The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1.00 General Application Materials_PartHInlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET A3.1 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 1.59 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 1.59 Q Capt (cfs)= 1.33 Q Bypass (cfs) = 0.26 Depth at Inlet (in) = 2.21 Efficiency (%)= 84 Gutter Spread (ft) = 4.49 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.84 Bypass Spread (ft) = 1.19 Bypass Depth (in) = 1.18 Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET A5 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.46 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.46 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.46 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.47 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.47 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.11 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET A5.1 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.26 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.26 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.26 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.18 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.19 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 4.43 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET A6 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.27 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.27 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.27 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.20 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.21 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 4.47 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET A6.1 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.54 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.54 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.54 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.56 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.77 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.29 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET A7 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.71 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.71 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.70 Q Bypass (cfs) = 0.01 Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.72 Efficiency (%)= 99 Gutter Spread (ft) = 2.44 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.45 Bypass Spread (ft) = 0.34 Bypass Depth (in) = 0.34 Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET A8 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.52 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.52 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.52 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.54 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.68 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.26 Bypass Spread (ft) = 0.04 Bypass Depth (in) = 0.04 Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET B1 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.53 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.53 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.53 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.55 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.72 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.28 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET B2 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 1.30 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 1.30 Q Capt (cfs)= 1.15 Q Bypass (cfs) = 0.15 Depth at Inlet (in) = 2.08 Efficiency (%)= 88 Gutter Spread (ft) = 3.96 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.71 Bypass Spread (ft) = 0.97 Bypass Depth (in) = 0.96 Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET B4 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 1.03 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 1.03 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.96 Q Bypass (cfs) = 0.07 Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.94 Efficiency (%)= 93 Gutter Spread (ft) = 3.36 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.60 Bypass Spread (ft) = 0.73 Bypass Depth (in) = 0.73 Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET B4.1 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.53 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.53 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.53 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.55 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.72 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.28 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET B6 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.27 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.27 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.27 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.20 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.21 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 4.47 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET B6.1 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.54 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.54 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.54 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.56 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.77 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.29 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET B9 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.19 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.19 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.19 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.05 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.06 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 4.09 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET B9.1 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.44 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.44 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.44 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.44 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.45 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.05 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET B10 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.09 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.09 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.09 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 0.80 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 0.80 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 3.40 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET B11 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.35 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.35 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.35 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.32 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.33 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 4.77 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET C1 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.44 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.44 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.44 Q Bypass (cfs) = -0- Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.44 Efficiency (%)= 100 Gutter Spread (ft) = 1.45 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.05 Bypass Spread (ft) = -0- Bypass Depth (in) = -0- Inlet Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Monday, Apr 25 2022 INLET C2 Combination Inlet Location = On grade Curb Length (ft) = 3.06 Throat Height (in) = 5.00 Grate Area (sqft) = -0- Grate Width (ft) = 1.50 Grate Length (ft) = 2.94 Gutter Slope, Sw (ft/ft) = 0.083 Slope, Sx (ft/ft) = 0.020 Local Depr (in) = -0- Gutter Width (ft) = 1.50 Gutter Slope (%) = 5.80 Gutter n-value = 0.013 Calculations Compute by:Known Q Q (cfs)= 0.68 Highlighted Q Total (cfs)= 0.68 Q Capt (cfs)= 0.67 Q Bypass (cfs) = 0.01 Depth at Inlet (in) = 1.69 Efficiency (%)= 99 Gutter Spread (ft) = 2.33 Gutter Vel (ft/s) = 5.44 Bypass Spread (ft) = 0.31 Bypass Depth (in) = 0.31 Half Moon Subdivision Final Engineering Garfield County, Colorado Design Report Page 11 Appendix F: Cost Estimate Subdivision Improvments Agreement Date: September 30, 2022 Half Moon Subdivision Battlement Mesa, CO By: Daniel Stewart, PE Roaring Fork Engineering 1 201-00000 CLEARING AND GRUBBING L S 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 2 202-00200 REMOVAL OF SIDEWALK SY 13 $25.00 $325.00 3 202-00220 REMOVAL OF ASPHALT MAT SY 135 $8.00 $1,080.00 4 202-00240 REMOVAL OF ASPHALT MAT (PLANING)(2 INCH)SY 82 $2.00 $164.00 5 202-05008 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER LF 202 $12.00 $2,424.00 6 202-05022 SAWING ASPHALT MATERIAL (2 INCH)LF 281 $5.00 $1,405.00 7 202-05026 SAWING ASPHALT MATERIAL (6 INCH)LF 305 $8.00 $2,440.00 8 203-00010 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION (COMPLETE IN PLACE)CY 19830 $8.50 $168,130.00 9 203-00011 BOULDER EXCAVATION (12 INCH PLUS) CY 8500 $50.00 $422,500.00 10 203-00041 TRENCH (SPECIAL) (COMMON UTILITY TRENCH)LF 2601 $30.00 $78,030.00 11 203-00043 GAS LINE LF 3835 $25.00 $95,875.00 12 203-00060 EMBANKMENT MATERIAL (COMPLETE IN PLACE)CY 16614 $12.00 $199,368.00 13 203-00061 BOULDER PLACEMENT CY 8500 $20.00 $170,000.00 14 207-00210 STOCKPILE TOPSOIL CY 8500 $8.50 $72,250.00 15 208-00012 EROSION LOG TYPE 1 (9 INCH)LF 2437 $4.00 $9,748.00 16 208-00045 CONCRETE WASHOUT STRUCTURE EACH 1 $500.00 $500.00 17 208-00056 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION (TYPE III)EACH 23 $150.00 $3,450.00 18 208-00070 VEHICLE TRACKING PAD EACH 2 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 20 304-06007 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (CLASS 6)CY 1716 $72.00 $119,232.00 21 403-34721 HOT MIX ASPHALT (GRADING SX) (75) (PG 58-28)TON 1736 $100.00 $173,600.00 22 420-00133 GEOTEXTILE (SEPARATOR) (CLASS 2)SY 243 $4.50 $1,093.50 23 504-03411 RETAINING WALL (BOULDER)SF 1687 $42.00 $70,854.00 24 603-01155 15 Inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (Install Only)LF 1540 $40.00 $61,600.00 25 603-01240 24 Inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (Install Only)LF 452 $45.00 $20,340.00 26 603-01300 30 Inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (Install Only)LF 128 $55.00 $7,040.00 27 603-05015 15 INCH RIENFORCED CONCRETE END SECTION (INSTALL ONLY)EA 1 $250.00 $250.00 28 603-05030 30 INCH RIENFORCED CONCRETE END SECTION (INSTALL ONLY)EA 2 $400.00 $800.00 29 603-50005 SEWER SERVICE EACH 48 $1,500.00 $72,000.00 30 603-83008 8 INCH SEWER PIPE (SDR 35)LF 2063 $90.00 $185,670.00 31 604-20003 OUTLET STRUCTURE (SPECIAL) (WEIR)EACH 1 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 32 604-39001 MANHOLE SPECIAL (STORM DRAIN)(CURB INLET)EACH 27 $4,500.00 $121,500.00 33 604-39002 MANHOLE SPECIAL (STORM DRAIN)(CONICAL RIM)EACH 2 $4,000.00 $8,000.00 34 604-39010 MANHOLE SPECIAL (SANITARY SEWER)EACH 20 $8,000.00 $160,000.00 35 607-11455 FENCE WOOD LF 1776 $29.00 $51,504.00 36 609-21008 MONOLITHIC SW W/ MOUNTNBALE C&G LF 3892 $100.00 $389,200.00 37 613-00200 2 INCH ELECTRICAL CONDUIT LF 1100 $10.00 $8,570.00 38 613-00400 4 INCH ELECTRICAL CONDUIT LF 5094 $15.00 $76,410.00 39 613-00400 4 INCH ELECTRICAL CONDUIT (FIBER)LF 7641 $15.00 $114,615.00 40 613-06001 ELECTRIC METER (STREET LIGHTS)EACH 2 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 41 613-10000 WIRING LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 42 613-13000 LUMINAIRE (LED)EACH 6 $750.00 $4,500.00 43 613-32250 LIGHT STANDARD WOOD EACH 6 $3,500.00 $21,000.00 44 613-40010 LIGHT STANDARD FOUNDATION EACH 6 $2,500.00 $15,000.00 45 613-50350 POWER TRANSFORMER & VAULT (SINGLE PHASE)(INSTALL ONLY)EACH 8 $3,500.00 $28,000.00 46 613-81000 PANELBOARD (STREET LIGHTS)EACH 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 CDOT REFERENCE NO. CONTRACT ITEM NO.CONTRACT ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST Page 1 Subdivision Improvments Agreement Date: September 30, 2022 Half Moon Subdivision Battlement Mesa, CO By: Daniel Stewart, PE Roaring Fork Engineering CDOT REFERENCE NO. CONTRACT ITEM NO.CONTRACT ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST 47 614-00011 SIGN PANEL (CLASS I)SF 16 $25.00 $400.00 48 614-01503 STEEL SIGN SUPPORT (2-INCH ROUND)(POST AND SOCKET)EACH 4 $250.00 $1,000.00 49 619-00002 WATER SERVICE EACH 48 $1,500.00 $72,000.00 50 619-00007 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATERLINE EACH 2 $4,000.00 $8,000.00 51 619-06060 6 INCH WATERLINE (C900)LF 76 $210.00 $15,960.00 52 619-06120 8 INCH WATERLINE (C900)LF 2018 $140.00 $282,520.00 53 619-78048 6 INCH FIRE HYDRANT EACH 5 $6,500.00 $32,500.00 54 620-00001 FIELD OFFICE (CLASS 1)EACH 1 $10,900.00 $10,900.00 55 620-00020 SANITARY FACILITY EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 56 625-00000 CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING L S 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 57 626-00000 MOBILIZATION L S 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 58 700-70010 F/A MINOR CONTRACT REVISIONS F A 1 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 EOPC Total:$3,680,747.50 Page 2 Half Moon Subdivision, Battlement Mesa, CO April 25, 2022 Drainage Report 14 Appendix G – Geotechnical Report 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 phone: (970) 945-7988 fax: (970) 945-8454 email: kaglenwood@kumarusa.com www.kumarusa.com Office Locations: Denver (HQ), Parker, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Glenwood Springs, and Summit County, CO PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL STUDY PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT BATTLEMENT MESA, HALF MOON PARCEL NORTHSTAR TRAIL GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO PROJECT NO. 21-7-732 OCTOBER 27, 2021 PREPARED FOR: RISING TIDES ENTERPRISES, LLC ATTN: TODD BARTON 2399 46-1/2 ROAD DEBEQUE, COLORADO 81630 toddebarton@msn.com Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 21-7-732 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ....................................................................................... - 1 - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ................................................................................................ - 1 - SITE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................... - 1 - FIELD EXPLORATION ............................................................................................................ - 2 - SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................. - 2 - ENGINEERING ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................... - 3 - DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................ - 3 - FOUNDATIONS .................................................................................................................... - 3 - FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS ....................................................................... - 4 - FLOOR SLABS ...................................................................................................................... - 5 - UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM ..................................................................................................... - 5 - SITE GRADING ..................................................................................................................... - 6 - SURFACE DRAINAGE ......................................................................................................... - 6 - PAVEMENT SECTION ......................................................................................................... - 7 - LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................... - 8 - FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 – LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURES 4 THROUGH 6 – SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURES 7 AND 8 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1 – SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 21-7-732 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for the proposed residential development to be located on Battlement Mesa, Half Moon Parcel, Northstar Trail, Garfield County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the subdivision design. The study was conducted in accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to Rising Tides Enterprises, LLC dated August 16, 2021. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain information on the subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or expansion potential and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation and subgrade conditions for pavement section design. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION Development plans were preliminary at the time of our study. The development plan for proposed 47 single family lots and access street off Northstar Trail is shown on Figure 1. In general, the proposed residences are assumed to be one and two-story structures. Ground floors could be structural above crawlspace or slab-on-grade. Grading for the structures and access street is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 2 to 10 feet. Foundation loadings for this type of construction are assumed to be relatively light. If building development plans change significantly from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report. SITE CONDITIONS The property was vacant of structures at the time of our study. The ground surface slopes gently down to the west with moderate slopes beyond the north-northeast sides of the property down to a dry gully. The south and west sides are bordered by existing residential development and Northstar Trail as shown on Figure 1. Vegetation consists of moderately thick grass and weeds. - 2 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 21-7-732 FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on September 24, 2021. Eight exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a truck- mounted CME-45B drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Kumar & Associates. Samples of the subsoils were taken with 1⅜ inch and 2-inch I.D. spoon samplers. The samplers were driven into the subsurface materials at various depths with blows from a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. The subsoils encountered, below a thin topsoil layer, consist of sandy silt and clay (loess deposit) in most borings above very stiff to hard, sandy silty clay with scattered gravel and cobbles underlain by medium dense to dense, clayey sandy gravel with cobbles and scattered boulders and sandy clay with gravel zones. Drilling in the coarse granular soils with auger equipment was difficult due to the cobbles and boulders and drilling refusal was encountered in the deposit at some of the borings. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content, density, gradation analyses and liquid and plastic limits. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on the silt and clay soils, shown on Figures 4 through 6, generally indicate low compressibility under existing moisture conditions and nil to minor expansion potential when wetted under light loading. The samples of sandy silty clay, shown on Figures 5 and 6, had moderate expansion potential when wetted. Results of gradation analyses performed on small diameter drive samples (minus 1½-inch fraction) of the coarse granular subsoils are shown on Figures 7 and 8. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1. Free water was not encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the soils were typically slightly moist. - 3 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 21-7-732 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS There are no geologic conditions of significance which would make development of the property infeasible. The natural sandy silt and clay soils typically encountered below the topsoil are suitable for support of lightly loaded shallow spread footings with low bearing capacity. Settlement potential is expected to be relatively minor under relatively light loadings. The underlying clay soils could possess excessive expansion potential and need mitigation such as sub-excavation and replacement with structural fill but we should evaluate the expansion potential at the time of excavation and when building configurations and foundation depths and loadings have been determined. Structural fill consisting of granular soil can be used to reestablish design bearing level if needed. Below grade areas of the structures should be protected against groundwater impacts with an underdrain system. The following recommendations are made primarily for construction on the natural low or non-expansive soils or structural fill. Site specific subsoil information should be developed for foundation design of each building. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the buildings be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural low or non-expansive soils or compacted structural fill. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural low or non-expansive soils or structural fill should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psf to 3,000 psf. Based on experience, we expect settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be up to around 1 inch. Additional differential settlement of around ½ to 1 inch could occur if the bearing soils are wetted. 2) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. 3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of foundations at least 36 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this area. - 4 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 21-7-732 4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist lateral earth pressures as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls" section of this report. 5) The topsoil, expansive clay soils and loose disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the firm natural soils. The exposed soils in footing areas should then be moisture adjusted to near optimum and compacted. Structural fill should be compacted to at least 98% of standard Proctor density at near optimum moisture content and extend laterally beyond the footing edges a distance at least one-half the depth of fill below the footing. 6) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions. FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS Foundation walls and retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 50 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site soils. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the building and can be expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 40 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site granular soils. Backfill should not contain organics, debris or rock larger than about 6 inches. All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind walls. Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density at near optimum moisture content. Backfill placed in pavement and walkway areas should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density. Care should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment near the wall, since this could cause excessive lateral pressure on the wall. Some settlement of deep foundation wall - 5 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 21-7-732 backfill should be expected, even if the material is placed correctly, and could result in distress to facilities constructed on the backfill. The lateral resistance of foundation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of the sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure against the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.30 for the silt and clay soils and 0.45 for the granular soils. Passive pressure of compacted backfill against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 300 pcf. The coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. FLOOR SLABS The natural on-site sandy silt and granular soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab-on-grade construction. The clay soils may have potential to heave floor slabs and the subgrade condition should be further evaluated at the time of excavation to assess the need for sub-excavation of expansive clay soils and replacement with structural fill. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4-inch layer of free-draining gravel should be placed beneath interior slabs to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with at least 50% retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve. All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95% of maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist of the onsite predominantly granular soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock placed at near optimum moisture content. UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM Free water was not encountered in the exploratory borings during our exploration but it has been our experience in the area and where there are clay soils that local perched groundwater can - 6 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 21-7-732 develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below-grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawlspace and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. Shallow crawlspace areas (4 feet or less deep) may not need to be protected from wetting which should be evaluated by the lot specific subsurface conditions. Where subdrains are provided, the drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free-draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum ½% to a suitable gravity outlet. Drywells for drain water outlet will probably have limited capacity due to the silty clayey matrix of the granular soil. Free- draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 1½ feet deep. SITE GRADING The risk of construction-induced slope instability at the site appears low provided the building and utility trench excavations are dry and cut and fill depths are limited. We assume the cut depths for below grade levels and utilities will not exceed about 10 feet. Fills should be limited to about 8 to 10 feet deep. Structural fills should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density near optimum moisture content. Prior to fill placement, the subgrade should be carefully prepared by removing all vegetation and topsoil and compacting to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density. The fill should be benched into slopes that exceed 20% grade. Permanent unretained cut and fill slopes should be graded at 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter and protected against erosion by revegetation or other means. This office should review site grading plans for the project prior to construction. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after each building has been completed: 1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. 2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. - 7 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 21-7-732 3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 6 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 2½ inches in the first 10 feet in paved areas. Free-draining wall backfill should be covered with filter fabric and capped with at least 2 feet of the on-site finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. 5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least 5 feet from foundation walls. Consideration should be given to use of xeriscape to reduce the potential for wetting of soils below the building caused by irrigation. PAVEMENT SECTION A pavement section is designed to distribute concentrated traffic loads to the subgrade. Pavement design procedures are based on strength properties of the subgrade and pavement materials assuming stable, uniform subgrade conditions. Certain soils such as the fine-grained silt and clay soils and clayey matrix soils encountered on this site, are frost susceptible and could impact pavement performance. Frost susceptible soils are problematic when there is a free water source. If those soils are wetted, the resulting frost heave movements can be large and erratic. Therefore, pavement design procedures assume dry subgrade conditions by providing proper surface and subsurface drainage. Subgrade Materials: The upper silt and clay soils encountered at the site are mainly low plasticity which are considered a fair support for pavement materials. The classification tests on the soil indicate an Hveem stabilometer 'R' value of around 10 for asphalt pavements and a modulus of subgrade reaction of 50 pci for rigid (portland cement) pavements. The silt soils are considered moderately susceptible to frost action. Pavement Section: Since anticipated traffic loading information was not available at the time of report preparation, an 18 kip equivalent daily load application (EDLA) of 10 was assumed for combined automobile and truck traffic areas. This loading is typical of a local street with occasional service vehicles and should be checked by the project civil engineer. If the pavement will support significant construction traffic, we should be contacted for evaluation of the additional loading and section thickness. A Regional Factor of 1.5 was assumed for this area of Garfield County based on the site terrain, drainage and climatic conditions. - 8 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 21-7-732 Based on the assumed parameters, the pavement section in areas of combined automobile and truck traffic should consist of 6 inches of CDOT Class 6 aggregate base course and 4 inches of asphalt surface. An alternate section of 9 inches of CDOT Class aggregate base course and 3 inches of asphalt surface can be used. As an alternative to asphalt pavement and in areas where truck turning movements are concentrated, the pavement section can consist of 6 inches of portland cement concrete on 4 inches of CDOT Class 6 aggregate base course. The section thicknesses assume structural coefficients of 0.14 for aggregate base course, 0.44 for asphalt surface and design strength of 4,500 psi for air entrained portland cement concrete. The material properties and compaction should be in accordance with the project specifications. Subgrade Preparation: Prior to placing the pavement section, the entire subgrade area should be stripped of topsoil, scarified to a depth of 8 inches, adjusted to a moisture content near optimum and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density. The pavement subgrade should be proof-rolled with a heavily loaded pneumatic-tired vehicle. Pavement design procedures assume a stable subgrade. Areas which deform excessively under heavy wheel loads are not stable and should be removed and replaced with structural granular material such as CDOT Class 2 base course to achieve a stable subgrade prior to paving. Drainage: The collection and diversion of surface drainage away from paved areas is extremely important to the satisfactory performance of pavement. Drainage design should provide for the removal of water from paved areas and prevent wetting of the subgrade soils. Uphill roadside ditches should have an invert level at least 1 foot below the road base. LIMITATIONS This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled at the locations indicated on Figure 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our services do not include determining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If the client is concerned about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered Kumar & Associates Kumar & Associates Kumar & Associates Kumar & Associates Kumar & Associates Kumar & Associates Kumar & Associates Kumar & Associates TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Project No. 21-7-732 Page 1 of 2 SAMPLE LOCATION NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT NATURAL DRY DENSITY GRADATION PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE ATTERBERG LIMITS AASHTO CLASSIFICATION SOIL TYPE BORING DEPTH GRAVEL SAND LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC INDEX (%) (%) (ft) (%) (pcf) (%) (%) 1 2½ 4.5 109 Sandy Clay and Silt 10 and 15 combined 10.8 35 26 39 Sandy Clay and Gravel 2 2½ 9.5 88 Calcareous Sandy Silty Clay 5 8.1 37 20 43 Sandy Clay and Gravel 3 2½ 5.1 108 91 Slightly Sandy Silt 5 10.6 103 Sandy Silty Clay 4 2½ 6.0 99 Sandy Clay and Silt 10 8.7 35 28 37 Sandy Clay and Gravel 5 5 7.4 112 Sandy Silty Clay 10 11.1 64 45 28 A-7-6 (13) Sandy Clay with Gravel TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Project No. 21-7-732 Page 2 of 2 SAMPLE LOCATION NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT NATURAL DRY DENSITY GRADATION PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE ATTERBERG LIMITS AASHTO CLASSIFICATION SOIL TYPE BORING DEPTH GRAVEL SAND LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC INDEX (%) (%) (ft) (%) (pcf) (%) (%) 6 2½ 5.2 102 89 Sandy Clayey Silt 10 9.0 29 33 38 Sandy Clay and Gravel 7 3 6.5 79 29 10 A-4 (6) Sandy Silty Clay 8 1 6.3 87 29 10 A-4 (8) Sandy Silty Clay Half Moon Subdivision Final Engineering Garfield County, Colorado Design Report Page 11 Appendix F: Cost Estimate Subdivision Improvments Agreement Date: November 14, 2022 Half Moon Subdivision Battlement Mesa, CO By: Daniel Stewart, PE Roaring Fork Engineering 1 201-00000 CLEARING AND GRUBBING L S 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 2 202-00200 REMOVAL OF SIDEWALK SY 13 $25.00 $325.00 3 202-00220 REMOVAL OF ASPHALT MAT SY 135 $8.00 $1,080.00 4 202-00240 REMOVAL OF ASPHALT MAT (PLANING)(2 INCH)SY 82 $2.00 $164.00 5 202-05008 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER LF 202 $12.00 $2,424.00 6 202-05022 SAWING ASPHALT MATERIAL (2 INCH)LF 281 $5.00 $1,405.00 7 202-05026 SAWING ASPHALT MATERIAL (6 INCH)LF 305 $8.00 $2,440.00 8 203-00010 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION (COMPLETE IN PLACE)CY 19830 $7.50 $148,350.00 9 203-00011 BOULDER EXCAVATION (12 INCH PLUS) CY 8500 $35.00 $295,750.00 10 203-00041 TRENCH (SPECIAL) (COMMON UTILITY TRENCH)LF 2601 $25.00 $65,025.00 11 203-00043 GAS LINE (TRENCH & BACKFILL)LF 3835 $25.00 $95,875.00 12 203-00060 EMBANKMENT MATERIAL (COMPLETE IN PLACE)CY 16614 $8.50 $141,219.00 13 203-00061 BOULDER PLACEMENT CY 8500 $20.00 $170,000.00 14 207-00210 STOCKPILE TOPSOIL CY 8500 $7.50 $63,750.00 15 208-00012 EROSION LOG TYPE 1 (9 INCH)LF 2437 $4.00 $9,748.00 16 208-00045 CONCRETE WASHOUT STRUCTURE EACH 1 $500.00 $500.00 17 208-00056 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION (TYPE III)EACH 23 $150.00 $3,450.00 18 208-00070 VEHICLE TRACKING PAD EACH 2 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 19 212-01201 LANDSCAPING (VEGETATION, IRRIGATION, PERMANENT GROUND COVER) LS 1 $117,460.00 $117,460.00 20 304-06007 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE (CLASS 6)CY 1716 $68.00 $112,608.00 21 403-34721 HOT MIX ASPHALT (GRADING SX) (75) (PG 58-28)TON 1736 $100.00 $173,600.00 22 420-00133 GEOTEXTILE (SEPARATOR) (CLASS 2)SY 243 $4.50 $1,093.50 23 504-03411 RETAINING WALL (BOULDER)SF 1687 $42.00 $70,854.00 24 603-01155 15 Inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (Install Only)LF 1540 $40.00 $61,600.00 25 603-01240 24 Inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (Install Only)LF 452 $45.00 $20,340.00 26 603-01300 30 Inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (Install Only)LF 128 $55.00 $7,040.00 27 603-05015 15 INCH RIENFORCED CONCRETE END SECTION (INSTALL ONLY)EA 1 $250.00 $250.00 28 603-05030 30 INCH RIENFORCED CONCRETE END SECTION (INSTALL ONLY)EA 2 $400.00 $800.00 29 603-50005 SEWER SERVICE EACH 48 $1,500.00 $72,000.00 30 603-83008 8 INCH SEWER PIPE (SDR 35)LF 2063 $80.00 $165,040.00 31 604-20003 OUTLET STRUCTURE (SPECIAL) (WEIR)EACH 1 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 32 604-39001 MANHOLE SPECIAL (STORM DRAIN)(CURB INLET)EACH 27 $3,500.00 $94,500.00 33 604-39002 MANHOLE SPECIAL (STORM DRAIN)(CONICAL RIM)EACH 2 $3,500.00 $7,000.00 34 604-39010 MANHOLE SPECIAL (SANITARY SEWER)EACH 20 $6,500.00 $130,000.00 35 607-11455 FENCE WOOD LF 1776 $17.00 $30,192.00 36 609-21008 MONOLITHIC SW W/ MOUNTNBALE C&G LF 3892 $55.00 $214,060.00 37 613-00200 2 INCH ELECTRICAL CONDUIT LF 1100 $7.50 $6,427.50 38 613-00400 4 INCH ELECTRICAL CONDUIT LF 5094 $12.00 $61,128.00 39 613-00400 4 INCH ELECTRICAL CONDUIT (FIBER)LF 7641 $12.00 $91,692.00 40 613-06001 ELECTRIC METER (STREET LIGHTS)EACH 2 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 41 613-10000 WIRING LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 42 613-13000 LUMINAIRE (LED)EACH 6 $750.00 $4,500.00 43 613-32250 LIGHT STANDARD WOOD EACH 6 $3,500.00 $21,000.00 44 613-40010 LIGHT STANDARD FOUNDATION EACH 6 $2,500.00 $15,000.00 45 613-50350 POWER TRANSFORMER & VAULT (SINGLE PHASE)(INSTALL ONLY)EACH 8 $3,500.00 $28,000.00 CDOT REFERENCE NO. CONTRACT ITEM NO.CONTRACT ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST Page 1 Subdivision Improvments Agreement Date: November 14, 2022 Half Moon Subdivision Battlement Mesa, CO By: Daniel Stewart, PE Roaring Fork Engineering CDOT REFERENCE NO. CONTRACT ITEM NO.CONTRACT ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST 46 613-81000 PANELBOARD (STREET LIGHTS)EACH 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 47 614-00011 SIGN PANEL (CLASS I)SF 16 $25.00 $400.00 48 614-01503 STEEL SIGN SUPPORT (2-INCH ROUND)(POST AND SOCKET)EACH 4 $250.00 $1,000.00 49 619-00002 WATER SERVICE EACH 48 $1,200.00 $57,600.00 50 619-00007 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATERLINE EACH 2 $4,000.00 $8,000.00 51 619-06060 6 INCH WATERLINE (C900)LF 76 $110.00 $8,360.00 52 619-06120 8 INCH WATERLINE (C900)LF 2018 $125.00 $252,250.00 53 619-78048 6 INCH FIRE HYDRANT EACH 5 $6,500.00 $32,500.00 54 620-00020 SANITARY FACILITY EACH 1 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 55 625-00000 CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING L S 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 56 626-00000 MOBILIZATION L S 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 EOPC Total:$3,021,800.00 Page 2 HALF MOON SUBDIVISIONBATTLEMENT MESA, CO FINAL PLAN MAP