Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFile Documents.1300 Riverside Dr.0309.2017 (19).ARBK 0309.2017.ARBK_Engineeringl_1300 Riverside Dr GRADING AND_DRAINAGE_REPORT.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf(13) Page: 5 Are there any effects of adjacent Author: pjm drainage issues on this Are there any File Name: GRADING_AND_DRAINAGE_REPORT.1300Rive property? effects of rside.2017.12.pdf adjacent No. There are no changes to offsite drainage patterns. Historically, the drainage issues lot to the left drained onto the site before discharging to Fred Lane and on this property? then Riverside Dr or onto the site before discharing to Riverside Dr. This pattern has not been changed. All offsite water still eventually discharges to Riverside Dr. Page: 5 This property has a 5'drainage This property has Author: pjm a5'draina9eand File Name: GRADING AND DRAINAGE REPORT.1300Rive and utility easement on the west utility easement - - - property line, include a on the west rside.2017.12.pdf p,ouee,tyline. discussion about the limitations discussion about Historical drainage patterns will continue to for use. There is proposed work the limitations for prop There eisrkin utilize the drainage easement. We do not in this area, show that it is Ili this area.show that It is believe that utility mains will use the utility permitted. kr G permitted easement. All surrounding lots have existing utility services that do not utilize the easement. .ma . ,„ ..,_.F,..w.,a.°_.._._. Page: 6 w`—, t," °--^°—dm Author: pjm include runoff coefficients in the ncal apropoeazse, File Name: GRADING AND DRAINAGE REPORT.1300Rive table or on the plans. rside.2017.12.pdf ,,,.... ,.,,- :=7'''' '="--m -mm The table has been revised. FLOW(FT) Page: 6 T) (CFS) (CFS) 5ft flow length seems low for the 95 0.021 0.191 Author: pjm 85 0.0 0.0 5 0.2 23 3 0.24508 File Name: GRADING AND DRAINAGE REPORT.1300Rive proposed basins, please show 5 5 °I -0:363 rside.2017.12.pdf the flow path on sheet C200 to verify. lowfllor ow tlhe pro se ength ed 5-ft flow paths and at times 45% slopes are ease show the flow plath on sheet used to force the rational method C2°°,°verify. spreadsheet to use a time of concentration of 5 minutes. - 0.05 95 0.021 0.191 Page: 6 0.01 85 0.023 0.20E Author: pjm Labeled as percentage but 0.17 0.50 5 0.053 0.24E shown as decimal. 0.47 0.50 5 o.oss 0 .29 3 File Name: GRADING_AND_DRAINAGE_REPORT.1300Rive 00 0.505 0.177 0.353 rside.2017.12.pdf \_ Labeled as percentage The percentage is now shown. but shown as decimal. RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT J I Page: 8 Author: pjm Are there no subbasins in the File Name: GRADING AND DRAINAGE REPORT.1300Rive analysis? rside.2017.12.pdf Area subbasins We have drilled down and provided a total of —•--� _ • in the the analysis? 18 sub-basins. Page: 8 Author: pjm Discuss how the impervious Discuss how the File Name: GRADING_AND_DRAINAGE_REPORT.1300Rive area from each basin is treated impervious area rside.2017.12.pdf through the site BMPs. from each basin The report now describes how runoff is routed is treated from basin to the BMPs. through the site BMPs. Page: 9 Author: pjm Basin 2 not 1. File Name: GRADING_AND_DRAINAGE_REPORT.1300Rive rside.2017.12.pdf Basin 2 not 1. 1 Propose it :2 The report has been updated. Basin PB:1 is composed of the yard and patio area surrounding the house.The basin 88'1 sf and is d]%impervious.This basin produces 0.293 cfs of runoff,which is caps s inlets in the basin. I Proposed Basin PB:3 Basin PB:3 is a roof basin.The basin developed a 100-yr flowrate of 0.363 cfs.PB:2 utters and downspouts,which are tied to the pipe network.From the pipe network,ru he drywcll. a�,wmm�m°t do da°ea, Page: 9 „ueM�.rt°�-.nr4u°nun ,�ama�daet,aa�,.rt,aa�� The URMP requires LID to be „�,wr;nd.s etro�u�.a„e.,he a�maa„rod,be.e pa,. Author: pjm File Name: GRADING_AND_DRAINAGE_REPORT.1300Rive followed, describe what efforts requires rside.2017.12.pdf have been made to reduce The LIMP s followed, runoff, increase infiltration, describe what efforts have been made toaa Where possible, the team utilized partially disconnect impervious area and a� noff, rvious amw a�s reme,mdaaaaa °np�°areya °te run.area andro paved systems such as the parking area and route runoff through landscape. en-trance walks to interrupt runoff an encourage infiltration. The report has been updated to reflect this use of LID. • Page: 9 Can alternative routing be used heyartlasi producesurroundingNeff,whc The baap M1saan Author: pjm:.This basin produces 0.293 cfs of runoff,which is captured by instead of hard File Name: GRADING AND DRAINAGE REPORT.1300Rive piping? he basin developed a100-yr Bowmm of 0.363 cfs.Pe:3 is cap- rside.2017.12.pdf are tied to the pipe network.From the pipe network-runoff is �be�sed nsfeadrofting It is not possible to utilized swales on this and Routing hard piping? property. There are low points that would sere possible to provide WQCV and detention. ads early in the design process. prevent flow from reaching its intended BMP. :red atormwater requirements early in the process_ ag for stormwater quality treatment. ryance was utilized to increase the time stromwater is in contact RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT QCV in watershed inches is O.10in(see Ap- Page: 1 0 try area of 0.247 acres is 89.6 cf(0.247 ac X Author: pjm Was the 1.5 factor of safety for of the site,as well as pip etworks,route File Name: GRADING AND DRAINAGE REPORT.1300Rive sediment accumulation used in provides 389.53ef ofdet lion which is ade- — — — this calculation for WQCV? ef).See Section 3.5 for 11 information. rside.2017.12.pdf Was the l. factor of Yes. A factor of safety of 1.5 was used to safety for sediment size the WQCV requirement. accumulation used in this calculation for WQCV? rs flow contributions to Pipe A,as well as Page: 11 Pipe Aprofile,and Appendix Efor Pipe Please clarify what area is Author: pjm Please clarify what draining to each inlet, 1-8 and ws area is draining to File Name: GRADING AND DRAINAGEREPORT.1300Rive xI each let,1s$Itndthe rside.2017.12.pdf _ _ _ the trench drains. It appears that trench0.0.30 appears that this this system is for treating the 0.082 0.028 system is the ufortrnoffandng An discussion of the 10,754 sf of drainage roof runoff and patios/walkways, 0.363 patiosroofdrainage area has been added utilizing 18 sub-basins. how is the roof drainage routed is the roof drainage routed to the inlets? to the inlets? Does"drains a802 Does"drains directly' piped to? directly"= piped to? D1).As a result,Pipe B will be composed of R-ac well m canaciPc Runoff i.a routed to Page: 12 Author: pjm Pipe D not C File Name: GRADING_AND_DRAINAGE_REPORT.1300Rive Pipe D not C rside.2017.12.pdf The report has been updated. 3.2.4 Pipe D Pipe C is fed by TD 2 PVC pipe at a minima Appendix C for Pipe I PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf(47) ..,=F Page: basins Author: pjm Please show and describe the File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf subbasins and pertaining information required in the major The plans has been updated. grading and drainage project checklist in the URMP. z.00 Page: details Author: pjm Two outlet pipes, one for each °" ' pump?Call out elevations for PP_roouner p File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf sem seem We utilized two pipes for discharge to these pipes. L as • •` i reduced the outfall velocity. We are no longer ���• ���� Two outlet pipes,one ', _ for each pump?Call using a pump sytem. Instead the drywell ism f out elevations for eomwmaa �• .• •�� these pipes. L ..i 4.00 drains by gravity to a level spreader. HP 1. KvaqpietwAl RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT i Page: details � �--I I—o.52 It appears that 5'of vertical Author: pjm separation from groundwater will File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf We have revised the drywell depth toprovide not gb achievedla withs this drywell »,- ry p design. Please revise. 5-ft of separation. The total drywell depth is Itappears that 5'of dical separation less than 9-ft deep. A variance will be from groundwater will not be achieved with this drywell design. required. Please revise. Page: details How will this lid be accessed for Author: pjm File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf maintenance and inspections? How will this lid be What is the emergency overflow accessed for The drywell cover depth has been modified path? maintenance and Inspections?What is _ to allow for 3 inches of mulch cover. The L/ the emergency overflow path9 mulch can easily be removed for o zoo 2 maintenance access. TWD 4M PVC � Page: details A drywell with pump is not a I Author: pjm COA approved BMP. The URMP — z File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf does not reference any pump vault design or pumps in We have revised the drywell depth to provide drywells. Due to potential failure 5-ft of separation. The total drywell depth is and system complexity,the use of pumps cannot be permitted on less than 9-ft deep. A variance request is a residential drywell.An provided in this submittal packet to request a available option is to have the drywell with a total depth of less than 10-feet. system surcharge and over top at a historical rate by means of gravity flow. If this cannot be achieved the drywell needs to be designed for full detention. F Page: grading and drainage Author: pjm Based on the survey this SI...TN_Based on the survey File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf location is not the historic p location of discharge for the this location is not the The quarter acre lot has two discharge points: no half of the property.The historic location of discharge for the one to Fred Lane and one to Riverside Drive. release point for the historic rate northern half of the print rtyfor The releashistoric If we look at the lot regionally, both basins point for the historic shall be at the historic location. rate shall be at the historic location discharge to Riverside Drive. Page: grading and drainage o tlp •w _ Author: pjm Show the proposed grading in �, File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf this area more clearly. 4 , _� _` , 1 Additional grading information has been {. ',1 i added to the plan. '°ttNi t '+1 I - — RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT / Page: grading and drainage aea�P a � Author: pjm Note that any hard surfaces File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf within the 5'utility easement could potentially be impacted sr thet any This is understood by the ownership. if/when future utilities need to be installed in this area. Installing .'"'i"''' hardscapes in the easement are ter,��. Ng . '"`` installed at your own risk. L Page: grading and drainage F �er-` Author: pjm The drywell is shown within 10' s3" of the property line. File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf �` Demonstrate there are no ' The drywell location is outside of 10-ft to the _ Thetl10 Of is shown existing utility conflicts in the M.GRATE B INLET-5 within 10'of the 0008 property h property line and 10-ft to the structure. We ROW nor potential future utility 20" a SUMP:29 Demon$trotete there are 8 Oexis In lIcts In Waybelieve that the Bluebeam scale may have 89693 corridor conflicts and provide a 99934'PVC a the ROW C'PVC ,Potential future utility°°'"dorconfict9 been off during your measurement. formal variance request. antla me l ee a formal TRENCH DRAIN a gUesl. TRENCH DRAIN DISCHARGE HECHDRAIINOSCHARGE Uk. TO FRENCH DRAIN Page: grading and drainage =*'y �, \'66o Author: pjm 8 ft �y i File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf Lu ', We believe that the Bluebeam scale may L a_ have been off during your measurement. P 3 ,= R.: - i— I..'�ss. s so ra< i _=— -� Page: grading and drainage New plantings and retaining �9,a . Author: pjm i File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf walls are not permitted in the 5' ' utility easement unless language Nawoama BMol PVC®g00% 1 Per our meeting, we do not believe that we are required granting permission to do so is ra�orguage gNt a. I 1 to do this. Instead, we understand that neighboring provided for review. P a ,�dome properties have been served by utilities and that they do w , not require the easement for future improvements. The g owners understand that if this is not the case, then they r ' have built in the easement at risk. 6Uo2.DD 8002.0 Page: grading and drainage �.� r Author: pjm 11 ft << File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf ,% €•,N tP'ir We believe that the Bluebeam scale may 3001.84 bw-"at BDD,.65 have been off during your measurement. f1 517 ,11.68'of 6'PVC-4 2.00 ` FT GRAV 7,, N RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Tp1 Page: grading and drainage INLET-5 Author: pjm 10 ft 6"GRATE File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf RIM:8000.08 SUMP:2.0" We believe that the Bluebeam scale may rNV IN:7 9�}..934"PVC have been off duringyour measurement. INV OUT:39:93 4"PVC INV OUT:7996.93 4"PVC • jam_ --. I ,. —....._. TRENCH C PeF. Page: grading and drainage MATCH EX °°r`Fr 1' Author: pjm A point discharge is not Toz 8 File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf permitted. Please include a -- A level spreader has been added to the design and detail fora level p spreader or similar. design. A point discharge is not permitted.Please include a design and detail fora level spreader or similar. 3T°R. Page: grading and drainage Author: pjm Call out spot elevations of the File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf property corners. Spots have been added. _ �_ elevations out spot of the Iproperty comers. INV ou,•o99es5 n•'PVC Page: grading and drainage Author: pjm Trench drain shall drain to the TRENCH DRAIN File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf drywell, trench drain at the s"E �RORANsos AR�ER°T°R property line or green space. T RENON DRAIN The plan has been updated to use a pan at The french drain will not be Trench drain shall the driveway. permitted. drain to the drywell, trench drain at the property line or green space.The french drain will not be permitted. Page: grading and drainage Author: pjm Existing and proposed 1-foot Existing and contours are required to fully proposed 1-foot File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf contours are depict the grading plan for the required to fully Contours are shown. I am a PE. The plans site. This plan shall be designed depict the grading plan for are stamped. and stamped by a PE. the site.This plan shall be designed and stamped by a PE. RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT (JuI.ryye. Page: grading and drainage The trench drain in the ROW will Author: pjm \_=,,; File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf require a permanent revocable TREN( encroachment license. FRENCH GRAIN— TO FR These have been relocated. The trench drain in the ROW will require a permanent revocable encroachment license. Page: grading and drainage Author: pjm Clearly identify which trees are z,83 PVC @zpa, File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf existing and which are proposed. Please see landscape set. Clearly identify which ENV OUr'99 800191 ees areep andrvhicM1 are proposed, BW oo (-/„1 a, 14"PVC ew sooz .l.� Page: grading and drainage Since the driveway is Author: pjm TNow"°:A'susnrcn r roa. File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf snowmelted,the driveway is not TRENC ROE permitted to drain to the asphalt TO FRENCH Since the driveway is The driveway is now a pan.snowmelted,the roadway. Can the driveway be y is ne permitted to dam to pitched back toward the property the asphalt roadway. Can the driveway be line trench drain? the ro back line trench dra properly line trench drain? Page: landscape details Author pjm Call out slopes on grading File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf profiles to ensure COA max slopes are not exceeded. Refer to Civil drawings for all grading as it relates to COA requirements, elevations indicated on Landscape Architectural set are based on spot elevations provided by PE and for reference for fence ht. for Zoning purposes only. Page: landscape details Author pjm Call out slopes on grading File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf profiles to ensure COA max slopes are not exceeded. Refer to Civil drawings for all grading as it relates to COA requirements, elevations indicated on Landscape Architectural set are based on spot elevations provided by PE and for reference for fence ht. for Zoning purposes only. RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Page: landscape details °' north fence north elevation Author: pjm Show the cross section locations File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf on the site plan. see LS.6.0 for corresponding cross section locations ,—i dea000• Page: landscape details IAuthor: pjm Grading plans shall be designed File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf by and stamped by a registered Colorado PE to ensure the mpLtn:as grading routes all runoff to the intended areas. a,. Refer to Civil drawings for all grading as it relates to COA requirements, elevations indicated on Landscape Architectural set are based on spot elevations provided by PE and for reference for fence ht. for Zoning purposes only. I Page: main level site plan �1 Landscape in this area does not 0,m Author: pjm ,t_ _.�_= File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf match landscaping site plan which calls for 3 trees here. \ Revise for consistency. itr — Landscape in _ _rAWNigi _this area does •: "�\ lantdsr:: site a_ 1 -or39ee„ere. New Architectural Site Plan matches updated Landscape Plan oN FF Page: profiles What is being represented here? Author: pjm 8002 File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf hat is being �Nesented here? The profile is crossing the pipe 1 o o .FS at an angle and so it is showing oo it as a oblong cross-section. c 10.10'of 4"PVC @-28.01% 0=1.069CFS .464GF5 1 n."m Q_o Page: profiles Author pjm This pipe has two length/slope File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf call out. Please clarify. This length/slope pes can The pipe turns at a joint and length/slope call out. Please clarify. therefore, two pipes are called out. C ELEV:7996.95 RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT `t „ — Page: Proposed landscape Author: pjm Clearly identify which trees are ' I t 4��t = File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf existing and which are proposed. F''0 I �l©i' . ,er.i. Eg —. ,,l =_4j' Please reference LS.3.1 for existing trees and proposed trees . t L,'IAA Page: Proposed landscape Clarify the edging for the Author: pjm existing aspe planting bed. Is this raised? How File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf —existing evergreen will this accommodate plowing Clarify the edging for the planting bed.Is this and snow storage activities? plant bed-wJe4giog_raised?How will this modate plowing and snow storage activities? Edging is at-grade decorative aluminum edging as is typical in landscape installations to divide materials and will not interfere with snow plow and storage activities. Page: Proposed landscape Author: pjm Clarify what the steel retaining \ steel retainir p File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12. df is. Provide a detail and call out where it is located. Clarify what the steel retaining is.Provide a detail and call out where it is located. This has been removed from the design, grade will remain natural in this location with no new stone fence\ retaining. m; Page: Proposed landscape it .. Show that the new flowering plan[ng betl w/etlging Author: m Y_xj,t 1 Pl deciduous trees in this area do File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf not interfere with the sight A5hp th tm new triangle. now gtl as es o-ee m ao not interfere with the sight viangle. 3> wtlnweing This tree has been removed from the design as it is located in line of sight triangle dead River.pus trees along Rive d\ Ilk ®}' t to pl Page: Proposed landscape Please show the drywelll lid on . ,,. �� Author: pjm * . " }. I— File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf PL - the landscape plan. i --- drywelll Id on the See LS.1.0 for drywell size and location Flaaseaheathe lantlacap e plan. RIVERSIDE DR. RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT A - ,' ^- Page:temp micropile and ground nail walls locations Author: pjm Is this gas meter existing or File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf proposed? How will it be protected during excavation if it Q.o' �n� THE GAS METER IS EXISTING AND WILL BE is existing? C REMOVED AND RE-ROUTED DURING '�irt j CONSTRUCTION TO THE WEST ELEVATION OF THE GARAGE Its Page:temp micropile and ground nail walls locations any; Depict limits of lay back A _�, Author: pjm excavation include upper and , ,$ .. File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf THESE NOTES HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE lower limits of excavation and side slopes. jj Iti REVISED EXCAVATION DRAWINGS I . I �\ Page:temp micropile and ground nail walls locations Author: pjm It appears that the soil retention It appears that the soil system may impact the tree root retention system may - - File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf impact the tree root zones, clarify if any existing zones,clarify if any THE SOIL RETENTION SYSTEM HAS BEEN trees will be in conflict. If there existing trees will be in REVISED TO WORK AROUND ALL TREES EXCEPT are conflicts then the design conflict.If there are shall be altered or obtain a tree conflicts then the design _ -- A COUPLE ASPENS TO THE NORTH,WHICH NAILS removal permit. shall be altered or obtain § WILL PASS THE DRIP ZONE BY A COUPLE FEET. a tree removal permit. I TELEPHONE- WE HAVE DISCUSSED WITH DAVE RADECK AND DESCRIBED THESE Lave NAILS WILL BE 4'-6'BELOW GRADE AND NOT IMPACTING THE HEALTH OF THE TREES w1 Page:temp micropile and ground nail walls locations How will utilities be installed or WA Author: pjm •. File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf affected with the stabilization techniques?Show all proposed k s.....\_: wowwm ei rres bel alley or affected NEW WATER AND SEWER LINES WILL RUN utility conflict ins to verify there are h,heaablfiza0o echn19uesp6Aow BETWEEN SOIL NAILS TO THE HOUSE. SOIL a,l Xosetl utility locations�o verity he,ea,e o o RETENTION WILL BE REMOVED AS NEEDED. NEW • GAS AND ELECTRIC LINES WILL RUN PARALLEL TO MICROPILE WALL. SEE PROPOSED UTILITY PLAN ON _j'n..L, I C600 A,:, 1 Page:temp micropile and ground nail walls locations Verify the micropile wall will not Author: pjm "®„ File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf impact any existing or future utilities in this 5'easement. —aa_ma,. '°'""°""'"'°""= ONLY EXISTING UTILITIES IN THIS AREA IS A ,I,k a PHONE LINE,WHICH WILL BE RE-ROUTED. ALL NEW UTILITY RUNS WILL BE EAST OF THE MICROPILE WALL. RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT C 1., Page:temporary micropile and ground nail walls general notes Author: pjm Add a general note that a 3.8 oo maximum deflection of 0.003' Add a general note File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf that a maximum 3,Toere C per foot of depth is permitted at deflection of 0.003'per foot of depth is the property lines adjacent to the permitted4 4.0 Sie` SEE NOTE ON PLANS nt the public ROW and that there shall property lines adjacent to the public ROW and that there shall be no 4.1 Wa1l be no deflection at the property deflection at the property lines adjacent 4.2 TJ0de lines adjacent to the neighboring to the neighboring properties. 4.3 EIOOLS properties. ell,C 4.4 Te-i Page:temporary micropile and ground nail walls general notes Show the surcharge area on the 3 Author: pjm site plan sheet Grade-2 for both Show the surcharge 3 File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf retention systems, soil nails and area on the site plan micropile walls. sheet Grade-2 for both retention systems,soil SEE NOTE ON PLANS nails and micropile 3. walls. 3. -ABANDON EXISTING Page: utilities WATER SERVICE Call out water service line size PERCOA Author: pjm STANDARDS 1 and type. Is File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf and ty fire suppression required? Call out i Fire supression is required. A line size and type.Is fire suppression required? 2-in type K copper service is shown. Page: utilities 6 ft SS SS �S Author: pjm File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf We believe that the Bluebeam scale may I have been off during your measurement. / 1 Ad E t W .,.s W �-,e SERVICE I Page: utilities Author: pjm 10'of separation is required E I E — File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf between sanitary and water t0'of separation is services. I egtoryd e nd alwwateretR We believe that the Bluebeam scale may tary a services. Ss SS ss —z177,7— have been off during your measurement. rAN00N EXISTING /WARTERSERVICE 10-ft of separation is provided. • E COA STANDARDS W W / W LATER SERVICE_i RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Page: utilities Author: pjm Include COA Water Department Include COA File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf standard detail page. Water Department The standard detail has been added to a new standard detail page. sheet -- C601. I •1 PERCOA Page: utilities STANDAR Author: pjm Show the water service line w w 1 W File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf connecting to the building. WATER SERVICE/i t'- The plans have been updated. ,, Show thewater service line connecting to the building. I/ I T12 Page:V_SURVEY �j.,-ELE T"" I T13 Author: pjm Call our ROW width and rIO ls File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf distance to the nearest r 6 intersecting street if within 200'. 9 Tz0 elU Call our ROW width and distance to the 0, neereslmleraeclmgs eetifwunmz00'. RE: UPDATED SURVEY rid b� E 6; Page:V_SURVEY It appears that the existing tree )�I Author: pjm\� File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf canopy shown in the survey on the south side of the residence W ONLY EXISTING TREE SOUTH OF THE RESIDENCE does not match existing conditions. Include tree location, °" IS SHOWN AT T51. DRIPLINES ARE SHOWN FOR ALL diameter, drip line extent, etc.for u°ovaars m°r me a.ar°s vaa w^oor tc TREES ON THE LANDSCCAPE, EXCAVATION AND "°"°e"°°="°rm°�°h°.,=�"g ��_ this area. 'amele=°r0 reeeoo °o'°r^I° � ARCHITECTURAL PLANS. EVERYTHING IS COORDINATED. Page:V_SURVEY The surveyors certificate shall 5 NOTED.I FURTHER STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THE TITLE Author: pjm MONS MY KNOWLEDGE METII AND BELIEF. E SUBJECT MOP.,ARE File Name: PlanSet.1300Riverside.2017.12.pdf state the error of closure is less than 1/15,000. The surveyor's certificate shall state the RE: UPDATED SURVEY error of closure is less than 1/15,000. NANCY DEDMAN TRUST#1 Project No. CITY OF ASPEN,COLORADO 17040 RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Soils Report.pdf(2) Page: 3 ign recommendations and other Verify the geotech has reviewed Author: pjm the current plans and that their sed construction and the subsurface File Name: Soils Report.pdf report is still accurate. Verify the geotech has WE HAVE HAD EXTENSIVE REVIEW WITH GEOTECH ENGINEER,STRUCTURAL ENGINEER,CIVIL ENGINEER TION reviewed the current AND ARCHITECT. GEOTECH&STRUCTURAL ENGINEER HAVE CONCLUDED THE HIGH LEVEL GROUND plans and that their report is still accurate. WATER IS 2'BELOW THE BASEMENT SLAB AND THEREFORE,ARE STILL REQUIRING A FOUNDATION not been developed.The new DRYWELL UNDERSTANDING THAT PUMPING WILL BE REQUIRED A COUPLE MONTHS OF THE YEAR. WE Ime excavation for the building will HAVE ADDED A DRYWELL SYSTEM TO THE PROJECT ALONG WITH WATERPROOFING AS NEEDED. I the existing ground surface. For the Page: 5 Author: pjm Verify drywell has 5'vertical separation from groundwater imples obivined from hc boring included nawral moinure File Name: Soils Report.pdf level malyses.Results of gradation analyses performed on small inch fmmion)of the coarse granular subsoils are shown on snmmmized;n Tnblc t. Verify drywell has 5' BASED ON HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING,THERE IS A 5.14'SEPARATION FROM THE aration fromlcal groaundwater level re boringat l4 fee[a 4 time of driltmg a oatheupperso;ls BOTTOM OF THE DRYWELL TO THE GROUNDWATER. mat encluntion and passible rase should be expecced. ATION BEARING CONDITIONS e adequate for support of spread foor;ng foundm;ons.Fill RECEIVED 05/04/2018 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT