: 1 0. r-r-~ \ >< UJ 1'\ 0 1'-i\-'\ z 2 0 ['\ Expansion \ Ci5 (/) upon 1\ UJ a: 3 wetting 0. ~ (1) 0 () 4 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE ( ksf ) ) Moisture Content = 14.6 percent Dry Dens ity = 11 3 pet Sample of: Sandy Sil ty Cl ay From : Boring 6 at 5 Fee t 0 --v ?fi. ~ ( -z 1 -0 ~ \I--~~ r--r--No move ment Ci5 (/) up on wetting UJ a: 2 0. i\p ~ 0 () 3 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE ( ksf) 107 0503 ~tech SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 6 HEPWORTH·PAWLAK GEOTECHN ICAL HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 1 Job No. 107 0503 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SAMPLE LOCATION NATURAL NATURAL GRADATION PERCENT ATTERBERG LIMITS UNCONFINED BORING MOISTURE DRY GRAVEL SAND PASSING LIQUID PLASTIC COMPRESSIVE SOIL NO. DEPTH CONTENT DENSITY NO. 200 LIMIT INDEX STRENGTH TYPE (%) (%) SIEVE (ft) (%) (pcf) (%) (%) (PSF) 1 2 8.9 106 84 Sandy clay and silt 5 9.3 119 92 Slightly sandy clay 2 10 5.4 107 Sandy clay 3 5 8.4 108 92 Slightly sandy clay 4 2 6.2 98 Sandy silty clay 5 5.9 107 85 Sandy silty clay 5 5 8.3 106 Sandy silty clay 6 5 14.6 113 87 Sandy silty clay 10 14.2 113 Sandy silty clay ,,_2007 14:04 From:HP-GEOTECH 9709458454 ~tech HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL July 3 I, 2007 CMCGroup Attn: Pete Tobin Colorado Center, Tower I 2000 S. Colorado Boulevard Denver, Colorado 80222 To:13037781478 1-lr:pwonh·Pawl:-lk Georechn1cal. Inc. 5020 Counry Road 154 Glenwood Srrmgs, Color<1do 81601 Phone: Y'l0-945-79S8 Foxo 970-945-8454 em;;~1l; hpg:eo@hpgeotech.com Job No. 107 0503 Subject: Interim Findings, Proposed Office_ and Shop Building, West of Rifle Jet Center, Oarfiefd county Airport, county Road J)L, Garfield county, Colorado Dear Mr. Tobin: This letter provides interim findings of the subsoil study we are performing for the subject site according to our proposal for geotechnical engineering services with you dated June 20,2007. A new single story structure, approximately 18,500 square feet in size, will be constructed in a vacant area west of the Rifle Jet Center building. Six borings were drilled within the proposed building footprint as requested for the subsoil study. The subsoils encountered in the borings, below about 1 foot of topsoil, consisted of stiff to very stiff, sandy clay and silt down to the maximum explored depth of 2 I feet. Free water was not encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were slightly moist to moist. The soils are expected to have variable settlement potential and collapse when wetted under load. Construction of the proposed office and shop building appears feasible based on geotechnical considerations. Spread footings bearing on the undisturbed natural soils and sized for an allowable soil bearing pressure on the order of 2,000 psf should be suitable for support of the proposed building. The soils tend to compress when wetted under loading and there is a risk of post-construction foundation settlement. Positive surface drainage should be provided away from the structure to prevent wetting of the bearing soils. More detailed reconunendations will be provided in the project report when completed. In the meantime, if you have any questions, please call our office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH-PA Trevor L. Knell, P. Rev. by: SLP TLK/cay attachments Figure I -Locations of Exploratory Borings Figures 2 and 3 -Logs of Exploratory Bormgs Figure 4-Legend and Notes Pmi<Pr 1(YUi41-711 q • Colorodo Spring' 719-633-5561 • S;lverthorne 970-468-1989 ~1-2007 14:05 From:HP-GEOTECH 9709458454 To:13037781478 BENCH MARK: TOP OF SLAB: !;LEV. •100.0', ASSUMED. 107 0503 AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON • BORING3 BORING4 • BORING 1 EXISTING ROAD ACCESS LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 1 '1-2007 14:05 From:HP-GEOTECH 100 95 90 85 BORING 1 ELEV.=102.2' 32112 28/12 23/12 50/12 46/12 9709458454 BORING2 ELEV.=100.8' 26/12 15/12 28/12 38/12 37/12 To: 13037781478 BORING3 ELEV. = 1 00.5' 23/12 17/12 12/12 32/12 26/12 Note: Explanation of symbols Is shown on Figure 4. 107 0503 LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS 95 Iii ~ z 0 90 ~ ~ w 85 FIGURE 2 '1-2007 14:06 From:HP-GEOTECH 100 95 ~ u. ' z 90 0 )~ ~ w BORING4 ELEV.=100.3' 13/12 21/12 23/12 64/12 44/12 9709458454 BORINGS ELEV.=100.9' 14/12 17/12 21/12 37/12 36/12 To: 13037781478 BORINGS ELEV.=102.1' 13/12 16/12 10/12 14/12 15/12 Note: Explanation of symbols Is shown on Figure 4. 107 0503 ~tech LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS HEPNOA'Tlt'-PAWLAK GEOtECHNICAL P,5/6 tii w u. 90 z Q ~ ~ w 85 FIGURE 3 AUG-Q1-2007 14:06 From:HP-GEOTECH 9709458454 To: 13037781478 P.6/6 LEGEND: ~ TOPSOIL; D CLAY AND SILT (CL-ML): p Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-lnch I .D. California liner sample. Drive sample blow count; indicates that 32 blows of 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive 321 12 the California sampler 12 inches. NOTES: 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on July 25, 2007 with 4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided. 3. Elevations of exploratory borings were measured by instrument level and refer to the Bench Mark shown on Figure 1. 4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content (% ) DO = Dry Density ( pel) -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve U:~1~0:7~05~0~3~L:d~r~~ti~.P~~~~~·~·~··~~=========L=E=G=E=N=D=A=N=D=N=O=T=E=S=========F=IG=U=R=E==4~ Garfield County Building & Sanitation Department 108 8th Street, Suite #401 Glenwood Springs, Co. 81601 Office 945-8212 Inspection Line 384-5003 Job Address: 0375 Cr 352, Rifle Locality: ---------~2::.:1:..:..7:..._7-..=24:..:..1~-.::::00::...-:..:..47:,.:6:..__ ________ _ Use of Building: _______ __:N.:.:e:..:.w:..:.m=et=al:..:.o:.:f:.:fi.::cce:.:,..:.st:.:o:.:ra"'g"'e ______ _ Owner: Board of County Comissioner of Garco Contractor: _________ __:C:.:M.:.:..:::C...:G:.:r=o::Jupt:.:'..:::ln:::c:.__ ________ _ Amount of Permit: _.;::$=.2,=2::..:35:.:,8::..:6:.:9.:.:.0:.:0_ Date: Clerk: __ c ___,.J~-~..-=.ti~~f-.1.-~.::..__-