DOCSLIB.ORG

2020 Staunton State Park - Phase II-B Construction Improvements DIVISION I - SPECIFICATIONS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2020 Staunton State Park - Phase II-B Construction Improvements DIVISION I - SPECIFICATIONS 2020 Staunton State Park - Phase II-B Construction Improvements DIVISION I - SPECIFICATIONS PROJECT I.D. NO. C19ST3 RQS: 2021*0148 APPR. CODE PC002INFP PRE-BID CONFERENCE: August 19, 2020 at 1:30 PM BID OPENING: August 26, 2020 at 1:30 PM PROJECT MANUAL STAUNTON STATE PARK - PHASE II -B 06/26/20 6/23/20 100% CD Job #: 2018.113 2020.06.26 6/25/2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS DIVISION 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS 00 3100 AVAILABLE PROJECT INFORMATION Geotechnical Report DIVISION 01 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 01 1000 SUMMARY 01 2214 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT 01 3000 ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS 01 4000 QUALITY REQUIREMENTS 01 4100 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS 01 4120 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PROTECTION 01 4533 CODE-REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS AND PROCEDURES 01 5000 TEMPORARY FACILITIES AND CONTROLS 01 6000 PRODUCT REQUIREMENTS 01 7000 EXECUTION AND CLOSEOUT REQUIREMENTS 01 7800 CLOSEOUT SUBMITTALS DIVISION 03 - CONCRETE 03 3000 CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE 03 4500 PRECAST ARCHITECTURAL CONCRETE DIVISION 04 - MASONRY 04 7200 STONE MASONRY VENEER DIVISION 05 - METALS 05 1200 STRUCTURAL STEEL FRAMING 05 5000 METAL FABRICATIONS DIVISION 06 - WOOD, PLASTICS, AND COMPOSITES 06 1000 ROUGH CARPENTRY 06 1753 SHOP-FABRICATED WOOD TRUSSES 06 1800 GLUED-LAMINATED WOOD CONSTRUCTION 06 2000 FINISH CARPENTRY DIVISION 07 - THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION 07 1900 GRAFFITI COATINGS 07 4113 METAL ROOF PANELS 07 4646 FIBER CEMENT SIDING 07 6200 SHEET METAL FLASHING AND TRIM 07 9200 JOINT SEALANTS DIVISION 09 - FINISHES 09 9113 EXTERIOR PAINTING 09 9600 HIGH-PERFORMANCE COATINGS 2018.113 Page 1 2020.06.26 CPW - Staunton Phase III TABLE OF CONTENTS 100% Construction Documents DIVISION 26 – ELECTRICAL 26 0500 COMMON WORK RESULTS FOR ELECTRICAL 26 0501 EQUIPMENT CONNECTIONS AND COORDINATION 26 0519 LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL POWER CONDUCTORS AND CABLES 26 0526 GROUNDING AND BONDING FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS 26 0529 HANGERS AND SUPPORTS FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS 26 0533 RACEWAYS AND BOXES FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS 26 0553 IDENTIFICATION FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS 26 2416 PANELBOARDS 26 2713 ELECTRICITY METERING 26 2726 WIRING DEVICES 26 2813 FUSES 26 2816 ENCLOSED SWITCHES AND CIRCUIT BREAKERS 26 3100 PHOTOVOLTAIC COLLECTORS 26 5100 LIGHTING DIVISION 31 - EARTHWORK 31 1000 SITE CLEARING 31 2000 EARTH MOVING 31 2300 EARTHWORK 31 2512 TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL 31 3700 RIP RAP DIVISION 32 – SITE IMPROVEMENTS 32 0190 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE 32 1216 ASPHALT PAVING 32 1313 CONCRETE PAVING 32 1540 CRUSHED STONE PAVING 32 1723 PAVEMENT MARKINGS 32 1726 TACTILE WARNING SURFACING 32 3300 SITE FURNISHINGS 32 4000 ROUGH STONE VENEER 32 9113 SOIL PREPARATION 32 9219 NATIVE SEEDING 32 9300 PLANTS DIVISION 33 - UTILITIES 33 4200 STORMWATER CONVEYANCE END OF TABLE OF CONTENTS 2018.113 Page 2 2020.06.26 CPW - Staunton Phase III TABLE OF CONTENTS 100% Construction Documents SECTION 00 3100 AVAILABLE PROJECT INFORMATION PART 1 GENERAL 1.01 EXISTING CONDITIONS A. Certain information relating to existing surface and subsurface conditions and structures is available to Contractor, but are not part of the Contract Documents, as follows: B. Geotechnical Report: Geotechnical Investigation Report, Staunton State Park Phase 3; prepared by Tetra Tech, Project No. 200-280535-19001, dated November 21, 2019, dated April 23, 2018. 1. A copy is included with this document. 2. Contractor is urged to examine data provided. 3. Contractor should visit the site and become acquainted with existing conditions. 4. This report identifies properties of below grade conditions and offers recommendations for the design of foundations, prepared primarily for the use of Owner's Project Representative. 5. Interpretation: This report is provided only for information and convenience. Owner and Owner's Project Representative disclaim responsibility for accuracy, true location and extent of soil conditions that have been evaluated by others. Owner and Owner's Project Representative further disclaim responsibility for interpretation of the report data by the Contractor; including but not limited to projecting soil bearing values, rock profiles, soil stability, and presence, level, and extent of underground water. 6. Applicable Requirements: Specific and variable recommendations contained in this document are subject to acceptance by Owner for incorporation in the Contract Documents prepared by Owner's Project Representative. Comply with requirements specified in the Contract Documents for earthwork, paving systems, and other applicable work scope items. PART 2 PRODUCTS (NOT USED) PART 3 EXECUTION (NOT USED) END OF SECTION 2018.113 00 3100 - 1 2020.06.26 CPW - Staunton Phase III AVAILABLE PROJECT INFORMATION 100% Construction Documents Staunton State Park Phase 3 Geotechnical Investigation Report 200-280535-19001 November 21, 2019 PRESENTED TO PRESENTED BY Colorado Parks & Wildlife Tetra Tech Dave Coffman, P.E. 130 Ski Hill Rd., #140 P +1 970.453.6394 P 303.291.74 07 Breckenridge, CO 80424 tetratech.com 6060 Broadway, Denver, CO 80216 [email protected] Prepared by: 1 1 / 2 1 / 2 0 1 9 Jacob Jansen, E.I November 21, 2019 Geotechnical Engineer Reviewed by: 1 1 / 2 1 / 2 0 1 9 Kenneth Temme, P.E. November 21, 2019 Senior Geotechnical Engineer 1 1 / 2 1 / 2 0 1 9 Staunton State Park Phase 3 Geotechnical Investigation Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Previous Study ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Site Location .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.4 Existing Conditions and Proposed Improvements .......................................................................... 1 2.0 GEOTECHNICAL FIELD PROGRAM ..................................................................................................... 2 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................ 3 3.1 Regional and Site Geology ............................................................................................................. 3 3.2 Subsurface Profile ........................................................................................................................... 3 3.3 Groundwater .................................................................................................................................... 3 4.0 GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM ...................................................................... 4 5.0 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................. 6 5.1 General ............................................................................................................................................ 6 5.2 Shallow Foundations and Retaining Structures .............................................................................. 6 5.3 Site Preparation and Earthwork ...................................................................................................... 7 5.4 Slabs-on-Grade ............................................................................................................................... 9 5.5 Seismic Design Criteria ................................................................................................................. 10 5.6 Exterior Flatwork ........................................................................................................................... 12 5.7 Surface Drainage .......................................................................................................................... 12 5.8 Utility Trenches and Excavations .................................................................................................. 12 5.9 Pavement Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 12 5.10 Special Considerations – Radon Gas ......................................................................................... 13 6.0 GEOTECHNICAL RISK ........................................................................................................................ 14 7.0 LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................................ 15 8.0 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................... 16 Tetra Tech November 2019 i Staunton State Park Phase 3 Geotechnical Investigation Report LIST OF TABLES Table 4-1: Results of the geotechnical laboratory testing program ............................................................. 5 Table 5-1: Earthquake and Seismic Design Parameters ........................................................................... 11 LIST OF FIGURES EXHIBIT A: Borehole Location Map and Proposed Improvements APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Boring Logs APPENDIX B: Laboratory Results Tetra Tech November 2019 ii Staunton State Park Phase 3 Geotechnical Investigation Report 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose This report presents the results of a geotechnical
Load more

Recommended publications
  • C. Developing Trail Systems
    C. DEVELOPING TRAIL SYSTEMS Trails are more than simply lines on a map, a form of transportation or route to destinations. Trails are an experience. Engaging trails systems provide a sense of unique place, highlight natural topography and attract outdoor-based tourism. A vast and varied experience hooks trails users and leaves them wanting to return for more exploration. This tool kit offers suggestions for building destination-worthy trail systems. Best Management Practices For Developing Trail Systems Sustainability Simplified. Sustainable trails provide an intended experience in a steady state with minimal undesired impacts. Sustainability does not have to mean “sanitizing” or “dumbing- down” trails… yet, expect to hear that concern. Well-designed trail systems need not come at the detriment of natural resources. Trails can actually help protect resources by fostering appreciation for the great outdoors and by managing users Greenbelt Trail in Costilla County (courtesy of Root to minimize impacts while maximizing fun. Four House Studio) components of trail sustainability: • Physical: Trails remains in intended condition with rhythmic vs. tight and twisty) and the distinctive minimal erosion, braiding, or degradation. qualities of a trail or system. • Environmental: Trails minimize disturbance to flora • Challenge tests fitness and ability. Treat each as + fauna and sedimentation to watersheds. Planned a different measure. Ability refers to technical trails systems—even with increased mileage— aptitudes like sure-footedness, bike handling, can yield less impact than existing conditions scrambling or even navigation. Fitness refers by keeping users on trail, reducing erosion and to the capacity for sustained effort required for avoiding areas of greatest habitat sensitivity.
    [Show full text]
  • Pikes Peak Group Program – February 18 Denise Snow Presents: Cross Country Skiing Around the World
    Pikes Pique The Newsletter of the CMC Pikes Peak Group February, 2020 | No. 264 Pikes Peak Group Program – February 18 Denise Snow presents: Cross Country Skiing Around The World There are many opportunities for cross country ski vacations around the world. Many countries support a stronger cross country culture than what we have in the United States and make it much easier to travel and ski hundreds of kilometers of well prepared tracks. Come and see skiing opportunities from Norway to New Zealand and beyond as well as the advantages that can be found in places where great skiing is not just for the downhill folks. Come join Denise at the Ivywild School Center, 1604 S Cascade Ave. Happy hour at 6:00, program starts at 6:30 in the Barrel Room. Hope to see you there! The Pikes Peak Group in Pictures Aiken Canyon Hike New Member Orientation L–R: Vishal Rana, Adam Keller, Ray Ruiz, Adrienne Ross, Tyler L–R: Gary Marx, Missy Starks, Randy Bliss, Joanne Larraga, Jim King, Ruben Valdez, Emily Ernst, Audrey Burkart (co-leader), and Thieme, and Keely Nolan. Kay Cower. Keely and Randy are members of the Denver group. Photo credit: Dean Waits (leader) More on page 3! 1 Welcome New Members! Your PPG Council Katharina Anderson Tyler King Chair – Kristen Buckland Tracey Anderson Benjamin Ladau 419-260-7807, [email protected] Margo Bedford Terrence Ladau Past Chair – Vacant Ramsey Blahnik Wendy Ladau ARCPro Director – Scott Kime Reed Blahnik Andrew Laub 719-235-0939, [email protected] Joe Cocklin Vickie Laughlin BMS Co-Directors – Tom Mulcahy
    [Show full text]
  • DAR-Colorado-Marker-Book.Pdf
    When Ms. Charlotte McKean Hubbs became Colorado State Regent, 2009-2011, she asked that I update "A Guidebook to DAR Historic Markers in Colorado" by Hildegarde and Frank McLaughlin. This publication was revised and updated as a State Regent's project during Mrs. Donald K. Andersen, Colorado State Regent 1989-1991 from the original 1978 version of Colorado Historical Markers. Purpose of this Project was to update information and add new markers since the last publication and add the Santa Fe Trail Markers in Colorado by Mary B. and Leo E. Gamble to this publication. Assessment Forms were sent to each Chapter Historian to complete on their Chapter markers. These assessments will be used to document the condition of each site. GPS (Lat/Long) co-ordinances were to be included for future interactive mapping. Current digital photographs of markers were included where chapters participated, some markers are missing, so original photographs were used. By digitizing this publication, an on-line publication can be purchased by anyone interested in our Colorado Historical Markers and will make updating, revising and adding new markers much easier. Our hopes were to include a Website of the Colorado Historical Markers accessible on our Colorado State Society Website. I would like to thank Jackie Sopko, Arkansas Valley Chapter, Pueblo Colorado for her long hours in front of a computer screen, scanning, updating, formatting and supporting me in this project. I would also like to thank the many Colorado DAR Chapters that participated in this project. I owe them all a huge debt of gratitude for giving freely of their time to this project.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Visitor Guide Available Online
    Page 2 Page 3 Inside the Guide... Gold Belt Tour Page 10 Trails of Gold Map Page 7 Cripple Creek Parks Page 32 Events Page 8 Fishing Page 31 Gambling Page 17 Historic Cemeteries Page 30 Lodging Page 9, 26 Mine Tours Page 29 Modern Mining Page 28 Museums Page 24, 25 Scenic Overlooks Page 33 Shuttle Website Info Page 7 Theater Page 22 Train Ride Page 20 Victor Ice Rink Page 32 Cripple Creek Page 16, 17 Victor Page 12, 14 Thanks to our advertisers for their support and to our contributors for their content. This guide is a product of ZStudios, POB 244, Victor, CO 80860. This guide and more information available online at VictorColorado.com. All contents copyright April 2020. Page 4 old! Few words can change the character of an entire region like the cry of “gold fever”. Gold was discovered here in 1890; the fever spread like wildfire, bringing thousands to the PiGkes Peak region. Prospectors Bob Womack and Winfield Scott Stratton discovered the gold ore that touched off the legendary Cripple Creek and Victor Gold Rush. The ranching country on Pikes Peak's western slopes was transformed as thousands flocked to the area to seek their for - tunes. Towns sprang up on the mountainsides serving 500 gold mines, all requiring fuel, sup - plies, transportation, and a large supply of labor. It became a priority to link the Cripple Creek and Victor Mining District to places beyond. Two stage roads and three railroads were built to carry lumber, food, coal, ore, and people to and from the mining district towns.
    [Show full text]
  • Right Track 2004 Annual Review Colorado Lottery a Division of the Colorado Department of Revenue
    We're on the Right Track 2004 Annual Review Colorado Lottery A division of the Colorado Department of Revenue COLORADO LOTTERY Looking n behalf of the Colorado Lottery, a division of the Colorado Department of ORevenue, I am pleased to present the calendar year 2004 annual review. And yes, the Colorado Lottery is "on the right track" in our efforts to maximize revenues, provide new and exciting games, and maintain our commitment to customer service Ahead and efficient operations. Through hard work and dedication, the Lottery was able to set new sales records in to 2005 2004, while at the same time identifying efficiencies that allowed us to return additional dollars to our proceeds recipients. s in 2004 The Lottery celebrated yet another successful year with sales over $408 million, breaking the previous calendar year record of $398 million in 2002. The Scratch product line once again led the way in setting the new sales record. In 2004, the Lottery sold more than The Colorado Lottery ended fiscal year 2004 by setting an The Colorado Lottery will undergo $274 million in Scratch tickets. all-time Scratch sales record of $260.9 million. a major computer conversion in Proceeds recipients received more than $ 104 million during 2005. Changes will include new, In addition, the Colorado Lottery began implementation of an entirely new computer game system and fiscal year 2004. This was the second-highest proceeds state-of-the-art terminals that introduced state-of-the-art Scratch game vending machines. These changes will provide the opportunity for produce Powerball, Lotto and distribution in the Lottery's 22-year history.
    [Show full text]
  • Staunton State Park Biological Inventory
    Staunton State Park Biological Inventory Prepared by: Susan Spackman, David Anderson, Jeremy Siemers, Phyllis Pineda, and Jill Handwerk Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Colorado State University College of Natural Resources, 254 General Services Building Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 Prepared for: Colorado State Parks, Jefferson and Park Counties, Colorado December, 1999 Staunton State Park Biological Inventory Prepared by: Susan Spackman, David Anderson, Jeremy Siemers, Phyllis Pineda, and Jill Handwerk Prepared for: Colorado State Parks, Jefferson and Park Counties, Colorado ii Acknowledgments The Colorado Natural Heritage Program would like to thank Colorado State Parks for making this work possible. We would also like to acknowledge and sincerely thank Bob Bruce for generously contributing his time and expertise to this project. As our primary contact he gave crucial assistance with orienting CNHP biologists within the park, and was extremely helpful with accessing information about the park. The University of Colorado and the Colorado State University Herbaria provided important species distribution information. The information management staff with CNHP was responsible for integrating the data resulting from the inventory into the Biological Conservation Datasystem. This effort was performed by Jill Handwerk, Jeremy Siemers, Jodie Bell, Alison Loar, and Adam Carheden. Crucial assistance with digitizing PCAs and element occurrences was provided by Amy Lavender. Valuable editorial feedback was provided by Bob Bruce, Janet Coles,
    [Show full text]
  • All Grants Awarded Through Fiscal Year 2020 INTRODUCTION and KEY
    All Grants Awarded Through Fiscal Year 2020 INTRODUCTION AND KEY This report is a list of all grants awarded by the Colorado Historical Society’s State Historical Fund (SHF) since its inception in 1992 (state Fiscal Year 1993) through the end of Fiscal Year 2020. The amounts listed are the original award amounts. If for some reason the entire grant amount was not used (i.e. a project was terminated or was completed under budget) the full amount awarded will appear. In other instances grant awards were increased either to enable project completion or to cover the costs of easements. In these instances, the additional award amount is shown in a separate entry as an increase. In those cases where no work was accomplished and the funds were either declined by the grant recipient or were required to be returned to the SHF through rescissions, no entry will appear. For this reason, projects listed in one version of this report may not appear in later versions, and the financial information shown in this report may not be comparable to other revenue reports issued by the SHF. Grants listed in this report are identified by project ID number. The first two characters in the project ID number represent the fiscal year from which the grant was scheduled to be paid. The state is on a July 1 – June 30 fiscal year. So, for example, all grants made between July 1, 2006 and June 30, 2007 will be coded “07”. The next two characters identify the type of grant. In the case of grants that are awarded based on specific application due dates, the grant round in which the project was funded will be paired with either a letter or number.
    [Show full text]
  • 5B Part Two- MAY
    Pike National Historic Trail Association Newsletter May-B 2016 Vol. 10 No. 5B Part Two- MAY Celebrating 210 Years- The Santa Fe Trail Association (SFTA) celebrated the Bicentennial of Pike’s 1806-7 Southwest Expedition 10 years ago. One can use our website- zebulonpike.org to recall the many activities conducted during 2006. The Pike National Historic Trail Association became the child of the SFTA. It was formed by John Patrick Michael Murphy and our current President. SFTA donated its website and many of its leaders including Dr. Leo Oliva and Dr. Clive Siegle volunteered. Others from the Bicentennial Committee quickly joined the effort including Zebulon Montgomery Pike, Dorothy Urban, and Mike Bandera with Dr. Rev. Roy Escott Pike, Erwin Young, Patrick Surrena, Tom Rollings and Rex Rideout. Bicentennial Liberty Bell & Daffodil Pike’s Damn’d Rascals- 4 John Brown BOTH expeditions. Went with Pike, Robinson and Miller to climb Pikes Peak Tried for desertion August 2, 1809, at New Orleans. He had deserted Lt. Wilkinson at Fort Adams November 21, 1807, and had been absent until June 6, 1809, when he surrendered to Maj. Amos Stoddard at Natchitoches. His sentence of corporal punishment was remitted because of voluntary surrender. Brown lived in the Cold Water district of St. Louis County, Missouri, for 42 years. When he died at the age of 86 his obituary appeared in the Missouri Republican, August 21, 1840. He is believed to be the oldest rascal. January 24, 1807 Saturday- Pikes Journal … he [Brown] exclaimed, “that it was more than human nature could bear, to march three days without sustenance, through snows three feet deep, and carry burdens only fit for horses” &c.&c.” “Brown, you this day presumed to make use of language which was seditious and mutinous, … I will pardon, but be assured, should it ever be repeated, by instant death, I will revenge your ingratitude and punish your disobedience.” This was one of a very few instances where Pike had to discipline.
    [Show full text]
  • Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC)
    Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC) Summits on the Air USA - Colorado (WØC) Association Reference Manual Document Reference S46.1 Issue number 3.2 Date of issue 15-June-2021 Participation start date 01-May-2010 Authorised Date: 15-June-2021 obo SOTA Management Team Association Manager Matt Schnizer KØMOS Summits-on-the-Air an original concept by G3WGV and developed with G3CWI Notice “Summits on the Air” SOTA and the SOTA logo are trademarks of the Programme. This document is copyright of the Programme. All other trademarks and copyrights referenced herein are acknowledged. Page 1 of 11 Document S46.1 V3.2 Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC) Change Control Date Version Details 01-May-10 1.0 First formal issue of this document 01-Aug-11 2.0 Updated Version including all qualified CO Peaks, North Dakota, and South Dakota Peaks 01-Dec-11 2.1 Corrections to document for consistency between sections. 31-Mar-14 2.2 Convert WØ to WØC for Colorado only Association. Remove South Dakota and North Dakota Regions. Minor grammatical changes. Clarification of SOTA Rule 3.7.3 “Final Access”. Matt Schnizer K0MOS becomes the new W0C Association Manager. 04/30/16 2.3 Updated Disclaimer Updated 2.0 Program Derivation: Changed prominence from 500 ft to 150m (492 ft) Updated 3.0 General information: Added valid FCC license Corrected conversion factor (ft to m) and recalculated all summits 1-Apr-2017 3.0 Acquired new Summit List from ListsofJohn.com: 64 new summits (37 for P500 ft to P150 m change and 27 new) and 3 deletes due to prom corrections.
    [Show full text]
  • Persson Mines 0052N 11296.Pdf
    THE GEOCHEMICAL AND MINERALOGICAL EVOLUTION OF THE MOUNT ROSA COMPLEX, EL PASO COUNTY, COLORADO, USA by Philip Persson A thesis submitted to the Faculty and Board of Trustees of the Colorado School of Mines in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science (Geology). Golden, Colorado Date ________________ Signed: ________________________ Philip Persson Signed: ________________________ Dr. Katharina Pfaff Thesis Advisor Golden, Colorado Date ________________ Signed: ________________________ Dr. M. Stephen Enders Professor and Interim Head Department of Geology and Geological Engineering ii ABSTRACT The ~1.08 Ga Pikes Peak Batholith is a type example of an anorogenic (A)-type granite and hosts numerous late-stage sodic and potassic plutons, including the peraluminous to peralkaline Mount Rosa Complex (MRC), located ~15 km west of the City of Colorado Springs in Central Colorado. The MRC is composed of Pikes Peak biotite granite, fayalite-bearing quartz syenite, granitic dikes, Mount Rosa Na-Fe amphibole granite, mafic dikes ranging from diabase to diorite, and numerous rare earth (REE) and other high field strength element (HFSE; e.g. Th, Zr, Nb) rich Niobium-Yttrrium-Fluorine (NYF)-type pegmatites. The aim of this study is to trace the magmatic evolution of the Mount Rosa Complex in order to understand the relationship between peraluminous and peralkaline rock units and concomitant HFSE enrichment and mineralization processes. Field work, petrography, SEM-based methods, whole rock geochemistry, and electron probe micro-analysis (EPMA) of micas was performed on all rock units to determine their textural, mineralogical and geochemical characteristics. Early peraluminous units such as the Pikes Peak biotite granite and fayalite-bearing quartz syenite contain annite-siderophyllite micas with high Fe/(Fe + Mg) ratios, and show relatively minor enrichments in REE and other HFSE compared to primitive mantle.
    [Show full text]
  • CCLOA Directory 2021
    2 0 2 1 Colorado’s Most Comprehensive Campground Guide View Complete Details on CampColorado.com Welcome to Colorado! Turn to CampColorado.com as your first planning resource. We’re delighted to assist as you plan your Colorado camping trips. Camp Colorado All Year Wildfires Table of Contents Go ahead! Take in the spring, autumn and winter festivals, Obey the local-most fire restrictions! That might be the Travel Resources & Essential Information ..................................................... 2 the less crowded trails, and some snowy adventures like campground office. On public land, it’s usually decided by snowshoeing, snowmobiling, cross country skiing, and the county or city. Camp Colorado Campgrounds, RV Parks, & Other Rental Lodging .............. 4 even downhill skiing. Colorado Map ................................................................................................. 6 Wildfires can occur and spread quickly. Be alert! Have an MAP Colorado State Parks, Care for Colorado ...................................................... 8 Many Colorado campgrounds are open all year, with escape plan. Page 6 Federal Campgrounds, National Parks, Monuments and Trails ................... 10 perhaps limited services yet still catering to the needs of those who travel in the off-seasons. Campfires aren’t necessarily a given in Colorado. Dry Other Campgrounds ...................................................................................... 10 conditions and strong winds can lead to burn bans. These Wildfire Awareness, Leave No
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX a APPENDIX a Tiliber SALE Sumllary
    APPENDIX A APPENDIX A TIliBER SALE SuMllARY Area r.ocarmn -“anagemenr Area Treatmentl Esrlmated Probable Harvest -RIS I.ocatmn Area Volume “ethods by -Towashw & Range* (Acres) m LlpiBF Forest Type 1984 leadvllle 28 30 57 02 lodgepole pine 100210 clearcut T9S, R80W 1984 Leadvllle 2B 30 86 03 Lodgepole pne 100210 clearcut T8S. mow 1984 Leadvllle 70 50 143 03 bdgepole pule 100203 clearcur; spruce,fr ms, R80W shelterwood 1984 Leadvllle lhstrxt-vlde 80 2.29 08 All species. approprrare for nanagement Area.*=C 1984 Sahda 4B 320 457 16 Spruce,flr group 101001; 101002 selectmn T14S, R80W 1984 Sallda 40 200 114 0.4 Douglas-*rr thmnmg; 102311 lodgepole pine and T48N, WE aspen. clearcur 1984 SalIda 5B 15 29 0 1 Lodgepole pm 102211 clearcur T49N, R7E 1984 Salzda 5B 30 86 0.3 Aspen: clearcut 1027.06 public fuelwood T49N, WE 1984 Sahd.9 40 25 86 0.3 Aspen clearcur 101301 public fuelwood T13S, R77W 1984 Sahda District-wide 320 200 0.7 All species approprrate for nanagement Area 1984 San Carlas ,A 318 loo0 3.5 Spruce,fx. clearcut; 103510 Douglas-fir: two-step T24S, R69W sheltewood 1984 San carkss rhstrzct-wrde 420 257 0.9 All Epecles appropriate for Management Area 1984 Pxkes Peak WE 314 143 0.3 Ponderosa pine and 115302. 113303 Douglas-cr. Two-step TI1S. R68W shelterwad; spruce/ fm and aspen clearcut 1984 PlkS Peak 7A 476 286 10 Douglas-fm and 117101, 117102, ponderosa pme two- 117401, 11,402 step shelterwood, T11 s; 12s. wow aspen. clearcur *All Townshq and Range ~~rar~ons refer to the New “exzco and Sxcth Prmcxpal “enduas, ““Ifed States survey “See Chapter III, Management Area Preserqrmns for harvest methods by specks A-l TIMBER SALE SuMEwlY Area hcatlo” -Managemn Area Treatment Estmated Probable Harverr Hlscal -RI8 locatloo Area Yolme Methods by Year: District Sale Name -Township 6 Ranae (Acres) gcJ MMBF Forest Type 1984 Pikes Peak .Jobos Gulch 1OR 450 286 I.0 Poaderosa pm.e 116701, 116002 two-step shelterwood T118, R69” 1984 Pikes Peak Quaker RLdgs 28 250 143 0.5 Ponderoaa pme TWO- 116601.
    [Show full text]