Garfield County { Building & Planning Depa 1t

1 oa Bth Street Suite 401

Glenwood Springs, CO 81601-

Phone: (970)945-8212 Fax: (970)3S.C-3470

Project Address

I 30475 HWY 6 & 24

_ Rifle, co Owner lnfonnatlon

r John Cozza

Pan:el No.

217907100408

Address

co

Subdivision

~13rmit NO. BLRE-9-1 0-1776 Pennit Type: Resiaential B~ilding

Walk Classification: Addition Pennit Status: Active

Issue Date: 10/7/2010 Expires: 04/05/2011

Section Township Range

Phone Cell

625-2030

Contractor(s) Phone Primary Contractor Required Inspections:

Proposed Construction I Details

Converting agricultural building into a Carport Valuation:

Total Sq Feet:

$ 13,824.00

1152.

FEES DUE FEES PAID

Fee

Plan Check Fee Residential Building Fee

Total:

Thursday, October 7, 2010

Amount

5154.21 5237.25

$391.46

lnv Total Paytype Amt Paid Amt Due

lnv # BLRE-9-10-20553 5 391.46 Check # 4579 5391.46

$0.00

Forln•pedlon• Cllll: 1 (888)868-5306

Inspection IVR

See Permit Record

Building Department Copy

2

I I

Q o:mLD COUNlY BUILDING PERMIT APPUCATir· ~ , 8 8111 Stn:ct, Suite 401, Glenwood Spring5, Co 81601

Phone: 970-945-8212/ Fax: 970-384-3470 /lnspe<:tion Line: 970-31!4-5003 www.garliefd-county.com

Parcel No: (lhi.s infDnDIIIion is available 11 tbc assessors office 970-94S-9!34)

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 Class of Worlc o Addition

11 Garage: Septic: oAUached 0 Detached oiSDS

12 Driveway Permit: . Owners valuation ofWolk: $

NOnCE

S':"D n ro ?Q·J , tt ~I) c. I

AJt Pb;

AJt Ph:

AJt Ph:

yo. ofFioors:

AILII!!!itt· This appliCII!ioD for a BoildiDa 1'1:mlir mus1 be sisaal by lhe Owner ofdu: prop:r!Y, dclcribcd ~~hove, or •lllllhoriJzdiiJad. If !be sip~~we below is no11bat oflbc Owac:r, a~ lcUct or aulbarily, sisaal by !be Owacr, must be providal wilb Ibis Applic.d011.

J.sn! ACI!!!, A Buildiq Pamil-be iiiUCd willlout proof oflcplllld .drqulc -=uro lhe propaty for purposes ofimpco:bcms by lhe BuildiD& Dq.rlmmL O!l!g l'tt!!!!P, Mallipluo:pnlcpcnnits may be ro:qaiftld: (I)Siltlc Eleclricall'amit, (2) Coaaty ISDS i'cnDit, (3) .-her po:rmirroquin:d for usc oa lhc propco1y idmli&al abo¥~ c. a- Slllc or

Coull!)' Hi&hwayf Road Accca or a S!l* WUII:WIIor Dii!CUF Pamit. Void !'!;rpolt. A BaildingPcnaitbo:a>mcsrwllaad voidiflhnork&ldharilal inor.......,._...t wilbio lBO .J.ys oflhcdaleofissulaccmd if•ort issuspcodcd orabmdoocd forapcriodofiBO

days llflor COOIIIIICIICCIDCIIl

CER11JIICAnON I bc:n:by c:crlify thlll ,_., n:ad diU Appli..rioa _.lbat lbc illlbrmlllicB c:oataiDcd .bovc is true aad correc1. I DDdc:nlaDd lbat lllc Boildilt& J)o:pnDalt ao:q11J !be Applic:alio-, ... witb tbc plaa aod spcr:ilicdioos ud odlo:r dala IIUbQDIIal by me or 011 my bcbalf(submilalls), t...ed 1'1*1 my a:rtificatiao ., ID acancy. Assumi111 c:omplctcacu oflbc lllllmitlals md ,.,...,U of Ibis Applic:aliao, a BoildiD& 1'1:nail will be issuo:d pDiiDa pcrmissioa 1o RIC, u Owner, 10 COOSinld lhe SlniCIDtc{a) 111d facililica do:tailc:d 011 tbc submitlals reviewal by lbc BuildiJJ& tlo:pctmmL Ia c:oaidc:nlioa oftbc i--=c oflbc BaildiJia 1'1:mli1, lapcc lbat I -..I my eprs will c:omply witb prrMsiou of uy fc:dcnl, Slate or local lno fC1111a1iaA !be •ark -..1 tbc Clllrficld Coualy Buildin& Code, ISDS tq\llllimu -..1 l!ppli;able bDd IIIC lqlll.li0111 (Coomly Rqulatiao(•)). J edalowlafaclbat !be Baildiaa Pamit 1111)' be SIISpOIIdc:d or revot.c:d, ~ nolicc 6un lloc Coaruy, if tbc lc>cabcm. COIIJinldioo or use of !be llrUdun:(s) md fiociljly(lca), clcsaibcd above, GC aor iD campljcu:c witb County Rqulalioa(a) or my OCllcr ipplic:lble lno. I hereby pm~l pcrmissiao ID lilc Baildias Dcponnozd ID CDic:r tbc pmpc:rty, described above, ID iBspcd lhe work. I funhcr adDowlod&c dial tbc issurlc:c of !be Baildia& Pamil docs not prcvcat tbc Buildias Offici.! lioat: (J) n:quiriaalhc c:orn!ldioa ofelttft iD tbc submilllls, if my, discoYacd ~ iuuaDcc; or (2) stcppin& a!IISWclioo or usc or !be lltnlelun(a) ar facitity(ics) if such is iD violllioo orC'olloly Rqulllioo(s) or my Olba-llpplitablc """· Jtcvi.,.... oftbis ApPiCIIioo, iaclodios submittals, -..1 Uupa:ticmsoftbc worlc by lbc Buildiaa Do:pmmcut do DOl-a 11c:cCJ111aCC orft:111011sibl1ity or l.iability by lhe Coaoly ofcrron, Ollliuials at disaqloncica. M lbc Owac:r,lldalowlcdac INt rapor~ribilil)' for cumpli111c:o with faJcnl,-ud loc:allaws and County Rqulalions n:st wilh me ud my authorized "Beall, iocludlas wilhout limllllioo my ardlilect dcsiper, aapccr mdl at builder. 1 HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE TIIAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND ntE NonCE & CERTIFICA110N ABOVE:

O/C) DATE

STAFF USE ONLY

url~

Mise: Fees:

207.25 Fees Paid: -Bi ~1i Da~ ~iANo & Issued Da~:

Setbacks: OCCGroup: Coast Type: Zoaiag:

>R l-28-DATE DATE

The following items are required by Garfield County for a fmal Inspection:

l) A final Electrical Inspection from the Colorado State Electrical Inspector.

2) Pennanent address assigned by Garfield County Building Department and posted at the structure and where readily visible from access road.

3) A finished roof; a lockable building; completed exterior siding; exterior doors and windows installed; a complete kitchen with cabinets, sink with hot & cold running water, non~absorbent kitchen floor covering, counter tops and finished walls, ready for stove and refrigerator; all necessary plumbing.

4} All bathrooms must be complete, with washbowl, tub or shower, toilet, hot and cold running water, non~absorbent floors, walls finished, and privacy door.

5) Steps over three (3) risers, outside or inside must be must have handrails. Balconies and decks over 30" high must be constructed to all me and IR.C requirements including guardrails.

6) Outside grading completed so that water slopes away from the building;

7) Exceptions to the outside steps, decks, grading may be made upon the demonstration of extenuating circumstances., i.e. weather. Under such circumstances A Certificate of Occupancy may be issued conditionally.

8) A final inspection sign off by the Garfield County Road & Bridge Department for driveway installation, where applicable; as well as any final sign offby the Fire District, and/or State

Agencies where applicable.

A CERTmCATE OF OCCUPANCY (C.O.) WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL THE ABOVE ITEMS HAVE BEEN COMPLE'IED.

A C.O. MAY TAKE UP TO 5 BUSINESS DAYS TO BE PROCESSED AND ISSUED.

OWNER CANNOT OCCUPY OR USE DWELLING UNTIL A C.O. IS ISSUED. OCCUPANCY OR USE OF DWELLING Wl1HOUf A C.O. WILL BE CONSIDERED AN ILLEGAL OCCUPANCY AND MAY BE GROUNDS FOR VACATING PREMISES UNTIL ABOVE CONDIDONS ARE MET.

I understand and agree to abide by the above conditions for occupancy, use and the issuance of a C.O. for the building identified in the Building Penn it.

O~TUt7 omlbcr2007

t:J,- 2 7- 2. 0/t:J DATE

Bapplicwoodc

() 0

0 0 VALUATION FEE DETERMINATION

Applicant Address Date

John Cozza Subdivision ~~~~------~~----------..:3;.::;0..;.47,;.;5;..:HWY:..:..;.:...;_6;:;....::&:....:2:....:4.!..., :..:Ri:.:..fl:..::e~-------Lot/Block

Contractor ----------------------------

Finished (Livable Area): Main

Upper

Lower Other

Total

Basement: Unfinished

Square Feet

Valuation

Conversion of Unfinished to Finished

Total Valuation

Garage/Storage (wood framed)

Carport:

Total Valuation

Crawl Space

Total Valuation

Decks/ Patios/Porches Covered

Open

Total Valuation

Type of Construction:

Occupancy:

Valuation

Total Valuation

sq.ft

sq.ft

sq.ft

sq.ft X $74.68 0 sq.ft

sq.ft X $41.00 sq.f1 X $33.68

sq.ftX $18.00 1152 sq.ftX $12.00

Commercial

sq.ft X $9.00

sq.ft X $24.00 sq.ft X $12.00

sf X sf X sf X sf X sf X sf X

OWNER

0.00

0.00

13,824.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

13,824.00

0 c

GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING 970-945-8212

MINIMUM APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS For

SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CONSTRUCTION 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 wi11 result in the delay of the permit issuance and in proceeding with building construction. The owner or contractor shaH 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.

TWO (2) SETS OF CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS & TWO (2) SITE PLANS MUST BE SUBMITTEDFOR ALL APPLICATIONS.

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 yonr 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 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. Applicants are required to indicate appropriately and to submit the completed checklist at time of application for a permit.

Plans to be included for a Building Permit, must be on drafting paper at least 18":x24'• and drawn to scale.

1

Plans must include a floor plan, a concrete footing and foundation plan, elevations all sides witb decks, balcony, steps, hand rails and guard rails, windows and doors, including the finish grade line' and original grade. A section showing in detail, from the bottom of the footing to the top of the root: including re-bar, anchor bolts, pressure treated plates, floor joists, wall studs and spacing, insulation, sheeting, house-rap, (which is required), siding or any approved building material. Engineered foundations may be required.

A window schedule. A door schedule. A floor framing plan. a roof framing plan, roof must be designed to withstand a 40 pound per square foot up to 7,000 feet in elevation, a 90 M.P.H. wind speed, wind exposure B or C, and a 36 inch frost depth.

All sheets to be identified by number and indexed. All of the above requirements must be met or your plans will be returned.

All plans submitted must be in compliance with the 2003 IRC, and 2006 IECC.

1. Is a site plan included that identifies the location of the proposed structure or addition and distances to the property lines from each comer of the proposed structure(s) prepared by a licensed surveyor and has the surveyors signature and professional stamp on the drawing? Properties with slopes of 30% or greater must be shown on the site plan. (NOTE Sectioo: 106.2) Any site plan for the placement of any portion of a structure within 50 ft. of a property line and not within a previously surveyed building envelope on a subdivision final plat shall be prepared by a licensed surveyor and have the surveyor's signature and professional stamp on the drawing. Any structure to be built within a building envelope of a lot shown on a recorded subdivision plat shall include a copy of the building envelope as it is shown on the final plat with the proposed structure located within the envelope. Yes )i..A

2. Does the site plan also include any other buildings on the property, setback easements and utility easements? Please refer to Section 5.05.03 in the Garfield County Zoning Resolution if the property you are applying for a building permit on is located on a comer lot. Special setbacks do apply. Yes /:J.A.

3. Does the site plan include when applicable the location of the I.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) and the distances to the property lines, wells (on subject property and adjacent

proper~r ~trearns or water courses? Yes /

4. Does the site plan indicate the location and direction of the County or private road accessing the

propertyi 1 II Yes t::LLI.

2

0 0

0 0

5. Have you provided any RESOLUTIONS and/ or LAND USE PERMIT(S) associated with this property? Yes A/A ifYes please provide a COPY. No ____ _

6. Are you aware that prior to submittal of a building permit application you are required to show proof of a legal and adequate access to the site? This may include (but is not limited to) proof of your right to use a private easement/right of way; A County Road and Bridge permit; a Colorado Dept. of Highway Permit, including a Notice to Proceed; a permit from the federal government or any combination. You can contact the Road & Bridge Department at 625-8601. See phone book for other agencies Yes AlA •

7. Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all reinforcing steel in accordance with the IRC or per stamped engineered design? Yes NA

8. 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 NA No ___ _

9. Do the plans indicate the size and location of ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces and soffits? Yes AlA No ___ _

10. Do the plans include design loads as required by Garfield County for roof snow loads, (a minimum of 40 pounds per square foot up to & including 7,000 feet above sea level), floor loads and wind loads? Yes ALA

11. Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor, and roof construction? Yes AlA

12. Does the building section drawing include size and spacing of floor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof rafters Joists or trusses? Yes J.J •

13. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method of positive connection of all columns and beams? Yes NA

14. Does the elevation plan indicate the height of the building or proposed addition from the undisturbed grade to the midpoint between the ridge and eave of a gable or shed roof or the top of a flat roof! (Building height measurement usually not to exceed 25 feet)

Yes .NA

3

15. Does the plan include any stove or zero clearance fireplace planned for installation including make and model and Colorado Phase II certifications or phase II EPA certification? Yes AlA No ____ _

16. Does the plan include a masonry fueplace including a fireplace section indicating design to comply with the IRC? Yes tVA No. ____ _

17. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that egress/rescue windows from sleeping rooms and/or basements comply with the requirements of the IRC? Yes Af.A

18. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural light and ventilation for all habitable rooms? Yes ALA

19. Do the plans indicate the location of glazing subject to human impact such as glass doors, glazing immediately adjacent to such doors; glazing adjacent to any surface normally used as a walking surface; sliding glass doors; fixed glass panels; shower doors and tub enclosures and specify safety glazing for these areas? Yes NA No ____ _

20. Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas furnaces, boilers and water heaters indicated on the plan? Yes '.li.A

21. Do you understand that if you are building on a parcel of land created by the exemption process or the subdivision process, are building plans in compliance with all plat notes and/or covenants? Yes MJ.

22. Do you understand that if you belong to a Homeowners Association (HOA), it is your responsibility to obtain written permission from the association, if required by that association, prior to submitting an application for a building permit? The building permit application will be accepted without it, but you run the risk of the HOA bringing action to enforce the covenants, which can result in revocation of permit issued. Additionally, your Plan Review fee is not refundable if the plans have been reviewed by the Building Department prior to any action by the HOA that requires either revocation or substantial modification of the plans. Yes Y.J1.

23. Will this be the only residential structure on the parcel? Yes NA No Ifno-Explain:. _____ _

24. Have two (2) complete sets of construction drawings been submitted with the application? Yes fi..J1.

4

0 0

0

25. Do you understand that the minimum dimension a home can be on a lot is 20ft. wide and 20ft. long? Yes A/4

26. Have you designed or had this plan designed while considering building and other construction code requirements? Yes AU .

27. Do your plans comply with all zoning rules and regulations in the County related to your properties zone district? Yes A/j

28. Does the plan accurately indicate what you intend to construct and what wiiJ receive a final inspection by the Garfield County Building Department? Yes AtJ

J

29. Do you understand that approval for design and/or construction changes are required prior to the application of these changes? Yes N4

30. Do you understand that the Building Department will collect a "Plan Review" fee from you at the time of application submittal and that you will be required to pay the "Permit Fee" as weJJ as any "Road Impact" or "Septic System" fees required, at the time you pick up your building pennit? Yes NJ

31 . Are you aware that you must call in for an inspection by 3:30 the business day before tbe requested inspection in order to receive it the following business day? Inspections will be made from 7:30a.m. to 3:30p.m. Monday through Friday. Inspections are to be called in to 384-5003. Yes All/- No ____ _

32. Are you aware that requesting inspections on work that is not ready or not accessible will result in a $50.00 re-inxection fee? Yes N

33. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections required under the IRC including approval on a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and occupancy of the building? Yes NA:

5

34. Are you aware that the Permit Application must be signed by the Owner or a written authority being given for an Agent and that the party responsible for the project must comply with the IR.C? Yes ..J.L4

35. Do you understand that you will be required to hire a State of Colorado Licensed Electrician and Plumber to perform installations and hookups, unless you as the homeowner are performing the work? The license number of the person performing the work will be required at time of applicable inspection. Yes AL4

36. Are you aware, that on the front of the Building Permit Application you will need to fill in the ParceVSchedule Number for the lot you are applying for this permit on prior to submittal of a building permit application? Your attention in this is appreciated. Yes .Af.L1

37. Do you know that the local fire district may require you to submit plans for their review of fire safety issues? Yes ,A/,f (please check with the building department about this requirement)

38. Do you understand that if you are planning on doing any excavating or grading to the property prior to issuance of a building permit that you will be required to obtain a grading permit? Yes &/l.

39 . Are you aware that if you will be connecting to a public water and/or sewer system, that the tap fees have to be paid and the connections inspected by the service provider prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy?

.Yes ALA 40. If you anticipate obtaining a water tap from the City of Rifle, please provide a letter indicating that

the City will provide water service. No building permit application will be accepted without such a letter. Yes l:J.A

I hereby acknowledge that I bave read, understand and answered these questions to the best of my ability.

~;e~ -Owner ,

9 - .2. 2 - /6 S ignaturt;;;Si Date

Phone: 97/J - ~25'- }_QJ(J (days); J dn1C:. (evenings)

6

0 ()

0 0

Project Name: {, 0 Z .Z:.A

Project Address: ,3o Q1 7 5" ,lf.CYJL 6

Notes:

If any required information is missing delays in issuing the permit are to be expected. Work may not proceed without the issuance of a permit If it is determined by the Building Official that additional information is necessary to review the application and plans to determine minimum compliance with the adopted codes, the application may be placed behind more recent applications for building permits in the review process and not reviewed until required information has been provided and the application rotates again to first position for review, delay in issuance of the permit or delay in proceeding with construction.

bpminreqsfMar2009

7

GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING REQUIREMENTS

Codes: 2003 IRC, me, IFGC, IMC, IPC, 2006 IECC. Setbacks: Check subdivisions and zone district for setback requirements. Snowload (measured at the roof! Not ground): 40PSF up to 7000fl elevation.

Seismic design category: 8

50PSF 7001 ft to 8000ft.

75PSF 8001 ft to 9000ft. lOOPSF 9001 to 10000ft.

Weathering probability for concrete: Severe.

Termite infestation probability: None to slight.

Wind speed: 90mph.

Decay probability: None

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 16over 7000ft. elevation.

Air Freezing Index: 2500deg F-days to 7000ft.; over 7000ft. to be determined by Building official

Ice shield under-layment required. Mean Annual temp: Variable

Insulation: Windows/doors U=.35, Skylights U:;~-.6, TBL 402.1.17 2006 IECC.

Minimum R-Values:

• Ceilings/roofs R values are R-38 stick built structures. R38log

construction and steel rafter construction.

• Walls R values are R-19 wood frame; R-19 cavity R-3 sheathing or R-10

sheathing for steel studs.

• Floors R-values are R·30 or enough to fill cavity.

• Basement wall R-values are R-10 below grade, R-19 above grade.

• Slab perimeter R-values and depth is R-10/24in

• Crawl space wall R-value are R-10 below grade and R-19 above grade.

If floors over crawl space 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· l9 insulation. Common ceiling/floor

garage to house must have R-19. Take precautions to protect plumbing in these areas.

bpminreqsfMar2009

8

0 0

r PATTILLO ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS

1215 grand avenue, post office bo.x 751 glenwood springs, colorodo 81602 phone (970) 945-9695 fax (970) 945-4921 e-mail: piiC@sopris.net

September 9, 201 0

John Cozza 30475 Highway 6 Rifle, CO 81650

Subject: Cozza Carport Building Structure Capacity Investigation

To Whom It May Concern:

At the request of Mr. John Cozza, personnel from Pattillo Associates Engineers have completed an investigation of the structural load capacity ofthe existing carport building located on ranch property at 30475 Highway 6 in Garfield County, between Silt and Rifle, Colorado. We understand that Mr. Cozza is obligated to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy in accordance with current Garfield County building standards for the use of the structure as a private passenger automobile storage facility. Our findings and conclusions are presented herein.

SCOPE AND STANDARDS

The scope of our investigation included I) an inspection of the premises, 2) interviews with Mr. Cozza and his family regarding the construction of the building, 3) analysis of the vertical load-carrying capacity of the roof framing, 4) a design check of the lateral wind force resistance system of the building, and 5) evaluation of the capacity of the embedded pole~type foundations. The building code used as a standard for compliance was the 2009 edition ofthe International Building Code (IBC), and loads were determined in accordance with the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Publication 7, "Maximum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures", 2005 edition. Additional information regarding snow loads for the site was obtained from "Colorado Ground Snow Loads" by the Structural Engineers Association of Colorado, published in 2007.

BUILDING DESCRIPTION

The Cozza Carport consists of a single-level main structure with a slab-on-ground floor located on a relatively flat site. It was reported to have been constructed in the early-to mid- I 970's. Plan dimensions are approximately 48 feet east-west by 24 feet north-south. A small shed-roof addition about 5 feet wide exists on the east end of the structure, and a 6'-4" wide roofed livestock chute lies along the north side of the building. The main roof is comprised of gable-shaped manufactured wood trusses spaced at 24 inches with glued and stapled plywood gusset connections. The roof pitch on the north side of the offset east-west ridge was built with a 4:12 slope, while the south side is somewhat steeper, at a 6: 12 pitch. The trusses are supported by triple-ply 2x8 header members on both north and south sides, which are in tum supported by a series of 8 preservative-treated round wood pole columns that are encased in concrete and embedded in the ground. The west end of the west-most headers are supported by an existing wood-stud building which

Cozza Carport Building Investigation September 9, 2010 Page two

appears to be conventionally framed. Roofing consists of corrugated galvanized steel sheeting, resting on flat 2x4's spaced at 24 inches, spanning over the roof trusses. Light gauge metal "hurricane" clips exist at each end of each truss and serve to transfer any wind-induced uplift forces from the roof framing to the header beams. The header beams are also held down to the columns by vertical steel straps with bolts and lag screws.

VERTICAL LOAD CAP A CITY

The capacity of the carport structure to support vertical (gravity) loads was limited primarily by bending strength capacity of the three-ply 2x8 Douglas Fir header beams that span approximately II '-6" between pole columns. Shear strength and deflection limits were determined not to control the load capacity of the headers. Dead loads were calculated at 5.0 pounds per square foot (pst), including a 0.7 psfallowance for miscellaneous loads. Considering a maximum 2 month load duration, the total load capacity of the headers was determined to be 284 pounds per lineal foot (pit) for #2 Grade timber and 316 plf for# 1 Grade timber. Grade stamps were not visible on the headers, but the appearance of the wood is consistent with current Grade 2 classification or better.

Structure snow loads were calculated in accordance with ASCE 7-05, considering an Importance Factor of0.8 (minor storage facility), an unheated structure (Ct= l.2) with partial exposure (Ce"" 1.0) and unobstructed slippery roof surfaces (includes metal roofing). Balanced and unbalanced loading conditions were evaluated in accordance with ASCE Section 7.6.1 and Figure 7-5.

Snow loads on structures per ASCE 7 are based on Ground Snow Load (GSL) values. As explained in Section 7 .2, "Ground Snow Load determination ... shall be based on extreme value statistical analysis of data available in the vicinity ofthe site using a value with a 2 percent annual probability of being exceeded (50 year mean recurrence interval)." Such studies have recently been conducted for Colorado and published in a booklet titled "Colorado Ground Snow Loads, 2007'' prepared by the Structural Engineers Association of Colorado Snow Load Committee (Richard Cunningham, P.E., Chairman). Please refer to excerpts of this publication which are attached hereto. Both Rifle and Glenwood Springs are locations where historic data was available for statistical analysis, with 87 years and 99 years of data compiled, respectively. The recommended SO-year GSL for Rifle is 20 psf and for Glenwood Springs is 30 psf. Interpolating between those values for a Silt location (6 miles from Rifle and 24 miles from Glenwood) provides a GSL value of approximately 22 psf.

Using a Ground Snow Load of22 psf for the Cozza Carport results in roof snow loads of 15.0 psffor the 4:12 pitched roof and 12.6 psffor the 6:12 pitched roof. Considering unbalanced load conditions, the maximum design load imposed on the header beams is 309 ptf. This is within calculated capacities for# I Grade timber and within 9% of the calculated capacity for #2 Grade timber.

0 0

0 Cozza Carport Building Investigation September 9, 2010 Page three

0

An analysis of a typical roof truss assembly was conducted using computer modeling (RISA-20) techniques. Using balanced loading conditions and assuming #1 Grade for the 2x4 Douglas Fir chord and web members, the capacity of the trusses was detennined as adequate for support of the design snow loads described above. The capacities of the plywood gusset connectors were deemed adequate because no distress in existing conditions was noted and the use of adhesive precluded analyses of mechanical connectors.

Gravity load capacities of corrugated metal decking, roof purl ins and columns were not calculated, but do not likely control the vertical load capacity of the building.

HORIZONTAL LOAD CAPACITY

To assure overall structural integrity, all code-compliant structures must offer adequate resistance for transient lateral forces as well as gravity-induced vertical loads. In this case, the carport was analyzed for lateral wind forces in accordance with 2009 IBC and ASCE 7-05, based on 90 mile per hour basic wind speed. Because it is considered an "Open Structure" by definition, the building was analyzed by Method 2 Analytical Procedure per ASCE-7 Section 6.5.

The coefficients used to detennine design wind pressures were as follows: Kd=0.85, 1=0.87 ("low risk for loss ofhuman life"), Kz=0.70 (Exposure B, Case I), K.zl-=1.0, and G=0.85 (rigid structure). An 82% reduction in pressure was also taken, considering the lower density of air at elevation 5500 feet above Mean Sea Level. The resulting wind pressure was calculated as 8.80 psf.

To calculate the net lateral force exerted by the wind on the roof structure, Cn values were detennined in accordance with Figure 6-18B of ASCE 7. Eight load cases were considered (Load cases A and B, each with clear and obstructed wind conditions for wind directions of 0 and 180 degrees), and the worst case condition resulted in a net horizontaf force of 65 plf (3250 pounds total) located 11. J feet above ground surface.

The lateral wind force is resisted equally by the eight embedded 8 inch diameter pole columns. The calculated bending stress of the columns is 1077 psi, which compares favorably with the allowed bending stress of 1602 psi, conservatively assuming that Ponderosa Pine poles were used.

FOUNDATION CAPACITY

No differential movement distress was observed with foundation support conditions of the carport building. It was reported by Mr. Cozza. who personally constructed the foundations, that the columns were embedded a minimum of 42 inches into the ground and were encased in concrete that was at least 24 inches in diameter. A concrete slab of at least 4 inches thickness covers the floor area of the carport and surrounds the embedded poles.

Cozza Carport Building Investigation September 9, 20 I 0 Page four

In accordance with IBC section 1807.3.2.2, the required embedment of constrained embedded posts to resist design wind pressures described above is 3.2 feet. This assumes a Class 4 soil (silty sand) and a structure that is not sensitive to one-half inch of lateral rotation, both of which are consistent with our experience of similar buildings in the Silt area.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on detailed analysis of this structure, I conclude that the framing for building as constructed is acceptable in meeting minimum standards as prescribed in the 2009 International Building Code for vertical (gravity) loads and horizontal (wind) forces. Furthennore, the foundations as reported constructed is deemed adequate for support of said design loads. The structural performance of the building is confirmed by its generally excellent appearance and lack of evidence of any excessive differential movement or deflection over its 35 year existence.

LIMITATIONS

Please be aware that our investigation was limited to the structural conditions of the building, based on readily observable conditions. No intrusive or destructive methods were employed, nor were laboratory tests conducted. Any building owner should realize that satisfactory perfonnance of structural systems relies on diligent maintenance to prevent degradation and decay.

I reserve the right to modify any ofthe opinions expressed herein if additional information is provided or if other conditions are discovered.

This completes my report. Please contact me if you have any questions or would like copies of detailed calculations.

RMP/mms

enclosures: em11il copy:

Colorado Ground Snow Loads, 2007 (excerpts) John Cozza (ilcmcc'Uhotmailxom)

0 0

0 0

Structural Engineers Association of Colorado

COLORADO GROUND SNOW LOADS 2007

Prepared By

The SEAC Snow Load Committee

Richard J. Cunningham PE Chairman

December 2007

©Copyright 2007 by Structural Engineers Association of Colorado

Cover photograph reprinted by permission of Sandra Leidho~dt

i ~·

~ ~

f j [

f t f t ·t. v· E

Structural Engineers Association of Colorado

COLORADO GROUND SNOW LOADS 2007

PREFACE

When the Structural Engineers Association of Colorado (SEAC) first published its Snow Load Design Data for Colorado in 1971 , it was the only comprehensive source for establishing design snow loads in Colorado. Engineers and building departments have been using the loads provided by SEAC for design since the publication of the report. In recent years, there has been much confusion on how to use this roof design load data with a 30 year mean recurrence interval in conjunction with current design codes which are all written in terms of ground snow loads with a 50 year mean recurrence interval. The need to update the snow load design data to be compatible with national standards, as well as the availability of another thirty years of data and the ability to apply univariate statistical methods to ground snow depths or loads, prompted the SEAC Snow Load Committee to issue this report.

The ground snow loads are based on the requirements set forth in ASCE 7-05 Minimum Design Loads far Buildings and Other Structures for determining these values based on a 50 year mean recurrence interval (MRI). Additionally, a 500 year MRI ultimate ground snow load is utilized where this value divided by an appropriate load factor exceeds the 50 year MRI. The loads on the maps can be used directly with the parameters in the 1997 Uniform Building Code and the 2000-2006 lntematianal Building Codes. The values given herein are suggested values for the areas indicated and should be validated with local building officials prior to using them.

This report is divided into four sections as follows:

Section I - Ground Snow Loads Summary The relationships for ground snow load and snow depths are presented in this section. This section also indicates the ground snow loads for various cities and towns located in Colorado.

Section II - Ground Snow Loads Development Procedures This section of the report indicates the procedures used to develop the 2007 ground snow loads. The statistical procedures are included therein. A discussion of the development of the ground snow load and depth methodology is also presented. The methods utilized for determining the snow densities are discussed in this section

Colorado Ground Sno .... ~ds 2007 0 Pagei

0 0

• Section Ill - Ground Snow Load Comparison A comparison of the snow loads developed in 1971 and those developed herein are discussed in this section of the report. Only sites common to both 1971 and 2007 were compared. Where required, adjustments to the 1971 roof design loads were made so that relevant comparisons to the 2007 ground snow loads could be made.

• Section IV - Ground Snow Loads -All Sites Section IV presents a tabulation of all the SNOTEL, NWS and Snow Course sites that were investigated during the course of preparing this document. The sites used have an applicable ground snow load value indicated.

The publishing of the Colorado Snow Loads 2007 was not the work of any one person but required participation of several individuals and engineering firms that contributed to the endeavor.

• The firm of S. A. Miro Inc. was generous in allowing Mr. Cunningham the time to pursue this publication as Chairman of the SEAC Snow Load Committee. As might be expected, numerous hours were required to develop the many statistical procedures used in determining appropriate design ground snow depths and loads as well as to research over 800 sites having applicable data and determining the appropriate snow load densities.

• Jeannette M. Torrents PE of the firm of JVA, Inc. provided much needed data relating to ground snow load depths and their snow water equivalencies. She also participated in the writing of portions of the report. The final ground snow load map was produced through her efforts. Her help is greatly appreciated

• Mr. Jim Harris PE of the firm of J. R. Harris CO. provided the data for the Denver snow depths and snow water equivalencies that proved invaluable in determining the appropriate snow load densities at lower elevations in the State of Colorado particularly prior to 1948. His numerous meetings with the committee chairman are greatly appreciated.

• While a graduate student at the Colorado School of Mines, Brian O'Conner spent the summer of 2006 aiding in the completion of the report .. ~rian was able to assemble all of the remaining site data in an orderly fashion and m complete the statistical analysis for detennining the 50 year mean recurrence intervals.

Richard J. Cunningham PE Chairman - SEAC Snow Load Committee

Colorado Ground Snow l.oads 2007 Page ii

Structural Engineers Association of Colorado

SECTION II -GROUND SNOW LOADS DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES

INTRODUCTION

Prepared By Richard J. Cunningham PE

This section of the report describes the procedures used to develop the design ground snow loads for the State of Colorado. The snow load map can be used in conjunction with the provisions set forth in, UBC 1997, ASCE 7-02 or ASCE 7-05. The map covers the entire state from Wyoming to New Mexico and Utah to Kansas. The development of this map was undertaken to affirm, clarify, and update the ground snow loads throughout the state since the last undertaking conducted some 35 years ago.

The map is based on snow data obtained from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) located in Portland, Oregon and other sources. Members of the Snow Load Committee were able to access the data from the NRCS computers through the courtesy of the Colorado NRCS office located in Lakewood, Colorado. Richard Cunningham developed computer programs to analyze the data statistically and was assisted by committee member Brian O'Connor.

Ground snow loads in the State of Colorado are known to have a high degree of variance because of the mountainous regions of the state. Ground snow loads as high as 300 psf have been measured in the mountains. Snow accumulations west of the continental divide are normally associated with storms that develop on the west coast of the United States. while those on the east side of the divide are principally related to upslope conditions associated with storms occurring in the Gulf of Mexico.

CODE REQUIREMENTS

As stated in ASCE 7-05, and previous additions of this code, "Ground snow loads, p9 , to be used in the determination of design snow loads for roofs shall be as set forth in figure 7.1 for the contiguous United States ..... " This code further indicates that all sites within the CS {case specific) area shall be approved by the authority having jurisdiction.

Although many of the sites in the state, primarily east of the mountains, are not located in "CS" areas, it is difficult to compare the results of this study to the values indicated in ASCE-7 since the probability density functions used in this analysis differ from those utilized in the aforementioned code. Further, the ASCE-7 code does include data from recent snow storms that affected a number of sites east of the mountains.

As may be seen from the adjoining map for Colorado taken from figure 7.1 of ASCE 7-05, most of the Front Range and nearly all of the western slope areas fall into this category.

Colorado Ground Snow Q s 2007 Q Page 1 of Section II

0 0

ASCE 7-05 indicates that the ground snow load for these regions shall be based on extreme-value statistical analysis of available data in the vicinity of the site using a value with a 2% annual probability of being exceeded (50-year mean recurrence interval).

It is expected, however, that structural elements should be able to sustain snow loads considerably in excess of the 50-year design snow load without loss of integrity. The snow load beyond which an element loses its ability to resist loads is referred to as the ultimate snow load.

The ultimate snow load should be identified such that its probability of occurrence is reasonably small. Although this value is not currently specified by ASCE-7 for snow loads, wind velocities are based on a 500-year MRI ultimate wind speed. The ultimate snow load is equal to or greater than the 50-year ground snow load multiplied by a ground snow load factor.

Me.1n Recuuence lnteaval

MRI

{yea1s}

25 ---------.. --50 - --·--- --........ _ .... 75 r------------100 - -----···---.... --...... , ... _ 500 '------------- · 1000

HISTORY

Exceedance Probabilily Of MRI

50 Ye.us

1-(1-t:Ft1RI)50

87~~ r-- --------64~~ ----.. ·-··--- .. ·---49~~ ,...-- ··-----------··---39~· .......... -.................. , ... __ , ,,,, ___ ...... 10% _,, ................... -...... , .... _,,,_~ ... so.~

As the table indicates, the probability of exceeding a 500 year ground snow load is 10% over the 50 year useful life of the structure or its elements. The exceedance probability in any given year is 0.2%

SEAC first published snow load design data for Colorado in 1971. Until now, the 1971 report was the only comprehensive source for establishing design snow loads in Colorado.

The 1971 SEAC report referenced the Commentary of the 1965 National Building Code of Canada for information on drift and unbalanced loads because there was no American design standard at that time. Current editions of national design standards such as the Uniform Building Code, International Building Code, and ASCE 7 include provisions for drift and unbalanced loading. All three standards use ground snow load and a fifty-year mean recurrence interval to calculate design snow loads.

Colorado Ground Snow Loads 2007 Page 2 of Section II

Many Colorado jurisdictions used the 1971 SEAC snow load map as a reference to set design snow loads, but required higher design loads than indicated by the map in order to account for drifting, sliding, etc. Most Front Range jurisdictions' design snow loads are 1.2 times the ground snow load and do not correspond to the flat roof snow load of 0.7CeCtlsPg used in ASCE 7. Some jurisdictions account for this discrepancy: the City of Denver allows a ground snow load of 25 psf to be used for drift calculations, but does not permit the roof of commercial buildings to be designed for less than 30psf.

This section of the report intends to clarify ground snow loads for use in structural design by providing values that can be used with current codes to more accurately reflect roof design snow loads. In addition to incorporating thirty more years of data, this report uses as a minimum a fifty-year mean recurrence interval of ground snow loads as required by current design standards rather than the thirty-year mean recurrence interval used in the 1971 design data and more realistically accounts for snow density.

DATA ACQUISITION

The data used for this study was acquired from 800 sites throughout the state of Colorado utilizing three different types of snow measurement methods. The three snow measurement methods are SNOTEL (SNOwpack TELemetry), Snow Course, and Cooperative Observer Program (COOP) sites run by the National Weather Service (NWS). The p.rimary purpose of these snow measurement sites is to determine the amount of water located in the mountain snow pack of Colorado. SNOTEL and Snow Course measurement sites are located in the mountains of Colorado, while the NWS Coop sites are located throughout the state. Each measurement station has its own identification number as well as corresponding elevation, latitude, and longitude.

For the purpose of this report, the maximum monthly snow depths or Snow Water Equivalence (SWE) for the history of the site were recorded for further analysis. The data is accessed from two locations. For SNOTEL and Snow Course data, the information is available through the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) website, http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/. The data for the NWS COOP sites was acquired through the NRCS database in Portland, Oregon.

The most accurate of these measurement methods is SNOTEL. SNOTEL sites are unmanned, auto­mated snow measurement systems located through­out the mountains of Colorado. SNOTEL sites became operational in 1979 and are considered the most accurate method to measure the SWE of the snow pack. Currently there are 91 SNOTEL stations throughout Colorado; primarily situated in small clearings surrounded by trees to reduce the effect wind has on the snow depth. SNOTEL uses a pillow system that measures and records the weight of the snow located at the site. SNOTEL sites contain four

pillows, each with a surface area of four square feet. Snow pillows typically have flat stain­less steel or synthetic rubber surfaces. The pillow below this flat surface is filled with antifreeze solution and the pressure in the pillow is related to the water-equivalent depth of the snow on the platform.

Cotorado Ground Sno>A ) ds 2007 0 Page 3 of Section II

"

0 0 A SNOTEL site makes two measurements a day. The data is sent out daily to two master stations located in Boise, Idaho, and Ogden, Utah using meteor burst communications; all of the data and operation of these sites are controlled by NWCC in Portland, Oregon.

A Snow Course is a permanent site where manual measurements of snow depth and snow water equivalency are taken by trained observers. Snow Course (SC) sites began operation in 1936. Currently there are 269 Snow Course sites located throughout the mountains of Colorado. Slowly these sites are being replaced with the SNOTEL sites due to the better accuracy of SNOTEL data. Measurements are usually taken around the first of the month during the winter and spring. Generally, the courses are about 1 ,000 feet long and are situated in small meadows protected from the wind. The trained observers will ski or snowshoe out onto the snow course sites with long steel tubes. A core sample of snow is taken from which the depth of the snow pack is recorded as well as the SWE. The SWE is measured by taking the difference in weight between the empty steel tube, and the tube containing the snow core sample. Measurements are taken every 100 feet along the site and the reported value is the average of the ten measurements.

NWS COOP stations are run by volunteers at over 400 sites throughout Colorado. COOP sites only measure the depth of snow fallen, not the SWE of the snow. The cooperative network was established in 1890 to make meteorological observations and to establish and record climate conditions in the United States, primarily for agricultural purposes. Today the network is increasingly used by the NWS to support meteorological and hydrological forecasts and warnings and to verify forecasts. Snow measurements are taken on snow boards placed in unobstructed area away from shadows of structures and the north side of structures. When taking the measurement of snowfall, both existing snow on the ground and freshly fallen, the rain gauge on the station, an eight inch diameter steel tube that is three feet high, is used. Snowfall and total snow depth are measured daily and sent off to be recorded at the NWS storage facility in Portland.

Data Processing

In order to proceed with a statistical analysis of the data, each set needs to meet two criteria: 1.) The site has to have 12 or more years of data in the historical record, otherwise there is not enough data to accurately determine the 50 year snow load and 2.) At least one storm in the history of the site record of more than 20 inches. The minimum allowable ground snow load considered in the state of Colorado is 20 psf. A snow storm of 20 inches or less will not exceed this minimum limit using ground snow depth and density relationships established for settled snow conditions.

Comparison of Data

There are many locations throughout the state of Colorado that have multiple measuring methods at the same location. The accuracy of the data is dependent on the method in which the data is collected. SNOTEL sites are the most accurate because they send in data of the SWE at that particular location daily. Snow Course sites are less reliable in providing the maximum SWE at a particular location because data is only recorded once a month and it is possible that the maximum SWE can occur mid-month and can melt before the next measurement is taken. At certain Snow Course sites, there are pillows

Colorado Ground Snow Loads 2007 Page 4 of Section II

th a: P• a e ir n

r

t

that record the SWE on the first of every month. These pillows have the same problem as the Snow Course sites in that it is possible for them to miss the maximum SWE at a particular location. However, these Snow Course Pillow sites are considered more accurate than regular Snow Course sites because they eliminate any possible human error in measurement, and have the ability to measure the entire depth of snow at once, instead of in sections as is required when the snow gets too deep for traditional measurement techniques.

NWS COOP sites are considered to be the least reliable because no SWE data is provided. Without the SWE data, the snow depth needs to be converted from inches to SWE using the density of the snow. The few NWS COOP sites that did exist in the mountains of Colorado have been replaced with more reliable SNOTEL or Snow Course sites. The density of the snow in Colorado is highly variable because the composition of the snow is different in each storm as well as in each season.

DATA STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Discrete Data Analysis

After the data was acquired, it was placed in an MS EXCEL spreadsheet for further processing. The data, in the case of NWS sites, comes in two forms 1.) Snow depth measured for the date and storm in question and 2.) Accumulated snow depth from previous days associated with the storm in question. ln the case of SNOTEL and SC sites, the data is usually accumulated snow depths or SWE due to the continuous snowfall at the altitudes involved.

The data placed in an MS EXCEL spreadsheet for each of the individual sites was then reviewed for use in further analysis. That is to say, in a number of NWS sites, data could be missing for individual dates for a given month; no measurements were taken for several months within a given year, or accumulated snow depth measurements were not taken at all. Any of these items could render the site inappropriate for further analysis.

At any given station where records of ground snow data over a number of years are available, a random variable may be defined which consists of the largest snow depth or snow water equivalency depth for every year of record. Using these records, the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of this random variable may be estimated to characterize the probabilistic behavior of the largest yearly ground snow depth or snow water equivalency. In some cases, where judgment indicated, the daily snow depths were used where accumulated snow depth measurements were not available. This is particularly true at lower elevations where snow storms are of short duration.

It is interesting to note that snow depth data comes in two forms 1.) Annual series data and 2.) Partial-duration series data. An annual series takes one event from each year of record while the partial-duration series method considers all events above a certain threshold and is used in the analysis. As may be recognized, the annual series technique does not consider the fact that another separate and distinct stonn in the same given year may be higher than the maximum event in a subsequent year. Kite [8] considered these two recurrence intervals and found that the discrepjflcy for the two types of series was only significant at low recurrence intervals. At a 50 year recurrence interval, the difference was only about 1%.

Colorado Ground Snow )Is 2007 Q Page 5 of Section II

0 0

Once an annual series of snow depth or SWE had been developed for a particular site it was then analyzed for the following descriptors of randomness:

• Mean Value • Variance • Standard Deviation • Coefficient of Variation • Skewness Coefficient • Minimum and Maximum Values

A smaller value for the coefficient of variation is indicative of lesser uncertainty or randomness of the variable being analyzed; conversely a larger coefficient of variation indicates more uncertainty. If the skewness coefficient (third Moment) is zero, the randomness is symmetric, if positive the dispersion of the variable is above the mean and if negative below the mean. Shown below are the data descriptors for measured ground snow depths for Denver:

Numbe1· of Dat<l Sam1)fes: II= "111.000

D.-lt.l £vle.1n. :-:data: Xdata = 5.892

D,1f;l V.11i.mce. vdata: Vdata = 2.J.296

D.1t.1 St;md.lltf Devi.ltion. 5data: %u= 4.929

Dtlt•l Coefficient of V.ui.1tion. Qdata: {\:tata = 0.837

D.lt.l Skewness. a data= edata = 3.360

0.1t.l Pe.llmess. ~ .. = Ktlata "' 17.555

0.1M Minimum V.1lue r.undata: Mindata "" 1.300

D.1t.1 M.lximum V.1Jue r,J,lxdata: Maxdata .. 35.600

As may be seen, the coefficient of variation is quite large and the data is positively skewed.

A more complete description of a variable can be obtained by plotting the data graphically in the form of a histogram. This is accomplished by placing the data in equally spaced intervals and counting the number of observations in each group. For Denver, the following histogram clearly shows the skewness of the data.

Colorado Ground Snow Loads 2007 Page 6 of Section II

Structural Engineers Association of Colo

GROUND SNOW LOADS· CITIES AND TOWNS

The following tables of ground snow loads for cities and towns in Colorado should be used with the following restrictions and commenls:

1. Use in conjunction with the recommendations cited in ASCE-7 for ground snow load adjustments. 2. Use ground snow loads only In the immediate vicinity of a city or town particularly where ground elevation changes abruptly. 3. Verify ground snow load values with the local authority having jurisdiction, 4. Ground snow loads shown in "red" are based on a statistical analysis of available data. 5. Ground snow loads shown in "blue" are based on interpolation of snow isoclines shown on the Colorado Grown Snow Load map.

City/Town County City/Town County

Colorado Ground Snow loads 2007

City/Town County GSL Elev City/Town ( psf] (feet]

County

.vans :.Jtero Vel<!

~1tv :ams 3ar1and ~slilla onifer UPIOil_ iekl

:rust ad Bune. ;ran• Saquacne ·~1k: ·---·--1?.:,'~el:ci'L.-... -.-· ..

:rtccle :reeK railer 'risco umm1t :mo· .oQan rvil~ 1esa

·o~ :am .• -------f~,\~==-=~~~---'Oxfi IIQ

~~~rMountatn~iummll ·--------------·· .... ·i~~~--.. +~~E~~ :reede

noman loroan

ountas

•eeo rail raoanoe :IC~Sl lei oel Norte Grande ··+- -; \rao anoe

ove GreeK IOiores rnnc .ake rand tiiOQO 1 Plata .rael lekl ~s :iowa .reen MOUntain Faits. I"'BS0/1 ener ale, :aole 1 : vmaoe

ifon leiQ ·;rover ~eld kiev um!l_ unni .. tll\

Page 4 of Secfooo I

Elev ll psf ) [ feet 1

41l:l\J

885(

~ ~·~ ~· II;T\!!_ @1-:==-u~~!!~~Gre;;:;;-eJ<.---·----·1--tti-niiLrn j---·-·----+-~-n;3s~oon !Estes ParK .ann

Colorado Ground Snow Loads 2007 Page 5 of Sectioo I

NCRSSite Information .. ' . .

No l ctr, HUC • • f I

: LaL :long.: Eltv.: Slttname • I .. ..

t:l}) 43 -n-;3823; 11Uif;-5t90;FLORENCE t:n: _, Nll/llllltlll :lfl53l 1#11111 l &440:FLOOISSAHT FOSSil OED 134: WI --:3852: _,. f 8510:Fl0RISSAHTFOSSIL BEDS

''135; 73 #llltllll## :3833l 111111#: 4700:FOROER 8 S 130:41 ..,.:3841!'*"i 5870iFORTCARSON 137; 69 ,.., ;4035;-: 5000;FORT COLLINS 139; 67 .,._ l3714l- l 7600lFORT LEWIS 139t 1111 - t4004i-: 5020tFORT LUPTON 2 SE 140! 17 1111M1111 :4015: #111111: 4320lFORT MORGAN 14t: 4t 11111111111111 !3&41!..,: 5570:FOUNTAIN U2; 41 IIIIMIIII l3&47; 11#1#: 5960lFOUNTAJN 6 HHE U3:89 111111/1111111:3eo7:11#1111:4330:FOWLER1SE 144 ~ 49 1111###1111 : 3SI57 : tim : 856Q: FRASER 1 .. 5! .C& llllll#m ! J952: tl##ll! 857oiFRASER 146: 27 11111111111111:3600:-: 8210:FROZECREEK 147! 77 111111#111111 !J910~,..,: 44BO:FRUITA 1 W 148 : 5S -:3746:...,! 6970:GARONER 149l - 111111#111111 f3840i 11#11#: 4SSOiGATEWAY 1 SE 1sf 111/1111111# ll 917l #111111 l 5G10lGENOA 151 ':'-.111111#111111 ;3942: 11111111: 8720lGEORGE70WH 152: 77:-]3900:.,. i 7000!GLADE PARK STORE 153: 49: tllltl#llll# :3!M7: ll#ft: 8690;GLEN MAR 154; U 1111111#111111 ;4048l #111111: 8270:GLENDEVEY 155_: ~s!111111#111111Jl9~i_~i 5750:Gl£NWOOOSPRJ~GSII _~ 151itU~ t<4009-: IINI, 76 10 t~t"~5 ~H

1S7: 9 : 111111#111111:3727 i lt###i4950~GRAFT2NNE 158: 99 ! IIIII#### ! 3304! 11111111 : 3480: GRANADA 159: n! 111111##1111 !Jli()J! #111111: ~760:GRAHO JUNCT10H II ESE 160: n : 111111##1111 i3906: #IIIII i 4840!GRAND JUNCnON WSO AP 161: 49: 111111##1111 :4018! 11#11#! 8720!GRAHDI.AKE 1 NW 162: .49:111111##1111 ~4011: ,.,: 8290!GRANOLAKE6SSW

• • • • t •

163; ~5lllllll##llll!3927! 11#11#; 5090!GRANDVALLEY 164 ~ 9J :..,., :3928: II###~ 8670~GRANT 165: 81 1 111111##1111 !4047: #111111 1 6870:GREAT DIVIDE 166: 3 i~~~~~W~~~~b74Jilllllllli 8120lGREATSAHDOUNESHM 167: #tl : f#lt#lll# :4025: ,. : <4850: GREELEY 168; 1111:111111#111111;4025: 111111111 ~720:GREELEVUNC 169: Q: 111111##1111 bs53i .. : n~oiGREEN MOUNTAIN DAM no: 35:...,.:3911! ... ; 6880:GREENLAHO 171: 35: 111111##1111 139131 #111111: 6900!GREENLANO 8 NE 1121 41: 111111#111111 ;3906! tllti#l; 74B01GREENLAND 9 SE 173! 81: 11#1#111111 !4037! 11111111: 6800:GREYSTONE 174: 13: 111111##1111 b957: 11#1111 ! 7950iGROSS RESERVOIR 175l 1111! 111111##1111 :4052: 11#11# l S080lGROV£R 10 W \7,_! : 1#11#11#11 :3845:.,.: 8fi10!GUFFEY 1f ~ 13841: #111111 1 e200:GUFFEV 10 SE tit._..{;;;;;i3849l 111111# l 9010!GUFFEYSN 179: 51: 111111##1111 :3833: #111111: 76801GUHNISOH I H 180:81 :111111111111# :4022: .. ! 6230:HAMILTON 181 : 9 :,....., il729i ... ~ <4.-60:HARMON RANCH 182 ~ 93! tll#l#ll#ll: 3~2: .. ~ B&80 !HARTSEL ;183t 61 :11##1#11:3827! t###: 4520:HASWELl 184: t3!111111##1111!3958i .. : 5930:HAWTHO~E 185! 1111 1 _, ;4029 1 #111111 1 8440 :HAYDEN

''186: 791 111111##1111 !3746: 11111111: oooolHERMIT7 ESE 187: 81 ! ,... :4059:,..: 7110hi1AWATHA 188; 89 : 111111##1111 ! 3745: 11#11#: 4250:HIGBEE2 SW 189: 69! #11###111 :4058: ,., ~ nso :HOHNHOLZ RANCH !t90! 99! IUIDI#, :3ao3: ... : 3390:HOLLY 19\: 9S! 11#111111# !4035: .... : 3730:HOLYOKE 192: 49 l ,_. :4003: lllfllll ! 7610 :HOT SULPHUR SPRINGS 2 S 193l69: #llllllllll.t ;co3&l 111111# l 9520 jHOURGLASS RESERVOIR 194 ' 1 'MII#IIII#'4000'II#UIII' SOOO•HOVT 195: 73: ,_. b908! biM: 5030iHUGO

ltse! 1D :#I##M lls..s: "'##; 7570:10AHOSPRINGS 197;1111~111111#111111!3945;UIIII! 3970;IOALIA4NHE 198: 67 l lltiiiiM ;3709; 11111111: 846011GHACIO 1 N 199: 91 1 ~ !Joos : 11111111; 11111111 :INOEef:NOENCE PASS 5 SW

Colorado Ground Snow Loads 2007

COLORADO GROUND SROWLOAD STUDY- NWS SITES SUMMAR't

- - • M•ll : Mu _;~ l tt11RI 2007 StatUI : Y•ara ! u•u : u•w I ~nuw : t ···-- ,. -· i ::tnow • Snow ; -- - --~- m - oor - AOJUSI ~ .. ..,.., of __ ~u. ·;of o.ta; U•• ; Type Typl ; ~~ ; Depth - Type; Ptpth Ll'laftlth_ _ _!__ Snld - Oeplh l_ft.S!~-----.l'".oti_

TA. -~ 3 : N -- -NA- -- : --:-~-:

A ! 6 : N NA : : ~ ' • t • t

NS • ' N NA • • ' lA i 28 ! y Snwd s 0.975 : 14.0 I i : 20.0 A i 20 : V Snwd S 0.968 : 18.0 : : 20.0 A l 103 ! Y Ml.red S 0.993 l 23.0 lH l 17 1 ! 111.3 20.0 A i 53 : Y Snwd C 0.981 : .tB.O GA : 51.9 : 50.9 94.0 lA : 27 : V Mixed S 0.974 : 19.0 : : 20.0 A : 53 : Y Mlud S 0.937 : 12.0 : : lA : <45 ! Y Mixed S 0.985 ! 19.0 : :

t t .. I I

20.0 20.0 I

lA : 13 : N NA ! : ~ A ! 53 : 'I Ml•ed S 0.987 : 13.0 ; : 20.0 lA : 61 : Y Snwd C 0.989 ! 75.0 GU ! 70.1 ! 56.7 107.2 A ! 6 ; N NA ; : :

NS : ! N NA : : : A l 54 : Y Snwd S 0.987 : 18.0 : : 20.0 lA : 23 : Y Snwd S 0.970 1 27.0 FR ! 26.5 ! 28.7 28.8 A i 51 : Y Mbed S 0.988 : 15.0 ! : 20.0 A : 46 ! Y Snwd S 0.985 : 13.0 ! : 20.0 lA : 32 : Y Snwd S 0.978 ! 420 GU ! 23.1 : ~0.0 42.1 IA!3!N NA : :: 1At4:N NA : : ! lA : 9 : t4 NA ! ! :

i t o t I

A ~ 99 ~ y Mixed s 0.993 : 30.0 lH : 28.2 : 29.6 28.0 ~~.

lA : 2 : N : tA : 1 : N : A : 38 : Y ! Mbect A : 101 : Y : Snwd lA t 53 : Y ! Snwd lA : 34 : v !snwd lA ! n : v ! snwd A : 36 : v : snwd

NS ! : N : A : so : v : snwc~ tA ; 18 : N : Strwdi A i 34 : Y !Snwd A : 52 ! Y !Snwd tA : .t : N : lA:4tN: lA : .t : N : tA ! <4 : N : A : 2J ! Y : Snwdi lA : 22 l y iMlled lA : 3 : N : A : 50 ! Y ! Snwd

1A i 2 : N : A : 97 : Y !Mixad lA lA lA A lA A A lA lA A A A lA A NS A lA A A lA

5t : Y : J.U11d 13 • N • 17 ; Y ! SI'IWd 78 : y :Mixed 21 : y :Snwd 54 t Y : Snwd 52 : Y :Mixed 5 : N : 12 ! N : . . 9 I N •

81 i Y iMb:ed 53 : v :Snwd 29 : Y ~MlKed

7 ! N : : N :

e : N : 27 1 Y } Mixed •US ! Y :Snow 47 : " : Mlxed 22 ! Y ; Snwd

.. .. HA NA s s c c s c

NA s

NA s c

HA NA HA HA s 9

NA s

NA c c

HA s s s c c

HA NA NA s s c

N.-. NA NA s s s ~

0.982: 0.993 ~ 0.987! 0.930: 0.960 :

0.091 l o.sao : 0.9Q: 0.980: 0.987 ~ . . . . . 0.970: 0.989: . 0.98& ~

O.Wl 0.1166

0.1180 0.991

• 0.974 0.987 0.987

0.991 0.987 0.1178

0.974 0.985

! 0.985 '0.9811.

14.0 18.0 49.0 38.0 26.0 JO.O

24.0 180 30.0 38.0

43.0 17.0

540

30.0 39.0

220 22.0 29.0 43.0 72.0

16.0 20.0 48.0

36.0 19.0 32.0 _96.0

FR I LG

NO NO FR GU

LN!

FR GU

NO

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FR : . . LN : FR :

'

FR I Go\ GA FR : . . . l

FR I FR ~ GU NO

13.5 15.4 49.5 45.11 34.3 37.5

21.7

27.6 40.4

35.8

33.0

25.7 37.0

24.9

30.1 39.4 57.5

46.1

29.5

28.3 103.8

15.2 22.8 54.4 356 31.8 l5.9

24.1

32.2 43.1

42.4

34.4

26.6 38.7

23.8

31.1 408 59.8

50.8

31.9 33.2 106.1

. . . : 20.0

~ 20.0 102.0 59.0 30.6 59.7

. : . . ! . . . . . . . . . . . .

: . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . .

211

31.4 76.2

45.6 20.0

34.3

38.5 66.1

20.8 20.0 29.9 70.5 114.3

20.0 20.0 93.3

: 31.0 ~ 20.0 : 32.7 : __ :Z20.

18 48 28 18

15 55

&4

27

17 56

14

26 38

15

35

22

44 I 41 ' 47

12 14

51

26 83 37 25

20 69

69

40

20 69

27

31 66

20

51

38

42 50 64

20 20

48

35 I 39 _98 ' 1ft

20 20 20 95 20 20 20

20 105

20 25 20 20 55

30

20

eo 30 60

20

30 75

45 20

35

40 65

20 20 30 70 115

20 20 90

55

30 220

11 II 10 14 10 10 II

II I(

14 11 14 10 10

I(

14 14 14 14 14 10 14 13 10 10 14 10 to 10 14 10 10 11 11 11 14 14 11 10 II 10 14 13 14 11 10 11

11 10 14 10 10 11 10 10 14 14 <

HUC Basin Data _ sn~w JJeplh

10 i 11 : 13l14 . . . . . . . . . . 23i 19: 12 ~

13 42

. . ,, . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . 361

30 :

. . . . ' .

.(] : 17 :·

14 16

16

13

27

. . .

. . . . . . . . .

I" 175

i 18

115

. . :30 . f : 14 : 18 : 49 :38

126 . . 24 ~

38

~ ~ . . : ~

1 ~ ~ :

n l ~ :

! 0 : n . . . .

~= 20 l

! ~ . . . '

~ : 19 :

: 32 : ~

le¥111!!.!!..

10 : 11 : 13 : 1.4 . . . . 4780: 5870!

5000 i 5020 : .. 320 :

5570! .t330! . . . . l

697Ql

5610 :

8720 ~

8670

4720

7950 5080

8680

5930

3130

7570 31170

+ . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . :6120 . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . .

8200t

i !

~520:

l ~~ .

3390:

•

~ :

l . .

. . . ' . . . . : . . . . ~ 7600 . . . l . 18560

i••so . 14550 . . . . . . . :5750

47$1, 4840 8720 8290 5090

7740

7660 6230

6440

7810

64f~l ....

Commal"ll

lnsuftldenl 11811 lnsufflcienl dill

lnsulftclenl dall

lnwffident dala

SOOyr

43"2008 lnsutnclenl dall tnsullicient dall lnsullidont data

lnsulfide nt dall Insufficient dall tnsufficlcnl dall

SOOyr 500yt

Usa UNC Data SOOyr

lnsufl"oenl dall lnsumdet~l dll8 tnsuffidenl dala Insufficient dal•

43' 2003 less lhan 20"

lnsuffldenl dala

SOOyt Less than 20'

SOOyr

lnsutriclenl data lnsullldenl data lll311ffldanl daln l ess than 20'

SOOyt SOOyr

lntufllciont dAtA

lnauflk:•out d i1UI

WUyr l"'l UIMI ;oo·

f,IIQtl 10 ol ApJlOndlt A

NCRS Site lnfonnatlon

Sllename :I

Na :ctv: HUC : ! : : : Lal flong.i tirev. i

336; 37 Hiiiit;3931: 11114/lf: BG20;REDCUFF 33Tl9T ,.....;31111: .. : n1o:REOSTONE 33&! 97 ,__ :3912:.,., i 8070iREOSTONE 4 W 3311: 33 ,.,.,. :31•2: 1111t1t1: a780:Rtco ~o: 91 IIHitllilll :3809: 1#11111: 7000:RJOGWAY 341: 45 llll#llltll :3932: MM: 5320iRIFLE ~2: &J.111111 .. :3743;-; ~60;RIOGRANOERESERVOIR 3-tl! 89:H-IM!J802i ... : 4170:Fl0CKYFORD2SE ~4:1111:111111-:4009:1#11111; 47•o:ROGGEN2S 345!41 :,,..:3850: .. : 6020!RUSH l48: 69: :4043: ... : 7698!RUSTtc9WSW 347: ott : ..... !38St: ... : 9050:RuXTOH PARK 348:8 :,.,.:3755! ... : 6650:RYE 349: IIJ :1111 .... :3805:.,: 7&90iSAGUACHE 350: 15 :,.,.. :3932:...,! 7t60:SALJOA 351: 15:._,.:3832:...,: 7.90:SAI.IOA3W 352:23: ,_.,_ :3112: Ulll: 7990:SAN lUtS 353: 2l:,..... :3711:,: 8060:SAN LUtS 1 E 354: 3 l 1111111#11111: 3739; -~~ ; 7540 ;SAN LUIS lAKES 3W 355; 51 :1111111111111:3829; 1111111: n30:SAPINER08E 356: Ill!..,.,. :3824!,: 1470:SA.RGENTS l51!N!..,..:3824! .. ! 81•o:SARGENTS6W 358: 35:..,.,.:3924:1111111: ~:SEDALIA4SSE 359: "": ,..., :~o56: .., : 3580:SEDGW1CK 360! Ill~,_., :•ost:., ~ 3t90!SEOGWICK 55 301! 63 :..,.., :3918: ... ! 4700!SEt8ERT 362: 73: ..... :3933:11111111: 5180iSHAW2E Jel: 55 l _, ;37~3: IIIII/I: n50lSHEEP MOUNTAIN 364: .CS ~ ,..,. :393-4: II#IM ! !5930 :sHOSHONE 365: 13:,.,., ;4002; """~..,!SILVER LAKE 368: .. :---:3749],..: 9270:SILVERTON 367: 39 : ,.,., : 39()g: """ : sao:SIMLA 388l 119 l-:.o3Sl """ : 9100lSKY RANCH LUTHERN CAMP 36V: 59i .... 1111:3924:.,. ~ 62ooiSOUTH PLATTE 370: S7:.,.. :•o2a: ,. : 8340:SPICER 371:9 iiiiiMIIIIIti:3724: ... :.._.1D:SPRINGFtELD 372; 9 ;t#lllllllllll;3723; -: ~580;SPRJNGFIEL07WSW 373: 9 : IIMHIItiM :3717 l IIIII/I: •500:SPRJNGFIELO 8 S 374: 9:--:3719:--: 4390iSPRINGFIEL08SW 375; 19 l t#IIIIIIIIM ;3S.1 l 1#11111; 1#11111 ;SQUAW MOUNTAJN 376! 15!,..,.., :3842! ... :,.. !STELMO 377! 7 f....., :3713: ... : e6GO:STATE TURKEY EXP FAR 378l Ill l,.,.,.. :402!1l ,. : e&cOlSTEIIMBOAT SPRINGS 379: 75:,..,. :.-037: ,_,: 39-40:STERUNG 380; 9 :-.;3717liiiiiii;3800;STONINGTON 381: 63 :.,., :391e:"": .-.-JO:sTRAnoN 38.2: 35: IIIIMitiiM :3920! .... : se.co:STRONTIA SPRINGS ON.t 383! 6S:...,. :3915: """~ 9740:SUGARLOAF RESERVOIR 384! #II!,.,. :3726:.,.:,., :sUMMIMLLE 385! 81 :.,., !4030:""! 5860!SUNOEAM 7 SW 388: 49: tlftiUIIIII :4000!,.: 8340!TABERNASH 387: &7! IIIIMIIIIItl !3731! 1111111: 7lOO:TACOMA

388: H : ..... bmi ... i 4960iTACON'Y 10 SE Jag: 51 :.,.,..:3649: .... ~ 9200:TAYl0RPARK 300: .. :.....,. :3756: .. i 8800!TELLURIOE 391: 65:...., lJ920l lllltltl l.,.. lTENNESSEE PASS m: 71 :#111111111111:3705: tJIIIIII: 8270!TERCt04NW 393!,. : ....... :3937: ,_! •ssohHURMAN 3 ENE Js.: 89:11111111/1111:3740; 1111111 l 4830lTIMPAS 13 SW 395: 71:,.,.. :3110! 111111': GOJo!TRJNIOAO 396: 71:,.., :3115! ... ~ 5750:11UNIOAD FMARPT 397:71 :.....,:3709! ,.,: B120:TRIHIOAOlN<E 398: 71 l,.,. :3711: 1#11111: 8050:TRINIOAO RIVER 399: n: llllllll/llllb750:..., ~ 87ooiTROUTLAKE 400: 71 : ...... !JTOBi .... : 5810:mov 1 SE 401:05 :IIIIIHIIIN ;3905;-: 9180;TWIIt LAKES EVAPORATION 402: 65 !1111111111111 :Jaoe: .... : 8200!lWIN lAKES RESERVOIR .col; 9 ;...,.b734;111NM· 413o!twoeum:s

Colorado Ground Snow Loada 2007

COLORADO GROUND SNOW LOAD STUDY - NWS SITES SUMMAR' NCRS Site Data I stitlillcafOata

Slltul : Ye•ra : Oat. : Dltl oiSite :orDal•! Us• iTYP•

lA 4 -N lA 2 N A 15 Y Sfi'MI A 53 Y Sfi'MI A 20 Y Snwll ... 87 y Ml•ed lA 23 ; y : MJ•ed A ea!v!snwcS lA 6 ! N : A 20:v:Snwd A. 13 : N : tA .... : y !Snwtl lA 27 ! Y : Mixed A 47 : Y : Snwd A 41 ! Y :Mud lA : 13 : N : NS : : N ! A i 15 : N i Snwd tA : 8 ! N : lA ! T ! N :

A : 43 : Y :Mhted lA : 11 : N ! A : 40 : Y :fAiaed lA!11!N! A ! _... ! Y !Snwd lA ! 5 : N ! . . . A : 11 : N ! A : 15 : Y ! Snwd A : 53 : Y iStr.W lA. : 5 : N : A ! S3 ! Y :Snwct

NS : : N : lA : 4 : H : tA : 17 : Y : Snwd A : 48 : Y : SnMI IA•58•Y• A ~ _.2 : Y : Snwd IA~17!Hi lA • 6 • N • . . . "' : 17 : y : Snwd lA ! 3 ! N ! tA ! 14 : N :

A. : 82 ! v :snwd lA : 47 : Y : Snwd lA ! 47 ! Y : Snwd JA : 48 : y : Mlzed A : 18 : Y : Snwd A : •a : v :snwt~

lA : 1 : N : lA ! 5 ! N ! 1A. : 1 : N : lA ! l8 : Y :Snwd rA : 3s. ! v isrM lA i 28 : Y : Sn\W A ! &7 ! Y ! Snwd

lA : 6 : N i lA • 1 • N • . . . lA : 5 : t' : lA ~ 17 ~ Y : Snwd tA i 41 ; Y ! Snwd A : 47 : N :

A : 6 i N i A ' 17 • N '

lA i 18 i N i Snwd lA : 40 : Y : Snwd lA : 3 : N : A i 45 f Y iMbed lA ! 44 ! Y ! Sfi'MI

Snow: Ma• : M•• Type : ~~p~ : Depth

NA NA c c s s

O.V55 0.967 0.1166 0.992

c s

0.1170 0.990

NA s 0.1166

NA c 0.9&4 s 0.$74 s 0.985 s

NA NA NA NA NA c

NA s

NA s

NA NA s c

NA c

NA NA c c s s

NA NA c

NA NA c 5 5 s s c

NA HA NA s s c c

NA NA NA s s

NA s

NA c s

NA c s

0.983

U55

0.9&4

D.ll83

0.9&4

0.955 0.987

i 0.992

l 0.960 i 0.986

l 0983

: 0.960 . . : 0.99Z : 0 .985 : 0.985 : 0.988 : 0.862

~ 0.986 . . . : 0 .982 : 0.982 ! 0.975 : 0.990 . . . . : 0.960

0.983

0.962 0.983

0.885 0.984

. . . 59.0 69.0

,25.0 £5.0 ~1.0

19.0

23.0

49.0 38.0 23.0 •z.o

11.0

37.0

30.0

24.0

29.0 39.0

70.0

30.0 49.0

21.0

49.0

61.0 18.0 12.0 28.0 35.0 66.0

53.0 11.0 72.0 IIU

16.0 31.0

79.0 18.0

38.0 fi .O

--r"1W -..u u ; EV : SOYR PDF : snow : Snow : &nld Typ• : ll•pth ; n. ·· t

GU NO GU NO GU

FR

NO GU

LN . . . . . . . . GAi G-'

GA NO

NO

F NO

LN

GU

LN

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

66.6 81 .5 25.5 21.3 51.4

17.5

48.6 39.8

42.6

311.2

28.9

33.6 39.3

119.5

48.9 50.8 20.0 22.4

641

57.1

FR 20-2 LN •&.7 GA 64.2

GU 79.6

20.0

FR 33.0

71.3 7U 25.5 25.2

~ 82.8 :

32.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

54. \ 35.2

44.6

42.~ :

=l 31.8 i 38.9 1 71.1

35.1 48.3

20.0

61.0

55.1

26.3 39.1 73.8

52.6

78 .•

28.6

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

: 30.0

140.6 147.7 22.8 22.5 121.2 20.0

31 .5

\0\.3 35.~

20.0 ~8.11

20.0

r•.6

31.5

20.0

30.8 116.0

140.1

57.9 88.1 0.0 23.~

\171

103.6 20.0 20.0 23.8 40.8 ,.5.8

61.1 29.0 156.8

20.0 26.9

20.0

•a.2 20.0

M•• Depth

72

23

15

22

38 18 42

17

~8 182 1~8

52 l&

57 20

22

64

72 64

•o

123

18

1971R ool ftro

1\4

34

23

29

•o 23 3!1

20

42 134 90

51 20

76 20

25

87

104

7•

37

98

24

2007 Adfuel

1"!>81

145 20 20

120 20

30

100 35 20 50

20

75

30

20

30 65

140

60 00 20 25

115

100 20

25 •o 145

eo 30

155

20 35

20

HUC

14 14 1~

1~

14 1~

13 11 \0 11

11 11 13 11 11 n n n 14 14 ~ ro ro ro ro ro 11 ~

ro 14 11 ro ro ro 11 11 11 11 ro 11 14 14 ro 11 ro ro 11 n ~

14 ~

11 14 14 11 11 ro 11 11 11 11 11 14 11 11 11 11

HUC Buln Data ~_l;ln_ow O~P!It

10: 11: 13: 14

. . 30~ 24: . . . . .

~a 111

23

49 36

23 n

2!1

. . . . . . 30: 49:

i 0

121

•sl . . . 18 :

: 12 28: 35:

~66 . . . . . . . I ..

: 16

~ 31

~ i i 18_ . :38 . ,,

59 89 25 25

37

39

70

01

53

72 &4

Ern-.tlOn . . . 10 : 11 : 13 : 14

• • 9460• ! 4170 i i :6020: : . . . . . . . . . : iJ0.50: : ~6850: : : :7690:

8070 8780 7000 5320

r··1 1 ~ i ~8470

5980~ i 39110 . • . . . . . . . . . .

n 6200: : SJ.co: : :••to:

:•sao: . . i ~ -·. -·. . . . . . . . . . . . .

3940: : : 3800!

4430! : 5840: : I 9140 l

. . . . . . . .

n : 4&30:

I""' I ~ 5e10 ~ : 920()! . . t 4130 I

5!130

:11270 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i6&4o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ 7300

: G200

l8800 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Cammenl

lllsullldenl Nil lnsulldenl dill

Leu \han 20" lnsulftdent dall

500)'1' 11'111111den1 d8la

lnsulkienl dala

lnsulllcleol dlla ln$ullld«<l da18

lnsulldenl dela

lnsulftclonl do too

1nsuiDdent cUll lnsuttldenl dall

lnsulldenl de too

IIISU!Iic:lenl data

s .. Spmglield 7 WSW 500yr

See SpMgfield 7 WSW See Springfield 1 WSW

lnf<lllicienl cllU lnl.,._dall

c

,-.

lnsullldent dell lnN11d•m1 dall lnSUitlclenl ~ Lessflan20'

SeeSNCR lnouiOOenl dill Insufficient data lnsufflcienl Nla

Sn...-.sad s .. lmldad Seelrini.Ud SeeSNCR

lllsulliclonl dall

Page 13 of Appendix A

Permit Card POST ON SITE

Garlield County Building and Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: (970)945-8212 Fax: (970)384-3470

PermitNO. BLRE-9-1 0-1776

AGREEMENT In consideration of the issuance of the permit, the applicant hereby agrees to comply with all laws and regulations related to

the zoning, location; construction and erection of the proposed structured for which this penn it 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 department and IMMEDIATELY BECOME NULL AND VOID.

Residential Building Parcel #:2179071 00408

Owner's Name: John Cozza ----------------------------------Job Address: 30475 HWY 6 & 24

Rifle, CO

ContractorW Phone Primary Contractor

Inspection Scheduling Code

Owner's Phone: 625-2030

Total Square Feet: 1152.

Work Description: Converting agricultural buildin~ into a Carport

ln'SPection~~.Jf;'-~E...:__,.,~;.avr.-o ~~-·~~ W~·'l;?';'·~~..!" COmrilents -'r;.:t'-':'=':;"-'~ ... ~.a~-.~.:.t..;,~G.O.-.,. - _~>. -·- · - -~ • f'&2E!Ra~ ~at~: ~---

Footers · ~~ lloo-:1' •

Foundation Walls ~~ Framing •t~ -Drywe~ll · ~q~ A

I ~

Final ~;:-' IU~t-~~ ..Jl.-\ t19-11~ I

f~~ ' - I Mise .-· .. ~ I

Insulation ,~·. : ... ~;;.~ ~ f ""- L.. ( ....1--tTI-A Grout r6:1~. r

i'f/.. f?JAF"("cF . .-. Mechanical LraF r;;,, Lr ~/, L ~·.__~. ,, UG Plumbing

r-~~ L~~~~

,.,- "-~..-~ '"' Rough Plumbing C6}!~ ~r •. ,' ~- .-hu..._ Gas

{;-: ... ~tr.,;

ADDITIONAL INSPECTIONS MAY BE REQUIRED

POST THIS IN CONSPir.UOUS PLACE WHEN CONSTRUCTION IS STARTED ) For Inspections Call: 1-888y868-5306 ()