HomeMy WebLinkAboutCO & DOCS - 03-00048 - Deseret Industries - New CommercialCERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
City of Rexburg
Department of Building Inspection
Building Permit No: R -o, -o8 -io
Applicable edition of code: ❑ International Building Code 2000
❑ International Residential Code 2000
❑ Uniform Building Code 1 997
Site address: Deseret Industries
Use and occupancy: Retail Store /Warehouse f LDS Family Services
Type of construction: Concrete Masonry
Design occupant load: 784
Sprinkler System required: ❑ Yes ❑ No
Name and address of owner: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -day Saints
601 N. 2nd E.
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
Contractor: Bateman — Jacobson Const. Co.
Special conditions:
Occupancy: ❑ Full ❑ Partial ❑ Temporary
This Certificate, issued pursuant to the requirements of Section log of the
International Building Code, certifies that, at the time of issuance, this
building or that portion of the building that was inspected on the date listed
was found to be in compliance with the requirements of the code for the
group and division of occupancy and the use for which the proposed
occupancy was classified.
Date: May 12,
C.O. Issued by:
Building Official
There shall be no future change in the existing occupancy classification of the building nor shall
any structural changes, modifications or additions be made to the building or any portion thereof
until the Building Official has reviewed and approved said future changes. ,
Water
State of Idaho Electrical DepartmeYit - (208 -356 -4830 ) ❑ Merlin Webster
,
R
a
BU I L PERMIT A PP L ICA REXBURG, ID DATE
THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY APPLIES FOR A PERMIT FOR THE WORK HEREIN INDICATED
OR AS SHOWN AND APPROVED IN THE ACCOMPANYING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIO
OWNER ADDRESS I / 1i , Y1 1i PHONE ' =" o rl
>' t
BUILDER �, C t Y t[ y ARCHITECT #. 5 I ' " , ' t t f DESIGNER
STRUCTURE: NEW U REMODEL O ADDITION U REPAIR U RENEWAL U FIRE DAMAGE
U RESIDENCE OMMM. U EDUCATIONAL U GOVT U RELIGIOUS O FENCE U PATIO U CARPORT U GARAGE U AWNING
FOOTINGS FOUNDATION BASEMENT FLOORS EXT. WALLS INT. WALLS CEILING ROOF HEAT INSULATED
IWOONICRETE Id CONCRETE U PARTIAL U WOOD U WOOD, U WOOD U WOOD U BUILT UP. (IGAS Q WALLS
U MASONRY U MASONRY U FULL X'CONCRETE ®MASONRY' U MASONRY U DRYWALL U WOOD SH. ROIL QCEIUNG
U OTHER U OTHER Q'NO U OTHER U CONCRETE U CONCRETE U PLASTER U COMP. SH. U COAL ® FLOORS
(JI VENEER U DRYWALL U TILE U TILE U FIREPLACE Q PERIMETER
U METAL U PLASTER tR ACOUSTIC )i) ROLL ROOF. O ELECTRIC
U STUCCO U TILE aOPEN U METAL
This permit is issued subject to the regulations contained in the Uniform Building Code and Zoning Regulations of Rexburg, and it is hereby agreed
that the work to be done as shown in the plans and specifications will be completed in accordance with the regulations
pertaining and applicable thereto: The issuance of the permit does not waive restrictive coven
REMARKS: C.tR,i,:,-
03
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING dr ZOMNG PAID CASH $
VALUE ;
FEE PAID U CASH APPLICANT CkCHECK
BUILDING DATE ADDRESS
INSPECTOR
WHITE-0wner's Copy CANARY — Building Departmenrs Copy PINK — Assessor's Copy GOLDENROD-Iriq- w
APPLICATION FOR BUIIIDING PERMIT
CITY OF REXBURG, IIIAHO
Date of Application S
Permit No. - Q ,40
OWNER
T
CONTRACTOR
Name _p
i
Mailing Address -, i ! /) PQi da I () 3 0L f+A b -971, ox
City /State /Zip c (j) 1 i •�-L 4T LI I Q
Telephone/Fax/Mobile [ - � � C jj
PROJECT INFORMATION DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
Property Zone: l3 IS existing use compatible with zoning, (screening parking,
When was this building last occupied N p L ( � P>( ,; I n na
Architect! Engineer Firm ti I��6 Cx � P_S Plan Name
Subdivision Lot Block
Circle One Residenti cial � Educational Government Remodel Other
Circle One NeWHouse Addition/l�emodei to House New Commercial
Circle One Basement: None/ Finished / Unfinished Other. Patio/
Lot Square Footage 2q � S �a Lot Width
Commercial Remodel
Carport/ Awning N/ A �
Square Feet I ' 33 image Square Feet Number of Stories I Height of Building 2 ( I
What will structure be used for: Home Home Business Apartment Commercial then
Will there bean apartment? Njft If so, hoar many units fit/ 1f4
Total Estimated
Signature of APT
Code
Zone
Building Type
i
Signature of Inspector
Issued by
Are you in a flood plain -J�
C
lv L ' 10 (/ 'A l E f i55C)�Cr S I I�� (�jc' )cl Au nu 4�
City /State /ZiP �) 1Cbl�(� - � ��fl 93 t4b
Building Permit Fees
OF �iEXBuRIG
Plan Check Fees
f �� (a
Plumbing Permit Fees
E P 5 2 003
:"waED)CASH
Dig ' g Permit F s
c
��SS�i• F�
. 3 3 2, ��.
$ _ — --- -----
t�//
Froniti'obta
TOTAL S
3 3 4 1 1-1 9, 8 (
lv L ' 10 (/ 'A l E f i55C)�Cr S I I�� (�jc' )cl Au nu 4�
City /State /ZiP �) 1Cbl�(� - � ��fl 93 t4b
CITY OF REXBURG
APPLICATION FOR PLUMBING PERMIT
OWNER FEES
1
Name pi. r Plumbing Permit .................... $ ( { _
Address Tel. Sewer Inspection .................. • • $
�{/ C�
Lot / / B �= Add. Inspection of Pipe • . • • • • • • • • • $
PLUMBER Inspection of Fixtures • • • • • • • • • • • . $
f r
Name
Address Tel.
NATURE OF INSTALLATION
Use
Rough Plumbing
Bath Tubs
Septic Tank
Urinal
Fixtures
Water Piping
Laundry Trays
Complete
Water Heater
Sewer
DESCRIPTION OF WORK''
Bath Tubs
Urinal
Showers
Sink Trap
Laundry Trays
Water Heater
Wash Basin
Other
Toilet
Slop Sinks
Kitchen Sinks
Floor Drain
Drinking Fountains
Lawn Sprinklers
Water Softeners
Dish Washing Mach.
Clothes Washer
a
$
TOTAL $ 2 L 3 3- 6
Received: Date
By
INSPECTOR'S RECORD
N
i
SEP 5 2003
CASH $
Sewer
Other
Finish Plumbing
s
INSP. NAME
E
I
CITY OF REN RU_RG A rDR ES S FORM-
(Choose either la or lb)
Date: 2'L
Filled out by:
Ia. SUBDIVISON
a. Block
b. Lot
lb. CITY BLOCK
- a. Lot
2. ASSIGNED ADDRESS
N
3. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
12
12,
- - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
ul
U p
nurx er.
wre
T As
211
ASSOCIATES
DAM
MPI P. WATSM
ft
ONSWU$ .JAN K csx RI, T
r
� C
V f
Q�
Tony Burdette
Jacobsen Construction
Deseret Industries Building
North 2 East
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
9 March 2004
Dear Tony,
The following areas are areas we have some concern about with the Special Inspections
being completed at your building. Please get with the Inspection agencies and do a
follow -up on the following areas to see if they have been completed and/or what
corrective action has been completed.
Forsgren Engineering
9 Oct Concrete footings have a high slump (7 ") for cylinders 128 -131. Tests show they
still reached required strengths. Why was truck accepted?
7 Nov Concrete footings have a high slump (6 '/4" and 5 3 /4 ") for cylinders 164 - 167.
Seven day tests show that the concrete will probably make the required strength
there are no 28 -day reports but still why were the trucks accepted with a slumps
so high?
10 Nov Concrete footings have a high slump of 7" for cylinders 168 -171. Cylinder 168
show a 7 -day test that exceeded the required strength but again why was the truck
accepted with a slump almost twice the maximum?
18 Nov Concrete footings have a high slump of 7.5" for cylinders 188 -191. Cylinder 188
show a 7 -day test shows that the required strength will probably be met but again
why was the truck accepted with a slump almost twice the maximum? There are
no further results for the 28-day tests. Did this batch make the required strength?
19 Nov A letter was sent to Forsgren Engineering from the Building Official requesting
that the high slump matter be looked into and to date this letter has not been
answered.
25 Newl The floor slab was poured with a high slump again. There are no test results for
cylinders 192 -195 for 7 or 28 -day tests. Why was this truck accepted and did the t
concrete finally reach the required strength? 'P(E"ueC-P, Add e& _ 'Je5 S'�`'��
23 Dec Cylinders were tested and found to be "highly frozen" during curing as noted S �'
below in the comments of the report. The walls were heated but why did the
samples freeze? In the notes it was added that the wall "it is believed to meet the
required 2500psi in 28 days. Did the wall pass or fail? Why is it believed to pass
if the cylinders froze? If the average is 1951 psi as stated then this wall is a
failure and should be replaced for not meeting the required strength.
31 Dec A report was submitted with a notation of invalid due to rapid platen advance for
r
cylinders 252 to 254. What does this mean? There were also 3 reports submitted
and only 1 had a load listed.
12 Jan A mortar test was completed without any results being listed for 6 cylinders
( #'s 258 -263). Did the cylinders reach the required strength. �J
15 Jan Forsgren identified an area that had 2 pieces of rebar as being omitted from a
stem wall. There is no follow -up as to actions, if any, that were required. Did the
engineer pass this area as being OK without the rebar being in place? Was he
even notified?
21 Jan Forsgren identified areas that appeared to have frost in the mortar and a letter was
made up. There are no follow -up actions, if any, and what was required. Did the
engineer pass this area as being OK?
MTI I �
12 Dec Deck puddle and seam welds were inspected and several were
rejected and marked for re-inspection but no re-inspection is documented. �M 1 n
J 1� Pe
23 Dec Report indicates that 8 puddle welds and 11 seams welds were rejected and
a re- inspection was required. There are no re- inspection reports for pass or fail.
The distribution area had ledger angles inspected but there was no lift available to
inspect the bottom side welds. There is no follow -up on the welds for the bottom
side of these welds. Did they pass, fail, or not inspected?
5 Jan Ledger angle welds were inspected above but the bottom welds were not
inspected. Did the welds for the bottom side pass, fail, or not inspected?
8 Jan Ledger angle embeds were inspected and passed with the exception of welds
marked for re- inspection. Were these welds re- inspected?
n man A bolt inspection was completed for the distribution center and the results
�C were complete but were they in compliance?
16 Jan Deck puddle welds were completed and in compliance with the exception of
6 puddle welds marked for re- inspect Were these welds re- inspected?
Reliance Testing
13 Nov Cylinders 183/184 were tested and found to not make the required strength. The
mortar temperature was below minimums and almost frozen at 33 degrees. Why
wasn't this mortar rejected at that time and not waiting 28 days only to find out it
did not make the minimum requirements? Was the engineer notified and what
was his remarks, if any, and shouldn't this wall be replaced?
Cylinders 1 86/187 were tested at 28 days and did not make the required strength.
This report did not have a mortar temperature as in the above report and neither
cylinder made the required strength. A thermometer was on site for one set of
cylinders why not for the other set? As in above was the engineer notified and
what remarks did he have, if any?
Both sets of cylinders above and 231/234 were cast on 13 November but did not
get to the test facility until 11 Dec for a 7 day test, which had 1 pass, and 5 fail.
The 7 -day test would have been on or about the 20 of November not 11 Dec.
Dec 11 should have been the 28 -day test. Two reports were submitted and
cylinder 234 had 2 different results. Which is correct? (Neither passed) Was a
28 -day test ever performed and did they pass? With 1 set of cylinders frozen and
another almost frozen and the last not having a temperature available shows this
wall did not make minimum strength and should be removed. Was the engineer
ever notified and what were his remarks, if any?
5 Dec A 28 -day test was preformed on cylinders 217/218 and both only made the average
strength of 2373 psi. What is the required strength? Is the required strength for
the mortar (1800psi), for the grout (2500psi), for the CMU (1750psi) or
something else. ?. If the strength is required to be 2500 psi then they did not make
the required strength but if the strength is for the mortar or CW then they pass,
there is no required strength listed on the report. Was the engineer notified and
what was his remarks if any?
11 Dec A 28 -day test performed on 2 cylinders and neither passed. Was the engineer
notified and what was his remarks if any. The mortar temperature was at
minimums, 40 degrees. Was anything done to bring the temperature up to
acceptable limits?
12 Jan A masonry prism was tested that showed the 7 -day strength to 1418 psi. for
cylinder # 264. There is no follow-up for the 28-day test and a pass or fail. There
were 3 reports submitted for this cylinder and # 265 and #266 have no data at all
with different days for testing on #264.
There are many discrepancies in these reports and have no follow -up inspection
reports submitted. If the slump, air, and/or temperature is out of limits as specified in the
specifications it is the responsibility of the special inspector to refuse the truck. There is
mortar /grout that was or almost frozen and the compression tests failed. This is another
responsibility of the Special Inspector to reject the material if not within the
specifications. We now have a substandard footing/wall/slab in place that does not meet
the minimum requirements. The trucks should have been rejected or the
engineer/Building Official should have been notified as soon as possible and followed the
engineer's recommendations. Was the engineer ever notified about these conditions?
The building department, as well as the engineer is to be notified if there is ever a
situation like this per the International Building Codes. We were never notified of any of
these situations.
We need a letter for the above items with a follow -up indicating if the inspection
was done and corrected, or what was done to resolve the situation with the engineer's
recommendations so we can show corrective actions for each of these items
Your co- operation is greatly appreciated in answering each of the above items.
Sincerely,
Jon Berry
Building Inspector
Cc to: Val Christensen, Building Official
JRW and associates, Architects
Tanner Smith Barfuss Associates, Engineers
r
cil 0 7
STATE OF IDAHO
www.ci.rexburg.id.us
P.O. Box 280
12 North Center Street
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
Phone (208) 359 -3020
Fax (208) 359 -3022
e -mail rexburg @ci.rexburg.id.us
6/10/2003
John Watson
JRW
49 Professional Plaza.
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
Dear John,
I have reviewed the drawings for the Deseret Industries building and have identified the
following deficiencies:
1. The handicapped parking spaces do not have the 5' aisle as required. Also a van
accessible space with a 9' wide aisle adjacent to it is required.
2. Please provide a Flood Elevation Certificate as required in the 2000 International
Building Code (IBC) Section 1612.5.
3. A soil investigation report must be provided. The structural calculations use the
soil conditions of Site Class "C ". Without an engineered site study, the default
Site Classification is "D ". Please provide a soil investigation study or revise the
structural calculations using Site Class "D ".
4. The structural calculations are not consistent. Part of the document references the
IBC and part the 1997 Uniform Building Code. At the front of the document, the
snow load (live load) is accurately identified as 35 lb /t while in the roof
calculations the snow load used is 30 lb/ft. The document identifies the seismic
use group as group I. The IBC Table 1604.5 lists "buildings or structures where
more than 300 people congregate in one area" as seismic use group II. The retail
area of the store has an occupancy of 487.
5. On page 2 of the roof section of the structural calculations, the engineer makes the
statement that the mechanical roof unit weights have not been included in the
structural design and that roof joist manufacturer should provide the design.
Please provide me with the necessary engineering document.
6. On page G1.2 an "as is" area is identified at the rear of the building as having -an
exit serving 120 occupants. Two exits are required with exit lights. Sheet E1.1
identifies an exit sign in the "as is" area leading back into the building. Please
remove this symbol.
7. The exit signs on page E 1.2 are not the same as on page FD 1.1. Please add where
missing.
8. The exiting thru the vestibule does not meet the requirements set forth in the IBC
Section 1006.1 and Table 1004.2.1.
9. Submit manufacturer's certificate of compliance for all components as per IBC
Section 1621.3.5. Page 50.1 identifies that equipment seismic bracing will be
provided by the equipment manufacturer. Please supply this information.
10. IBC Table 601 identifies the roof construction of Type II -B buildings as being
required to have a 0 hr. fire- resistance rating. Footnote "c" makes an exception
for F -1 occupancies. Section 302.3.2 of the IBC requires that "the most restrictive
type of construction, so determined, shall apply to the entire building" in order for
Section 302.3.2 - "Non- separated Uses" to apply. The roof construction must be
1 -hr rated.
11. The plans and specifications identify special inspections required for concrete,
masonry, reinforcing steel, steel roof deck and all structural welding. Please
provide us with information and certifications of the people and firm that will be
performing these inspections. We need to meet with the inspection company
representative to go over special inspections prior to construction.
12. Structural observation by the Engineer is a requirement of your Quality Assurance
Program that is detailed on page 50.2. Please provide a list of projected visits.
13. Page 50.2 identifies IBC Sections 1505.2 thru 1505.4 to be followed for concrete
testing. These sections deal with roof assemblies. Please make the necessary
changes.
14. The Fire Department has reviewed the plans. I have attached a copy of the report.
Please provide the necessary information they have requested.
These items need to be addressed before issuance of a building permit. Please let me know
if you have any questions. I can be reached during the day at 359 -3020 Ext. 324.
Sincerely,
Val Christensen
Building Official
C.C. John Millar
Chris Huskinson
Jon Berry
u
RG
cay
s � 4 eCISHE�
� l' 6
STATE OF IDAHO
P.O. Box 280
12 North Center Street
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
Phone (208) 359 -3020
Fax (208) 359 -3022
e -mail rexburg @srv.net
RE" UI?G -MADISON COUNTY
EMERGENCYSERTICES
26 NORTH CENTER STREET
REXBURG, IDAHO 8340
208 -359 -3010
208-359-3006 FAX
2000 International Fire Code
Plan Review
Plan Date: 4-03
Review Date: 5 -29 -03
Building Name: DESERET INDUSTRIES AND DISTRIBUTION CENTER
Building Address: NORTH SECOND EAST, REXBURG
Stories: 1 Type of Construction: H -B
Occupancy Classification: M, B, F -1
Existing Floor Area: N/A
New Construction Floor Area: APPROXIMATELY 39,133 SQUARE FEET
1. Required Fire Flow (Appendix B): 4,250 GP M/THRE E HOURS
Comments: FIRE FLOW MAY BE REDUCED IF EACH BUILDING HAS A FIRE
SUPPRESSION SYSTEM THROUGHOUT.
2. Water Supply (Section 508, Appendix C) Required: YES
Fire Hydrant Location: OKAY
Fire Hydrant Flows: UNKNOWN
Fire Flow Test Location: N/A
Fire Flow Supplied By: N/A
Other Approved Water Source: NONE
Water Supply Acceptable: SEE COMMENTS
Fire hydrant Location Acceptable: YES
Water Supply Comments: PLEASE PROVIDE AN ENGINFEWS ASSESSMENT
OF WATER FLOWS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
3. Fire Apparatus Access Roads (Section 503, Appendix D) Required: YES
Acceptable Width: X Length: X Surface: X
Complete Road Acceptable: YES
Comments: NONE
4. Access Roads and Water Supply, including fire hydrants are required to be installed
and made serviceable prior to and during time of construction (Section 501):
Comments: IF NOT INSTALLED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND MADE
OPERATIONAL, A STOP WORK ORDER WILL BE ISSUED.
5. Installation of portable fire extinguishers (Section 906) Required: YES
Location shown: NOT SHOWN Type provided acceptable: NOT SHOWN
Comments: MINIMUM SIZE OF 2A10BC REQUIRED TO BE MOUNTED
THROUGHOUT FACILITY WITHIN TRAVEL DISTANCES.
b. Automatic fire extinguishing systems (Section 903) Required: YES
Type of system being installed: NOT SHOWN
Sprinkler system monitoring (Section 907) required: YES
Comments: PLANS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED TO STATE PRIOR TO
ISSUANCE OF A BUH DING PERMIT.
7. Standpipes (Section 905) required: NO
Type required: Comments:
8. Ventilating hood and duct fire extinguisher system (Section 609) required: NO
Type being provided:
Automatic fuel shut -off required:
Portable fire extinguisher shown:
Comments:
9. Fire alarm systems (Section 907) required: YES
Type of system required: Manual: Automatic: Both: X
Type of system being provided: Manual: Automatic: Both: X
Components of system shown: Smoke Detectors: X Heat Detectors:
Manual. Pull Station: X Sounding Devices: X Visual Devices: X
Door Holders: Duct Detectors: Flow Alarm:
Sprinkler Valve Monitoring: REQUIRED
Fire Alarm System Acceptable: NO, SEE COMMENTS BELOW
10. Other corrections that are required by special occupancy or conditions: FIRE
ALARM SYSTEM: PLEASE SUBMIT PLANS IN ADDITION TO THE
FOLLOWING SUBMITTALS: ALARM CONTROL AND TROUBLE
SIGNALING EQUIPMENT, ANNUNCIATION, POWER CONNECTION,
BATTERY CALCULATIONS, CONDUCTOR TYPE AND SIZES, VOLTAGE
DROP CALCULATIONS, MANUFACTURERS MODEL NUMBERS, AND
LISTING INFORMATION FOR EQUIPMENT, EVICES AND MA TERIAL S
AND INTERFACE CONNECTIONS. ADA UNITS SHALL HAVE ALL
HORN/STROBE UNITS. PLEASE INDICATE WHERE FACP WILL BE
LOCATED. PLANS MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
OR A STOP WORK ORDER WILL BE ISSUED.
ADDITIONAL ALARM SYSTEM COMMENTS:
DISTRIBUTION CENTER -
1. ADD PULL STATION TO FRONT VESTIBLE EXIT
2. ADD HORN/STROBE UNIT WITHIN 15 FEET OF FRONT
VESTIBLE EXIT
MAIN COMPLEX-
1. ADD HORN /STROBE UNITS IN HALLWAY LEADING TO
OFFICES ON NORTH SIDE.
2. ADD HORN /STROBE TO MENS BATHROOM
3. ADD HORN /STROBE TO SOUTH END OF HALLWAY 202
4. ADD PULL STATION AT REAR EXIT FROM PROCESSING
S. ADD PULL STATION AT REAR EXIT FROM RETAIL
6. MOVE PULL STATIONS WITHIN FIVE FEET OF FMr
7. ADD HORN /STROBE UNITS TO WAITING AREA OFFICES
ON NORTH SIDE.
Plans as submitted are acceptable: NO
Plans checked by: CHRIS HUSICINSON Date: 5 -29-03
Please furnish comments back to the plan reviewer in the following manner:
Written Comments: X New Plans: X
1
P�URG ci f y
« z�
s � 4 eCIsHE�
1 1
STATE OF IDAHO
P.O. Box 280
12 North Center Street
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
Phone (208) 359 -3020
Fax (208) 359 -3022
e -mail rexburg@srv.net
July 31, 2003
John Watson
JRW & Associates
1152 Bond Ave.
Rexburg, ID 83440
RE: Rexburg Deseret Industries Utilities Review
Dear John:
I have reviewed the utility plans for the new Deseret Industry buildings and have a few comments
as follows. These comments are divided into various utilities.
Storm Sewer:
1. There are several locations in storm drain lines where lines are junctioning or angles are made
in the pipe. These need to have man holes to facilitate cleaning and to meet DEQ Standards.
2. I need to have submitted the calculations for the storm water flows and for the sizing of the
storm water detention pond.
I. i heed ueLan on the Stviiu water puimp station, now it wlll L) v p erateu, aiid piping
— -- - - -- arrangements—
Waste Water:
1. Waste water lines are shown as six inch. Because of the length of these lines and the volume,
these must be considered as main lines with eight inch minimum line size.
2. Where the sanitary sewer connects to the City main line if this is not being done at an existing
man hole, a man hole will have to be installed.
Water System:
1. The ten inch fire loop as shown will not be allowed. This line allows for a significant length
of piping which sits dead with no flow. Lines of this type have a serious potential for
contamination. The fire line must be looped into other lines so that flow can be maintained in
this line at all times.
e71
2. It is our recommendation that the two lines on the south side of the building be eliminated and
that the ten inch fire line which extends around the west side of the building and protrudes onto
additional properties located south of this development be continued over to the proposed Teton
River Village and interconnected with their fire supply system. This will allow for circulation of
water in these lines and still provide for a looped condition. The consumed water could be taken
from this fire line and metered as necessary.
3. The plans show a water meter on the six inch line. It is not anticipated that the consumed use
on this project would require a six inch line. It is recommended that this be evaluated to see if a
two or four inch meter would not be adequate for the facility.
4. All connections made to existing City main lines must be done utilizing a saddle and hot tap
to eliminate contamination.
5. The water system must be adequately valved to provide maintenance of the system without
taking it completely off line.
6. Because of the amount of utilities being extended on this project, these plans must be
submitted to the Division of Environment Quality in Idaho Falls for their review. These lines are
considered main line extensions and as such required DEQ approval.
7. Fire hydrants used for this project shall either be Waterous or clow.
If you have questions or need further discussion on either of these items, please contact me at
your convenience.
Si erely,
- - - - - -- �-0hn Mil�ar v - - - - -- - -- - _ -- -
c: Val Christensen
City Building Department
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES / INC.
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
May 17, 2004
Mr. John Berry, City Inspector
City of Rexburg
P.O. Box 280
Rexburg Idaho 83440
Dear Mr. Berry:
From September, 2003 until the present, Forsgren Associates, Inc. performed testing and inspections for the
soils and asphalt, concrete, masonry, steel, and miscellaneous inspections associated with the construction
of the Rexburg Deseret Industries building, as requested by the Architect, JRW & Associates, and according
to the requirements of the 2000 International Building Code (IBC) as adapted by the City of Rexburg.
The soils and asphalt, concrete, masonry, and steel tests and inspections were submitted to the City of
Rexburg throughout the duration of the project construction, and a summary was submitted on May 12
2004.
Forsgren Associates, Inc., having provided tests and inspections for the above building, herein states that the
field tests, laboratory tests, and field inspections were in compliance with the plans and specifications and
the 2000 IBC as required for special inspection.
Respectfully yours,
w i
Jo artineau Inspector
Brent "Husk" Crowther, P.E.
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS 350 NORTH 2"' EAST/ REXBURG, ID 83440 / (208) 356.9201 /FAX (208) 356.0206
REXBURG /BOISE/ WYOMING/ WENATCHEE /SALT LAKE CITY / SACRAMENTO COLORADO
WWW.FORSGREN.COM
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES/ INC.
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
350 North 2 East
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
JRW and Associates
1152 Bond Avenue
Rexburg Idaho 83440
Dear Mr. Watson
This letter is intended to address concerns posed by the City of Rexburg's Inspector, Jon Berry. It is
customary for Forsgren Associates to present all testing and inspection results as part of their final
inspection report per the IBC. Failing tests and problems are a usual part of the inspection business, and are
addressed by additional inspections and tests. However, since specific items are of concern, they are
addressed below directly to Mr Berry:
Oct 9th thru Nov 19 Forsgren Associates, Inc. follows usual concrete testing practice and samples the
truck after 1/3 of the volume of the truck is unloaded. The slump test occur abo ut 3 to 5 minutes after that
oint sob the time the - tech reports slump, u to half of the load ha s laced. The issue here becomes
- P y P A P the load p
whether or not the last half of the load should have been allowed to be poured, and the answer is no.
/ Nov 25 Plasticizer is used for pumping grout where floor slabs are involved, and the slum increases uite f
a bit. 28 -day breaks ranged from 5252 to 6287 psi where 4000 psi was required. p q
Dec � st After this incident, Forsgren Associates, Inc. moved to remedy the problem b
samples inside of the tent to be more representative of the curing process and masonry grout strengths.
3 Lxc.
1� Improper platen advance might have been a better phrase. Forsgren Associates has remedied the
problem with the testing procedures they use.
Please ignore the reports without results, if you will. They did, however, carry information on the conditions
under which the pour occurred.
Jan 15 Yes, mistakes do happen, and these were missed by inspector and concrete contractor alike. The
remedy, since the rebar was not epoxied into place when the wall went up, will have to come from the
structural engineer and JRW is responsible for notifying him of our inspection findings.
Jan 21 St The best answer to this is that the frost was taken seriously and both Jacobsen and Pete Mickelsen
were involved in discussing the seriousness of this.
This concludes the responses I am able to make in the time allotted.
Thank you,
,Joel Martineau
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS 350 NORTH 2 EAST / REXBURG, ID 83440 / (208) 356.9201 /FAX (208) 356.0206
REXB URG / BOISE / WYOMING / WENATCHEE / SALT LAKE CITY / SACRAMENTO /COLORADO
WWW.FORSGREMCOM
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES IINC.
Project No. 01020136
Report No.
CONCRETE TEST REPORT
Date Cast 11/25/03 Cast By J. Martineau No. Cast 4
Project Rexburg Deseret Industries (DI)
Location of Pour Floor Slab: corner coordinates are: E -1. E -4 F -1 F -4
Contractor: Jacobsen /Double J Concrete
Report To: Tony
Concrete Supplier: Walters Concrete Mix # 854
Quantity Represented 65 cubic yards Strength Requirement 4500 psi at 28days
MATERIAL PROPORTIONS USED (Quantities per Cubic Yard of Concrete) Mix No
Cement Ibs bags
Type Brand
Fine Aggregate (ssd)
LBS Source Type
Course Aggregate (ssd)
LBS Size Source Type
Course Aggregate (ssd)
LBS Size Source Type
Water Total
Gals Gals /Bag
Admixture; Amount
Kind
Admixture; Amount-
Kind--- - --
Above Information Obtained From: FPA Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor Other (Designate)
Ent Air 5.7 % Actual Slump 6.5" Inches Ticket # 9741
Temperature: Air 18 ° F Concrete 60 O F Weather Cloudy /Breezy /Cold
Water Added at Job gallons Time Batched: 0846 Time Off Site: 0920
Mixing: Central Mix Truck Mix X Job Mix
Above Site Information Obtained From: FPA X Batching Inspection
Contractor Concrete Supplier Other
(Designate)
CYLS Delivered to Laboratory b FPA X Contractor
Project Engineer
Engineer Common Carrier
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
F177 elAge
#
Days
Lab
#
Date
Received
Date
Tested
Total
Load
Ibs
Size
Unit
Load
(psi)
BREAK
TYPE
192
11/26
12/02
48100
4 *8
3830
A
2
28
193
11/26
12/23
79000
4 *8
6287
B
3
28
194
11/26
12/23
66000
4 *8
5252
D
4
28
195
11/26
12/23
76700
4 *8
6100
C
Tested By: J Martineau
Remarks: Double J covered the concrete slab with insulating blanket.
Results Reviewed By:
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES
Project No. 01020136
Report No.
MORTAR TEST REPORT
Date Cast 12 January 2004 Cast By J. Martineau No.Cast 6
Project Rexburg Deseret Industries (DO
Location of Masonry. East exterior wall of building from twelve to sixteen feet in height from
building coordinated C -1 to within 10 feet of F -1
Contractor: Jacobsen /Mickelson
Report To: Tony Burdette
Supplier: Mickelson (mixed Quickcrete type S Mix at site)
Quantity Represented 0.5 cubic yards Strength Requirement 1800 psi at 28days
MATERIAL PROPORTIONS USED
Mix Number Mortar Ibs bags Type S Brand: Quickcrete
Water Total Gals Gals /Bag
Above Information Obtained From: FPA Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor Other (Designate)
Temperature: Air 40 O F in Tented Area Mortar 77 O F Weather Clear, Calm 20 deg F
Time Mixed: 1550 Time Sampled: 1555
Mixing: Mixer on Site X
Above Site Information Obtained From: FPA X Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor Masonry Supplier Other (Designate)
CYLS Delivered to Laboratory by FPA X Contractor Engineer Common Carrier
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
Field
#
Age
Da s
Lab
#
Date
Received
Date
Tested
Total
Load
Ibs
Size
Unit
Load
(psi)
BREAK
TYPE
1
7
258
14 Jan
19 Jan
9850
3 *6
1394
D
2
28
59
14 Jan
09 Feb
13950
3 *6
1974
3
28
60
14 Jan
09 Feb
15400
3 *6
2179
4
7
61
0263
14 Jan
19 Jan
Note 1
2 *4
-
qD
5
28
62
14 Jan
0.9 Feb
6900
2 *4
2.97
6
28
14 Jan
09 Feb
6400
2 *4
2038
D
Remarks: Samples stored inside of tented area. Cooler 27 deg. F. upon retrieval.
Samples show frost patterns on surfaces. Note 1: Test invalidated by frost damage.
Tested By: J Martineau
Results Reviewed By:
K: TAW \Rexburg DI \700 Const \760 Comply \763 Masonry\Mortar Sampling & Testing \01- 12- 04Mortar.rtf
SPECIAL INSPECTION
Project Name: Rexburg Deseret Industries
Inspection Date: January 21, 2004 at 1115
Inspector: Joel Martineau
Type of work: Masonry Inspection
Forsgren inspected the placement of masonry block and reinforcing steel in the east
exterior wall of Deseret Industries between twelve and sixteen feet above the finished
floor slab, beginning at coordinate C 1 and running north to within 20 ft. of the northwest
building corner at coordinate Al. This includes masonry over doorways and windows.
Forsgren observed the placement of 3 CY of grout into the wall, and measured the
temperature of the grout (52 deg F ). The wall was poured solid.
Forsgren found the masonry work inspected to be in compliance with the approved plans
and specifications (see notes 1 and 2 below).
Note 1: the masonry contractor repaired and grouted the two locations mentioned in the
preceding report (1 -20 -03 at 1500) without any further problems.
Note 2: Forsgren saw evidence of frost formation along mortar joints near A -1. This
matter is addressed in a separate inspection document.
Technician: Joel Martineau
Special Inspector: Jeff M. Snyder
K'. \JP.lii ,nwu � [ ?3 "! a; r' ; „„ 3�, ;'v; , y _{ � � ' 6i� tic:
t'.....: .? (•Ompw! — o.2 1Yasi c* 'J - 20 R. t,, Y ias;t t _r ;x:3:1 i - P. ?a"way mi Pntk' '•` `.
"
_ 00/10/04 WED 17:57 FAX 203 959 2271 _ JRW VA _ 0 001
JR W & ASS OCIf!TES
1152 BOND AVENUE
1ZE"URG, IDAHO 83440
(208)'359-2309
Fax: (208) 359 -2271
E -mail: irkvg&ab eone.net
FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET
Date:
To :, �t j
Of r
Sender: �Y---\A-4
YOU SHOULD RECEIVE PAGE(S), INCLUDIN a THIS COVER SHEET.
IF YOU DO NOT RECI E ALL THE PAGES, PLEAS F CALL 208.359 -2309.
M
i�
T 7 Vic:
$ 1
Received Fax MAR 10 2004 •32PM ion : FORSGRFN ASSOCIATES INC REXBURG 2
03/10/04 WE1 1 1 11
� PO. Box 280
' 12 North Canter Street
Rexburg. Idaho 83440
now (208) 359.3020
STATE OF IDAHO FAx (21)5) 359.3022
&Hull cItyheII0ci.rexburgJd.u6
��GfsNE�
9 March 2004
Tony Burdette
Jacobsen Construction
Deseret Industries Building
North 2 East
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
Dear Tony,
The following arem are areas we. have some concern about vl ith the Special Inspections
"being comple - tIM a y our ►itldin . — T'lease get wi`tfi ie 1ris� ►E:ciiori agenct`es atl�ao a
follow-up on the following areas to see if they have be: n completed and/or what
corrective action has been completed.
Forsgren Engineering
9 Oct Concrete footings have.a high slump (7 ") -, for cylinders .128 -131. Tests show they
still reached required strengths. Why was truck accept ;ii?
7 Nov Concrete footings have a high slump (6 and 5 V) f it cylinders 164 -167.
'Seven day rests show that the concrete will probably make the required strength
there are no 28 -day .reports but still why were the tru .l:s accepted with a slumps
so high?
10 Nov Concrete footings have a high slump of T' for cylinde •s 168.171. Cylinder 168
show a 7 -day test that exceeded the required strength ' tut again why was the truck
accepted with a slurrnh almost twice the maximum?
18 Nov Concrete footings have a high slump of 7.5" for eylin, Iers 188 -191. Cylinder 188
show a 7 -day test shows that the required strength wi' l probably be met but again
why was the truck accepted with a slump almost twit : the maximum? There are
no further results for: t. e 28 -day tests. Did this batch I cake the required strength?
19 Nov A letter was sent to Forsgren Engineering from the R iilding Official requesting
that the high slump - :matter be looked into and to t. ate this letter has not been
answered.
25 Nov The floor slab was poured with a high slump again. "here are no test results for
cylinders 192 -195 fbC7 or 28 -day tests: Why was th s truck accepted and did the
concrete finally reach the required strength?
23 Dec Cylinders were tested and found to be "highly frozen' during curing as noted
below in the comments of the report. The walls N ►c:re heated but why did the
samples freeze? in the notes it was added that the w. dl "it is believed to meet the
required 2500psi in 28 da -s. Did the wall pass or fai (" Why is it believed to pass
if the cylinders fro - le? I[ the average is 1951 psi as stated then this wall is a
failure and should 1 replaced for not meeting the re, wired strength,
31 Dec A report was submitted with a notation of invalid du: to rapid platen advance for
Received Fmx MAR 10 2004 6:32AM '; 44ax'stgi* ion : EORSGREN ASSOCIATES INC REXBURG n 3
03/10/04 WED 17_58 FAX 208 359 22x71 _ JRW & ASSOC.
la 003
cylinders 252 to 254. What does this mean? There were also 3 reports submitted
and only 1 had a load listed. .
12 Jan A mortar test was completed without any results being li ited for 6 cylinders
( #'s 258 -263). Did the cylinders reach the required strer. th.
15 Jan Forsgren identified,an,area that had 2 pieces of rebar as I e.ing omitted from a
stem wall. There is. no follow -up as to actions, if any, th :rr were required. Did the
engineer pass this area as being OK without the rebar being in place? Was he
even notified?
21 Jan Forsgren identified areas. that appeared to have frost in b it- mortar and a letter was
made up. There are no follow -up actions, if any, and w -at was required Did the
engineer pass this areaas being OK?
MTI
12 Dee Deck puddle and searil welds were inspected and seven I were
rejected and marked for rc ,spection but no re- inspecti al is documented
23 Dec Reportindicate� 1 Lseams welt l;, wece.reject=Land __. _.
are-inspection was required. "There are no re- inspectiol reports for pass or fall.
The distribution area had ledger angles inspected but th n-e was no lift available to
--- -- - - - -- inspect the bottom side, welds --T -here is no- follow- up -o -;i the - welds- for the bottom
side of these welds. Did they fuss, fail, or not inspectec ?
5 Jan Ledger angle welds were ins, above but the bottom welds were not
inspected. Did the welds for the bottom side pass, fail, ar not inspected?
8 Jan Ledger angle embeds were inspected and passed with th( exception of welds
marked for re- inspection. Were these welds re- inspectc. d?
9 Jan A bolt inspection was completed for the distribution cen: er and the results
were complete but were they in compliance?
16 Jan Deck puddle welds were completed and in compliance with the exception of
6 puddle welds marked for re- inspection. Were these v •elds re- inspected?
Reliance Testing
13 Nov Cylinders ) .83/18 + were { ested and found to not make i l required strength. The
mortar temperate: L w`s lbciow minimums and almost ' ro at 33 degrees. Why
wasn't this mortar. rej.cetcd ;it that time and not waiting ; 28 days only to find out it
did not male the mi simurn requirements? Was the :rtgineer notified and what
was his remarks, if any, and shouldn't this wall be repl iced?
Cylinders 186/187 u%re tasted at 28 days and did not hake the required strength.
This report did nor Kaye a mortar temperature as in tl,e above report and neither
cylinder made .th reauired strength. A thermometer was on site for one set of
cylinders why :not for.!he other set? As in above war the engineer notified and
what remarks did he if any?
Both sets cif cv_ lind.ers ebove. and 231/234 were cast o't 13 November but did not
get to the test facility until 11 Dec for a 7 day test, N hich had I pass, and 5 fail.
The 7 -day test wo °u d...havc� been on or ;about the 20" of November not 11 Dec.
Dec I ' should huve= been the 28 -day test. Two I r;ports were submitted and
cylinder 234 had , dffferent results. Which is correc :i' (Neither passed) Was a
28 -day test ever performed and did they pass? With ' :;et of cylinders frozen and
another almosi frozen and the last not having a temp mature available shows this
03/10/04 WED
17:58 FAX 209 359 22.7;1.
JRW & ASSOC.
wall did not make minimum strength and should be ren roved. Was the engineer
ever notified and what,were his remarks, if any?
S Dec A 28 - day test was p e 67ned nn cylinders 217/218 and be M only made the average
strength of 2373" psi., "What is the required strength? h the required strength for
the mortar (I 800ps) - for the grout (2500psi), for the CMU (1750psi) or
something else.?. If the strength is required to be 2500 1 si then they did not make
the required .strength . b:ut if the strength is for the mortar or CMU then they pass,
there is no required strength listed on the report. Was the engineer notified and
. was his remarks if Tiny?
11 Dec A 28 -day test performed on 2 cylinders and neither pass ad. Was the engineer
notified and what. was .his remarks if any. The m mar temperature was at
minimums, 40 degrees,. Was anything done to brir g the temperature up to
acceptable limits?
12 Jan A masonry prism was tested that showed the 7 -day Wer.'gth to 1418 psi. for
cylinder # 264. There is no follow -up for the 28 -day ter t and a pass or fail. There
_— were 3 repro mbrniued for cylinder and # ar d -#2fr6 havnw at
with different days for testing can #264.
There are many discrepancies in these reports an d hai a no follow =up inspection
reports submitted. If the siui p air and/or temperature is out � ,i'limits as specified in the
specifications it is the respom"Ibility of the special inspector ti: refuse the truck. There is
mortar /grout that wa:; or iriost fioen and the compression ti its failed. This is another
responsibility of the S xc 1nsp:ctor to reject the m atrial if not, within the
specifications. We nov= have a substandard footing/wall /slab m. place that does not meet
the minimum reeltiire.Mertts. The trucks should have been rejected or the
engineer/Building Official should have been notified as soon ti r possible and followed the
engineer's recommendations.'. Was the engineer ever notibi:d about these conditions?
The building department, as.. well as the engineer is to be notified if there is ever a
situation like this per the Tritemational Building Codes. We %� e -re never notified of any of
these situations.
We need a letter for the abov:; items with a follow -up i•adicating if the inspection
was done and corrected, or whai was done to resolve the situation with the engineer's
recommendations, so we.ca i. show corrective actions for each >r these items
Your co- opreration is greatly appreciated in answering -itch of the above items.
Sincerely,
Jon Berry -
Building Inspector.
Cc to: Val Christensen 'wilding Official
JRW and associates, Architects
Tanner Srnith Ba7ftiss Associates, Engineers
lQ 004
r H FORSGREN
m. ASSOCIATES INC.
September 12, 2003
Mr. Doug Kourth
Ellsworth - Paulsen Construction, Inc.
195 East 600 South
American Fork, UT 84003
RE: Fire flow re- testing for Teton River Village development in Rexburg
Dear Doug:
We completed the flow re- testing at the development site this morning. We used the hydrant on
the looping line on the north side of the Jack in the Box to measure system static and residual
pressures. The hydrant opened for flow metering was at the northwest corner of the site on the
main line near O'Dell's Furniture Store.
We measured a flow of 2,700 gpm at a residual system pressure of 61 psi. Static pressure before
testing was 79 psi. Using a modified Hazen Williams equation calculation recommended by the
manufacturer of our flow meter, flow at 20 psi is expected to be 5,130 gpm. Available flow in a
water system can vary widely throughout the day and year based on system use. Under the
instantaneous flow conditions at the precise time the test was conducted, the 4,500 gpm flow
requirement was met.
City staff stated that due to the increased population with school in session, the 75 hp booster
pump to the north was running at the time of this test. This explains the increased flow as
compared to the previous test. I spoke with John Millar, City Engineer about what would happen
if there were a major structure fire and the booster pump wasn't running. He said they would
manually turn the booster pump(s) on to meet fire flow requirements.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (208)- 356 -9201.
Sincerely,
R PE
� J
Brent "Husk" Crowther, PE
Forsgren Associates, Inc.
Enclosure — flow calculations
Cc: Blair Kay, Rexburg City
t, "]k',V0r"h -1'au1 Cn%�10 M .- 4(}i „u71,T`�,III r..,�>rresp��rr�et�ec�t }! ..iicnt'�. ?:3?: -(' io” 1es.doc
A COMPANY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS CENTRAL OFFICE 350 NORTH 2ND EAST / REXBURG, IDAHO 83440 / (208) 356 - 9201
REXBURG / BOISE / EVANSTON / WEST YELLOWSTONE / SALT LAKE CITY / WENATCHEE
R S R E
ASS INC.
BY DATE PROJECT NO.
OWNER - PROJECT
�c -
,/ CHK'D BY DATE
FEATURE f = D -'% 4° K "Y.( .G SHEET OF
I � 0.'t
6
i,�
V ®) (135'0 J i w `> = a �j 00 Jf K-,
V's ®.s�
0 a *A _11 �a_____�
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES INC.
September 24, 2003
Mr. John R. Watson, Architect
JRW & Associates
1152 Bond Ave.
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
RE: Fire flow re- testing for proposed Deseret Industries development in Rexburg
Dear John:
We completed the requested flow retesting at the proposed site this morning. We again used the
hydrant at Horkley's Exxon service station at the northwest corner of 2 " East and 7` North to
measure system static and residual pressures. The hydrant again opened for flow metering was to
the south, near the northeast corner of the proposed development site. This hydrant is also on the
west side of 2 nd East across from the Sears store.
We measured a flow of 2,300 gpm at a residual system pressure of 65 psi. Static pressure before
testing was 76 psi. Using a modified Hazen Williams equation calculation recommended by the
manufacturer of our flow meter, flow at 20 psi is expected to be 5,540 gpm. Available flow in a
water system can vary widely throughout the day and year based on system use. The required
flow shown in the code review from Rexburg- Madison County Emergency services is 4,250 gpm.
Under the instantaneous flow conditions at the precise time the test was conducted, the 4,250
gpm flow requirement was met.
City staff stated that due to the increased population with school in session, the 75 hp booster
pump to the north was running at the time of this test. This explains the increased flow as
compared to the previous test. I spoke with John Millar, City Engineer about what would happen
if there were a major structure fire and the booster pump wasn't running. He said they would
manually turn the booster pump(s) on to meet fire flow requirements.
As always, if you have any questions, please contact me at (208)- 356 -9201
Sincerely,
jf, fE usk" Crowther, PE
Forsgren Associates, Inc.
Enclosure — flow calculations
Cc: Blair Kay, Rexburg City
CA 00 '4hi4 {) ( ovnr9 1.11 C u cr VOI CI 2 40'' I�2i ^lo , .I.
A COMPANY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS CENTRAL OFFICE 350 NORTH 2ND EAST / REXBURG, IDAHO 83440 / (208) 356 - 9201
REXBURG / BOISE / EVANSTON / WEST YELLOWSTONE / SALT LAKE CITY / WENATCHEE
SRE
ASSOCIATES, INC.
OWNER - PROJECT BY DATE PROJECT NO.
1)Z Plow TL 5/ a9' /a..?
FEATURE TP � CHK'D BY DATE
�1 SHEET IOF
VA 7 1
✓� -"tip � ,,.y�' � � ! �` � k- ,s9�.,e�„�.et./t,et.�"^�.��E`
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES INC.
December 9, 2003
JRW & Associates
1152 Bond Ave.
Rexburg ID 83440
RE: Interior Footing Subgrade for DI Building, Rexburg, Idaho
Dear John Watson:
01 -02 -0136
Due to the misplacement wterof four interior column footings, Jacobsen requested that the foundation
de be
subgra evaluated to demine if the subgrade will carry a load of 2620 psf. This load will be
imposed on the footing subgrade if only new anchor bolts are installed. A lesser load would be
imposed on the subgrade if the footings are extended.
The foundation subgrade beneath these column footings will support the load of 2620 psf. However,
because other footings are designed with the lower load of 1700 psf differential settlement of up to
3/8 inch could be expected between the wall footings and column footings if the full design load is
imposed on the footings.
If you have any questions or need more information please do not hesitate to contact (208) 356 -9201.
Sincerely,
FORSGREN ASSOCIATES, INC.
/effffen!yer, PE
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
CC: Jacobsen
Rexburg building Department
Structural Engineer, Leon Tanner
A COMPANY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS CENTRAL OFFICE 350 NORTH 2ND EAST / REXBURG, IDAHO 83440 / (208) 356 -9201
REXBURG / BOISE / EVANSTON / WEST YELLOWSTONE / SALT LAKE CITY / WENATCHEE
FORSGREN
_ ASSOCIATES /NC.
December 9, 2003
Magnuson Metals
PO Box 900235
Sandy, UT 84090 -0235
Attn: Brian Jensen
Dear Mr. Jensen:
Persuant to OSHA regulations 29CFR 19 26.752(a)(1)(2), this letter is to inform Magnuson
Metals that the concrete in the footings, walls, and masonry walls at the Deseret Industries
Building in Rexburg Idaho, have attained, on the basis of appropriate ASTM standard test
methods of field -cured samples, 75 percent of the intended minimum compressive design strength
within seven days.
To -date, all seven -day compressive strength results on the concrete, mortar, masonry grout, and
CMU prisms have exceeded the 75 percent OSHA requirement.
We recommend ,_$truQ1iaral steel not be erected on any walls that have not cured for at least the
seven -day period. m....- . _
Sincerely,
FORSGREN ASSOCIATES, INC.
oel Martineau
Inspector
A COMPANY OF PROFESS IONAL ENGINEERS
REXBURG CENTRAL OFF /CE 350 NORTH 2ND EAST / REXBURG, IDAHO 83440 / (208) 356 -9201
/ BOISE / EVANSTON / WEST YELLOWSTONE / SALT LAKE CITY / WENATCHEE
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES/ INC.
A COMPANY OF PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS
Date:
February 27, 2004
LETTER of TRANSMITTAL
To: John Watson, Sr.
Company: JRW Associates
Address: 49 Professional Plaza
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
From Joel Martineau
RE: Soil Compaction Test Results
via US Mail are the following items:
Copies
No. of pages
Description
1
2
Field Density Tests from October 27, 2003.
1
1
Field Density Tests from October 28, 2003.
1
1
Field Density Tests from November 6, 2003.
1
3
Field Density Tests from November 10, 2003.
1
3
Field Density Tests from November 11, 2003.
1
1
Field Density Tests from November 12, 2003.
1
1
Field Density Tests from November 18, 2003.
1
1
Field Density Tests from November 19, 2003.
1
2
Field Density Tests from November 21, 2003.
1
1
Field Density Tests from December 1, 2003.
1
1
Field Density Tests from December 11, 2003.
These items are:
❑ for approval ❑ approved as submitted ❑ resubmit copies for approval
® for your use ❑ approved as noted ❑ submit copies for distribution
❑ as requested ❑ returned for corrections ❑ return corrected copies
® for review and comment
REMARKS:
Field density tests surfaced during the past 3 weeks that were not previously reported. A review of the tests of Oct.
27, 2003 found 3 failing tests just inside of the foundation wall at 94% compaction. In addition, Test #22 of Nov. 11,
2003 failed. A test at the same location passed one day earlier, prior to re- grading activities. All other failing test
locations are still accessible, and will be re- tested as part of the grading and compaction activities this spring.
Signed �be iu
Testing Technician for Forsgren
Copies to Jacobsen Construction, Zollinger Construction, The City of Rexburg.
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS 350 NORTH 2 EAST / REXBURG, ID 83440 / (208) 356.9201 / FAX (208) 356.0206
REXBURG /BOISE /WYOMING/ WENATCHEE / SALT LAKE CITY/ SACRAMENTO COLORADO
WWW.FORSGREN COM
K:VRWWexburg DR700 Cons6760 Camply1761 Soils & AsphaitlSWWFA - Transmittal late tests 2- 27- 04.doc
4, 5, and 7 were below the required minimum density.
9.1 1134.9
Tester T. Olsen Reviewed by
(REMARKS: (SOIL TYPE JOPT.MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
FORSGREN
PROJECT
DI
_ ASSOCIATES /INC.
Client
JRW
Contractor
Jacobsen /Zollinger
Date 10/27/03
Weather
Cloudy, Windy, 50 deg. F.
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF
Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP
Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC
Electrical
TR
Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG
Footing
WL
Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST
Street
WTL
Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT
Retest
PL
Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
4, 5, and 7 were below the required minimum density.
9.1 1134.9
Tester T. Olsen Reviewed by
(REMARKS: (SOIL TYPE JOPT.MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
REMARKS:
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
SOIL TYPE
OPT. MOISTURE
MAX DRY DENSITY
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
Test 16 was below the minimum required density.
FORSGREN
PROJECT
DI
_ ASSOCIATES /INC.
Client
JRW
134.9
Results of at least 94.5% of Proctor Density are passing.
Contractor
Jacobsen /Zollinger
am F
Date 10/27/03
Weather
Cloudy, Windy, 50 deg. F.
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF
Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP
Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC
Electrical
TR
Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG
Footing
WL
Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST
Street
WTL
Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT
Retest
PL
Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
REMARKS:
SOIL TYPE
OPT. MOISTURE
MAX DRY DENSITY
Test 16 was below the minimum required density.
Gravelly (pr)
9.1
134.9
Results of at least 94.5% of Proctor Density are passing.
>iy
am F
Tester T. Olsen Reviewed by f'
SOIL TYPE
Tester JMS Reviewed by
MOISTURE I MAX DRY DENSITY
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
FORSGREN
PROJECT DI
_ ASSOCIATES /INC.
Client
JRW
Contractor
Jacobsen/Zollinger
Date 10/28/03
Weather
Cloudy, Windy, Cool
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF
Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP
Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC
Electrical
TR
Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG
Footing
WL
Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST
Street
WTL
Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT
Retest
PL
Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
SOIL TYPE
Tester JMS Reviewed by
MOISTURE I MAX DRY DENSITY
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
FG
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
FB
Finish Base
PROJECT Rexburg Deseret Industries
Finish Sub Base
FSG
Client JRW
FF
Finish Floor
Contractor Jacobsen /Zollinger
Weather Cloudy breezy cool
LOCATION KEY
BF Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
BP Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
ELC Electrical
TR
Trench
FTG Footing
WL
Wall
ST Street
WTL
Waterline
RT Retest
PL
Parking Lot
compaction over 94.5% is acceptable.
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES / INC.
Date 11/06/03
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
ELEVATION KEY
FG
Finish Grade
FB
Finish Base
FSB
Finish Sub Base
FSG
Finish Sub Grade
FF
Finish Floor
= SPR 1 9.1
126.8
Technician Joel Martineau Reviewed by
IREMARKS: SOIL TYPE JOPT.MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
Technician Joel Martineau Reviewed by
(REMARKS: SOIL TYPE JOPT.MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
Distribution Store area; waterlines backfilled to finished sub -base elevation.
(Compaction results of at least 94.5% are acceptable. sandy = sPR 1 1126.8
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
FORSGREN
PROJECT
DI
— ASSOCIATES /INC.
Client
JRW
Contractor
Jacobsen /Zollinger
Date 11/10/03
Weather
Cloudy breezy cool
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF
Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP
Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC
Electrical
TR
Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG
Footing
WL
Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST
Street
WTL
Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT
Retest
PL
Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
Technician Joel Martineau Reviewed by
(REMARKS: SOIL TYPE JOPT.MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
Distribution Store area; waterlines backfilled to finished sub -base elevation.
(Compaction results of at least 94.5% are acceptable. sandy = sPR 1 1126.8
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
SOIL TYPE
OPT. MOISTURE
MAX DRY DENSITY
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
Compaction results of at least 94.5% are acceptable.
_ FORSGREN
PROJECT DI Rexburg
— ASSOCIATESIINC.
Client JRW
9.1
134.9
Contractor Jacobsen /Zollinger
Date 11/10/03
Weather Cloudy breezy cool
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC Electrical
TR
Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG Footing
WL
Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST Street
WTL
Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT Retest
PL
Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
REMARKS: Test 9 failing.
SOIL TYPE
OPT. MOISTURE
MAX DRY DENSITY
Compaction results of at least 94.5% are acceptable.
pit run = PR
9.1
134.9
`��•••••v.w.. �/VV� IYICiI {IIIGQU
levee y
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
FORSGREN
PROJECT DI Rexburg
— ASSOCfATESIINC.
Client JRW
Contractor Jacobsen /Zollinger
Date 11/10/03
Weather Cloudy breezy cool
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC Electrical
TR
Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG Footing
WL
Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST Street
WTL
Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT Retest
PL
Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
results of at least 94.5% are acceptable.
run = PR
Technician Joel Martineau Reviewed by
9.1 1134.9
REMARKS: Tests 22 and 25 failed. ISOIL TYPE JOPT.MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
PROJECT DI Rexburg
Client
JRW
Contractor
Jacobsen
Weather
Cold
TR
LOCATION KEY
BF
Backfill
BP
Building Pad
ELC
Electrical
FTG
Footing
ST
Street
RT
Retest
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
F
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES / INC.
Date 11/11/03
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
SL
Sewerline
FG
Finish Grade
TR
Trench
FB
Finish Base
WL
Wall
FSB
Finish Sub Base
WTL
Waterline
FSG
Finish Sub Grade
PL
Parking Lot
FF
Finish Floor
Results of at least 94.5% of Proctor Density are
Tester J. Martineau
Reviewed by
9.1 1134.9
NOTES: The tests listed in this report were performed for backfilled areas around the loading dock, within the I SOIL TYPE JOPT.MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
floor slab area. I �,
REMARKS: Test #8 and #9 near crest of fill area.
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
OPT. MOISTURE
MAX DRY DENSITY
Test #12 was 6 ft. from edge of fill.
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
_ FORSGREN
PROJECT
DI Rexburg
sandy = SPR
— A SSOCiATESII N C.
Client
JRW
m
Contractor
Jacobsen /Zollinger
Date 11/11/03
Weather
Cloudy breezy cool
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF
Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP
Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC
Electrical
TR
Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG
Footing
WL
Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST
Street
WTL
Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT
Retest
PL
Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
REMARKS: Test #8 and #9 near crest of fill area.
SOIL TYPE
OPT. MOISTURE
MAX DRY DENSITY
Test #12 was 6 ft. from edge of fill.
sandy = SPR
9.1
126.8
Compaction of at least 94.5% is acceptabl
m
Technician Joel Martineau / � Reviewed by
REMARKS: Test 19 is retest for #25 of 11- 10 -03.
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
OPT. MOISTURE
MAX DRY DENSITY
Test 24 is retest for #22 of 11- 10 -03.
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
_ FORSGREN
PROJECT
DI
= ASSOCIATESII
Client
JRW
9.1
134.9
Contractor
Jacobsen/Zollinger
Date 11/11/03
Weather
Cloudy breezy cool
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF
Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP
Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC
Electrical
TR
Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG
Footing
WL
Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST
Street
WTL
Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT
Retest
PL
Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
REMARKS: Test 19 is retest for #25 of 11- 10 -03.
SOIL TYPE
OPT. MOISTURE
MAX DRY DENSITY
Test 24 is retest for #22 of 11- 10 -03.
Test 22 did not meet compaction spec. due to re- grading. Refer to test 19 @ same location on Nov. 10.
pit run = PR
9.1
134.9
Compaction results of at least 94.5% are acceptable..F
Technician Joel Martineau Reviewed by �� ----
r' `
Results of at least 94.5% of Proctor Density are
Tester J. Martineau
12
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES / INC.
Date 11/12/03
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
ELEVATION KEY
FG
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
FB
Finish Base
FSB
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
FSG
PROJECT
DI Rexburg
Finish Floor
Client
LDS Church /JRW
Contractor
Jacobsen
Weather
Cold
LOCATION KEY
BF
Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
BP
Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
ELC
Electrical
TR
Trench
FTG
Footing
WL
Wall
ST
Street
WTL
Waterline
RT
Retest
PL
Parking Lot
Results of at least 94.5% of Proctor Density are
Tester J. Martineau
12
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES / INC.
Date 11/12/03
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
ELEVATION KEY
FG
Finish Grade
FB
Finish Base
FSB
Finish Sub Base
FSG
Finish Sub Grade
FF
Finish Floor
Reviewed by
9.1 1134.9
REMARKS: Tests 1 and 2 are below the minimum required density. SOIL TYPE JOPT.MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
REMARKS:
Test 3 is below minimum density requirements. Area was part of SL TR BF.
Compaction results of at least 94.5% are accept
Technician Joel Martineau
TYPE JOPT.MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
ger Pit run 1 9.1 1134.9
Pit 1 9.1 1126.8
Reviewed by
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
_ FORSGREN
PROJECT
DI
ASSOCIATES /INC.
Client
JRW
Contractor
Jacobsen/Zollinger
Date
11/18/03
Weather
Cloudy breezy cool
Project
01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF
Backfill
SD Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP
Building Pad
SL Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC
Electrical
TR Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG
Footing
WL Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST
Street
WTL Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT
Retest
PL Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
DATE
TEST TEST
LOCATION
ELEV.
% DENSITY SOIL
% COM
NO. DEPTH
MOISTI WET I DRY TYPE SPEC FIELD
DI Parking SB
11/1
2 8
180 E of E-1 along E Line
0 N of E Line
FSB
5.2 136.5 129.7 PR
95.0 96.1
11/18 4 8'
100 E of E-1 along E Line
0' N of E Line
FSB
5.6 133.8 126.7 SPR
95.0 99.9
REMARKS:
Test 3 is below minimum density requirements. Area was part of SL TR BF.
Compaction results of at least 94.5% are accept
Technician Joel Martineau
TYPE JOPT.MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
ger Pit run 1 9.1 1134.9
Pit 1 9.1 1126.8
Reviewed by
EMARKS: Test #1 failed to meet the density requirement.
Test #7 failed to meet the density requirement.
TYPE JOPT.MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
ger Pit Run 1 9.1 1 134.9
Compaction results of at least 94.5% are accept
Technician Joel Martineau
Pit (Sandy) 1 9.9 1 126.8
Reviewed by
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
_ FORSGREN
PROJECT DI
— ASSOCIATES /INC.
Client
JRW
Contractor
Jacobsen/Zollinger
Date
11/19/03
Weather
Cloudy breezy cool
Project
01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF
Backfill
SD Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP
Building Pad
SL Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC
Electrical
TR Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG
Footing
WL Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST
Street
WTL Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT
Retest
PL Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
DATE
TEST TEST
LOCATION
ELEV.
% I DENSITY SOIL %
COM
NO. DEPTH
MOIST WET DRY TYPE SPEC
FIELD
DI Parking Sub base (SB)
:.. .f
ila ... ;
11/19
2 8
60' W of 2nd E curb on F Line PL
FSB
4.2 138.7 133.2 PR 95.0
98.7
ow
Now a ft
11/19
4 8"
140' W of 2nd E curb on F Line PL
FSB
5.2 136.0 129.2 SPR 95.0
95.8
11/19
,
6 8'
c
220' W of 2nd E. curb on F Line PL
FSB
5.7 136.6 129.2 PR 95.0
95.8
,,
s > <
., $;- t;
11/19
8 8
60' E of G-1 on G Line PL
FSB
5.5 134.8 127.8 PR 95.0
now
:. x... �
��
11/19 10 8"
wax._ ... �a.,�.
140' E of G 1 on G Line PL
,
FSB
5 0, 136.0 " 129.4 A PR 95.0
X 96.0
EMARKS: Test #1 failed to meet the density requirement.
Test #7 failed to meet the density requirement.
TYPE JOPT.MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
ger Pit Run 1 9.1 1 134.9
Compaction results of at least 94.5% are accept
Technician Joel Martineau
Pit (Sandy) 1 9.9 1 126.8
Reviewed by
Results of at least 94.5% of Proctor Density are
Tester J. Martineau
Reviewed by
9.1 1134.9
I RELiARKS: SOIL TYPE OPT. MOISTURE MAX DRY DENSITY
Tests 1 and 2 were below the minimum required density. 3 I ", FREE
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
FORSGREN
PROJECT
DI Rexburg
— ASSOCIATESIINC.
Client
LDS Church /JRW
Contractor
Jacobsen
Date 11/21/03
Weather
Cold
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF
Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP
Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC
Electrical
TR
Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG
Footing
WL
Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST
Street
WTL
Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT
Retest
PL
Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
Results of at least 94.5% of Proctor Density are
Tester J. Martineau
Reviewed by
9.1 1134.9
I RELiARKS: SOIL TYPE OPT. MOISTURE MAX DRY DENSITY
Tests 1 and 2 were below the minimum required density. 3 I ", FREE
DATE
TEST
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
LOCATION
ELEV.
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
DENSITY
FORSGREN
PROJECT
DI Rexburg
NO.
ASSOCIATES /INC.
Client
LDS Church /JRW
Contractor
Jacobsen
DRY
TYPE SPEC
Date 11/21/03
Weather
Cold
8"
215'
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
0' N of J -1: PL SB
LOCATION KEY
4.8%
134.0
127.9
BF
Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP
Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC
Electrical
TR
Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG
Footing
WL
Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST
Street
WTL
Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT
Retest
PL
Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
DATE
TEST
TEST
LOCATION
ELEV.
%
DENSITY
SOIL
%
COMP
NO.
DEPTH
MOIST
WET
DRY
TYPE SPEC
FIELD
11/21
14
8"
215'
E of J -1
0' N of J -1: PL SB
@FSB
4.8%
134.0
127.9
PR
95.0
AMM
sum
11/21
16
8"
140'
E of J -1
0' N of G -1: PL SB
@FSB
4.9%
129.4
123.4
SPR
95.0
97.3 %
�
O k i
�8"
11/21
18
60'
E of J -1
0' N of G -1: PL SB
@FSB
4.7%
129.8
124.0
SPR
95.0
REMARKS: All tests were in parking area east of the SE building corner, and are at finished sub -base elevation.
TYPE
MOISTURE MAX DRY DENSITY
Results of at least 94.5% of Proctor Density are
Tester J. Martineau
Reviewed by
9.1 1134.9
SOIL TYPE
of at least 94.5% of Proctor
are
Tester J. Martineau Reviewed by
MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
9.1 1134.9
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
FORSGREN
PROJECT DI Rexburg
— ASSOCIATESIINC.
Client LDS Church /JRW
Contractor Jacobsen
Date 12/01/03
Weather Cold
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC Electrical
TR
Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG Footing
WL
Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST Street
WTL
Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT Retest
PL
Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
SOIL TYPE
of at least 94.5% of Proctor
are
Tester J. Martineau Reviewed by
MOISTUREI MAX DRY DENSITY
9.1 1134.9
11.5 1125.8
Technician Joel Martineau Reviewed by
(REMARKS: Nuclear Gauge #7 standardized at site prior to testing. ISOIL TYPE (OPT. MOISTURE MAX DRY DENSITY
REPORT OF IN -PLACE SOIL DENSITY TESTS
BY NUCLEAR GUAGE METHOD
FORSGREN
PROJECT
DI
= ASSOCIATES /INC.
Client
JRW
Contractor
Jacobsen/Zollinger
Date 12/11/03
Weather
Cloudy breezy cool
Project 01 -02 -0136 0001
LOCATION KEY
BF
Backfill
SD
Storm Drain
ELEVATION KEY
BP
Building Pad
SL
Sewerline
FG Finish Grade
ELC
Electrical
TR
Trench
FB Finish Base
FTG
Footing
WL
Wall
FSB Finish Sub Base
ST
Street
WTL
Waterline
FSG Finish Sub Grade
RT
Retest
PL
Parking Lot
FF Finish Floor
11.5 1125.8
Technician Joel Martineau Reviewed by
(REMARKS: Nuclear Gauge #7 standardized at site prior to testing. ISOIL TYPE (OPT. MOISTURE MAX DRY DENSITY
N e- I o F 2—
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATE'S / INC_
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
PLEASE REPLY TO:
■ REXBURG OFFICE ❑ FARMINGTON OFFICE
11 EVANSTON OFICE ❑ BOISE OFFICE
FORSGREN ASSOCIATES ❑ SALT LAKE OFFICE ❑ WENATCHEE OFFICE
❑ SACRAMENTO OFFICE
J REXBURG 350 North 2nd East, Rexburg, ID 83440 (208)358.9201
SALT LAKE CITY 370 East 500 South, Ste. 200, Sall Lake City, UT 84111 (801) 364.4785
EVANSTON 849 Front Street, Ste 201, Evanston, WY 82930 (307)789.6735
FARMINGTON 1433 North Highway 89, Suite 110, Farmington, UT 84025 (801)447.4700
BOISE 1444 West Bannock, Boise, ID 83702 (208)342.3144
WENATCHEE 112 Olds Station Road, Ste A, Wenatc oo, WA 98901 (609)667.1426
SACRAMENTO 3110 Gob Canal Ddve, Suite C, Rancho CORIM, CA 95670 (916)838.1119
DATE: _ 19- Apr -04
PROJECT NO.: 01 -02 -0136 700 -0001
REFERENCE: Rexburg Deseret Industries Construction
WE ARE ENCLOSING:
Martineau, Field and
If enclsoures are not as noted, please notify us.
KtMAKKS:
Cc: City of RexbU[g Inspecto Jacobsen Construction, and as appropriate: Magnusson Metals, Zollinger
Construction, JJ Concrete, and Pete Mickelsen Construction.
Page 2 of 2
List for ADril 19. 2nna Ri ihmiff.l Kw r,.—.,... A ---- :_.
Date
Item
12/22/03
Proctor 03 -054
Pa es
1/27/04
Mortar Test Re Report samples #285 - 286 -287 28 day tests on 2 -24 -04
1
1
1/28/04
Grout Prism Test Re ort#288 - 289 -290 28 day test on 2 -25 -04
2/5/04
MTI CMU Prism Test Report, final set: 40513-40516 4-4 -04
1
2/3/04
Special Inspection: Floor Flatness including revisions of prior results.
2/5/04
Grout Prism Test Report Lab Sample #300 - 301 -302; 28 day test on 3 -04 -04
2/16/04
Mortar Test Report samples #306 - 307 -308 7 da test on 2 -28 -04
1
1
2/16/04
Grout Prism Test Report #309 - 310 -311 lab samples, 7-day test on 2 -28/04
1
2/16/04
Grout Prism Test Report #309 - 310 -311 lab — 28-day tests on 3 -15 -04
1
2/24/04
Steel Inspection - Daily Inspection Report by Will Warren, MTI Special Inspector
1
2/25/04
Steel Inspection - Daily Inspection Report bv Will Warren, MTI S ecial Ins ector
— report
1
3/4/04
Concrete test
3/4/04
Concrete inspection report
1
3/6/04
Concrete test report
1
3/6/04
Concrete inspection report
1
3/8/04
Concrete Flatness inspection report.
1
3/11/04
Concrete test report
3 `
3/11/04
Concrete inspection report
1
3/16/04
Concrete test report
1
3/26/04
Proctor 04 -021
1
3/26/04
Proctor 04 -022
1
1
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES / INC.
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
December 22, 2003
To JRW Architects
The following proctor density results are being submitted for Zollinger Pit -run material used as sub -base fill at the
Rexburg Deseret Industries site.
Thank you,
Forsgren Associates
MOTQTT TP P -n 7ATCTTV TIT - rUD W 4TXT a mr�wr
Project: Rexburg DI
1V1• 1Wl Vl \1
Source: Teton Pit
Maximum Optimum %
Sample Date: 01 December 2003
Sample ID# Proctor 03 -054
Moisture
Test Date: 16 December, 2003
Tested BY: T. Olsen
Material Description: Well- Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel SW -SM
Liquid Limit: Plastic Limit:
Plastici Index: N/A
Sample Prepared:
Test Standard:
Moist X E698
ASTM D X
D
ASTM D 1557
Hammer Ti e: Mechanical Manual X
Method: C Mold Volume: 0.075 cuff
Assumed Point
Percent
Dry
Maximum Optimum %
Sp. Gr. Number
Moisture
Density
Dry Density Moisture
2.65 1
7.3
115.4
121.4 Ibs/ft ^3 11.5%
2
9.5
120.9
ASTM D -4718, Correction
3
13.0
120.0
for Oversize Particles
4
16.1
114.3
130.3 Ibs /ft ^3
Proctor Curve
124.0
122.0
120.0
d
a 118.0
L
a 116.0
114.0
112.0
7.0
Reviewed By `�
Jeffrey M. SnydciPOU
Geotechnical Engineer
Sieve
Size
Percent
Passin
3.0"
1.5"
1.25"
1.0"
7/8"
3/4"
5/8"
1/2"
3/8"
1/4"
#4
#8
#10
#16
#20
#30
#40
#50
#60
#80
#100
#200
74.5
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS 350 NORTH 2nd EAST / REXBURG, ID 83440 / (208) 356.9201 / FAX (208) 356.0206
REXBURG / BOISE / WYOMING / WENATCHEE / SALT LAKE CITY / SACRAMENTO
www.forsgren.com
9.0 11.0 13.0 15.0 17.0
Percent Moisture
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES/INC.
Project No. 01020136
Report No.
MORTAR TEST REPORT
Date Cast 27 January, 2004 Cast By J. Martineau No.Cast 3
Project Rexburg Deseret Industries (DI)
Location of Masonry Pillars outside Family Services Entrance near B -1 0 -4 ft high
Contractor: Jacobsen /Mickelson
Report To: Tony Burdette
Supplier: Mickelson (mixed Quickcrete type S Mix at site)
Quantity Represented 0.5 cubic yards Strength Requirement 1800 psi at 28days
MATERIAL PROPORTIONS USED
Mix Number Mortar Ibs bags Type S Brand: Quickcrete
Water Total Gals Gals /Bag
Above Information Obtained From: FPA Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor Other (Designate)
Temperature: Air 48 O F in Tented Area Mortar 44 Weather Cloudy, Calm. 28 deg F
Time Mixed: 1400 Time Sampled: 1535
Mixing: Mixer on Site X
Above Site Information Obtained From: FPA X Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor Masonry Supplier Other (Designate)
CYLS Delivered to Laboratory by FPA X Contractor Engineer Common Carrier
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
Field
#
Age
Days
Lab
#
Date
Received
Date
Tested
Total
Load
Obs)
Size
Unit
Load
(psi)
BREAK
TYPE
1
7
285
29 Jan
03 Feb
12420
3 *6
1757
B
2
28
286
29 Jan
24 Feb
15500
3 *6
2194
B
3
28
287
29 Jan
24 Feb
16300
3 *6
2307
Remarks: Samples stored inside of heated wall tenting on top of six foot scaffolding.
Averaged 28 -day result was 2251 psi.
Tested Bv: J Martineau
Results Reviewed By:
K: \JRW \Rexburg D1 \700 Const \760 Comply \763 Masonry \Mortar Sampling & Testing \01- 27- 04Mortar.rtf
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
FORSOREN
ASSOCIATES / INC.
GROUT PRISMS
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
TEST REPORT
PROJECT
CLIENT
PERMIT #
MIX ID
CY of Grout
Deseret Industries Rexburg
CONTRACTOR
SUPPLIER
TRUCK #
TICKET
INSPECTOR
Pete Mickelson & Sons
JRW
Walters Concrete
R- 03- -08 -10
W -46
516
31 deg. F./ 49 in tent
4.5
J Martineau
Pour Locations: Columns and Arch at Distribution entrance to 12 ft. high; walls connecting columns to building; 10 to
14 ft.: Columns in frnnt of Family Svc Pnfr- fn � 4: e a
MIX PROPORTIONS
FIELD PROPERTIES
SPEC.
Cement:
Fly Ash:
Water:
Coarse Agg. #1
Coarse Agg. #2
Fine Agg. #1
Fine Agg. #2
Admixture #1
Admixture #2
Admixture #3
Water /Cement Ratio
Prism
Area
Weather
Air Temperature
Grout Temperature
Time Batched
Time Placed
Entrained air %
Slump
Unit Wt.
Yield
Water Added
rc (psi)
Cloudy, Windy
Test Date
Total Load
Pounds
31 deg. F./ 49 in tent
Fracture
Type
288
60.4 deg. F.
3.1
9.3
1358
7
4 -Feb
1410
.5344
E
N/A
3.1
3.3
7 -3/4" prior to add H2O
6.01
28
25 -Feb
59000
5877
-
2901
3.1
7 gallons
9.5
6.0
28
2500
Cast Date 1/28/2004
No. Samples 3
Lab ID#
Prism
Width
Prism
Length
Prism
Area
Prism
Height
Age (Days)
Test Date
Total Load
Pounds
Unit Load-
PSI
Fracture
Type
288
3.0
3.1
9.3
6.11
7
4 -Feb
49490
.5344
E
289
3.1
3.3
10.0
6.01
28
25 -Feb
59000
5877
2901
3.1
3.1
9.5
6.0
28
25 -Feb
63000
6663
Remarks: Prisms built on 6 ft. high level scaffolding inside of heated wall tenting.
The averaged 28 -day strength is 6270 psi.
Tested By: Joel Martineau
Results Reviewed By:
grout prisms 1.28-04
MATERIALS
TESTING &
INSPECTION
ASTM C -1314 Compressive
Strength of Masonry Prisms
PAGE #1 OF 2
REVISION DATE 3/10/2004
\\WISERV ER2'.R E PO RTS \EASTERN
IDAHM2004REPORTST40005S -
DESERET INDUSTRIES
(FORSGREN) \CMU40513. DOC
❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections
Jeff Snyder
Forsgren Associates, Inc.
350 North Second East
Rexburg, ID 83440
Project: Deseret Industries Warehouse & Store
Permit #: R- 03 -08 -10
Contractor: Mickelson & Sons Inspector: Contractor Cast
Supplier: ---- - - - - -- Truck #: Not provided Ticket #: Not provided
Mix 1D: Not provided # Of Yards: 3 ` Report #: ---- - - - - --
Location: LDS Family Services front entrance near B -1, includes columns and walls connecting columns to building wall,
elevation 8' to 14'
Date Made: February 5, 2004
Type of CMU: Natural split face
Nominal Size (in.): 8 x 8 x 16
Provided
Ambient Temperatureff): 27
Temperature of Groutff): 51
Mortar Type: Type S
Min / Max Temp. F first 48 hours:
Upper /Lower Platen Diameter 11.5 in.
.ower Bearing Plate Thickness 2.85 in.
Specified CMU fm (psi): 1750
Grout f (psi): 2500
Mortar f (psi): 1800
Time Grout Batched: 9:25am
Time Grout Placed: 9:35am
Temperature of Mortar (°F): -- - - - - --
Diameter of Spherical Seat 6.5 in.
Required Upper/Lower Bearing Plate Thickness: 2.85 in.
#of Prisms: 4
cmu
Prism ID
Date
Received
Test Age
in Days
Date Tested
Prism
Grout
Prism
Width
(inches)
Prism
Length
(inches)
Prism
Height
(Inches)
Height: least
lateral prism
dimension
Correctio
n Factor
Percent Net
Area ASTM
C140
Net Area
(sq. in.)
Failure
Load (lbs)
Corrected
Compressive
Strength (psi)
Faihae Mode
1 -7 below
40513
Mar 2, 04
28
W4,04
Yes
7.65
7.70
15.71
2.05
1.00
58.91
149,030
2,530
7
40514
Rhar 2, 04
28
Mar 4, 04
Yes
7.70
7.63
15.65
2.05
1.00
58.75
175,080
2,980
6
40515
Mar 2, 04
28
Mar 4, 04
No
1 7.65
1 7.75
1 15.76
1 2.06
1 1.00
1
33.96
84,230
2,480
7
40516
Mar 2, 04
28
1 Mar 4, 04
No
1 7.70
1 7.65
1 15.53
1 2.03
1 1.00
1
33.68
87,220
2,590
7
1
Compressive Stye h of Masonry (average for the set of 28 risms i :
2,645
■ 1 1T� 1T x'111 7w° --
SW A (mo) A B A B A B A, B A B A B A P
(Front) FIG. 4 Sketches of Types of Fracture
If you have any questions concerning this report (cmu40513), please call us at (208) 529 -8242.
Respectfully submitted,
MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION INC.
Reviewed by: Cristopher McMurtrey
Eastern Idaho Assistant Manager
1230 North Skyline Drive, Suite C, Idaho Falls, ID 83402 208 -529 -8242 Fax: 208 - 529 -6911
Email: eimti @mti- id.com Website: www.mti- id.com
SPECIAL INSPECTION
Project Name: Rexburg Deseret Industries
Inspection Dates: 2- 03 -04, 2- 05 -04, and 2- 12 -04.
Inspector: Joel Martineau
Type of work: Concrete Inspection for Flatness of Floor Slabs
Forsgren conducted additional concrete floor slab flatness checks. For purposes of this
inspection, slabs were subdivided into 40 X 40 foot areas, and are referenced here by
their northeastern corners per the construction plat coordinates. The areas checked
included D -1, D -2, E -2, E -3, E- 1, C -1, A -3, A -2, A -1, and B -3 (see diagram, Exhibit 1).
Each area was measured for overall flatness using a taut mason's line. The slabs were
also checked in different directions using a ten -foot straight edge for high and low spots.
The results are presented in Exhibit 2.
Inspection results are divided into "pass ", "fail ", or "incomplete" due to further
inspection being needed. In order to pass inspection, slabs are required to deviate less
than 3/8 in. overall, and less than 1 /8th inch in 10 feet at any location on the slab area.
Technician: Joel Martineau
Special Inspector: Jeff M. Snyder
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES / INC.
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
d`G .
K JRWIROO'Iry D "0f Con;_, A) C mry 41 d:.t Name's m4pecuo, reoori.do-
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS 350 NORTH 2nd EAST/ REXBURG, ID 83440 / (208) 356.9201 / FAX (208) 356.0206
REXBURG / BOISE / WYOMING / WENATCHEE / SALT LAKE CITY/ SACRAMENTO
www.forsgren.com
FORSGREN ASSOCIATES, INC. EXHIBIT 2
Note: Results from the previous report are presented in shaded areas. D— ret,ndusties Flow Blab Flat— 11
Deseret Industries floor flab testing results as revised Feb. 12, 2004
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
FORSGREN
ASSOC /RTES / INC.
GROUT PRISMS
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
TEST REPORT
PROJECT
CLIENT
PERMIT #
MIX ID
CY of Grout
Deseret Industries Rexburg
CONTRACTOR
SUPPLIER
TRUCK #
TICKET
INSPECTOR
Pete Mickelson & Sons
JRW Architects
Walters Concrete
R- 03- -08 -10
W -83
516
00239
3.0
J Martineau
Pour Locations: Columns and Arch at LDS Family Services front entrance to 12 ft. high; walls connecting columns to
building; 10 to 14 ft.
MIX PROPORTIONS
FIELD PROPERTIES
SPEC.
Cement:
Fly Ash:
Water:
Coarse Agg. #1
Coarse Agg. #2
Fine Agg. #1
Fine Agg. #2
Admixture #1
Admixture #2
Admixture #3
Water /Cement Ratio
Prism
Area
Weather
Air Temperature
Grout Temperature
Time Batched
Time Placed
Entrained air %
Slump
Unit Wt.
Yield
Water Added
f (psi)
Clear, Breezy
Test Date
Total Load
Pounds
27 deg. F./ 45 in tent
Fracture
Type
300
51.8 deg. F.
3.3
10.1
0925
7
12 -Feb
0945
4487
B
WA
2.9
3.2
9.5"
6.01
28
4 -Mar
62000
6573
-
302
3.1
5 gallons
9.8
6.01
28
2
Cast Date 2/5/2004
No. Samples 3
Lab ID#
Prism
Width (in)
Prism
Length
Prism
Area
Prism
Height
Age (Days)
Test Date
Total Load
Pounds
Unit Load-
PSI
Fracture
Type
300
3.1
3.3
10.1
6.21
7
12 -Feb
45200
4487
B
301
2.9
3.2
9.4
6.01
28
4 -Mar
62000
6573
C
302
3.1
3.2
9.8
6.01
28
4 -Mar
63000
6459
C
Remarks: Prisms built at ground level in heated tented area next to walls being grouted. Temp. of samples at time of retrieval
documented at 45.5 deg. F.
Tested By: Joel Martineau
Results Reviewed By: 474--
grout prisms 2 -05-04
ra
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES i INC.
Project No. 01020136
Report No.
MORTAR TEST REPORT
Date Cast 16 Feb. 2004 Cast By J. Martineau No.Cast 3
Project Rexburg Deseret Industries (DI)
Location of Masonry Masonry in front DI Entry Walls @ 12' height
Contractor: Jacobsen /Mickelson
Report To: JRW
Supplier: Mickelson (mixed Quickcrete type S Mix at site)
Quantity Represented 0.5 cubic yards Strength Requirement 1800 psi at 28days
MATERIAL PROPORTIONS USED
Mix Number Mortar Ibs bags Type S Brand: Quickcrete
Water Total Gals Gals /Bag
Above Information Obtained From: FPA Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor Other (Designate)
Temperature: Air 69 O F in Tented Area Mortar 60 O F Weather Thin Clouds. 36 deg. F.
Time Mixed: 1000 Time Sampled: 1030
Mixing: Mixer on Site X
Above Site Information Obtained From: FPA X Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor Masonry Supplier Other (Designate)
CYLS Delivered to Laboratory by FPA X Contractor Engineer Common Carrier
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
Field
#
Age
Days
Lab
#
Date
Received
Date
Tested
Total
Load
Ibs
Size
Unit
Load
(psi)
BREAK
TYPE
1
7
306
18 Feb
28 Feb
9800
3 *6
1387
D
2
28
307
18 Feb
15 Mar
3 *6
3
28
308
18 Feb
15 Mar
3 *6
Remarks: Samples stored inside of heated tented area next to masonry on 6 ft. high
scaffold. Result for #306 was 77% of required strength.
Tested By: J Martineau
Results Reviewed By:
4i lll—
K:\JRW\Rexburg DI \700 Const \760 Comply \763 Meaonry\Mortar Sampling 6 Testing \02- 16- 04Mortar.rtf
FORSGREN GROUT PRISMS
AS30CA47ZS /NVC.
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
TEST REPORT
PROJECT
CLIENT
PERMIT #
MIX ID
Cy of Grout
Desere Industries Rexburg
JRW Architects
CONTRACTOR
SUPPLIER
TRUCK #
TICKET
INSPECTOR
Pete Mickelson & Sons
Wafters Concrete
R -03 -08-10
W-83
516
00350
3.0
J Martineau
Pour Locations: Columns and Arch at LDS Family Services front entrance to 12 ft. high; walls connecting columns to
buiidiner in M 1d A
MIX PROPORTIONS
Cement:
Fly Ash:
Water.
Coarse Agg. #1
Coarse Agg. #2
Fine Agg. #1
Fine Agg. #2
Admixture 01
Admixture #2
Admixture #3
Water /Cement Ratio
Lab ID#
FIELD PROPERTIES
Weather Thin Clouds, Cool
Air Temperature 36 deg. F./ 69 in tent
Grout Temperature 66 deg. F.
Time Batched 1039
Time Placed 1130
Entrained air % WA
Slump 9.0"
Unit WL
Yield -
Water Added 5 gallons
f c (psi)
SPEC.
Prism
Area
Prism
Height
Age (Days)
Test Date
Total Load
Pounds
Unit Load-
PSI
Fracture
Type
309
3.2
3.2
9.9
6.01
7
26-Feb
44200
4455
E
2500
Cast Date 2/16/2004
No. Samples 3
Lab ID#
Prism
Width (in)
Prism
Length
Prism
Area
Prism
Height
Age (Days)
Test Date
Total Load
Pounds
Unit Load-
PSI
Fracture
Type
309
3.2
3.2
9.9
6.01
7
26-Feb
44200
4455
E
310
28
15-Mar
311
28
15-Mar
Remarks: Prisms built at ground level in heated tented area next to walls being grouted.
Tested By: Joel Martineau
Results Reviewed By:
gout prisms 2 -18-04
AM FORSGREN
ASSOC /A TES / /NC.
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
GROUT PRISMS
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
TEST REPORT
PROJECT Deseret Industries Rexburg CONTRACTOR Pete Mickelson & Sons
CLIENT JRW Architects SUPPLIER Walters Concrete
PERMIT # R- 03 -08 -10 TRUCK # W -83
MIX ID 516 TICKET 00350
CY of Grout 3.0 INSPECTOR .J Martineau
Pour Locations: Columns and Arch at LDS Family Services front entrance to 12 ft. high; walls connecting columns to
building; 10 to 14 ft.
PROPORTIONS
FIELD PROPERTIES
Cement:
Weather Thin Clouds, Cool
Fly Ash:
Air Temperature 36 deg. F./ 69 in tent
Water:
Coarse Agg. #1
Grout Temperature 66 deg. F.
Coarse Agg. #2
Time Batched 1039
Fine Agg. #1
Time Placed 1130
Fine Agg. 92
Entrained air % N/A
Admixture #1
m
Slump 9.0"
Admixture #2
Unit
Admixture #3
Yield -
Water /Cement Ratio
Water Added 5 gallons
fc ( ed
2500
Remarks: Prisms built at ground level in heated tented area next to walls being grouted.
Tested By: Joel Martineau
Results Reviewed By: ----
grout Prisms 2 -1604
Co MATERIALS
TESTING &
INSPECTION
PAGE #1 OF 1
REVISION DATE 3/312004
\WITISERVER2 \REPORTS \EASTERN
IDANO\2004REPORTS \E40005s-
DESERET INDUSTRIES
(FORSGREN) \RPT019. DOC
❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections
Jeff Snyder Phone: (208) 356 -9201
Forsgren Associates, Inc. Fax: (208) 356 -0206
350 North Second East Other:
Rexburg, ID 83440
Project: Deseret Industries Warehouse & Store
Permit #: R- 03 -08 -10
Inspector: William Warren
Inspection Date: February 24, 2004
DAILY INSPECTION REPORT
On the above date, our representative performed work on the referenced project as reported below.
1) Welding inspection of joist seats at distribution center vestibule and retail store main entrance vestibule.
2) Welding inspection of deck seam and puddle welds at locations noted above.
3) Welding inspection of fillet welds at ledger angles at locations noted above (top side only).
Results: All complete and in compliance.
4) Inspection of the north entrance vestibule roof is scheduled for February 25, 2004.
Staff on site — Steel Inspection
William Warren — Welding Inspector
If you have any questions concerning this report (rpt019), please call us at (208) 529 -8242.
Respectfully submitted,
MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION INC.
Reviewed by: Cristopher McMurtrey
Eastern Idaho Assistant Manager
CC: Forsgren Associates, Inc.
1230 North Skyline Drive, Suite C, Idaho Falls, ID 83402 208 - 529 -8242 Fax: 208 - 529 -6911
Email: eimti@mti- id.com Website: www.mtkid.com
Co MATERIALS
TESTING &
INSPECTION
PAGE #1 OF 1
REVISION DATE 3/3/2004
\\MTISERV ER2 \REPORTS \EASTERN
IDAHO\2004REPORTS \E400055
DESERET INDUSTRIES
(FORSG REN) \RPT018. DOC
❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections
Jeff Snyder Phone: (208) 356 -9201
Forsgren Associates, Inc Fax: (208) 356 -0266
350 North Second East Other:
Rexburg, ID 83440
Project: Deseret Industries Warehouse & Store
Permit #: R- 03 -08 -10
Inspector: William Warren
Inspection Date: February 25, 2!904
DAILY INSPECTION REPORT
On the above date, our representative performed work on the referenced project as reported below.
1) Welding inspection of deck puddle and seam welds at the north entrance vestibule roof.
2) Welding inspection of fillet welds at ledger angle to embeds at top side of north entrance vestibule; and
at bottom sides of distribution center vestibule, main entrance vestibule, and north entrance vestibule.
3) Welding inspection of bridging angles in distribution center entrance, main entrance and north entrance
vestibules.
Results: All complete and in compliance.
4) Punch list of items still in need of inspection at bottom side of roof structure between gridlines 1 and 4
from row F to H; and at mid -span truss kicker angles between gridlines 2 and 3 from row A to H. Inspection
required after complete dead loading of roof and welding completed.
* * *RE- INSPECTION /RETESTING REQUIRED
Staff on site — Steel Inspection
William Warren — Welding Inspector
If you have any questions concerning this report (rpt018), please call us at (208) 529 -8242.
Respectfully submitted,
MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION INC.
60-) - e��
Reviewed by: Cristopher McMurtrey
Eastern Idaho Assistant Manager
CC: Forsgren Associates, Inc.
1230 North Skyline Drive, Suite C, Idaho Falls, ID 83402 208 - 529 -8242 Fax: 208 - 529 -6911
Email: eimti @mti- id.com Website: www.mti- id.com
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES/INC.
Project No. 01020136
Report No.
CONCRETE TEST REPORT
Date Cast 03/04/04 Cast By J. Martineau No. Cast 4
Project Rexburg Deseret Industries (DI)
Location of Pour Floor Slab: corner coordinates are as follows: G -1 G -2 H -1 and H -4
Contractor: Jacobsen /Double J Concrete
Report To: Tony
Concrete Supplier: Walters Concrete Mix # 521
Quantity Represented 55 cubic yards Strength Requirement 4500 psi at 28days
MATERIAL PROPORTIONS USED (Quantities per Cubic Yard of Concrete) Mix No
Cement Ibs bags Type Brand
Fine Aggregate (ssd) LBS Source Type
Course Aggregate (ssd) LBS Size Source Type
Course Aggregate (ssd) LBS Size Source Type
Water Total Gals Gals /Bag
Admixture; Amount Kind
Admixture; Amount Kind
Above Information Obtained From: FPA Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor
Other (Designate)
Ent Air 6.2 % Actual Slump 5 -3/4 Inches Ticket # 00624
Temperature: Air 45 ° F Concrete 64 O F Weather Cloudy, Cold
Water Added at Job gallons Time Batched: 0840 Time Off Site: 0915
Mixing: Central Mix Truck Mix X Job Mix
Above Site Information Obtained From: FPA X Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor Concrete Supplier Other (Designate)
CYLS Delivered to Laboratory by FPA X Contractor Engineer Common Carrier
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
Field
#
Age
Days
Lab
#
Date
Received
Date
Tested
Total
Load
Ibs
Size
Unit
Load
(psi)
BREAK
TYPE
1
7
312
Mar 05
Mar 11
49200
4 *8
3920
2
28
313
Mar 05
Apr 01
4 *8
3
28
314
Mar 05
Apr O1
4 *8
4
28
315
Mar 05
Apr 01
4 *8
Tested By: J. Martineau
Remarks: Outdoor temp 24,de F. Inside of building heated.
Results Reviewed By:e
X- 1 .
FORSGRE
ASSOCIATES / INC.
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
Project Name: Rexburg Deseret Industries
Inspection Date: 3/04/04
Inspector: Joel Martineau
Type of work: Concrete Inspection and Sampling
Forsgren inspected the placement of reinforcing steel for the Deseret Industries floor slab
from coordinates G to H and 1 to 4; slab thickness was 4 inches.
Forsgren observed the placement of approximately 55 cubic yards of concrete at the
above location.
Forsgren monitored the first load arriving at the job site for correct mix and proper slump.
Forsgren performed 1 air entrainment test and performed 1 slump test. Forsgren cast 1 set
of 4 cylinders.
Forsgren found the work inspected to be in compliance with the approved plans and
specifications.
Technician: Joel Martineau
Special Inspector: Jeff M. Snyder
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS 350 NORTH 2nd EAST/ REXBURG, ID 83440 / (208) 356.9201 / FAX (208) 356.0206
REXBURG / BOISE / WYOMING / WENATCHEE / SALT LAKE CITY / SACRAMENTO
www.forsgren.com
C
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES/INC.
Project No. 01020136
Report No.
CONCRETE TEST REPORT
Date Cast 03/06/04 Cast By K. Yarger No. Cast 4
Project Rexburg Deseret Industries (DI)
Location of Pour Floor Slab corner coordinates are as follows: F -1 F -4 G -1 and G -4.
Contractor: Jacobsen /Double J Concrete
Report To: Tony
Concrete Supplier: Walters Concrete Mix # 852
Quantity Represented 55 cubic yards Strength Requirement 4500 psi at 28days
MATERIAL PROPORTIONS USED (Quantities per Cubic Yard of Concrete) Mix No
Cement Ibs bags
Type
Brand
Fine Aggregate (ssd)
LBS Source
Type
Course Aggregate (ssd)
LBS Size
Source
Course Aggregate (ssd)
LBS Size
Source
Water Total
Gals
Gals/Bag
Admixture; Amount
Kind
Admixture; Amount
Kind
317
Above Information Obtained From: FPA Batching Inspection
Project Engineer
Contractor
Other
(Designate)
Type
Type
Ent Air 7 % Actual Slump 8 Ticket # 00679
Temperature: Air 50 deg. F. Concrete 65 deg. F Weather Partly cloudy, windy
Water Added at Job gallons Time Batched: 0806 Time Off Site: 0825
Mixing: Central Mix Truck Mix X #521 Job Mix
Above Site Information Obtained From: FPA X Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor Concrete Supplier Other (Designate)
CYLS Delivered to Laboratory by FPA X Contractor Engineer Common Carrier
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
Field
#
Age
Days
Lab
#
Date
Received
Date
Tested
Total
Load
Ibs
Size
Unit
Load
(psi)
BREAK
TYPE
1
7
316
Mar 08
Mar 12
51500
4 *8
4090
2
28
317
Mar 08
Apr 02
4 *8
E 3
28
318
Mar 08
Apr 02
4 *8
4
28
319
Mar 08
Apr 02
4 *8
Tested By: W. McNaughton
Remarks: Outdoor temp 24 g. Inside of building heated.
Results Reviewed By:
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES / INC.
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
Project Name: Rexburg Deseret Industries
Inspection Date: 3/06/04
Inspector: Kathy Yarger
Type of work: Concrete Inspection and Sampling
Forsgren inspected the placement of reinforcing steel for the Deseret Industries floor slab
from coordinates F to G and 1 to 4; slab thickness was 4 inches.
Forsgren observed the placement of approximately 55 cubic yards of concrete at the
above location.
Forsgren monitored one load arriving at the job site for correct mix and proper slump.
Forsgren performed 1 air entrainment test and performed 1 slump test. Forsgren cast 1 set
of 4 cylinders.
Forsgren found the work inspected to be in compliance with the approved plans and
specifications.
Technician: Kathy Yarger C.
Special Inspector: Jeff M. Snyder
r
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS 350 NORTH 2nd EAST/ REXBURG, ID 83440 / (208) 356.9201 / FAX (208) 356.0206
REXBURG / BOISE / WYOMING / WENATCHEE / SALT LAKE CITY/ SACRAMENTO
www.forsgren.com
X -..
SPECIAL INSPECTION
Project Name: Rexburg Deseret Industries
Inspection Dates: 304 and 3 -8 -04
Inspector: Joel Martine
Type of work: Concrete Inspection for Flatness of Floor Slabs
Forsgren conducted additional concrete floor slab flatness checks. For purposes of this
inspection, slabs were subdivided into 40 X 40 foot areas, and are referenced here by
their northeastern corners per the construction plat coordinates. The areas checked
included F -1, F -2, F -3, G -1, G -2, and G -3 (see diagram, Exhibit 1).
Each area was measured for overall flatness using a taut mason's line. The slabs were
also checked in different directions using a ten -foot straight edge for high and low spots.
The results are presented in Exhibit 2.
Inspection results are divided into "pass ", "fail ", or "incomplete" due to further
inspection being needed. In order to pass inspection, slabs are required to deviate less
than 3/8 in. overall, and less than 1 /8th inch in 10 feet at any location on the slab area.
Technician: Joel Martineau
Special Inspector: Jeff M. Snyder
ZkL=
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES / INC.
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS 350 NORTH 2nd EAST/ REXBURG, ID 83440 / (208) 356.9201 / FAX (208) 356.0206
REXBURG / BOISE/ WYOMING / WENATCHEE / SALT LAKE CITY/ SACRAMENTO
www.forsgren.com
C : \DWG'S \DI Concrete Slob Survey.dwg, Exhibit 1, 3/19/2004 7:29:57 AM. 1:1 _ RFXR I IRr: nr r
A
4
3
2
1
0 40 80
SCALE IN FEET
EXHIBIT 1
LDS Church
Rexburg DI Concrete Slab Test
Area Reference
March 2004
BE ASSOCIATES, SOCIATES, INC
CONCRETE SLAB LAYOUT
J Fi G F E D C B
FORSGREN ASSOCIATES, INC. EXHIBIT 2
Deseret Industries floor flab testing results as inspected March 5th and 8th, 2004
Area Checked
Chalkline Test Location
Deviation
(in)
Chalkline
Result
10 ft. Flat Steel Results
Comments
Referenced by N.E.
Corner
From:
To:
F -1
F -1
G -2
2/8 in.
Pass
Pass
F -1
20'S of F -1
20' S. of F -2
2/8 in.
Pass
Pass
F -1
F -2
G -1
1/8 in.
Pass
Pass
F -2
F -2
G -3
1/8 in.
Pass
Pass
F -2
20' S of F -2
20'S. of F -3
1/8 in.
Pass
Pass
F -2
F -3
G -2
1/8 in.
Pass
Pass
Depression 20' SE of F -3, but within spec.
F -3
F -3
G-4
2/8 in.
Pass
Pass
F -3
20'S of F -3
20' S. of F-4
1/8 in.
Pass
Pass
F -3
F-4
G -3
1/8 in.
Pass
Pass
G -1
G -1
H -2
<3/8 in.
Pass
Pass
G -1
G -2
H -1
<3/8 in.
Pass
Pass
High in SE corner relative to overall slab
G -1
20'S of G -1
20'S of G -2
<3/8 in.
Pass
Pass
G -2
G -2
H -3
2/8 in.
Pass
Pass
G -2
20' S of G -2
20'S of G -3
2/8 in.
Pass
Pass
G -2
G -3
H -2
2/8 in.
Pass
Pass
G -3
G -3
H-4
1/8 in.
Pass
Pass
Drip spot near SW corner of slab.
G -3
20'S of G -3
20'S of G-4
2/8 in.
Pass
Pass
G -3
G-4
H -3
<3/8 in.
Pass
Pass
Deseret Industries Floor Slab Flatness III
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES/INC.
Project No. 01020136
Report No.
CONCRETE TEST REPORT
Date Cast 03/11/04 Cast By J. Martineau No. Cast 4
Project Rexburg Deseret Industries (DI)
Location of Pour Loading Dock retaining wall footings (3 separate locations)
Contractor: Jacobsen /Double J Concrete
Report To: JRW, Jacobsen Construction, JJ Concrete
Concrete Supplier: Walters Concrete Mix # 521
Quantity Represented 23 cubic yards Strength Requirement 3000 psi at 28days
MATERIAL PROPORTIONS USED (Quantities per Cubic Yard of Concrete) Mix No
Cement Ibs bags Type Brand
Fine Aggregate (ssd) LBS Source Type
Course Aggregate (ssd) LBS Size Source Type
Course Aggregate (ssd) LBS Size Source Type
Water Total Gals Gals /Bag
Admixture; Amount Kind
Admixture; Amount Kind
Above Information Obtained From: FPA Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor Other (Designate)
Ent Air 6.1 % Actual Slump 3 -7/8 Ticket # 00781
Temperature: Air 41 deg. F. Concrete 63.5 deg. F. Weather Sunny
Water Added at Job gallons Time Delivered: 1508 Time Off Site: 1530
Mixing: Central Mix Truck Mix X #521 Job Mix
Above Site Information Obtained From: FPA X Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor Concrete Supplier Other (Designate)
CYLS Delivered to Laboratory by FPA X Contractor Engineer Common Carrier
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
Field
#
Age
Days
Lab
#
Date
Received
Date
Tested
Total
Load
Ibs
Size
Unit
Load
(psi)
BREAK
TYPE
1
7
320
Mar 12
Mar 18
57000
4 *8
4556
A_B
2
28
321
Mar 12
Apr 08
4 *8
3
28
322
Mar 12
Apr 08
4 *8
4
28
323
Mar 12
Apr 08
4 *8
Tested By: W. McNaughton
Remarks: Samples stored it
Results Reviewed By:
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES/ INC.
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
Project Name: Rexburg Deseret Industries
Inspection Date: 3/11/04
Inspector: Joel Martineau
Type of work: Concrete Inspection and Sampling
Forsgren inspected the placement of reinforcing steel for three retaining wall foundation
pads near building coordinate A4 and on each side of the truck loading dock, running east
to west.
Forsgren observed the placement of 34cubic yards of concrete at the above location.
Forsgren monitored one load arriving at the job site for correct mix and proper slump.
Forsgren performed 1 air entrainment test and performed 1 slump test. Forsgren cast 1 set
of 4 cylinders.
Forsgren found the work inspected to be in compliance with the approved plans and
specifications.
Technician: Joel Martineau
Special Inspector: Jeff M. Snyder
A COMPANY OF ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS 350 NORTH 2nd EAST/ REXBURG, ID 83440 / (208) 356.9201 / FAX (208) 356.0206
REXBURG / BOISE / WYOMING / WENATCHEE / SALT LAKE CITY/ SACRAMENTO
www.forsgren.com
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES/INC.
Project No. 01020136
Report No.
CONCRETE TEST REPORT
Date Cast 03/16/04 Cast By J. Martineau No. Cast 4
Project Rexburg Deseret Industries (DI)
Location of Pour Loading Dock retaining walls (3 separate locations)
Contractor: Jacobsen Construction
Report To: JRW, Jacobsen Construction, JJ Concrete
Concrete Supplier: Walters Concrete Mix # 851
Quantity Represented 20.5 cubic yards Strength Requirement 3000 psi at
28days
MATERIAL PROPORTIONS USED (Quantities per Cubic Yard of Concrete) Mix No
Cement Ibs bags
Fine Aggregate (ssd)
Course Aggregate (ssd)
Course Aggregate (ssd)
Water Total
Admixture; Amount
Admixture; Amount
Above Information Obtained From
Contractor Other (Designate)
Type
LBS Source
LBS Size _
LBS Size _
Gals
Kind
Kind
FPA Batching Inspection
Brand
Type
_ Source Type
_ Source Type
Gals /Bag
Project Engineer
Ent Air 5.1 % Actual Slump 4 -1/4 in. Ticket # 00852
Temperature: Air 42 deg. F. Concrete 65.1 deg. F. Weather Sunny, Breezy
Water Added at Job gallons Time Delivered: 0853 Time Off Site: 0930
Mixing: Central Mix Truck Mix X #851 Job Mix
Above Site Information Obtained From: FPA X Batching Inspection Project Engineer
Contractor Concrete Supplier Other (Designate)
CYLS Delivered to Laboratory by FPA X Contractor Engineer Common Carrier
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
Field
#
Age
Days
Lab
#
Date
Received
Date
Tested
Total
Load
Ibs
Size
Unit
Load
(psi)
BREAK
TYPE
1
7
324
Mar 16
Mar 23
41000
4 *8
3263
B
2
28
325
Mar 16
Apr 13
4 *8
3
28
326
Mar 16
Apr 13
4 *8
4
28
327
Mar 16
Apr 13
4 *8
Tested By: W. McNaughton
Remarks: Samples stored in lab because there was not room for storage under concrete
blankets. Concrete c Nith blankets for 48 hours.
Results Reviewed By.
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES/ INC.
J. R.W. & Associates
1152 Bond Avenue
Rexburg, Idaho, 83440
March 26, 2004
Dear Sir/Madam
The Following are Proctor results for Truck Ramp obtained at our Rexburg, Idaho materials testing lab.
MnTgTTTRF- TIFATQ7Tv nU'rUDIIATATA TT/17.T T 1- l --
Project: Rexburg DI
Source: South Truck Ramp , Zollinger Pit
Sample Date: March 24, 2004
Test Date: March 25, 2004
Lab ID# 04 -021
Tested By: WWM
Material Description: Sandy Gravel with 27 percent retained on 3 /4 inch sieve.
Liquid Limit: NP Plastic Limit: NP Plasticity Index: NA
Sample Prepared: Moist X Dry Hammer Type: Mechanical Manual X
Test Standard: ASTM D 698 ASTM D 1557X Method: C Mold Volume: 0.075 cu.ft.
Assumed Point
Percent
Dry
Maximum Optimum %
Sp. Gr. Number
Moisture
Density
Dry Density Moisture
2.60 1
5.4
129.5
133.1 Ibs/ftA3 6.8%
2
7.9
130.9
ASTM D -4718, Correction
3
9.4
120.6
for Oversize Particles
4
9.4
120.6
139.9 Ibs /ftA3
Proctor Curve
140.0
135.0
4 1
C
a 130.0
ca D ensity
125.0
120.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0
Percent Moisture
Note: Maximum +3/4" content allowed by ASTM 1557 C is 30 %. This sample contained 27 % +3/4" particles.
Reviewed By
i
William W. M °Naughton
Sieve
Size
Percent
Passing
3.0"
1.5"
1.25'
1.0"
7/8"
3/4" .
5/8"
1/2"
3/8"
1/4"
#4
#8
#10
#16
#20
#30
#40
#50
#60
#80
#100
#200
73.0
Manager, Materials Laboratory
FORSGREN
ASSOCIATES / INC.
J. R.W. & Associates
1152 Bond Avenue
Rexburg, Idaho, 83440
March 26, 2004
Dear Sir/Madam
The Following are Proctor results for Truck Ramp obtained at our Rexburg, Idaho materials testing lab.
M(')TSTTTRR._T)RNCTTV TWT nunnnm
Project: Rexburg DI
Source: Zol linger Pit, Onsite stock pile
Sample Date: March 24, 2004
Test Date: March 25, 2004
Lab ID# 04 -022
Tested By: WWM
Material Description: Sandy Gravel with 3 percent retained on 1 /4 inch sieve.
Liquid Limit: NP I Plastic Limit: NP
Sample Prepared: Moist X I Dry I Hammer Type:
Plasticity Index: NA
Mechanical I Manual X
Test Standard:
ASTM D 698
1 ASTM D 1557 X
I Method: C I Mold Volume: 0.075 cu.ft.
Assumed Point
Percent
Dry
Maximum Optimum %
Sp. Gr. Number
Moisture
Density
Dry Density Moisture
2.50 1
5.3
121.9
123.6 Ibs /ftA3 7.7%
2
7.4
123.6
ASTM D -4718, Correction
3
9.2
122.8
for Oversize Particles
4
9.2
122.8
124.3 Ibs /ftA3
Proctor Curve
129.0
127.0
125.0
123.0
a
121.0
A
119.0 Dry De it
117.0
115.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0
Percent Moisture
Note: Maximum +3/4" content allow qd ,y ASTM 1557 C is 30 %. This sample contained 27 % +3/4" particles.
Reviewed By
William W. McNaughton
Manager, Materials Laboratory
Sieve
Size
Percent
Passing
3.0"
1.5"
1.25'
1.0"
7/8"
3/4"
5/8"
1/2"
3/8"
1/4"
#4
#8
#10
#16
#20
#30
#40
#50
#60
#80
#100
#200
97.5
1152 Bond Avenue
(208) 359 -2309
ARCHT=CTU °T_
Qualifications Certified By: RG, IDAHO.
N.C:A.R.B. Fax 359 - 2271
NATIONAL COUNCIL OF ARCHITECTURAL REGISTRATION BOARDS
- . ENGnTZERING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
a
20 10 0 20 40
M a%,... ... . .........
OT 1
nd EAST
SUBDIVISION
LAT 1
4 ,
LEGEND
REBAR & AL. CAP RECOVERED
IRON PIN RECOVERED
BUILDING HATCH
DRAIN FIELD BOUNDARY
Ilk,
LOT 2
2nd EAST
A SUBDIVISION
PLAT 1
SURVEYOR'S CIERTIS
1, David C. Lee, do hereby certify that I am a Professional Land SurvoyQr
and that I hold Certificate Number 10897 as prescribed by the laws
"k
the State of Idaho, I further certify that I have supervised the survey
shown on this drawing and that it correctly represents the results of that
survey.
DAVID C. LEE, Idaho P.L.S. No. 10897
L A j V 0
M
V16 C
ENCROACHMENT SURVEY
PART OF THE NORTH EAST 1/4 OF SECTION 19
TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RAGE 40 EAST, B.M
4
UNT jo�m
REXBURG, MADISON CO jb rs .
-
4.
77
V
A
TO NORTH—WEST CORNER OF
VICTOR M. MENDOZA AND
TO NORTH—WEST CORNER OF
DOMINGA 'MENDOZA PARCEL
LOS CHURCH PARCEL.
INSTRUMENT #288926
INSTRUMENT #228745
a
20 10 0 20 40
M a%,... ... . .........
OT 1
nd EAST
SUBDIVISION
LAT 1
4 ,
LEGEND
REBAR & AL. CAP RECOVERED
IRON PIN RECOVERED
BUILDING HATCH
DRAIN FIELD BOUNDARY
Ilk,
LOT 2
2nd EAST
A SUBDIVISION
PLAT 1
SURVEYOR'S CIERTIS
1, David C. Lee, do hereby certify that I am a Professional Land SurvoyQr
and that I hold Certificate Number 10897 as prescribed by the laws
"k
the State of Idaho, I further certify that I have supervised the survey
shown on this drawing and that it correctly represents the results of that
survey.
DAVID C. LEE, Idaho P.L.S. No. 10897
L A j V 0
M
V16 C
ENCROACHMENT SURVEY
PART OF THE NORTH EAST 1/4 OF SECTION 19
TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RAGE 40 EAST, B.M
4
UNT jo�m
REXBURG, MADISON CO jb rs .
-
4.
77
V
NOTES
(D ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVING
�2 CONCRETE CURB 4 &UTTER - A/502.1
�3 CONCRETE SIDEWALK - Y5V2.1
�4 12' CHAIN LINK FENCE 4 MOYISTRIP - L/5D2.1
O INLET BOX - R/502.1
�6 LIOHT POLE AND BASE - C/SV2-2
O CONCRETE DRAINAGE &UTTER - F/5D2.1
QS CONCRETE SIDEWALK - CURB 4 &UTTER - 0/502.2
CONCRETE DRIVE - R/5D2.2
AT ALL ENTRIE5 PROVIDE A
b"THICK X 48'VEEP CONCRETE FR05T WALL
EQUAL TO THE Y410TH OF THE WALK AND EXTENDING
46" AWAY FROM THE DOOR WAY taw EVILDN6 50
FROS
HALL i /
L ------ —j
-- -----------
NEH
WALK
/ 2
HO RESERVED PARKING 51(SNA&E (7YP. OF 8)
5EE DETAIL - D/5D2.2
4" PAINTED PARKIN& 5TRIPE5
PAINTED ACCeSSISILITY 1.0605
PATCH EXISTIN& ASPHALT
DRAIN 60RATE - N/502.1 Aj
CONSULT ARCHITECT foOR
EXACT BUILDING LOCATION / D ,;_
MOBILE HOME
PARK
z0
;, � is