HomeMy WebLinkAboutSite Certifications - 08/02/20178/16 Page 1
OVERALL SITE and DRAINAGE CERTIFICATION
Commercial, Multi-Family and Subdivision Certification Form and Checklist
Project Name:
Date:
Building Permit Numbers:
(Commercial or multi-family)
Per the requirement in Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM) Volume 1, Section 6.11, please fill in
all applicable items in this Certification Form for Commercial, Multi-Family and Overall Single Family sites.
NOTE: several items must be verified during construction. A copy of the approved grading plan must be
submitted with the as-built grading plan. (As-built elevations must be written in red next to the approved
elevations.)
•Use “Yes” for items completed as described.
•Use “N/A” for items that are not applicable to the site being certified.
•If any blanks are “No,” attach an explanation referencing the item number below.
Attach an explanation or description of the as-built condition for any items listed or for anything not listed but
shown on the approved construction plans.
Provide an as-built redline or Mylar drawing with the following:
I.Water Quality and Quantity Detention Basin Certification - FCSCM Vol.2, Ch.10
For multiple detention basins on a site, provide the following for each basin separately:
A. Volume: As-built topographic verification is attached at 1-foot (or less) contour intervals and
volume verification calculations for the water quality capture volume and the 100-year detention storage
volume.
1. Detention basin topography was prepared by a professional land surveyor registered in the state
of Colorado.
2.Both proposed and as-built contours are shown on the same plan sheet (dashed lines for
proposed and solid lines for as-built).
3.All critical spot elevations as shown on the approved construction plans have been verified and
the as-built elevations are shown on the plan sheet.
4.Stage-storage-discharge tables are provided on a separate document.
5.Verification that designed drain time is in compliance with Colorado Revised Statute § 37-92-
602(8) is attached and has been uploaded to the Statewide Compliance Portal
(tinyurl.com/COCompliancePortal) for approval. Uploaded documents must include:
a.The cover sheet from the approved drainage report
b.The stamped certification page from the approved drainage report
c.As-built topographic survey
d.Stamped certification page from the Overall Site & Drainage Certification
e.PDF output from the Stormwater Detention and Infiltration Design Data Speadsheet
Mainstreet Health & Wellness
10/25/16
B1504127
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8/16 Page 2
B.Water Quality and Quantity Detention Basin Grading: Attached is as-built verification that there is
a minimum 2% positive fall into the concrete trickle pans or flow-line(s) from all areas in the bottom of
the detention pond. If there is a “soft pan” in the flow-line, all areas still must meet the minimum 2%
grade requirement.
1.Low Flow: Choose one of the following detention basin low flow options as applicable:
a. Turf swale for low flow path in detention basin.
There is a minimum 2% grade in the flow-line(s) of the detention basin. The flattest as-built grade
is .
b.Concrete pan for low flow in detention basin.
There is a concrete pan installed that meets the grades as shown on the approved construction
plans. (Show as-built spot elevations.)
c.Soft pan for low flow in detention basin.
•Verify and document the soft pan material gradation, trench width and depth - to be verified
during construction by engineer. Picture documentation is preferred or engineer’s statement of
visual inspection and compliance. (Choose one below.)
o There is a soft pan with an underdrain installed that meets the design on the approved
construction plans. (Show the underdrain grades, bedding material, geotextile, spot elevations,
bends, cleanouts, etc.)
o There is soft pan installed without an underdrain but there is a type A or B soil. The soil
type must be documented by supplying verification from a registered professional geotechnical
engineer.
NOTE: Spot elevations are to be within 0.2 ft. +/-.
2. Side Slopes: The as-built side slopes of the detention basin have been calculated and are shown.
Indicate the side slope with an arrow and a numerical value (e.g., 6.25:1). The maximum slope allowed
is 4:1. Small areas of 3:1 may be acceptable, but slopes steeper than 3:1 must be stabilized or re-
graded. Provide documentation if a variance was granted for steeper slopes during the design process.
3.Spillway Certification: The following items must be field verified:
a.The location of the spillway is indicated on the as-built plan.
b.The width of the spillway is indicated on the as-built plan.
c.The elevation(s) of the spillway is shown on the as-built plan.
d.A concrete ribbon defines the location and grade of the spillway.
e.There is downstream scour protection in the spillway as per the construction plans. Indicate
type: (riprap size “D50” gradation and bedding type, geotextile, buried
riprap with inches of bury, etc.).
f.There are no obstructions in the spillway, such as trees, bushes, sidewalks, landscape
features, rocks, etc.
Yes
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
N/A
Yes
8/16 Page 3
4.Outlet Structure Certification
a.The orifice plate for the approved release rate is installed with the correct size and location of
the orifice.
b.The orifice plate for the water quality outlet is installed with the correct hole size, number of
rows and columns of holes.
c.The bottom hole on both the water quality and quantity outlets are at the bottom of the plate
so no water ponds in front of the plate.
d.The well screen is the correct material and is installed as shown on the construction plans.
e.100-year overflow grate elevation is . (Elev. A on detail D-46)
f.The top elevation of the water quality capture volume is . (Elev. B on detail
D-46)
g.Overflow grate is made of the correct material, has the correct bar spacing, is hinged at the
top and bolted at the bottom.
h.The bottom of the outlet box has no obstructions or misalignments that will cause it to retain
runoff water and is sloped at 2% towards outlet.
II.Channels/Swales - FCSCM Vol.1, Ch.7, Sect.3&4
A. Capacity: The as-built capacity of all the major channels and swales has been verified. They meet
or exceed capacity requirements shown in the approved drainage study for this project.
1.All swales are located within the drainage easements as shown on the construction plans.
2.Longitudinal slopes and side-slopes (cross-sections) have been verified. Design criteria requires
longitudinal slopes of 2% min. (on vegetated swales) and side-slopes no steeper than 4:1. If these
criteria are not met, the certification engineer will write a justification and propose mitigation for each
instance or have the issues corrected. If variances to these criteria have previously been approved and
are shown on the construction plans, no justification is needed.
3.As-built spot elevations on channels/swales are shown that correspond to spot elevations
shown on the approved construction plans.
4.All permanent erosion control measures are installed as shown on the approved construction
plans (e.g., drop structures, riprap, TRMs, etc.). (Include pictures and verification of the materials used
as part of this verification.)
5.All pans, curbs, storm pipes or other appurtenances appropriately tie into each other in the
system. (Pictures at tie-in points suggested.)
6.The minimum freeboard is provided for all channels and swales as shown on the approved
construction plans or as identified in the approved drainage study. (Show the freeboard provided on
the cross-sections as on the construction plan set or attached as separate documentation.)
7.The low flow portion of all channels or swales is clear of obstructions. (No landscaping, trees,
shrubs, sod, etc. infringe on the low flow portion of channels or swales.)
Yes
4912.7
4915.2
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
Yes
8/16 Page 4
III.Storm Pipes (aka storm drains) - FCSCM Vol.1, Ch.6, Sec. 4
A. Storm Drain Pipe Capacity: The as-built capacity of all pipes installed on this project has been
verified and meets or exceeds the capacity requirements shown in the approved drainage study for this
project.
1.All storm drain pipe sizes and materials have been verified and are in conformance with the
approved construction plans. (Indicate on the plan and profile sheets that they have been verified.)
Material and size substitutions must be approved prior to installation. If a pipe size or material was
changed during construction, the certification engineer must attach the approval documents or supply
them with this certification. Approval documents must include a calculation documenting the capacity
equivalency (equal or greater) of the substituted size.
2.The longitudinal slope of the pipe is as shown on the approved construction plans. The
acceptable minimum slope is 0.4%. All slopes flatter than the designed slope on the construction plans
must be justified with capacity calculations on an attached sheet.
3.The as-built invert elevations have been verified and are shown on the plan and profile sheets of
the approved construction plans.
B.Storm Drain Pipe Installation Requirements: All pipes are installed in accordance with the
approved construction plans.
1.The minimum cover requirements for all pipes have been met as shown on the approved
construction plans. These will be called out in critical locations.
2.All encasements and clearances as specified on the approved construction plans have been met.
3.Any specific joint types or construction methods specified on the approved construction plans
have been met. (List on a separate sheet and attach to this certification.)
IV.Concrete Pans - FCSCM Vol.1, Ch.7, Sec.4.1.3.4
A. Construction/Installation: All concrete pans have been constructed in accordance with the
approved construction plans.
1.The concrete pans are the correct size/width as shown on the approved construction plans.
2.The longitudinal slopes of the pans are as shown on the approved construction plans. The
certification engineer must justify or mitigate longitudinal slopes less than the minimum of 0.4% unless
a flatter slope was approved and is shown on the approved construction plans. Provide mitigation or
justification by separate document.
3.The cross-section of the pan is as shown on the construction plans. (Specifically, the pan cross-
section is “V” shaped and meets the side slope shown on the detail.)
4.The concrete pans are a minimum of 6 inches thick without reinforcement and a minimum of 4
inches thick with a minimum of 6X6-W14xW14 reinforcement per detail D20B and D20C. (Provide
documentation of the reinforcement used if different than shown on the details or on the approved
construction plans.)
5.The spot elevations shown on the concrete pan(s) have been verified and are shown on the as-
built drawings.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
8/16 Page 5
V. Storm Drain Inlets - FCSCM Vol.1, Ch.6, Sec. 3
A. Construction/Installation: All storm drain inlets have been constructed in accordance with the
approved construction plans.
1.The size and type of inlets are consistent with the inlets shown on the approved construction
plan. Indicate by writing “Verified” on each inlet on the plan sheet or list on a separate document the
inlet number(s), type and size (length). If the inlet installed is other than the one on the approved
construction plan detail sheet, provide the name and source of the detail with justification for equal or
better capacity.
2.The size of the inlet opening is consistent with the approved detail. (Check height and width.)
3.The elevation of the grate (if applicable) is at the elevation shown on the street profile or as
indicated by a spot elevation on the construction plans.
4.The as-built invert elevations of all pipes entering and leaving the inlet are shown on the plan
and profile sheets within construction tolerance of 0.2 feet. If substantially different, provide
justification and capacity calculations to show the capacity is not affected or propose mitigation.
5.The as-built size of the inlet box is as shown on the construction plans or an explanation or
justification is attached.
6.All Type C, R, 13 and 16 inlet covers are stenciled or stamped with the following (or an
equivalent) designation: NO DUMPING – DRAINS TO POUDRE RIVER.
VI.Culverts - FCSCM Vol.2, Ch.9
A. Construction/Installation: All culverts have been constructed and/or installed in accordance with
the approved construction plans.
1.All culvert sizes have been verified as indicated on the as-built construction plans as correct.
2.The culvert material type for all culverts installed is as on the approved construction plans and is
indicated on the as-built plans.
3.The as-built invert “in and out” elevations have been verified and are indicated on the as-built
construction plans.
4.The culvert headwalls or wing walls have been installed as shown on the approved construction
plans. Headwalls or wing walls may be needed in the as-built conditions onsite if the slopes adjacent to
the culvert are greater than 4:1. Please note areas needing stabilization in the certification narrative.
An alternative to consider is a turf reinforcement mat (TRM).
VII.Sub-Drains
A. Construction/Installation: All sub-drains shown on the construction plans have been installed in
accordance with those plans. Sub-drains installed with the sanitary sewer are to be verified on the
sanitary sewer plan and profile sheets of the construction plans. (NOTE: Indicate any sub-drains installed
after the plans were approved on the as-built plans.)
1.The size of the sub-drains are as approved on the construction plans and are indicated on the as-
built plans.
2.The type of sub-drain, in particular the perforated and non-perforated sections of the drain, are
as indicated on the approved construction plans.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
8/16 Page 6
3.The cover requirements per the construction plans are provided.
4.The cleanouts have been installed at the locations shown on the construction plans and are
accessible for cleaning. (Cleanouts can be buried a maximum of 6 inches deep with their locations
marked.)
5.The backfill materials for sub-drains are as shown on the approved construction plans. (This
includes the type, depth and width.)
6.The geo-textile liner completely wraps the sub-drain and the permeable backfill material unless
shown otherwise on the approved construction plans. (Sub-drain pipe wrapped in a sock filter material
is accepted only if approved prior to installation.)
VIII.Curb Cuts
A. Construction: All curb cut openings are constructed in accordance with the approved construction
plans.
1.The size (width) of the curb cut opening is as shown on the approved construction plans.
2.The curb cut openings tie into a downstream swale, pipe, or other appurtenances with a smooth
transition and there no obstructions such as riprap or sod impeding the flow downstream of the curb
cut.
IX.Sidewalk Culverts & Chases
A. Construction/Installation: All sidewalk culverts have been installed at the locations shown on the
approved construction plans.
1.The size (width and length) of the culverts are as shown on the approved construction plans.
2.The cover plate is a minimum 5/8-inch galvanized plate bolted to a galvanized angle iron per the
detail shown on the approved construction plans or per the City’s detail.
3.The sidewalk culvert invert “in and out” elevations have been verified and are indicated on the
as-built plans.
4.The sidewalk culvert opening is as shown on the approved construction plans or per the City’s
detail.
5.There is a smooth transition both on the inlet and outlet ends of the sidewalk culvert with no
obstructions such as riprap or sod impeding the flow into or out of the sidewalk culvert.
X. Site Grading
A. Construction: All common open spaces have been graded in accordance with the approved
construction plans.
1.The grading on all common open spaces bordering private lots has been verified as correct and
the as-built rear lot corner elevations have been shown on the as-built plans.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
8/16 Page 7
2.The as-built contours for “overlot grading” are shown on the as-built construction plans for all
common open spaces, tracts, outlots, etc. If not in compliance, please attach a narrative describing the
situation for noncompliance and when it may be corrected. An escrow for overlot grading may be
required. (NOTE: Residential Lot Grading Certification is a separate process from this Overall Site
Certification. It is understood that residential lots will be brought to final grade once the foundation is
backfilled so they may be lower than the plan shows at this Overall Site Certification stage.)
3.All turf reinforcement mats (TRMs) have been installed as shown on the approved construction
plans and the slopes are stabilized.
XI.Riprap - FCSCM Vol.1, Ch.7, Sec.4.4.4.3
A. Construction: All riprap has been installed in the locations and sizes indicated on the approved
construction plans.
XII.Permanent Erosion Control Fabric - FCSCM Vol.1, Ch.7
A. Construction: All fabric has been installed in the locations and sizes indicated on the approved
construction plans.
1.All fabric was installed per the details on the approved construction plans.
XIII.Post-Construction Site Cleanup - FCSCM Vol.3, Ch.7
A. Construction: All construction debris and obstructions of any kind have been removed from
drainage paths.
1.All construction debris has been removed except in staging area(s).
2.All ruts have been smoothed out in all construction areas.
3.All areas needing reseeding have been identified and future stabilization goals have been
coordinated with the Erosion Control Inspector and in accordance with FCSCM Vol.2 Chapter 12. Note
the area needing stabilization in the narrative.
XIV.Certification of Other Permanent BMPs - FCSCM Vol.2, Ch.8, Sec.2 & FCSCM Vol.2, Ch.12
A.The construction of channel drop structures is in accordance with the approved plan both in
location, horizontal dimensions and cross-section.
XV.Certification of LID and Water Quality Facilities - FCSCM Vol.3, Ch.4
A.Attached are the During Construction Inspection Checklist for Low Impact Development (LID) and
other items to be verified during construction, along with pictures and other required documentation.
N/A
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
February 2, 2016
Albert Frei and SonsP.O. Box 700Henderson, Colorado 80640
Attention: Mr. Rick Foster
Subject: Physical Properties Testing (ASTM)No. 2 stone, Pit 6Project No. CT16032.000-400
Dear Mr. Foster:
This report presents results of physical properties testing performed on materialdelivered to our laboratory in December, 2015. Representative samples delivered wereidentified as No. 2 stone from Pit 6. Testing was performed to determine the materialscompliance with ASTM specifications. The following testing was performed in generalconformance with the applicable standards.
1) Sieve Analysis (Gradation)2) Material Finer Than No. 200 Sieve by Washing3) Specific Gravity & Absorption4) Clay Lumps & Friable Particles5) Lightweight Particles 2.06) Lightweight Particles 2.47) Sodium Sulfate Soundness8) Magnesium Sulfate Soundness9) Rodded Unit Weight & Voids10) Loose Unit Weight & Voids11) Los Angeles Abrasion12) Fractured Faces13) Flat and Elongated Particles
A summary of the aggregate test results is attached, followed by the completetest results. Based on the test results, the material tested meets the ASTMspecifications for coarse aggregate. If you have any questions regarding this report,please call.
Respectfully submitted,
CTL | THOMPSON MATERIALS ENGINEERS, INC. Reviewed by:
Daniel L. Barrett Damon B. Thomas, P.E.Materials Lab Manager Division Manager
DLB:DBT/dlbEnclosures
1 copy sent
1 copy emailed:rfoster@albertfreiandsons.com
Passing (%)Specification (%)
Results Specification
CTL | THOMPSON MATERIALS ENGINEERS, INC.
Damon B. Thomas, P.E.
Test
Aggregate Qualification Summary - ASTM Specifications (ASTM C 33)
Sieve Size
Sieve Analysis (ASTM C 136 & C 117)
ATTACHMENT A
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Company Name:
Material Source:Project No.
Material Type:Report Date:
Oven Dry SSD in Submerged Bulk Bulk (SSD) Absorption
Weight (g) Air Weight (g) Volume Specific (%)
Weight (g) Gravity
Percent Weight Weight Percent
Grading of Before After Loss
Passing Retained Sample (g) (g)Loss
Clay Lumps and Friable Particles in Aggregate
(ASTM C 142)
Specific Gravity and Absorption of Coarse Aggregate
(ASTM C 127)
Sieve Size Weighted
Percent
Weight (g) Weight (g) No. 200 Sieve (%)
Initial Dry Final Dry Material Finer Than
Material Finer Than No. 200 Sieve by Washing
(ASTM C 117)
Sieve Size
No. 2 (ASTM C 33)
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATES
Percent Passing Percent Passing
Sieve Analysis of Coarse Aggregate
(ASTM C 136)
Fig. A-1
Company Name:
Material Source:Project No.
Material Type:Report Date:
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATES
Weight Weight Percent Weighted
Passing Retained Before (g) After (g) Loss % Loss
Weight Weight Percent Weighted
Passing Retained Before (g) After (g) Loss % Loss
(ASTM C 88)
Sieve Size
Lightweight Particles in Aggregate
(ASTM C 123)
Percent Grading
Soundness of Coarse Aggregates by Use of Magnesium Sulfate
Sieve Size
of Sample
(lbs)(ft3)(pcf)
Sample Weight Bucket Volume Unit Weight
Bulk Density (Unit Weight) and Voids in Aggregates (Rodded Method)
(ASTM C 29)
Soundness of Coarse Aggregates by Use of Sodium Sulfate
(ASTM C 88)
Percent Grading
of Sample
Weight (g) of Liquid Lightweight Particles
Sample Specific Gravity Percentage by Mass of
Fig. A-2
Company Name:
Material Source:Project No.
Material Type:Report Date:
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATES
Initial Final Percent
Weight Weight Loss
Percent of Fractured
Bulk Density (Unit Weight) and Voids in Aggregates (Loose Method)
(ASTM C 29)
(ASTM C 535)
Initial
Weight
Weight of
Resistance to Degradation of Large-Size Coarse Aggregate
by Abrasion and Impact in the Los Angeles Machine
(pcf)(lbs)(ft3)
Sample Weight Bucket Volume Unit Weight
Grading
Fractured
(ASTM D 5821)
(g)
Determining the Percentage of Fractured Particles in Coarse Aggregate
(minimum 2 faces)Particles (g)
Particles
Fig. A-3
Client:Albert Frei and Sons, Inc.Sample ID:
Project:Flat and Elongated Particles Pit Name:
Project No.CT16032.000
Sieve
Retained
Size
Percent of
Grading
Number of
Particles
Weight of
Particles (g)
Flat Particles
(by count)
Flat Particles
(by weight)
(g)
Percentage of
Flat Particles
(by count)
Percentage of
Flat Particles
(by weight)
Weighted
Percentage of
Flat Particles
(by count)
Weighted
Percentage of
Flat Particles
(by weight)
2½ inch 7 - - - -- -- -
2 inch 33 100 30,811.4 3 108.2 3.0 0.4 1.0 0.1
1½ inch 54 100 16,568.5 1 426.4 1.0 2.6 0.5 1.4
1 inch 5 - - - - - -- -
¾ inch 0 - - - - - -- -< ¾ inch 1 - - - - - -- -
Total: 100 Total Weighted Average Flat Particles:1.5 1.5
Particle Size Percent of
Grading
Number of
Particles
Weight of
Particles (g)
Elongated
Particles
(by count)
Elongated
Particles
(by weight)
(g)
Percentage of
Elongated
Particles
(by count)
Percentage of
Elongated
Particles
(by weight)
Weighted
Percentage of
Elongated
Particles
(by count)
Weighted
Percentage of
Elongated
Particles (by
weight)
2½ inch 7 - - - - - - - -
2 inch 33 100 30,811.4 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1½ inch 54 100 16,568.5 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1 inch 5 - - - - - -- -
¾ inch 0 - - - - - -- -< ¾ inch 1 - - - - - -- -
Total: 100 Total Weighted Average Elongated Particles:0.0 0.0
Total Weighted Average Flat Particles and Elongated Particles:1.5 1.5
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATES
Percentage of Elongated Particles in Coarse Aggregate
(ASTM D 4791) Criteria: 3:1 Ratio
Percentage of Flat Particles in Coarse Aggregate
(ASTM D 4791) Criteria: 3:1 Ratio
No. 2 stone
Pit 6
Fig. A-4
March 22, 2016
Albert Frei and SonsP.O. Box 700Henderson, Colorado 80640
Attention: Mr. Rick Foster
Subject: Physical Properties Testing (ASTM)No. 57 stone, Pit 6Project No. CT16032.000-400
Dear Mr. Foster:
This report presents results of physical properties testing performed on materialdelivered to our laboratory in December, 2015. Representative samples delivered wereidentified as No. 57 stone from Pit 6. Testing was performed to determine the materialscompliance with ASTM specifications. The following testing was performed in generalconformance with the applicable standards.
1) Sieve Analysis (Gradation)2) Material Finer Than No. 200 Sieve by Washing3) Specific Gravity & Absorption4) Clay Lumps & Friable Particles5) Lightweight Particles 2.06) Lightweight Particles 2.47) Sodium Sulfate Soundness8) Magnesium Sulfate Soundness9) Rodded Unit Weight & Voids10) Loose Unit Weight & Voids11) Los Angeles Abrasion12) Fractured Faces13) Scratch Hardness14) Flat and Elongated Particles15) Total Evaporable Moisture Content16) Potential Alkali Reactivity – ASTM C 1260
A summary of the aggregate test results is attached, followed by the completetest results. Based on the test results, the material tested meets the ASTM specifica-tions for coarse aggregate. If you have any questions regarding this report, please call.
Respectfully submitted,
CTL | THOMPSON MATERIALS ENGINEERS, INC. Reviewed by:
Daniel L. Barrett Damon B. Thomas, P.E.
Materials Lab Manager Division Manager
DLB:DBT/dlb
Enclosures
1 copy emailed:rfoster@albertfreiandsons.com
Passing (%)Specification (%)
Results Specification
Average Expansion Potential for
(%)Deleterious ASR
CTL | THOMPSON MATERIALS ENGINEERS, INC.
Damon B. Thomas, P.E.
Aggregate Qualification Summary - ASTM Specifications (ASTM C 33)
Sieve Size
Sieve Analysis (ASTM C 136 & C 117)
Classification
Potential Alkali Reactivity (ASTM C 1260)
Test
Days in Soak
ATTACHMENT A
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Company Name:
Material Source:Project No.
Material Type:Report Date:
Oven Dry SSD in Submerged Bulk Bulk (SSD) Absorption
Weight (g) Air Weight (g) Volume Specific (%)
Weight (g) Gravity
Percent Weight Weight Percent
Grading of Before After Loss
Passing Retained Sample (g) (g)
Sieve Size Percent Passing Percent Passing
No. 57 (ASTM C 33)
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATES
Sieve Analysis of Coarse Aggregate
(ASTM C 136)
Material Finer Than No. 200 Sieve by Washing
(ASTM C 117)
Initial Dry Final Dry Material Finer Than
Weight (g)Weight (g)No. 200 Sieve (%)
Specific Gravity and Absorption of Coarse Aggregate
(ASTM C 127)
Clay Lumps and Friable Particles in Aggregate
(ASTM C 142)
Sieve Size Weighted
Percent
Loss
Fig. A-1
Company Name:
Material Source:Project No.
Material Type:Report Date:
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATES
Weight Weight Percent Weighted
Passing Retained Before(g) After (g) Loss % Loss
Weight Weight Percent Weighted
Passing Retained Before(g) After (g) Loss % Loss
Sample Specific Gravity Percentage by Mass of
Lightweight Particles in Aggregate
(ASTM C 123)
Weight (g)of Liquid Lightweight Particles
Bulk Density (Unit Weight) and Voids in Aggregates (Rodded Method)
(ASTM C 29)
Sample Weight Bucket Volume Unit Weight
(lbs)(ft3)(pcf)
Soundness of Coarse Aggregates by Use of Sodium Sulfate
Sieve Size Percent Grading
(ASTM C 88)
of Sample
of Sample
Soundness of Coarse Aggregates by Use of Magnesium Sulfate
(ASTM C 88)
Percent GradingSieve Size
Fig. A-2
Company Name:
Material Source:Project No.
Material Type:Report Date:
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATES
Initial Final Percent
Weight Weight Loss
Total Evaporable Moisture Content of Aggregates by Drying
(g)(g)%
Weight Weight Content
Moisture
( ASTM C 566)
Initial Final
Sample Weight Bucket Volume Unit Weight
(ASTM C 29)
Bulk Density (Unit Weight) and Voids in Aggregates (Loose Method)
(lbs)(ft3)(pcf)
Determining the Percentage of Fractured Particles in Coarse Aggregate
(ASTM D 5821)
Initial
Weight
Weight of
Fractured
Percent of Fractured
(g) Particles (g)
Particles
(minimum 2 faces)
Grading
by Abrasion and Impact in the Los Angeles Machine
(ASTM C 131)
Resistance to Degradation of Small-Size Coarse Aggregate
Fig. A-3
Albert Frei and Sons, Inc.
Flat and Elongated Particles
CT16032.000
No. 57 stone
Pit 6
CRD-C
130-01
Standard
Recommended
Practice
for
Estimating
Scratch
Hardness
of
Coarse
Aggregate
Particles
Client:
Report
Date:
3/17/2016
Job
No.:
By
Technician:
DB
Material:
Nominal
Sieve
Size:
1"
Minimum
Criteria:
Particle
Size
Passing/Retain
Total
Individual
Weight
Total
Individual
Number
Classified
"Soft
"
by
Weight
Classified
"Soft"
by
Number
%
of
Soft
by
Weight
(5.1.3)
%
of
"Soft"
by
Number
(5.1.3)
%
Grading
of
representative
sample
(
>
%10)
Weighted
Avg.
Percent
1/2"
to
3/8"
min.
(200g)
200.6
265
0
0
0.0
0.0
43
0.0
3/4"
to
1/2"
min.
(600g)
601.6
111
0
0
0.0
0.0
35
0.0
1"
to
3/4"
min.
(1500g)
-
-
-
-
-
-
5
-
1
1/2"
to
1"
min.
(4500g)
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
2"
to
1
1/2"
min.
(12000g)
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
-
Total
Weights:
Total
Individual
Weight
Total
Individual
Number
Total
Classified
"Soft
"
by
Weight
Total
Classified
"Soft
"
by
Number
Total
%
of
Soft
by
Weight
(5.1.3)
Total
%
of
Soft
by
Nu
mber
(5.1.3)
Total
Grading
Total
Weighted
Avg.
Percent
802.2
376
0
0
0
0
83
0.0
Albert
Frei
and
Sons,
Inc.
CT16032.000
No.
57
rock
Fig.
A-5
ATTACHMENT B
POTENTIAL ALKALI REACTIVITY RESULTS
Client:Project No.
Project:Cast Date:
Aggregate:100%
Cement:100%Cementitious Content:440 g
0.68%Aggregate/Cement Ratio:990g/440g
0.02%Water/Cement Ratio:0.47
Age
(Days)1 2 3
3 0.004 0.002 0.002
7 0.014 0.015 0.013
10 0.021 0.018 0.019
14 0.028 0.031 0.027
21 0.045 0.047 0.045
28 0.059 0.057 0.058
Project No. CT16032.000-400 Fig. B-1
0.06
Albert Frei and Sons, Inc.
Expansion (%)
12/9/16
12/12/16
12/16/16
12/23/16
12/30/16
Potential Alkali Reactivity of Aggregates, Mortar-Bar Method
(ASTM C 1260)
AverageSample I.D.
No. 57, Pit 6
12/5/16
Cement Alkalies (Total Alkalies as Na2O):
2016 Qualification Testing
Date
Cemex I/II
0.02
0.00
0.01
CT16032.000-400
November 30, 2016
Cement Expansion (Autoclave):
0.03
0.05
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
%
Expansion
Days in Soak
Mortar Bar Expansion
Low Potential
Not Predictable
High Potential
March 8, 2016
Albert Frei and SonsP.O. Box 700Henderson, Colorado 80640
Attention: Mr. Rick Foster
Subject: Physical Properties Testing (ASTM)No. 89 Stone, Pit 6Project No. CT16032.000-400
Dear Mr. Foster:
This report presents results of physical properties testing performed on materialdelivered to our laboratory in December, 2015. Representative samples delivered wereidentified as No. 89 Stone from Pit 6. Testing was performed to determine the materialscompliance with ASTM specifications. The following testing was performed in generalconformance with the applicable standards.
1) Sieve Analysis (Gradation)2) Material Finer Than No. 200 Sieve by Washing3) Specific Gravity & Absorption4) Clay Lumps & Friable Particles5) Lightweight Particles 2.06) Lightweight Particles 2.47) Sodium Sulfate Soundness8) Magnesium Sulfate Soundness9) Moisture Content10) Flat and Elongated Particles11) Rodded Unit Weight & Voids12) Loose Unit Weight & Voids13) Los Angeles Abrasion14) Fractured Faces
A summary of the aggregate test results is attached, followed by the completetest results. Based on the test results, the material tested meets the ASTMspecifications for coarse aggregate. If you have any questions regarding this report,please call.
Respectfully submitted,
CTL | THOMPSON MATERIALS ENGINEERS, INC. Reviewed by:
Daniel L. Barrett Damon B. Thomas, P.E.Materials Lab Manager Division Manager
Enclosures
1 copy emailed:rfoster@albertfreiandsons.com
Passing (%)Specification (%)
Results Specification
CTL | THOMPSON MATERIALS ENGINEERS, INC.
Damon B. Thomas, P.E.
Aggregate Qualification Summary - ASTM Specifications (ASTM C 33)
Sieve Size
Sieve Analysis (ASTM C 136 & C 117)
Test
ATTACHMENT A
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Company Name:
Material Source:Project No.
Material Type:Report Date:
Oven Dry SSD in Submerged Bulk Bulk (SSD) Absorption
Weight (g) Air Weight (g) Volume Specific (%)
Weight (g) Gravity
Percent Weight Weight Percent
Grading of Before After Loss
Passing Retained Sample (g) (g)
(ASTM C 117)
Initial Dry Final Dry
Specific Gravity and Absorption of Coarse Aggregate
(ASTM C 127)
Sieve Size Weighted
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATES
No. 89 Stone
Percent Passing
Specification
Material Finer Than No. 200 Sieve by Washing
Sieve Analysis of Coarse Aggregate
(ASTM C 136)
Sieve Size Percent Passing
Loss
Percent
Weight (g) Weight (g) No. 200 Sieve (%)
Clay Lumps and Friable Particles in Aggregate
Material Finer Than
Sample Specific Gravity Percentage by Mass of
Lightweight Particles in Aggregate
(ASTM C 123)
(ASTM C 142)
Weight (g)of Liquid Lightweight Particles
Fig. A-1
Company Name:
Material Source:Project No.
Material Type:Report Date:
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATES
Weight Weight Percent Weighted
Passing Retained Before(g) After (g) Loss % Loss
Weight Weight Percent Weighted
Passing Retained Before(g) After (g) Loss % Loss
Sieve Size Percent Grading
of Sample
Soundness of Coarse Aggregates by Use of Magnesium Sulfate
Soundness of Coarse Aggregates by Use of Sodium Sulfate
(ASTM C 88)
(ASTM C 88)
Unit Weight
Bulk Density (Unit Weight) and Voids in Aggregates (Rodded Method)
(ASTM C 29)
(pcf)
Sieve Size Percent Grading
(lbs) (ft3)
Sample Weight Bucket Volume
of Sample
Fig. A-2
Company Name:
Material Source:Project No.
Material Type:Report Date:
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATES
Initial Final Percent
Weight Weight Loss
Total Evaporable Moisture Content of Aggregates by Drying
Weight Weight Content
(g)(g)%
( ASTM C 566)
Initial Final Moisture
(ASTM C 29)
(ft3)
Determining the Percentage of Fractured Particles in Coarse Aggregate
(ASTM C 131)
Resistance to Degradation of Small-Size Coarse Aggregate
by Abrasion and Impact in the Los Angeles Machine
(pcf)
Sample Weight Bucket Volume Unit Weight
(lbs)
Bulk Density (Unit Weight) and Voids in Aggregates (Loose Method)
Weight Fractured Particles
(g)Particles (g)(minimum 2 faces)
(ASTM D 5821 )
Initial Weight of Percent of Fractured
Grading
Fig. A-3
Albert Frei and Sons, Inc.
Flat and Elongated Particles
CT16032.000
No. 89 rock
Pit 6
MAIN OFFICE: 8646 Ridgewood Road | St. Joseph, MN 56374 | 320.363.4671 | 800.622.4952
WESTERN OPERATIONS: 5170 Kalamath Street | Denver, CO 80221 | 303.783.3864
DESIGN SHOWROOM: IMS Center | 275 Market Square | Minneapolis, MN 55405 | 800.622.4952
www.borgertproducts.com
• A stormwater management solution that functions as a
pavement and does not take up costly extra space
• Reduces harmful runoff
• Naturally filters out pollutants (nitrates, phosphorous, oil,
grease, etc.) and cools the water as it infiltrates the system
• Same durability and strength as the traditional Interlocking
concrete pavements (ICP)
• Does not frost, heave or crack
• No ice formation on the pavement in cold climates
• Easy to maintain the infiltration rate over time
• Achieve a range of LEED credits
• LID and BMP tool
• ADA compliant
Benefits of PICP
Composition and Manufacture
Minimum compressive strength = 8,000 psi
Maximum water absorption = 5%
Meets or exceeds ASTM C-936 and freeze-thaw testing
per section 8 of ASTM C-67.
Manufactured with type A aggregates
A Functional Stormwater Management System
Style & Dimensions
FiltraPave -
5” x 10” x 3 1/8”
Specify base material that meets State DOT specifications for Type A aggregate
Open-graded Subbase Reservoir
ASTM NO. 2 Stone (2 ½ inches) (Thickness is site specific)
Open-graded Subbase Reservoir
ASTM NO. 2 Stone (2 ½ inches) (Thickness is site specific)
Underdrain (Optional Per Design)
Underdrain (Optional Per Design)
Geotextile (Optional Per Design)
Geotextile (Optional Per Design)
Uncompacted Subgrade (Zero Slope)
Uncompacted Subgrade (Zero Slope)
Open-graded Base Reservoir 4"
(100mm) Thick ASTM NO. 57 Stone (3/4 inch)
Open-graded Base Reservoir 4"
(100mm) Thick ASTM NO. 57 Stone (3/4 inch)
Open-graded Bedding Course 1½ to 2"
(40 to 50mm) Thick ASTM NO. 8 Aggregate (3/8 inch)
Open-graded Bedding Course 1½ to 2"
(40 to 50mm) Thick ASTM NO. 8 Aggregate (3/8 inch)
To be designed by a Professional Engineer according to DOT specifications
To be designed by a Professional Engineer according to DOT specifications
Borgert Pavers 3 1/8” (80 mm) Thick Permeable Joint Material (ASTM NO. 8, 89 or 9 Aggregate)
Borgert Pavers 3 1/8” (80 mm) Thick Permeable Joint Material (ASTM NO. 8, 89 or 9 Aggregate)
... just better
MANUFACTURER OF PREMIUM CONCRETE
PAVING STONES & WALLS
Introducing Drena Series
FiltraPave (Patent Pending)
NEW - Permeable Interlocking
Concrete Pavement (PICP)
by Borgert Products, Inc.
PATENT PENDING
Cross-section of Permeable Pavement - Full Exfiltration
ZIEGLERROAD
PRECISIONDRIVE
A
PORTION
OF
LOT
1
OF
MAINSTREET
HEALTH
&
WELLNESS
SUITES,
RECORDED
MAY
22,
2015
UNDER
RECEPTION
NO.
20150031289,
LARIMER
COUNTY
RECORDS,
LOCATED
IN
THE
NORTHWEST
ONE-QUARTER
OF
SECTION
4,
TOWNSHIP
6
NORTH,
RANGE
68
WEST
OF
THE
6TH
P.M.,
CITY
OF
FORT
COLLINS,
COUNTY
OF
LARIMER,
STATE
OF
COLORADO
ALSO
KNOWN
AS
10700
EAST
BETHANY
DRIVE,
SUITE
100
AURORA,
COLORADO
80014
303-481-8567
(O)
303-481-8576(F)
ROCKY
MOUNTAIN INC
MERIDIAN
AS-BUILT
DRAINAGE
EXHIBIT
NW
1/4
SEC.
4,
T6S,
R68W
OF
THE
6TH
P.M.,
CITY
FORT
COLLINS,
COUNTY
OF
LARIMER,
STATE
OF
COLORADO
N
Page 1 of 1
S:\JOBS\Jobs2014\14-0019\PM\Submittals\170620 - Grading\170620 - As-Built Grading.doc
CIVIL ENGINEERING / SURVEYING / PLANNING / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
Cole & Associates, Inc. is a Missouri Corporation d.b.a. Cole Design Group, Inc. in Arizona and Texas, herein referred to as “Cole”
SUBMITTAL REVIEW COVER FORM
Project Number 14-0019
Project Name Mainstreet (Fort Collins, CO)
Date 06/20/17
Submitted By Meyer Najem
Reviewed By Eric Morff
Review is for general conformance with the design concept and contract documents. Markings
or comments shall not be construed as relieving the Contractor from compliance with the project
plans and specifications nor departures therefrom. The Contractor remains responsible for
details and accuracy, for confirming and correlating all quantities and dimensions, for selecting
fabrication processes, for techniques of assembly, and for performing his work in a safe manner.
Item
No Item
No
Exception
Taken
Make
Corrections
Noted
Revise
&
Resubmit
Rejected
Submit
Specified
Item
Not
Reviewed Remarks
1 As-built grading X
Reviewed by: Eric Morff Date: 06/20/17
Signature:
MERIDIANROCKY MOUNTAIN
10700 E. BETHANY DRIVE, SUITE 100
AURORA, COLORADO 80014
303-481-8567 (O) 303-481-8576(F)
N
MAIN OFFICE: 8646 Ridgewood Road | St. Joseph, MN 56374 | 320.363.4671 | 800.622.4952
WESTERN OPERATIONS: 5170 Kalamath Street | Denver, CO 80221 | 303.783.3864
DESIGN SHOWROOM: IMS Center | 275 Market Square | Minneapolis, MN 55405 | 800.622.4952
www.borgertproducts.com
• A stormwater management solution that functions as a
pavement and does not take up costly extra space
• Reduces harmful runoff
• Naturally filters out pollutants (nitrates, phosphorous, oil,
grease, etc.) and cools the water as it infiltrates the system
• Same durability and strength as the traditional Interlocking
concrete pavements (ICP)
• Does not frost, heave or crack
• No ice formation on the pavement in cold climates
• Easy to maintain the infiltration rate over time
• Achieve a range of LEED credits
• LID and BMP tool
• ADA compliant
Benefits of PICP
Composition and Manufacture
Minimum compressive strength = 8,000 psi
Maximum water absorption = 5%
Meets or exceeds ASTM C-936 and freeze-thaw testing
per section 8 of ASTM C-67.
Manufactured with type A aggregates
A Functional Stormwater Management System
Style & Dimensions
FiltraPave -
5” x 10” x 3 1/8”
Specify base material that meets State DOT specifications for Type A aggregate
Open-graded Subbase Reservoir
ASTM NO. 2 Stone (2 ½ inches) (Thickness is site specific)
Open-graded Subbase Reservoir
ASTM NO. 2 Stone (2 ½ inches) (Thickness is site specific)
Underdrain (Optional Per Design)
Underdrain (Optional Per Design)
Geotextile (Optional Per Design)
Geotextile (Optional Per Design)
Uncompacted Subgrade (Zero Slope)
Uncompacted Subgrade (Zero Slope)
Open-graded Base Reservoir 4"
(100mm) Thick ASTM NO. 57 Stone (3/4 inch)
Open-graded Base Reservoir 4"
(100mm) Thick ASTM NO. 57 Stone (3/4 inch)
Open-graded Bedding Course 1½ to 2"
(40 to 50mm) Thick ASTM NO. 8 Aggregate (3/8 inch)
Open-graded Bedding Course 1½ to 2"
(40 to 50mm) Thick ASTM NO. 8 Aggregate (3/8 inch)
To be designed by a Professional Engineer according to DOT specifications
To be designed by a Professional Engineer according to DOT specifications
Borgert Pavers 3 1/8” (80 mm) Thick Permeable Joint Material (ASTM NO. 8, 89 or 9 Aggregate)
Borgert Pavers 3 1/8” (80 mm) Thick Permeable Joint Material (ASTM NO. 8, 89 or 9 Aggregate)
... just better
MANUFACTURER OF PREMIUM CONCRETE
PAVING STONES & WALLS
Introducing Drena Series
FiltraPave (Patent Pending)
NEW - Permeable Interlocking
Concrete Pavement (PICP)
by Borgert Products, Inc.
PATENT PENDING
Cross-section of Permeable Pavement - Full Exfiltration
ZI
E
G
L
E
R
R
O
A
D
PRECI
S
I
O
N
D
R
I
V
E
A PORTION OF LOT 1 OF MAINSTREET HEALTH & WELLNESS SUITES,
RECORDED MAY 22, 2015 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 20150031289, LARIMER
COUNTY RECORDS, LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF
SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., CITY
OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO
ALSO KNOWN AS
10700 EAST BETHANY DRIVE,
SUITE 100
AURORA, COLORADO 80014
303-481-8567 (O) 303-481-8576(F)
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
IN
CMERIDIAN
AS-BUILT DRAINAGE EXHIBIT
NW 1/4 SEC. 4,
T6S, R68W OF THE 6TH P.M.,
CITY FORT COLLINS, COUNTY
OF LARIMER, STATE OF
COLORADO
N