HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/24/2026 - Work Session - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
REVISED AGENDA
WORK SESSION
March 24, 2026 Tuesday 2:30 PM
Council meetings are held in a hybrid meeting format. Hybrid meetings allow people to join online or in person at
the City & County Building. Learn more at www.slc.gov/council/agendas.
Council Work Room
451 South State Street, Room 326
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
SLCCouncil.com
2:30 PM Work Session
Or immediately following the 2:00 PM
Limited Community Reinvestment Agency Meeting
7:00 pm Formal and Community Reinvestment Agency Meeting
Room 315
(See separate agenda)
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Alejandro Puy, Chair
District 2
Erika Carlsen, Vice Chair
District 5
Victoria Petro
District 1
Chris Wharton
District 3
Eva Lopez Chavez
District 4
Dan Dugan
District 6
Sarah Young
District 7
The Work Session is a discussion among Council Members and select presenters. The public is welcome to listen. Items scheduled on
the Work Session may be moved and / or discussed during a different portion of the Meeting based on circumstance or availability of
speakers.
The Website addresses listed on the agenda may not be available after the Council votes on the item. Not all agenda items will have a
webpage for additional information read associated agenda paperwork.
Generated: 09:23:06
Welcome and public meeting rules
Note: Dates not identified in the project timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined. Item start
times and durations are approximate and are subject to change.
Work Session Items
1.Informational: Community and Environmental Impact Studies
for The Utah Inland Port Authority ~ 2:45 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a briefing from the Sustainability Department, the Utah Inland
Port Authority (UIPA), and consultant WSP USA, Inc about the findings from the
baseline and preferred scenario study for future development in the port
authority jurisdictional land and Northwest Quadrant.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a
2.Fiscal Year 2026-27 Funding Allocations for Federal Housing
and Community Development Grants and City Funding Our
Future Housing Programs
~ 3:05 p.m.
60 min.
The Council will receive a briefing on recommendations for allocating grant funding
provided through four Federal Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD)
programs and the City's Funding Our Future (FOF) housing programs. The funding is
allocated by the Council on a competitive basis to organizations which are mostly local
non-profits that specialize in providing services to the City’s most economically
vulnerable residents. For Fiscal Year 2026-27, approximately $11.3 million dollars is
expected to flow through the Division of Housing Stability to the organizations eligible to
receive grant funding. The HUD programs that provide this funding and oversee
activities of grant recipients are: Community Development Block Grants (CDBG),
Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG), the HOME Investment Partnership Program, and
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA). City housing programs are
funded from the local sales tax increment known as Funding Our Future.
For more information visit www.tinyurl.com/annualhudgrants.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, March 10, 2026
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, March 24, 2026 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, April 21, 2026
3.Tentative Break ~ 4:05 p.m.
20 min.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - n/a
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a
4.Informational: State Legislative Briefing Follow-Up ~ 4:25 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about priorities and issues the City worked
on during the 2026 Utah State Legislative Session.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, January 13, 2026, Tuesday, February 3, 2026, and Tuesday, March
24, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a
5.Ordinance: Zoning Map Amendment at Approximately 1073
South Navajo Street ~ 4:45 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the zoning of the
property at approximately 1073 South Navajo Street from R-1/5,000 (Single-Family
Residential District) to RMF-30 (Low Density Multi-Family). The proposal would allow
for the construction of additional for-sale homes on the 0.49 acre lot. The applicant
intends to retain the existing single-family home. Consideration may be given to rezoning
the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics. The project is within
Council District 2. Petitioner: Mark Overdevest, the property owner.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, April 7, 2026 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, April 21, 2026
6.Board Appointment: Business Advisory Board – Kim Stowe ~ 5:05 p.m.
5 min.
The Council will interview Kim Stowe, resident of Salt Lake County, prior to considering
appointment to the Business Advisory Board for a term ending December 31, 2029.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
7.Ordinances: Amendments for Daily Water Consumption and
Enacting Temporary Zoning Regulations ~ 5:10 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about ordinances that would amend a
section of Title 17 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to conserving City
water resources by limiting daily water use for new nonresidential uses. A
corollary temporary land use regulation amending Title 21A is also proposed
with the same daily water use limitation. The ordinances would clarify that
all new commercial, industrial, and institutional development, grouped into
the term “non-residential”, is subject to an annual average daily cap of
200,000 gallons of potable water. The ordinance would also limit the
exemption to agriculture, schools, government owned or operated facilities
that primarily provide social services, places of worship, and hospitals. In
2021, an ordinance was adopted that prohibits new commercial or industrial
land uses that would consume more than an annual average of 200,000
gallons per day. In 2022, an ordinance was adopted expanding that
prohibition to the City’s entire water service area, which goes beyond Salt
Lake City into neighboring jurisdictions. The temporary land use regulation
shall remain in effect for 180 days after its effective date.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
8.
Informational: Discussion of Cesar Chavez Boulevard Honorary
Street Name Change ~ 5:30 p.m.
20 min.
The Council will discuss potential changes to the honorary street name
Cesar Chavez Boulevard, including timeline and process.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a
9.Resolution: Sugar House Streetcar Extension Interlocal
Agreement between the Utah Transit Authority and Salt
Lake City
Written Briefing
-
The Council will receive a written briefing about a resolution that would authorize the
Sugar House Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement (ILA) between Salt Lake City
Corporation, the Salt Lake City Community Reinvestment Agency, and the Utah Transit
Authority (UTA). The ILA would allow the project to proceed into and through the
construction phase. UTA will own, operate, and maintain the future rail and rail
envelope.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
10.Resolution: Second Amendment to the Interlocal
Agreement between Utah Inland Port Authority and Salt
Lake City
Written Briefing
-
The Council will receive a written briefing about a resolution that would authorize the
second amendment to the Interlocal Agreement between the Community Reinvestment
Agency of Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City Corporation, and the Utah Inland Port
Authority (UIPA). The City and UIPA entered into a contract on October 25, 2022 to
comply with changes made by the Legislature in March 2022. The parties executed the
first amendment on July 25, 2024. This will be the second amendment to the
agreement.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 24, 2026
Standing Items
11.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair -
-
Report of the Chair and Vice Chair
12.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director -
-
Report of the Executive Director, including a review of Council information items and
announcements. The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to
City Council business, including but not limited to:
• Metro Water Board Vacancy, and
• Scheduling Items.
13.Tentative Closed Meeting -
-
The Council will consider a motion to enter into closed meeting. A closed meeting described
under Utah Code Annotated (UCA) Section §52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes
including, but not limited to discussing:
a. discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental
health of an individual.
b. strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining.
c. strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation.
d. strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property,
including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the
transaction would:
(i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under
consideration, or
(ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best
possible terms.
e. strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water
right or water shares, if:
(i) public discussion of the transaction would:
(A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under
consideration, or
(B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best
possible terms.
(ii) the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be
offered for sale, and
(iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body
approves the sale.
f. discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems.
g. investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct.
A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to
Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent
requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act.
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
On or before 2:00 p.m. on Monday, March 23, 2026, the undersigned, duly appointed City Recorder,
does hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1) posted on the Utah Public Notice
Website created under Utah Code Section 63F-1-701, and (2) a copy of the foregoing provided to The
Salt Lake Tribune and/or the Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any others who
have indicated interest.
KEITH REYNOLDS
SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER
Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda, including but
not limited to adoption, rejection, amendment, addition of conditions and variations
of options discussed.
The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for
reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary
aids and services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request,
please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slc.gov, 801-535-7600, or relay service
711.
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF MEMO
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Austin Kimmel
Public Policy Analyst
DATE:March 24, 2026
RE: Informational: Community and Environmental Impact Studies for the Utah Inland Port
Authority Jurisdictional Land and Northwest Quadrant
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will receive a briefing on a study examining current development trends and potential outcomes for
the future development of the jurisdictional Utah Inland Port Authority (UIPA) land within Salt Lake City. The
study has two parts: a Baseline Study and a Preferred Scenario Study. The study is intended to help the City and
UIPA determine how tax differential will be allocated. The UIPA Board was briefed on the study at its March 16,
2026 board meeting.
The Baseline Study provides an understanding of the current development trend under the area's existing
conditions. It was conducted by analyzing general plans, studies, and gathering stakeholder and community
input. The findings are organized into three categories: Economic, Transportation, and Environmental & Health.
Key takeaways are summarized on pages 5-6 of the Administrative Transmittal.
The Preferred Scenario Study builds on the Baseline Study findings and identifies investment and policy
considerations to achieve the best outcomes in the area and neighboring communities. It recommends short-
term and long-term actions to guide future investment and development. Priority recommendations are
summarized on pages 7-8 of the Administrative Transmittal.
The study stems from an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City and the Utah Inland Port
Authority. The original agreement committed a portion of the property tax differential to conduct a Health
Impact Assessment, Traffic Study, and Community Impact Assessment. In 2024, the agreement was amended to
instead engage a third party to conduct the Baseline and Preferred Scenario Study, completed by WSP.
The Council will consider a second amendment to the interlocal agreement at the March 24 Council and
Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA) Board meetings. This amendment streamlines how UIPA and the City
communicate and make recommendations for city-generated differential allocations, and changes the
expenditure on differential spending to emphasize public safety projects through 2029. After that, the City and
UIPA may reevaluate and amend the interlocal.
Goal of the briefing: To learn about the Baseline and Preferred Scenario Study, its key findings and
recommendations, and how Salt Lake City and the Utah Inland Port Authority plan to use the study to guide
future tax differential investment in the Inland Port and Northwest Quadrant area.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: March 24, 2026
Public Hearing: n/a
Council Action: n/a
Page | 2
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. The Council may wish to ask how Westside residents, who will be most affected by the developments of
the Port, can stay up to date on policy and investment decisions informed by this study.
2. The Council could ask how the City intends to continue to gather community feedback on priorities for
projects that could be funded by the tax differential.
3. The Council could ask what the next steps are to approve or implement this study.
UIPA Baseline Study
Summary Report
February 2026
Consists of the following data and analysis:
•Economics and Community
•Economic development and opportunities
•Transportation
•Road, rail, air, bike/pedestrian, and transit
•Environment and Human Health
•Land and habitat, air, water, and community health
•Community Engagement and Communications
•Stakeholder and community engagement
Baseline
Study
Introduction
3
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
→Baseline Study: The Baseline Study considers development trends from 2018 (the baseline year,
reflecting the creation of UIPA) to 2024.
→Objectives
→Provide UIPA, Salt Lake City, and the community with reliable data and analysis to understand how current
development trends under baseline conditions will impact the UIPA jurisdictional land and adjacent Westside
communities.
→Help Salt Lake City and UIPA leadership make informed decisions about the impacts and benefits of future
development in the UIPA jurisdictional land in the Northwest Quadrant if development continues on pace under
current conditions.
→Recommend mitigation strategies to reduce negative impacts to the community and environment and improve
overall sustainability and resiliency, and maximize the potential positive outcomes for the community,
environment, and economy.
→Integrate public engagement and solicit feedback from relevant community groups.
Introduction
4
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
→Area Context
UIPA study area covers
approximately 16,000 acres in
northwest Salt Lake City and
parts of northern West Valley
City and Magna Town.
→Baseline study covers the
portion of the UIPA
jurisdictional land within Salt
Lake City.
Area Context – Current Development
5
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
The area includes:
→A significant amount of
undeveloped land
→Recent growth in freight
activity
→Environmentally sensitive
lands
→Closed and active landfills
→Zoning to support
manufacturing and industrial
development
Baseline Map – Current Zoning
6
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Zone Acreage
AG: Agricultural 78.06
AG-2: Agricultural 2-acre Minimum 0.92
BP: Business Park 2.54
CC: Commercial Corridor 3.12
M-1: Light Manufacturing 10,341.92
OS: Open Space 1,706.69
TSA-MUEC-C: Mixed Use Employment
Center Transit Station (C)72.01
TSA-MUEC-T: Mixed Use Employment
Center Transit Station (T)11.27
Guiding Policies
7
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
→Salt Lake City Northwest Quadrant (NWQ) Master Plan (2016) Vision
A new, sustainable area of Salt Lake City that:
→Respects the unique nature of the Great Salt Lake and surrounding environment for current generations and
preserves sensitive natural environments for future generations.
→Includes an ecologically oriented industrial park that helps drive the City’s economic and natural resources
protection goals.
→Is an economic engine for the City, region, and state.
Development in the NWQ should accomplish the following:
→Environmental sensitivity, providing places for people to work and recreate while protecting natural resources and
wildlife habitat.
→A high-quality, well-designed built environment.
→Well connected with good transportation, linking people to jobs and other parts of the City and region and linking
businesses to goods and services by vehicle, rail, transit, air, bicycle, and foot.
→Economically thriving with a flourishing and diverse local, regional, and global economy.
→Well served with public and private services that are appropriate to people’s needs and accessible to all.
→NWQ Community Reinvestment Area (CRA) Plan
Developed by the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City in 2018
→Creation of CRA to facilitate the use of tax increment financing as a funding mechanism to further the City’s
economic development goals.
→Intended to facilitate the implementation of the community vision and land use plan established by
the NWQ Master Plan.
Methodology & Resources
8
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
→Reviewed and compiled existing data for the project area to inform baseline
conditions and future trends.
→Existing data and resources used to develop the Baseline Study include, but are not
limited to:
→Existing UIPA and NWQ studies and plans, including the NWQ Master Plan and development
agreements, UIPA NWQ and Statewide Logistics Strategy, and UIPA NWQ Sustainability Action Study
→Utah Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), Division of Water Quality data regarding the Great
Salt Lake and wetlands
→U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Act species, and Critical Habitat data
→Current zoning and permit data
→Salt Lake County Assessor’s data
→Transportation and traffic data from Utah Department of Transportation, Salt Lake City, Utah Transit
Authority, and Wasatch Front Regional Council
→Air quality monitoring data from Utah DEQ
→State Implementation Plan for criteria air pollutant non-attainment
→State and County Health Department data, including Utah Healthy Places Index, County Health
Rankings, City Health Dashboard, and Student Health Survey
→North Temple Landfill studies
→Various City asset management plans
→Great Salt Lake planning documents
→Demographic and jobs data for Westside communities reported in the Census
Economic Impact Assessment
•Project Area Existing Conditions
•Neighborhood Existing Conditions
•Property Tax Revenue and Allocation
Economics and Community Impact
Economic Findings
10
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Existing Conditions in the Project Area
Development within the present-day Project
Area dates back to the mid-2000s.
According to County records, the initial facility
in the area was Costco. Others followed with
an uptick in development after 2010.
Year Firm Acres SF Use
2005 Costco 123.92 496,522 Distribution
Center
2006 Union
Pacific 34.27 2,851 Intermodal
Terminal
2009 O'Reilly
Auto 12.96 193,916 Distribution
Center
Economic Findings
11
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Major Development in the Project Area since 2005
2005-2008
Costco Distribution
Center, 2005
SLC Intermodal
Terminal, 2005
Westport Distribution
Center, 2008
2009-2012
O’Reilly Auto
Distribution Center,
2009
2013-2015
Airport Technology
Park, 2013
Meridian Commerce
Center Building 1, 2015
2016-2018
Pacific Landing V, 2016
Post Consumer Brands
1550 S 5600 W, 2017
Salt Lake Community
College Westpointe
Campus, 2018
UIPA Established and
Jurisdictional
Boundary Defined, 2018
2019-2021
Amazon SLC 9, 2019
Legacy Logistics Center,
2020
Poplar Grove Industrial
Park, 2021
2022-2024
Utah State Correctional
Facility, 2022
SLC Port Phase 1A,
2022-2024
Amrize Manufacturers
6534 W 150 S, 2024
Economic Findings
12
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Development Trends in the Project Area
Development in the jurisdictional area has accelerated significantly since 2016. The graphs show both the number
of square feet and acres developed each year since 2005. They also show total space developed between 2005 and
2024. A small initial development surge occurred in 2016/2017 with a much larger spike in 2022/2023. This increase
is driven by population growth in the state, as well as purchasing behavior shifts towards online retail.
Square Feet Developed in Jurisdictional Area, 2005-2024
-
5,000,000.00
10,000,000.00
15,000,000.00
20,000,000.00
25,000,000.00
30,000,000.00
35,000,000.00
20
0
5
20
0
6
20
0
7
20
0
8
20
0
9
20
1
0
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
5
20
1
6
20
1
7
20
1
8
20
1
9
20
2
0
20
2
1
20
2
2
20
2
3
20
2
4
Sum of SqFt Cumulative Total
Source: CPCS Analysis of Salt Lake County Assessor’s Data
-
2,000.00
4,000.00
6,000.00
8,000.00
10,000.00
12,000.00
14,000.00
16,000.00
18,000.00
20
0
5
20
0
6
20
0
7
20
0
8
20
0
9
20
1
0
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
5
20
1
6
20
1
7
20
1
8
20
1
9
20
2
0
20
2
1
20
2
2
20
2
3
20
2
4
Sum of Parcel Acre Cumulative Total
Source: CPCS Analysis of Salt Lake County Assessor’s Data
Parcel Acres Developed in Jurisdictional Area, 2005-2024
Economic Findings
13
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Existing Conditions in the Project Area
Development Chronology in the NWQ
The NWQ is the largest part of the SLC industrial
real estate market (2023).
→Industrial real estate market was at its peak.
→Record amount of space delivered in 2021 and
2022.
→Five of the 10 largest current projects were
located within the NWQ.
→Sales and lease activity dominated by
distribution and logistics.
Economic Findings
14
Development Trends in and around the NWQ
Nearly half of the region’s industrial and
warehousing growth has occurred in
northwestern Salt Lake City.
The Wasatch Front region has experienced
industrial/warehouse growth of about 3% per
year over the last 30 years. This includes boom
and bust cycles, such as the rapid growth seen
in 2021-2023.
Growth has concentrated in areas surrounding
and including the NWQ. Industrial real estate
markets near the airport, California Avenue,
and in the far western potion of the region (in
Salt Lake City and areas outside the city).
Based on these existing trends, demand for
industrial and warehousing space in the
project area will remain strong. Long-term
growth rates in areas in and around the NWQ
have been about 3%.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Airport
8%California Avenue
34%
Downtown
0%Draper
7%East Murray
3%
Riverton
3%
Sandy
7%
South Valley
5%
Tooele County
1%
West Jordan
9%
West Murray
1%
West Valley
14%
West Outlying Salt
Lk
8%
Warehouse: Average Share of Annual Growth
Airport
California Avenue
Downtown
Draper
East Murray
Riverton
Sandy
South Valley
Tooele County
West Jordan
West Murray
West Valley
West Outlying Salt Lk
Economic Findings
15
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Regional and National Industrial Development Trends
NWQ development reflects national and regional trends.
→The graphs to the right, from Cushman & Wakefield, show
slowing construction in the national and regional markets
following a spike in construction activity during the pandemic.
→New space added to the market in the United States was at its
lowest since mid-2021 with a more than 35% drop from a
year ago.
→Following robust construction growth during the pandemic
years, both construction and leasing activity along the
Wasatch Front have decelerated.
→The amount of space under construction currently in the Salt
Lake metro represents a smaller amount of space than in any
of the eight previous years.
Space under Construction, United States
Space under Construction, Salt Lake Metro
Sources: Cushman & Wakefield, Marketbeat, United States, Industrial Q4 2024;
Cushman & Wakefield, Marketbeat, Salt Lake City, Industrial Q4 2024; CBRE
Salt Lake Industrial and Logistics, Q4 2024
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
(
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
)
Salt Lake County Utah County Davis County Weber County All Other Counties
Economic Findings
16
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
Sc
e
n
a
r
i
o
Utah Population Growth
Utah was the fastest growing state from 2010 to 2020.
→Added half a million new residents, an 18% increase in population.
→Much of this growth was concentrated along the Wasatch Front.
Utah’s growing population will require additional logistics services to meet consumer and commercial needs.
→The distribution of the population will impact freight and logistics demand. Continued rapid population growth in
the Intermountain Region will also drive demand for Utah-based logistics that serve the entire region.
Source: CPCS analysis of population data, U.S. Census Bureau, 2024.
Utah’s Growing Population, 2010-2050
Economic Findings
17
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
Sc
e
n
a
r
i
o
Existing Conditions in the Project Area
The Wasatch Front’s purchasing behavior is undergoing a notable transformation as online retail captures a larger
share of total sales. The rise of e-commerce providers, such as Amazon, have emerged as a significant driving force
behind this shift. This is evident in the substantial surge in online sales. In Salt Lake County alone, since 2019, online
retail spending has escalated by 173%.
This trend has prompted the development of new logistics facilities like warehouses and distribution centers ,
including four new Amazon distribution centers in the NWQ and three just outside of the NWQ boundaries in Salt Lake
City and West Valley City.
$-
$0.5
$1.0
$1.5
$2.0
$2.5
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Bi
l
l
i
o
n
s
o
f
D
o
l
l
a
r
s
Online Retail Spending in Salt Lake County
Source: CPCS analysis of Replica data, January 2024.
Economic Findings
18
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Existing Conditions in the Project Area
Zoning & Development Status In the NWQ, 2022 Two-thirds of the land in the
project area has not been
developed.
→15% of the project area
land is designated for
open space, agriculture,
or other non-light
industrial/manufacturing
uses.
→More than half the
project area land remains
available for future
development (2022).
→Less than one-third of
the project area is
developed (2022).
Economic Findings
19
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Existing Conditions in the Project Area
The study area had more than 10,000 jobs in
2022.
→Transportation and logistics industry is the
area’s largest employment sector.
→Manufacturing and professional/scientific/
technical services are the other leading
sectors.
→Combined, these represent nearly 80% of
the project area employment.
Industry Jobs of Total
Transportation and Warehousing 3,482 34.0%
Manufacturing 2,597 25.3%
Professional, Scientific, and
Technical Services
2,058 20.1%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Leading Employment Industries, NWQ (2022)
Economic Findings
20
NWQ Project Area Worker Profile
Workers in the NWQ project area are largely white (84%),
non-Hispanic/Latin (75%), and have some college
education (nearly two-thirds).
More than 55% of jobs in the project area do not require a
college degree.
Two-thirds of jobs pay $40,000 or more. While many of
the developments in the NWQ have followed the trends
from the airport and California Avenue areas, primarily
warehousing and distribution, the project area has been
able to attract developments that support higher paying
jobs in transportation, manufacturing, and professional/
scientific/technical services.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Economic Findings
21
Existing Conditions in Westside Neighborhoods
All four Westside neighborhoods have employment
levels below the citywide average of 80%.
→Westpointe and Poplar Grove have the lowest
employment rates among the four, with one in
four residents who report not having regular
work.
Note: Census Bureau employment rate differs from
the unemployment rate. It includes anyone 15 years
or older regardless of whether or not they are
seeking work.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Economic Findings
22
Existing Conditions in Westside Neighborhoods
Westside communities experience lower income
per capita than Salt Lake City as a whole.
→The Westside neighborhoods experience per
capita income levels between 40% and 50%
lower than the rest of the city.
→Aside from Westpointe, the remaining three
neighborhoods are near or at 50% of citywide
per capita income levels.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Economic Findings
23
Existing Conditions in Westside Neighborhoods
Westside community members largely work in the
NWQ, downtown, and at/near the University of
Utah, as well as along the I-15 corridor.
→Key work destinations for Westside neighbors
include the airport, Salt Lake International
Center, parts of the NWQ, and surrounding
businesses, particularly south of the airport.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Economic Findings
24
NWQ Project Area Worker Profile
The NWQ project area attracts workers from around the
Greater Salt Lake City area, but mostly from west of I-15.
Employers draw from the Westside communities as part
of the Project Area labor pool, but not quite as much as in
parts of West Valley City or Magna Town.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Economic Findings
25
Tax Increment Distribution
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Tax Increment
Collected within Salt
Lake City
10% to UIPA as pass
through to CRA for
Affordable Housing
10% to CRA for
Affordable Housing
25% to UIPA (set %)
PLUS an allocation
declining from 40% to
zero over time
40% for Environmental
Mitigation
40% for Community
Mitigation
20% for Economic
Development
25% to Salt Lake City
increasing to 65%
over time
Tax increment generated by development within
the NWQ support affordable housing,
environmental projects, community enhancement,
and economic development.
Early in the project area’s existence, up to 75% of the increment
flows to UIPA, including 10% passed along to the Community
Reinvestment Agency (previously the Redevelopment
Authority) for affordable housing. Over time, this decreases
until only 25% (plus the 10% housing pass-through) accrues to
UIPA. This remaining increment will continue to fund
environmental mitigation, community mitigation, and economic
development.
Key Findings and Observations
26
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Project Area Existing Conditions and Opportunities
The NWQ project area is designed to be an employment center. Juxtaposed between underserved neighborhoods,
critical natural resources and habitat, SLC International Airport, and other industrial activities.
→Development in the NWQ dates back to the early 2000s with the fastest growth occurring in the early years of this
decade. This corresponded to rapid growth in Utah and the Wasatch Front.
→In recent years, development has returned to more historic levels with more than half of the project area remaining
available for development.
→Roughly 15% of the area is set aside for open space, agriculture, or other non -light industrial/manufacturing uses.
The portion of the project area inside Salt Lake City is home to some 10,000 jobs.
→The transportation sector accounts for about one-third of the jobs, with a quarter being in manufacturing, and 20% in
professional/scientific/technical services.
→The NWQ workforce is largely white and has at least some college education.
→Roughly two-thirds of jobs in the NWQ pay more than $40,000 per year; over half do not require a college degree.
Key Findings and Observations
27
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Westside Community Existing Conditions
Neighborhoods on the west side of Salt Lake City have a different economic profile than the city as a whole.
→According to Census data, all four communities have lower employment levels than the city overall.
→Three of the four neighborhoods have per capita incomes at/near 50% below the city’s level.
Westside residents largely travel out of their communities for work.
→Key work locations for area residents include areas around the University of Utah, in downtown, and around and
south of SLC International Airport.
→Community members commute to portions of the NWQ and areas along I -15 for work.
→While NWQ employers draw workers from Westside neighborhoods, areas south of the project area, including West
Valley City and Magna Town, are somewhat more likely to be employed in the NWQ.
Opportunities/challenges exist for enabling Westside communities to share in the economic benefits in the NWQ.
→Although the four neighborhoods include portions of the NWQ, none of the neighborhoods’ residential areas are
adjacent to the NWQ (aside from the strip near SLC International Airport).
→Car ownership levels in the area, the availability of services (e.g., childcare, grocery stores, and medical care) in and
around the NWQ, and other factors, may make the NWQ a less desirable work location than other parts of the city.
→With less than half the jobs in the project area requiring a college degree and more than two -thirds paying more than
$40,000 per year, the NWQ could be a source of low-barrier-to-entry jobs.
Key Findings and Observations
28
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Development Trends and Property Tax Increment Generation
The industrial real estate markets that include the NWQ provide a good indication of baseline future activity. Using long -
term trends as the baseline, areas in and around the NWQ will continue to attract a large portion of the region’s
industrial and warehousing growth. As properties in the Salt Lake City portion of the project area develop, they generate
new property tax revenue. This “increment” is shared between Salt Lake City and UIPA based on an interlocal
agreement. Increment accruing to UIPA is allocated to affordable housing, environmental mitigation, community
mitigation, and economic development.
→The industrial market in northwestern Salt Lake City has been largely dominated by warehousing and distribution uses.
→The greater the value of the development in the NWQ, the more tax increment will be generated.
→While much of the area’s activity has been in warehousing, as mentioned earlier, the project area has attracted
advanced manufacturing and biotechnology companies.
→These types of facilities typically generate greater property tax revenue due to a higher valuation of the facility and
capital equipment.
Consists of the following elements:
•Existing and Planned Transportation
Assets
•Traffic Conditions and Impacts
•Air Cargo Considerations
•Rail Conditions and Impacts
•Role of the Jurisdictional Area in
Regional and National Logistics
•Road and Rail Safety
•Key Transportation Trends
•Transportation Findings
Transportation
Transportation
30
Existing Transportation Assets
Through a network of roads, rails, and a major
airport, the UIPA project area connects Utah
to regional markets, national destinations, and
global trade routes. The area is:
→Flanked by I-80, I-215, and I-15, providing
rapid road connectivity to wider regions
across the western United States.
→Served by extensive rail infrastructure:
→UP Railroad network
→Salt Lake City Intermodal Terminal
→Salt Lake Garfield and Western
(rail provider for NWQ industrial
parks) runs west from downtown
→Utah Railway runs from Utah
County line south and east
→Salt Lake City Southern Railroad
runs south from SLC
→Served by Salt Lake City International
Airport (SLCIA).
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Transportation
31
Planned Transportation Assets
Several projects are planned to expand the
transportation network and improve mobility in
the region. These projects include:
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
→State Street & 300 N
→SR 201 over 3200 W
→700 E from Parley’s
Trail to 1300 S
→I-215 W/2700 S Bridge
→3300 S from 1000
W to State Street
→SR 201 from 900 W to
State Street
→State Street from N Temple
to 400 S
→Tooele Transit Study
→Granary District Spur Line
→FrontRunner Double-
Tracking: South of Salt Lake
→FrontRunner Double-
Tracking: Warm Springs
→Central Station and North
Temple Station Area Plan
→Davis-SLC Community
Connector (Regional Route)
→Davis-SLC Community
Connector Study (Local
Route)
Transportation
32
Traffic Conditions and Impact
Jurisdictional Area Need: Additional
internal arterials and connections.
→The road network east and south of the
NWQ is well connected.
→There are limited routes traversing through
the area, necessitating additional internal
arterials and connections.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
The Jurisdictional Area is connected by:
Interstates
I-80 and
I-215
State Routes
SR 201 and
SR 172
Other arterials
& connector
routes
Transportation
33
Traffic Conditions – All Vehicles Level of Service (LOS)
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o
→I-80 and SR 201 currently operate at an LOS
corresponding to smooth traffic flow but are
nearing their designed capacity. Both
experience occasional congestion and
reduced speeds during peak hours.
→The north-south segments of I-215 and I-15
connecting with I-80 and SR 201 in Salt Lake
City exhibit an LOS with unstable flows and
operation at or near capacity.
Existing LOS Consideration:
→Without capacity and connectivity
enhancements, all major arterials are
projected to degrade to lower LOSs within
the next few years, characterized by constant
traffic jams even during off-peak periods.
Transportation
34
Traffic Conditions and Impact – All Vehicles Travel Time Index
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
During peak travel times, major roadways in the
Jurisdictional Area experience congestion,
evident by a Travel Time Index of >1.
Roadways that are particularly impacted
include:
→SR 201
→I-15
→I-215 at I-80
→I-80 at I-15
Existing LOS Considerations:
→Growth in the area’s population and
freight-related industries is increasing the
demand placed on the Jurisdictional Area’s
roadways.
→As SR 201 and I-80 are the only east-west
arterials linking the area to I-15, the impact
of this growth will continue to be seen in
exacerbated travel delays.
Transportation
35
Traffic Conditions and Impact – Bottlenecks
All-vehicle Bottlenecks
Bottlenecks in the Jurisdictional Area
generally occur at, or near, interchanges
and intersections. There is a particular
concentration of bottlenecks along
SR 201, at the edge of the Jurisdictional
Area.
Truck Bottlenecks
The I-80/I-215 and SR 201/I-215
interchanges in both directions are
among the top 10 Utah truck
bottlenecks, along with segments of I-15
between its north and south
interchanges with I-215.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Transportation
36
Traffic Conditions and Impact – Truck Volume
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
→The NWQ is the largest freight generator in Utah
and the Intermountain West, driven by the
concentration of manufacturing and distribution
centers operating in the region.
→By 2031, truck traffic is projected to increase
across the area. Notably, significant growth is
expected along I-80 and on I-215 south of Salt
Lake City International Airport. I-15 and SR 201
are also anticipated to see rising truck volumes.
Existing LOS Considerations:
→Future truck traffic volume trends are largely
fueled by substantial projected population
growth in Salt Lake County, which is expected to
drive higher freight demand.
→The rapid pace of industrial development within
the Jurisdictional Area will further contribute to
increased truck activity.
Transportation
37
Roadway Maintenance Conditions
Pavement Condition
A large majority of roads, for which data is available, are in at
least satisfactory condition:
→74% of roadway miles in Satisfactory or Good condition
→Another 19% of roadway miles in Fair condition
→Many routes in the northwest of the project area have
not been examined for pavement quality
Geometric Elements
→Shoulder width: Majority of roadway miles have at least
one shoulder sufficient for safety/emergency vehicle
access
→At least 70% of roads have at least one shoulder
that is 5+ feet wide
→Narrow shoulder widths (< 5 feet) are insufficient
for potential emergency pull-offs and bicycle
safety: 5600 W & I-80; 300 S intersection; between
700 S and 1100 S
→Bridge clearances: No issues found
→Lowest clearance in project area: 16.6 feet on I-80
at 7200 W
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Sources: Utah Department of Transportation, Wasatch Front Regional Council
Transportation
38
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Roadway Maintenance Conditions
Transportation Plan Identification
→Most routes with fair or worse pavement condition
have been identified within state and regional plans
(STIP and/or 2023-2050 RTP)
→Roads with poor pavement condition not identified in
plans are typically smaller roads geared for local traffic
(e.g., 300 S, John Cannon)
Planning Considerations
→State of good repair and safety needs should be
considered in future projects
→Look for opportunities to address pavement conditions
in conjunction with other improvements (e.g., new
5600 W bus route, Mountain View Corridor)
→Unknown pavement quality on routes without existing
data
→Traffic patterns may change due to future projects and
other nearby improvements
Sources: Utah Department of Transportation, Wasatch Front Regional Council
Transportation
39
Existing and Future Air Transportation Assets
SLCIA is home to a variety of commercial and air cargo services:
→There are some 300 flights per day to and from 90 locations
around the United States, Canada, Mexico, Europe, and South
Korea.
→SLCIA serves as the air cargo hub for the Wasatch Front, all of
Utah, and the Intermountain West as well:
→UPS, FedEx, and DHL provide express and wholesale service
in and out of SLCIA.
→Top exports by weight are chemicals and food products;
fastest growing exports include textiles, apparel, electronics,
mineral ore, and plastics.
→Imports are led by computers/electronics, with apparel,
miscellaneous manufactures, and electrical components
growing rapidly.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Existing Considerations:
→Less than 10% of Utah’s international air freight moves through
SLCIA; most is trucked to gateways, such as Los Angeles
International Airport, San Francisco International Airport, and
O’Hare International Airport.
→Key missing service is dedicated main-deck freighter
operations; addressing this gap is the focus of SLCIA’s cargo-
development strategy in partnership with UIPA.
Salt Lake City International Airport
Source: SLCIA Website, 2020.
Transportation
40
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
→SLCIA captures less than 10% of air
exports and imports bound related to
Utah, leaking most volume to LAX.
→From 2019 to 2021, air exports from
Utah increased at a faster rate than any
other state.
→In 2021, only 3% of the total weight of
goods originating from Utah was
exported by air from SLCIA, while 47%
departed from LAX and 11% from SFO.
→Most goods exported by air from SLCIA
originated in Utah, but 10% crossed state
lines to utilize SLCIA.
→Scheduled passenger service
utilization trends indicate airlines
average 13% payload utilization to
Europe when developing air cargo,
while SLCIA averages 6% utilization
to airports with a similar number of
departures to Europe.
→SLCIA payload utilization is below
average compared to airports with a
similar number of departures but is
on par with airports in the region.
→Ratio of imports to exports is
imbalanced, with two times more
tons imported into the US than
exported; however, SLCIA is
essentially balanced.
→Imbalances exist within specific
airlines and markets for SLCIA.
→Over 40% of air exports from Utah go to
Regional Comprehensive Economic
Partnership countries (RCEP, a free trade
agreement among Asia-Pacific countries)
and 60% of air imports bound for Utah
originate from RCEP countries.
→Import to export imbalance for the air
cargo mode is contracting, as the number
of imports is growing faster than exports.
→The largest share of air exports from Utah
goes to Europe and Asia.
→From 2019 to 2021, exports to Asia
increased by 31%, while exports to
Europe increased by 32%
→The largest share of air imports into Utah
comes from Asia and Europe.
→From 2019 to 2021, imports from
Asia increased by 99%, while
imports from Europe increased by
10%
Utah Air Cargo Imports and Exports Air Cargo Leakage, Retention & Capture Air Cargo on Passenger Aircraft
SLCIA Air Cargo Conditions
Transportation
41
The Future at SLCIA: Changes, Initiatives and Policies
SLCIA has developable on-airport land and is pursuing capacity-
boosting projects:
→North-side taxiway (completion 2028/29)
→Center runway extension (2030/31)
→A new de-icing pad
Additional suggestions for new initiatives from the SLC Air Cargo
Assessment & Development Strategy include:
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Source: Mead & Hunt
→Help maximize air cargo payloads for
current operations
→Showcase SLCIA air cargo offerings
→Become actively involved in the region's
cargo community
→Leverage strategic partnerships
→Understand the flow of commodities
through foreign trade zones
→Develop relationships with freight
forwarders and customs brokers
→Know the air cargo customers
→Identify leads at target companies
→Offer incentives for freight forwarders to
use SLCIA
→Identify a niche sector and world region to
focus on developing air cargo
Transportation
42
Rail Traffic Conditions and Impacts – Rail System & Commodity Flows
Goods movement by rail in Salt Lake County
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
9 Million Tons $33 Billion
Cargo moved to, from, and
between Utah communities by rail
Value of cargo
moved by rail
→Of the goods moved by rail to, from, and
between Utah communities, the majority
(58%) are inbound rail movements. This
accounts for 5.4 million tons of goods.
→The primary commodities transported by rail
include:
Source: CPCS 2021 Transearch data, S&P, 2023.
→Coal
→Petroleum products
→Chemicals
→Iron
→Copper smelter
materials
→Plastic
→Textile products
→Containerized goods
Source: UIPA Logistics Study, 2024.
Transportation
43
Rail Traffic Conditions and Impacts – Blocked Crossings
→Roadway delays at blocked at-
grade rail crossings occur along
the UP lines near I-15 and I-80.
→Where the line has at-grade
crossings near I-15, there are
frequently blocked crossings
along W South Temple St. On
average, blockages at the at-
grade crossings along W South
Temple St. occur for 3.6 hours.
→Where the UP line has at-grade
crossings near I-80, the at-
grade rail crossing at 200 S
Montgomery St. is blocked on
average for 3.38 hours per day.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Transportation
44
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Role of the Jurisdictional Area in Regional and National Logistics
→The Jurisdictional Area anchors a vast inland
region, enabling connections between Utah’s
communities and trading partners in the
Intermountain West and beyond.
→Utah’s importance in North American logistics is
due to its central location in the interior West. It
lies within a single-day truck trip to most of the
Intermountain West and parts of the upper Great
Plains.
→Both Southern California and Bay Area port
facilities are also within a one-day reach by truck.
Existing Logistics Consideration:
→As freight converges in Utah, significant amounts
of goods find their way to Salt Lake City and,
specifically, to the Jurisdictional Area due to its
location, population centers, and domestic trading
markets.
Source: UIPA Logistics Study, 2024.
Transportation
45
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Role of the Jurisdictional Area in Regional and National Logistics
Due to its location, Utah and Salt Lake City are
part of an interconnected network moving
goods throughout the Intermountain West and
to the rest of the United States.
Utah’s neighbors—Idaho, Nevada, Wyoming,
Colorado, and Arizona—are among Utah’s top
10 state trading partners by both tonnage and
value.
The most common goods supplied by Utah
businesses to these partners are:
→Agricultural and food products
→Minerals, chemicals, and fertilizers
→Motor vehicles and motor vehicle parts
→Petroleum refining products
→Gravel and sandSource: UIPA Logistics
Study, 2024.
Transportation
46
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Role of the Jurisdictional Area in Regional and National Logistics
→The Jurisdictional Area plays an
important role in the logistics
system of both Utah and the
broader United States.
→Manufacturers in the Jurisdictional
Area produce materials, distribution
centers in the Jurisdictional Area
ship to stores and consumers
throughout the region, and the
area’s intermodal terminal allows
businesses to move cargo between
trucks and trains.
Jurisdictional Area’s Logistics Roles
Source: UIPA Logistics Study, 2024.
Transportation
47
Active Transportation
Existing Bike/Ped Infrastructure
→Sidewalks and bike paths coverage is patchy
throughout the project area
→Most bike paths and sidewalks are located
along major roads (e.g., 5600 W, N. Temple
Frontage Road, 2200 W)
→More local roads frequently have few to no
sidewalks or bike paths
Planning Considerations
→Continuity of sidewalks and bike lanes is essential to
establish an active transportation network people
will use
→The design and type of sidewalk or bike path must be
considered in the context of the roadway it is along
or near (e.g., traffic volumes, speed, roadway width)
→New roadways or existing roadways are
opportunities for enhanced bike/ped infrastructure
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Sources: Utah Transit Authority, Wasatch Front Regional Council
Transportation
48
Active Transportation
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
N Temple Frontage (looking west)
Transportation
49
Active Transportation
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
5600 W/300 S Intersection (looking north)
Transportation
50
Active Transportation
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
2200 W (looking north)
Transportation
51
Transit and Public Transportation
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Source: Utah Transit Authority
Existing Routes
Existing service is very commute-oriented:
→451: Tooele – SLC (four trips during
morning/afternoon commute)
→F453: Tooele – SLC (five morning/afternoon
commute trips)
→513: WVC – SLC (two morning/afternoon
commute trips)
→551: SLC – International Center (seven
morning commute trips, five afternoon
commute trips)
Planned Routes
Currently planned service is all-day-oriented
→236: Airport – WVC (every 60 minutes)
→256: SLC – Bingham Hwy (every 15 minutes)
Potential Route Adjustments
→513 discontinued, replaced by Route 248 serving
Lake Park Corporate Center near 4650 W
Transportation Findings
52
Safety
Crash Analysis
Over the past five years, no clear pattern in absolute number of
crashes, though 2025 is on pace to exceed previous years.
→2021: 109
→2022: 128
→2023: 100
→2024: 128
→2025 (January – Early June): 60
Notable hotspots include:
→Mountain View Corridor @ California Avenue
→5600 W @ I-80 On-/Off-Ramps
→5600 W @ 300 S
→5600 W @ 2100 S
Planning Considerations
→Hotspots often have wide cross sections, relatively complex
designs, higher speeds, and higher traffic volumes
→Three pedestrian-involved and zero bicyclist-involved
crashes occurred over the past five years, likely due to low
overall number of pedestrians and bicyclists
→Additional development in the area could heighten or
reveal safety deficiencies (e.g., increased truck traffic,
bike/ped conflicts, and new roadways)
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Source: Utah Department of Transportation
Transportation Findings
53
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Safety – Vulnerable Roadway Users
Vehicle crashes involving vehicles and
vulnerable road users (bicyclists or
pedestrians) have occurred near the project
area. A concentration of these incidents
occurred in two areas:
→Between N Temple Road and W 700 N,
east of SR 68.
→Between I-15 and SR 89, by 1800 N. This
location is near the rail lines and has
industrial businesses located next to a
residential area, possibly leading to
increased conflict involving vulnerable road
users.
Analysis of truck-involved crashes highlights
concentration points of crash events, with the
north I-215/I-15 and I-80/I-15 interchanges
identified as the top two truck safety hotspots
in the state.
Transportation Findings
54
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Safety – Truck Parking Challenges
→Salt Lake City and the developed areas of the
NWQ face a critical shortage of truck parking.
→There are currently no public truck parking
facilities in the area and the trucks operating in
the NWQ are either served by some of the
industrial facilities that provide truck parking
space (e.g., Estes Express Lines) or the private
truck stops located along I-215 and I-15.
→Undesignated truck parking is concentrated
along I-15 and on local streets in the NWQ.
This is due to a lack of designated spaces for
truck drivers who are waiting for appointments
near shipper/receiver locations.
Private Truck Parking Facility Managed by Truck Parking Club, near I -215
Source: Google Maps
Transportation
55
Safety – Railroads
→Conflict between vehicles and trains over the
previous seven years occurred at at-grade
crossings throughout the NWQ. Often, these
incidents are due to drivers failing to stop for a
crossing or going around the gates.
→Within the NWQ, UP rail crossings with S 5600
W and W 700 S are at-grade. While these roads
are currently low traffic volume industrial access
roads, future traffic growth in the NWQ can pose
additional safety risks.
→Trainfo crossing alert program was launched in
2025 and will be implemented at five key
crossings: 300 North, 200 South, 800 South,
900 South, and 1700 South.
Existing Logistics Consideration:
→Without additional new protections, crossing
incidents are expected to increase with the
increase in road and rail traffic, bringing higher
casualty costs and delays.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
56
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Transportation
Regulatory Compliance
The regulations a project must comply with depends on the location and nature of the project. Answering
the questions below when initiating a project will help determine relevant policies and agency partners.
1. What is the geographic scope of the project?
Defining the geographic scope of the project will lay the groundwork for identifying what else is within the immediate
area of the project and thus relevant stakeholders and regulating agencies.
2. What is the scope of work?
Identifying the scope of work, including what type(s) of transportation elements is included, will help guide the
identification of relevant regulating agencies.
3. What infrastructure or other elements are within the geographic scope of the project or are affected by
the project?
The project may affect existing infrastructure, the environment, or other physical features in a way that triggers
documentation requirements, coordination processes, and other regulations.
4. Who owns, operates, maintains, or regulates affected infrastructure?
Knowing who owns, operates, maintains, funds, or regulates affected infrastructure, environmental, or other physical
features will help identify specific regulations or policies that must be followed, as well as available funding sources.
Transportation
57
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Regulatory Compliance
Agency Type Agency Name Roadway,
Interstate
Roadway,
State
Roadway,
County or Local
Transit,
Rail
Transit,
Bus Freight
Federal
Federal Highway Administration $$$$
Federal Transit Administration $$
Federal Railroad Administration $$
State Utah Department of Transportation $$$$$$
Trust Lands Administration
Local, County,
or Regional
Municipalities (Magna Town, Salt Lake
City, West Valley City)$$$
Salt Lake County $$$
Utah Transit Authority $$
Wasatch Front Regional Council $$$$$$
Possible Regulation
and Coordination
Possible
CoordinationPrimary Agency
Agency Responsibility or Involvement
$ = Potential Funding Source or Contributor
Transportation Findings
58
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Key Future Transportation Trends
→Expanded rail freight operations: Daily freight-train movements through the NWQ rail corridor are expected to rise about 35%
by 2045 as intermodal and bulk traffic to the inland-port terminals expands.
→Road traffic intensification: The Wasatch Front Regional Council's 2023-2050 RTP forecasts increase in vehicle miles traveled by
about 45% above 2023 levels by 2045, driven by continued industrial buildout, population growth, and associated truck and
passenger vehicle trips.
→SLC’s Reconnecting Communities program focused on improving community connectivity and addressing the negative impacts
of past transportation infrastructure decisions.
→Transit service adaptation: UTA's Moves 2050 Plan and SLC's Transit Master Plan prioritize localized transit solutions for the
NWQ, including on-demand shuttles and enhanced bus corridors to serve evolving industrial/residential zones.
→Technology-driven traffic management: Pilot projects like real-time train prediction systems (e.g., Trainfo Mobility Solution on
900 West) aim to mitigate congestion through sensor-based alerts.
→Active transportation infrastructure: Planned bike lanes (e.g., 7200 West) and multi-use trails (e.g., Mountain View Corridor
and Bangerter Highway) seek to improve non-motorized access amid industrial growth.
Transportation Findings
59
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Key Future Transportation Concerns without Mitigation
→Grade-crossing safety: Train movements are expected to climb 35% and vehicle-miles traveled 45% by 2045, sharply increasing
the likelihood of vehicle-train collisions in the NWQ and surrounding corridors unless crossings are upgraded or separated.
→Chronic congestion and access barriers: Longer and more frequent gate closures will stall Westside arterials, slowing emergency
response, isolating neighborhoods, and widening socioeconomic gaps.
→Environmental-justice exposure: Industrial growth without zero-emission requirements will concentrate additional diesel
exhaust and particulate matter in Westside communities that already face poor air quality.
→Roadway capacity and connectivity: Rising truck volumes threaten to overburden routes, such as 7200 West and SR 201, while
limited east-west links will further restrict access to jobs, healthcare, and education unless new transit options or grade
separations are added.
→Maintenance conditions: Increased truck traffic will lead to accelerated breakdown of pavement conditions, requiring more
frequent resurfacing and other state of good repair projects.
→Active transportation connectivity and safety: Crashes involving vulnerable road users (bicyclists and pedestrians) may become
more of a concern as the area develops if the active transportation network is not expanded. Increased truck traffic can increase
the severity of crashes, especially for vulnerable road users.
→Transit service: The area largely lacks direct transit service and existing transit service is primarily oriented around peak
commuting trips.
Transportation Findings
60
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Transportation Mitigation Measures
→Buildout new internal arterial roads and upgrade corridors like 7200 W to relieve bottlenecks and link I-80, I-215, and I-15
with freight and job centers.
→Finish Mountainview Corridor with direct access north of I-80 to close the missing ramp in current plans.
→Designate clear truck routes into, out of, and within the port area to mitigate freight impacts on neighborhoods.
→Expand the Union Pacific Intermodal Terminal and add rail-served sites plus better short line tie-ins to shift more tonnage
from road to rail.
→Roll out high-speed broadband and smart logistics tech (IoT, yard management, digital booking) as core site utilities.
→Launch scalable UTA transit service, connect to FrontRunner, and build weather-protected transit stations at major
employment centers.
→Create dedicated transit and shuttle loops plus on-demand micromobility, car-, van- and rideshare program.
→Fast track the Antelope Island & Westside Trails, stripe protected bike lanes on 7200 W and knit new trails into the
regional network for safe walk/bike commutes.
→Coordinate transit and active transportation improvements to ensure first/last-mile connectivity.
→Include transit and active transportation improvements in roadway projects to streamline implementation.
→Commit to zero-emission fleets across freight and passenger modes, powered by on-site renewables (e.g., solar
microgrids) and smart routing to cut idle and empty miles.
→Leverage Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Clean Ports and other federal grants, stand up Public Infrastructure
Districts, secure public-private partnerships, and rigorously rank projects to stretch every dollar.
→Deploy EV chargers, hydrogen stations to future-proof the area’s transportation operations and mitigate emission
impacts.
Consists of the following elements:
•Land and Habitat
•Air Quality
•Water
•Landfills
•Community Health and Quality of Life
Environment & Human Health
Land and Habitat
62
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Existing Conditions
→Great Salt Lake and Shoreline Considered one of North America’s most important
interior wetlands. Serves as a nesting and migration stopover location for millions
of birds.
→Water Topographic variation in the UIPA jurisdictional area is low and has poor
natural drainage, resulting in standing water, wetlands, and playas. Over 400 acres
of wetlands are present in the jurisdictional area.
→Soils Predominantly hydrologic soil Group “D,” or silt loam/silt clay loam, which
indicates low infiltration and high existing stormwater runoff potential.
→Natural Areas Approximately 11% of the UIPA jurisdictional area is designated Open
Space and is not developable, including the Lee Kay Wildlife Conservation Area that
is owned and managed by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources.
Land and Habitat
63
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Species of Greatest Conservation Need
Federally Protected Species May be present
in and around the UIPA’s jurisdictional area
that could be protected under the
Endangered Species Act:
→Canada Lynx
→Yellow-billed Cuckoo
→June Sucker
→Ute Ladies’-tresses
Species of Concern At risk due to
environmental changes near the Great Salt
Lake:
→Wilson’s Phalarope
→Eared Grebe
→American Avocet
→Black-necked Stilt
Migratory Bird Treaty Act and U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service Concern List May be present
in the area
→Bald Eagle
→Black Rosy-finch
→Brewer’s Sparrow
→Clark’s Grebe
→Golden Eagle
→Green-tailed Towhee
→Lesser Yellowlegs
→Long-billed Curlew
→Marbled Godwit
→Olive-sided Flycatcher
→Pinyon Jay
→Sage Thrasher
→Virginia’s Warbler
→Willet
→Willow Flycatcher
Land and Habitat
64
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Impact Evaluation
Wildlife Areas: Provide important wetlands and habitat areas. These areas serve as a
nesting and migration stopover location for millions of birds.
→Lee Kay Wildlife Conservation Area (within the jurisdictional area)
→Great Salt Lake and Shoreline (in vicinity of jurisdictional area)
→Kennecott Inland Sea Shorebirds Reserve (in vicinity of jurisdictional area)
Floodplains and Wetlands: Restrict development potential and require mitigation or
restoration if disturbed.
→UIPA Wetland Policy BP-17: Properties within UIPA project areas that include wetlands may be eligible for
UIPA incentives if projects avoid impacting on-site wetlands, enhance or restore existing wetlands on or
near the property, establish new wetlands on or near the property, or permanently preserve existing
wetlands on or near the property at the benefit of the surrounding environment.
Floodplains,
Wetlands, and
Conservation Areas
Kennecott Inland Sea
Shorebird Reserve
•3,700-acre private reserve
created by Kennecott Utah
Copper to mitigate habitat
disruption due to its mining
operations.
•Development within the
jurisdictional area should
consider impacts to this
reserve.
•120,000 birds and over
100 species call this area
home.
1
2
Mtn.ViewCorridor
Lee Kay Wildlife
Conservation Area
•Owned and managed by Utah
Division of Wildlife Resources
•Land is designated as Open
Space and is not developable.
•Contains 934 acres of land
available for public use.
•Over 220 species of birds,
including 18 rare birds, have
been identified here.
1
2
Water Quality
66
Regulatory Framework for Water Quality
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Clean Water Act Establishes the basic structure for regulating
discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and
regulating quality standards for surface waters.
Utah Water Quality Act Primary legislation for regulating water
quality, establishes the Utah Water Quality Board, and the state’s
approach to preventing and controlling water pollution.
Salt Lake County Stormwater Management Plan Improving
stormwater runoff quality and mitigating flood risks.
Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake & Sandy Long-
range supplemental water supplies for member cities and provide
water to other on a surplus basis.
Northwest Quadrant Master Plan Includes a goal to preserve
and conserve vital environmental sites, including wetlands and water
quality.
Stormwater
67
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Stormwater Runoff
Salt Lake City Stormwater Permit
→Issued by Utah DEQ Division of Water Quality
→Discharge municipal stormwater under the Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (UPDES)
→Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit effective August 16, 2023 through June 21, 2026
Citywide Stormwater Runoff
→Discharge enters the Jordan River or a stormwater canal
→Flows to the Great Salt Lake
→Industrial uses must obtain UPDES Multi-Sector General Permit stormwater permit coverage
Salt Lake City Stormwater Quality Program
→Follows the Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP)
→Implemented to meet the requirements of the City’s stormwater permit
→SWMP based on Minimum Control Measures (MS4 permit requirement)
→Protects water quality through education, involvement, pollution incident investigations, inspections, enforcement,
municipal good housekeeping, and dry and wet weather monitoring
Wastewater
68
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Wastewater Management
→Water Reclamation Facility Treats an
average of 35 million gallons of
wastewater daily.
→Treatment Wastewater is treated to
meet water quality standards set by the
state and safely returned to the
environment and Great Salt Lake in a
responsible manner.
→New Facility Current facility is 60+ years
old and near the end of its service life.
Construction of a new facility began in
March 2020 and planned to continue
through 2026.
Water
69
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Salt Lake City Public Utilities Service Area - Supply Sources
Existing Water Sources
→Surface water sources
→Big Cottonwood Water Treatment Plant
→Parleys Water Treatment Plant
→City Creek Water Treatment Plant
→Portions of Little Cottonwood Creek
→Groundwater
→Base wells
→Springs
→Peaking wells
→Preferred storage rights through
Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake &
Sandy (MWDSLS)
→MWDSLS Provo River Project storage
→MWDSLS Central Utah Project storage
→Utah Lake System Water
Future Water Sources
→Aquifer storage and recovery (ASR)
→New well development
→Wastewater reuse
→Additional surface water development
→Secondary water
Water
70
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Salt Lake City Public Utilities Service Area – Dry Year Production (Existing and Future Sources)
Supply Category Projected Average Year
Production (acre-ft)
Projected Dry Year
Production (acre-ft)
Existing surface water
sources
59,500 40,820
Existing groundwater
sources
7,500 17,900
Existing storage sources 73,760 38,900
New wells 0 12,000
Additional surface water
(MCWTP)
3,970 3,300
ULS 3,100 3,100
ASR -5,900 5,900
Reuse 4,200 4,200
Total 146,130 126,120
Source: Draft Salt Lake City Water Conservation Plan 2025
Water
71
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Salt Lake City Public Utilities Service Area - Water Demand
Historical Use (2000)
→285 gallons per day (gpd) per capita use
→174 gpd per person residential use
→12 gpd industrial use
→693 gpd per capita peak day use
Current Use (2022-2024)
→179 gpd per capita total use (see graph)
→151 gpd per person residential use
→10 gpd industrial use
→404 gpd per capita peak day use
Conservation Impacts (since 2001)
→23.5% reduction in total water demand
→36% reduction in residential use
→42% decrease in industrial use
→26% reduction in peak day demand
→121,164 AF average saved each year
Source: Draft Salt Lake City Water Conservation Plan 2025
Water
72
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Salt Lake City Public Utilities Service Area - Industrial Water Demand
→The majority of land in UIPA is zoned for
industrial uses
→Industrial customers show an increase in
indoor water use since 2001
→Lacking data to determine if this increase is
due to increase in water usage per
connection or if it is due to new industrial
connections added since 2001
→Work is ongoing to clarify water use within
this classification
→Industrial customers had the greatest
reduction in outdoor use between
classifications from 2001 to 2024
Volume of Use by Location of Use
and Classification (AF/Year)
Source: Draft Salt Lake City Water Conservation Plan 2025
Water
73
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Salt Lake City Public Utilities Service Area* - Water Use Limitations
Salt Lake City Ordinance 17.16.010, Section C
→City will deny water service in the City's designated water service area and areas where the City
is providing water under surplus water sales agreements under the following conditions:
→Any new commercial or industrial development that consumes or uses more than an annual average
of 200,000 gallons of potable water per day.
→Any commercial or industrial development that expands to an extent that increases its daily potable
water consumption or used to exceed an annual average of 200,000 gallons of potable water per
day.
→Director of the Department of Public Utilities may also deny water service to a new or existing water
customer for water use that exceeds an average of 200,000 gallons of potable water per day over less
than a year, if the proposed use would exceed the anticipated water availably for a particular location.
*Note: Land within the baseline study area includes areas that are not serviced by Salt Lake City water services.
Water
74
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Existing Conditions: State and Regional Water Conservation Goals
Conservation Goal Reduction
Amount
Benchmark
Year Goal Year
Governor’s Statewide Water
Conservation Goal 25%2000 2025
Central Utah Project Conservation
Agreement
12.5%2000 2020
25%2050
Utah’s Regional Municipal &
Industrial Water Conservation Goal 11%2019 2030
Salt Lake City Water Supply and
Demand Master Plan Goals
2.9%
2024
2030
7.4%2035
18.7%Long Term
Source: Draft Salt Lake City Water Conservation Plan 2025
Water
75
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Existing Conditions: State and Regional Water Conservation Progress
Source: Draft Salt Lake City Water Conservation Plan 2025
Water
76
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Salt Lake City Public Utilities Service Area - Industrial Land Use Water Conservation Goals
Year Metric Indoor Outdoor Total
2024 Daily use per connection (gpd)11,851 2,518 14,369
Current annual use (af)3,611 767 4,378
2060
Goal annual use (af)3,348 707 4,056
Required reduction in annual use (af)263 60 323
% Savings 7.3%7.8%7.4%
Savings per connection (gpd)863 196 1,059
→Total volumes listed above are for existing customers only
→Future customers will also contribute toward achieving water conservation goals
→Future customers will contribute to reducing per capita water use as they
implement improvements in water use efficiency
Source: Draft Salt Lake City Water Conservation Plan 2025
Great Salt Lake
77
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Great Salt Lake Restoration Efforts
→Although the Great Salt Lake is outside the boundaries of the jurisdictional area,
decisions about land uses in the NWQ have effects on the health of the lake and
surrounding ecosystem.
→Formed in 2022, the Great Salt Lake Strike Team represents committed research entities
and state agencies that provide timely, high quality and relevant data and research to
make informed decisions about the Great Salt Lake.
→Major areas of progress:
→Changes to water management framework
→Dust science and mitigation readiness
→More water – increasing inflows to the lake
→Improved understanding of human water use
→Long term planning
→Great Salt Lake 2034 Charter, signed September 24, 2025: statewide commitment to
restore and protect the lake’s economic, ecological, and cultural value.
Great Salt Lake
78
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Great Salt Lake Water Elevation
Source: Great Salt Lake Data and Insights Summary, 2026
Great Salt Lake
79
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Great Salt Lake Restoration Efforts
Lake health indicators and milestones in 2025:
→Ecosystem conditions
→Both north and south arms remain below health water levels
→Salinity levels in the south arm remain stabilized
→Funding
→$50 million in Federal funding for water and habitat projects
→Great Salt Lake Rising and Ducks Unlimited made major financial commitments to lake recovery
→State wetland grants provided to protect and restore wetland habitat
→Non-profit groups funded conveyance improvements
→Water donations and releases
→Voluntary water donations and leases increased nine-fold since 2021
→Multi-agency agreements balanced upstream water needs while contributing inflows
→Policies, programs, and strategies
→Mineral oversight, coordinated water distribution, water efficiency, groundwater quality
→Research
→Water shepherding, economic impacts, dust dynamics, invasive species mapping, bird habitat
Land, Habitat, and Water
80
Mitigation Measures
Developments
→Explore opportunities for transfer of development rights
to promote development in areas away from key wetland,
water, and other natural resources.
→Encourage landowners and developers to first focus
expansion and new development plans on land near
existing development before moving to areas near
wetlands or sensitive natural resources and habitats.
Water Conservation and Stormwater
→Encourage development types that are compatible with
sustainable water conservation and runoff mitigation
practices and enhancement of existing natural areas and
resources.
→Encourage the use of integrated and coordinated drainage
and stormwater control facilities between multiple users.
→Collaborate with municipalities to require stormwater
quality control measures for all polluting-generating
surfaces, such as media treatment, stormwater settling
wetponds, and biofiltration.
→Explore opportunities for water leasing and shepherding
to the Great Salt Lake.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Landscaping
→Encourage the use of native plants and promotion of
sustainable landscaping practices that enhance habitat
and reduce water use.
→Encourage the incorporation of green-stormwater
infrastructure in site development (e.g., rain gardens and
porous pavement).
Wildlife
→Preserve and improve existing conservation and open
space areas.
→Create and maintain parcels along the northwestern
portion of the area to serve as habitat buffer zones to
wildlife habitat and natural resources.
→Limit construction during the nesting season on parcels
near natural areas.
→Encourage bird-friendly site development and building
design practices, including dark-sky compliant lighting and
other elements to prevent collisions.
Air Quality
81
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Regulatory Compliance
Agency
Type
Agency Name Regulations Pollutants
Federal (EPA)→Regulates ambient air quality by
establishing National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS)
→Classifies locations that do not meet
NAAQS as nonattainment areas.
→Salt Lake City region is designated as
nonattainment for:
→Ozone
→SO2
→As of November 2025, Salt Lake City
area is in attainment for PM2.5
State Utah Dept of
Environmental
Quality (DEQ),
Division of Air
Quality (UDAQ)
→Monitors pollutant concentrations in
compliance with EPA strategy
→Two monitoring sites in UIPA study
area
→Tracks emissions trends
→Issues air permits for stationary sources
of pollutants
→Point sources reporting emissions:
→Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
→Volatile organic compounds
(VOCs)
→PM2.5
→No standards for concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs). GHG emissions are evaluated locally and regionally by developing
inventories to determine sources and track changes over time
→Air quality monitor findings are impacted by large-scale phenomenon, meteorology, and other local emission sources
Air Quality
82
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Existing Conditions
Inland Port
Station
Utah Technical
Center Station
Rose Park
Station
Ozone concentrations have fluctuated over time but remain above NAAQS for all monitoring stations
in the project area.
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.09
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024Oz
o
n
e
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
p
p
m
)
Year
Ozone Concentrations near NWQ
Inland Port Utah Technical Center
Rose Park NAAQS
Source: UDAQ All Criteria Pollutant Yearly Quicklook Summary Reports
Source: EPA Interactive Map of Air Quality Monitors
Air Quality
83
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Existing Conditions
All pollutants continue to be monitored by DEQ’s Department of Air Quality.
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024PM
2
.
5
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
µ
g
/
m
³
)
Year
PM2.5 Concentrations near NWQ
Inland Port Utah Technical Center
Rose Park NAAQS
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
SO
2
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
p
p
b
)
Year
SO2 Concentrations near NWQ
Inland Port Utah Technical Center
Rose Park NAAQS
Source: UDAQ All Criteria Pollutant Yearly Quicklook Summary Reports Source: UDAQ All Criteria Pollutant Yearly Quicklook Summary Reports
Air Quality
84
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Air Pollution due to Development
Manufacturing and industrial development in the NWQ area has the potential to increase long-term emissions
of air pollutants and GHGs. This is due to an increase in:
→Car and truck traffic
→Air freight
→Operations of off-road sources
→Rail traffic
→Industrial processes (e.g., boilers, generators, combustion, and process emissions)
→Construction activity
Potential emissions increases are regulated by the following:
→State Implementation Plan (SIP) – the State’s plan to lower air pollution and meet NAAQS
→Vehicle emissions are evaluated by Wasatch Front Regional Council for consistency with SIP (air quality
conformity)
→Facilities must comply with UDAQ’s stationary source air permitting requirements
Air Quality
85
Potential Impacts
Westside Neighborhoods
→Highest asthma burdens in Utah and
lower life expectancies compared to
Eastside neighborhoods
→May have higher total cancer risk
estimates from air pollutants than
other parts of the city
→Disproportionately impacted when air
pollution and socioeconomic factors
are considered together - most severe
harms from air pollution fall
disproportionately upon underserved
communities who are least able to
prepare for and recover from poor air
quality
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Air Quality
86
Control of Potential Emissions Increases
Construction Emissions
→Any source, 1/4 acre or greater in size, is required to submit a Fugitive Dust Control Plan (FDCP) to the
UDAQ.
→Some construction equipment sources require air permits from DEQ, such as large generators and
concrete batch plants.
Industrial Processes
→All stationary sources of emissions should be reviewed for DEQ air permitting requirements.
→DEQ will issue air permits that protect air quality through air pollutant emission limits, annual emissions
reporting, and occasional facility inspections.
Vehicle Emissions
→Increased vehicle volumes and changes to traffic flow will continue to be evaluated by the Wasatch Front
Regional Council (WFRC).
→UIPA’s continued participation in the WFRC planning process and stakeholder groups will ensure that
UIPA goals and challenges are considered as the region prioritizes projects.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Air Quality
87
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measures to Consider
→Minimize emissions during construction activities.
→Work with Salt Lake City to encourage contractors to minimize impacts to surrounding communities,
such as using newer low-emitting construction equipment and electric equipment and avoiding haul
routes through residential areas.
→Minimize fugitive dust emissions with best management practices that include using water or dust
suppressants on surfaces and stockpiles, covering or wetting all trucks transporting materials, and
using track-out controls where trucks enter public roads.
→Any source, 1/4 acre or greater in size, is required to submit an FDCP to UDAQ.
→The FDCP is required to help sources minimize the amount of fugitive dust generated on site.
→Minimize emissions after buildout of future development through education and incentive programs.
→Encourage electrification of vehicles, cargo-handling equipment, and building systems.
→Encourage energy efficiency and use of on-site solar power generation.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
1
234
5
88
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
2
North Temple Landfill
Inactive since 1979. Accepted into the
Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP).
UIPA has begun remediation.
Cannon Pioneer Landfill
Inactive since 1975. Could be
considered for remediation, added to
VCP list in 2022.
Salt Lake Valley Landfill
Active since 1979. Not yet reached
capacity.
Mountain View Landfill
Active. Accepts non-hazardous
construction/demolition waste and
regulated asbestos-containing
material.
Construction Waste Landfill
Active. Accepts non-hazardous
construction/demolition waste and
household waste resulting from
abatement, rehab, renovation, and
remodeling.
1
5
4
3
Active and Inactive Landfills
Landfills
89
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Active Landfill Potential Development Impacts
Active landfills can pose potential impacts to
the natural environment and surrounding
development, including:
→Increased truck traffic entering/leaving
→Equipment noise
→Dust
→Lights/light pollution
→Litter and mud track-out
→Odor
→Landfill gas and methane
→Can be hazardous to human health
→Methane is a GHG
→Presence of birds
→Gulls, crows, blackbirds, and starlings
→Restricted use of property
→Airport/airport expansion projects may be
restricted near landfills due to presence of
birds and risk of collisions with aircraft
→Future use must consider:
→Waste settlement
→If buildings are built on former landfill, the load will
cause further settlement and may differentially settle
as the waste is likely not homogeneous
→Additional foundation considerations may be needed
to address settlement, including piles, spread
footings, and removal of the waste and replacement
with controlled and compacted structural fill soils
→Construction restrictions
→Excavation into waste due to potential presence of
hazardous waste
→Potential impacts to health and environment; may
require:
→Landfill gas mitigation
→Groundwater mitigation
→Post-closure care and maintenance period (typically
~30 years) and ongoing environmental monitoring
Landfills
90
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Inactive Landfill Potential Development Impacts
Similar to active landfills, inactive landfills can pose
potential impacts to the natural environment and
surrounding development, including:
→Restricted future use of property:
→Settlement
→Excavation into waste
→Landfill gas and methane gas mitigation (can
accumulate in basements and under slabs)
→Groundwater mitigation
→Construction restrictions
→Post-closure care and maintenance period
(typically ~30 years)
→Environmental monitoring
→Future re-purpose beneficial uses:
→Open space (parks, wildlife, and trails)
→Municipal support (maintenance shops,
equipment, and material storage)
→Utility support (substation, solar panels, and water
storage)
North Temple Landfill looking east
North Temple Landfill
91
North Temple Landfill Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP)
Conditions
→Approximately 770 acres, of which 620 acres reported to contain municipal solid waste.
→Currently owned by the UIPA.
→Summary of information obtained from the site characterization efforts:
→Groundwater is high in total dissolved solids and is not a source of drinking water.
→Groundwater flows west and northwest across the site.
→Groundwater contamination extends more than 900 feet off site.
→Contaminants of concern in the groundwater include VOCs and metals.
→Surface soil is contaminated with lead near the former shotgun shooting range (SE area of NTL).
→Waste in the landfill includes household trash, tires and other debris.
→Subsurface soils are fine-grained and generally contain the leachate under the landfill.
→Landfill waste is the deepest on the western portion of the site.
→Contaminant concentrations are highest on the western portion of the site.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
North Temple Landfill
92
North Temple Landfill Remedial Action Plan (RAP)
→UIPA is actively cleaning up the site in a phased approach, starting in the southeastern portion
of the site
→Zoned for light manufacturing
→Intent of the RAP:
→Remove source material by excavating waste and evacuating standing leachate
→Reconsolidate waste within a new, modern on-site repository
→Evaporate, treat, and appropriately dispose of collected leachate
→Establish groundwater monitoring program for the entire site
→Establish environmental covenants in a site management plan that will incorporate a post O&M plan to
guide future development of the site
→Phase 1 is expected to be completed by the end of 2026
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
North Temple Landfill
93
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
North Temple Landfill Potential Development Impacts
Proposed mitigation of potential risks to human health and the environment1
→Groundwater will not be accessed for drinking water, irrigation, or bathing purpose.
→If the UIPA encounters contamination or potential contamination in soils or groundwater during future
construction, utility installation, and/or de-watering activities:
→UIPA will cease the activities and perform sampling as necessary to property characterize the material.
→If contamination is identified that exceeds EPA Regional Screening Levels or Maximum Contamination Levels
appropriate for the land use, UIPA will notify the Division of Environmental Response and Remediation (DERR) of the
sample results.
→UIPA will manage and dispose of contaminated material that is excavated or removed in a lawful and protective
manner and will otherwise exercise appropriate care with respect to contaminated material.
→If requested by DERR, UIPA will coordinate with DERR and will pay costs for DERR oversight.
1. Site Eligibility Report, August 2023
Health Assessment
94
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health
Assessment Scope
→The community health assessment covers a wide range of health measures, including:
→Health status
→Housing affordability
→Water and air quality
→Climate vulnerability
→Noise
→Access to community facilities, healthy food, education, parks and open space, and transit
→Due to varying source availability, the data for each of these health measures has a different
geographic focus as noted on individual slides.
→Where available, the study focuses on data for Westside neighborhoods
→Some measures include only data at the state, region, or city level
Health Assessment
95
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Community Demographics
Key Takeaways
→Health disparities are closely tied to
demographic factors, such as language,
race, education, and income.
→From 2023 to 2025, statewide demographic
trends showed marginal improvements in
poverty and graduation rates.
→Deep disparities in health outcomes and
access to care remain, especially for
communities of color and non-English
speakers.
Geographic Focus Salt Lake County and Utah
statewide data, with attention to population
subgroups and place-based health factors.
Demographic Factor Why It Matters Utah Context
Population Density Influences air quality, infectious disease
transmission, traffic injury rates, and
service delivery
Salt Lake County averages 1,574 people per
square mile, which supports clinic access but
increases exposure to pollution and traffic-
related health risks.
Age Distribution Determines demand for pediatric, adult,
and elder health services
27% of the population is under 18 and 12% are
over 65. Both groups require tailored preventive
and specialty care.
Race and Ethnicity Closely associated with disparities in
disease burden, access to care, and life
expectancy
Hispanic adults report poor health at a rate of
25%, compared to 12.6% of non-Hispanic white
adults (Utah Department of Health and Human
Services).
Languages Spoken Impacts communication with providers,
access to public health alerts, and
understanding of treatment
16% of Utah residents speak a non-English
language at home, including 7.4% who speak
Spanish (U.S. Census Bureau).
Educational Attainment Strong predictor of health literacy,
preventive care use, and chronic disease
outcomes
Utah’s statewide high school graduation rate is
93%, but significant gaps persist among Black,
Indigenous, and other communities of color.
Employment Influences insurance coverage, mental
health, and income security
Labor force participation is 69% overall, but
unemployment remains disproportionately high
among Black and Hispanic workers.
Poverty and Income Strongly tied to food insecurity, chronic
illness, housing instability, and ER use
Utah’s overall poverty rate is 9%, with higher
rates among Native American and Hispanic
populations, particularly in rural and Westside
communities.
Data sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Utah Department of
Health and Human Services, and American Community
Survey
Health Assessment
96
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Health Status
Key Takeaways
→From 2023 to 2025, Salt Lake City made little
progress in improving core health outcomes.
→Health gaps tied to income, coverage, and
place continue to affect public health in areas
near the Jurisdiction and throughout the
Westside.
Quick Facts
→Leading causes of premature death in Salt
Lake City include heart disease, cancer, and
diabetes, especially in underserved areas.
→The uninsured rate in Salt Lake City is
estimated between 10% and 12%, with
highest rates in Westside and immigrant
communities.
Geographic Focus Salt Lake City and Salt Lake
County, with focus on equity and public health
planning.
Indicator 2023 Baseline 2025 Current Key Findings
Chronic disease
prevalence
Slightly below
the state
average
No major
change
Illness remains concentrated in
areas with lower income and limited
access to healthy food and
recreation.
Mental health
distress
23.7% of adults
reported
frequent
distress
24% of adults
report frequent
distress
Rates remain high across all income
levels. Behavioral health resources
are still unevenly distributed.
Premature death Above the state
average
No new local
data available
Early death continues to be a major
issue linked to chronic illness and
economic hardship.
Primary care access 47 doctors per
10,000 residents
47.5 doctors
per 10,000
residents
Salt Lake City remains above the
state average in provider availability,
improving early care access.
Und population 12.1% of Utah
residents
without
insurance
11.5% of Utah
residents
without
insurance
Slight improvement statewide. Gaps
remain in Westside areas and
among Black, Hispanic, and
undocumented residents.
Data sources: Utah Department of Health and Human Services, Behavioral Risk Factor
Surveillance System, and U.S. Census Bureau
Health Assessment
97
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Community Facilities
Key Takeaways
→Community facilities in Westside Salt Lake County
neighborhoods are limited in number and capacity,
which directly affects residents’ access to timely care,
support, and crisis response.
→While long-term plans are in motion, access to
preventative care and support services in Salt Lake
County’s Westside neighborhoods remains limited and
unchanged since 2023.
Geographic Focus Westside neighborhoods in Salt Lake
County.
Clinic Definition Includes licensed public and nonprofit
facilities offering primary care, dental, behavioral health,
and reproductive wellness services.
Indicator 2023 Baseline 2025 Current Key Findings
Number of
clinics per
10,000
residents
1.8 licensed community
clinics per 10,000 residents
in Westside ZIP codes
(Utah HPI 2023)
1.8 licensed
community clinics
per 10,000
residents in 2025
(no net increase)
No change in the density
of clinics means access
remains limited despite
population growth in
some neighborhoods.
Emergency
room visits for
uncontrolled
diabetes
13.0 visits per 10,000
residents among adults
aged 18 and older in
Westside ZIP codes (UDOH
2023)
12.6 visits per
10,000 residents
in 2025 (Healthy
Salt Lake)
Slight decrease,
suggesting early signs of
better chronic care
management, but still
higher than state average.
Access to
community
health
resources
Utah ranked 50 out of 50
states in Sharecare Index
based on access to
supportive services like
clinics, public transit,
libraries, and wellness
infrastructure
Still ranked 50 out
of 50 states in
2025, with
minimal
systemwide
change
Despite recognition of
gaps, there has been no
measurable improvement
in access to upstream
health-supportive
resources.
Major
infrastructure
investment
No new major construction
or clinic expansions
recorded on the Westside
prior to 2023
New full-service
hospital under
construction in
West Valley,
expected to open
in 2028
Significant future
investment but offers no
current benefit for
Westside residents who
continue to face care
barriers today.
Data sources: Utah Healthy Places Index, Utah
Department of Health and Human Services, Salt Lake
County Health Department (Healthy Salt Lake),
University of Utah Health, 211 Utah, Sharecare Well-
Being Index, Utah Foundation
Health Assessment
98
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Community Facilities
Key Takeaways
→Community facilities in Westside Salt Lake County
neighborhoods are limited in number and capacity,
which directly affects residents’ access to timely care,
support, and crisis response.
→While long-term plans are in motion, access to
preventative care and support services in Salt Lake
County’s Westside neighborhoods remains limited and
unchanged since 2023.
Geographic Focus Westside neighborhoods in Salt Lake
County.
Clinic Definition Includes licensed public and nonprofit
facilities offering primary care, dental, behavioral health,
and reproductive wellness services.
Indicator 2023 Baseline 2025 Current Key Findings
Number of
clinics per
10,000
residents
1.8 licensed community
clinics per 10,000 residents
in Westside ZIP codes
(Utah HPI 2023)
1.8 licensed
community clinics
per 10,000
residents in 2025
(no net increase)
No change in the density
of clinics means access
remains limited despite
population growth in
some neighborhoods.
Emergency
room visits for
uncontrolled
diabetes
13.0 visits per 10,000
residents among adults
aged 18 and older in
Westside ZIP codes (UDOH
2023)
12.6 visits per
10,000 residents
in 2025 (Healthy
Salt Lake)
Slight decrease,
suggesting early signs of
better chronic care
management, but still
higher than state average.
Access to
community
health
resources
Utah ranked 50 out of 50
states in Sharecare Index
based on access to
supportive services like
clinics, public transit,
libraries, and wellness
infrastructure
Still ranked 50 out
of 50 states in
2025, with
minimal
systemwide
change
Despite recognition of
gaps, there has been no
measurable improvement
in access to upstream
health-supportive
resources.
Major
infrastructure
investment
No new major construction
or clinic expansions
recorded on the Westside
prior to 2023
New full-service
hospital under
construction in
West Valley,
expected to open
in 2028
Significant future
investment but offers no
current benefit for
Westside residents who
continue to face care
barriers today.
Data sources: Utah Healthy Places Index, Utah
Department of Health and Human Services, Salt Lake
County Health Department (Healthy Salt Lake),
University of Utah Health, 211 Utah, Sharecare Well-
Being Index, Utah Foundation
Health Assessment
99
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Housing Affordability
Key Takeaways
→Housing affordability directly affects physical and mental
health.
→From 2023 to 2025, housing cost burden and quality
showed only minor improvements.
→The connection between housing hardship and health
remains strong, especially for renters, older adults, and
those at risk of homelessness.
Quick Facts
→Over 7,100 Utah homes lack full kitchen facilities, and
more than 3,200 homes lack complete plumbing
(U.S. Census Bureau).
→Renters who are cost burdened are more likely to live in
areas with high crime and limited health supportive
infrastructure.
Geographic Focus Utah, with emphasis on renters, low-
income households, and people experiencing
homelessness.
Indicator 2023 Baseline 2025 Current Key Findings
Renters who are
cost burdened (spent
over 30% of income on
rent)
40% of renters 39% of renters Little change. Cost burden
remains high for renters,
especially in urban and Westside
areas.
Homeowners who
are cost burdened
(spent over 30% of
income on housing)
18% of
homeowners
17.5% of
homeowners
Slight improvement, though first-
time and low-income buyers still
face affordability barriers.
Delayed care due to
housing costs
11.6% of adults 11% of adults Financial strain continues to
affect health access for
thousands of Utah households.
Homes lacking
kitchen or plumbing
Over 10,000
homes
9,800 homes Modest improvement in housing
quality, though gaps remain in
rural and immigrant
communities.
Homeless mortality
rate
10 times higher
than the
general
population
Still 10 times
higher
Mortality crisis among unhoused
individuals remains severe and
unchanged across the state.
Data sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Utah Department of Health
and Human Services, and state housing reports
Health Assessment
100
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
Sc
e
n
a
r
i
o
mode share.
Community Health – Food Access
Key Takeaways
→Access to affordable and nutritious food is a critical foundation
for health.
→While some progress has been made, rural, tribal, and low-
income communities in Utah continue to face barriers to food
access that result in negative health outcomes.
→Focused investment is needed in rural grocery access, child
nutrition programs, and outreach to eligible households.
Quick Facts
→The Utah Foundation reported that more than 300,000
residents experienced food insecurity in 2023, with the highest
rates observed among tribal communities and low-income
families.
→The Utah Department of Health and Human Services recorded
an adult obesity rate of 31% in 2023, with the highest rates in
communities that lack access to healthy food options.
Geographic Focus Utah statewide, with emphasis on rural and
urban counties and Westside neighborhoods.
Indicator 2023 Baseline 2025 Current
Estimate
Key Findings
Households reporting
food insecurity
10.7%of households
experienced food
insecurity
9.3%of households
reported food
insecurity
Slight decline statewide, but
food insecurity remains a
major issue in tribal and rural
areas.
Access to grocery
stores in rural areas
Between 40% and 60%of
rural households lived
far from full-service
grocery stores
An estimated 38%of
rural residents still
lacked convenient
access
Some improvements from
mobile markets and
community food programs,
but large service gaps persist.
Adult obesity
prevalence
30.7%of Utah adults
were classified as obese
31% of adults
remained classified
as obese in 2025
Obesity remains closely tied
to low-income areas with
limited access to nutritious
food.
Students eligible for
free or reduced-price
lunch
42% of students were
eligible
43%of students
were eligible by
2025
A growing number of children
rely on school-based
nutrition, reflecting economic
need.
Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program
enrollment among
eligible households
78% of eligible
households were
enrolled
76%of eligible
households were
enrolled
Slight decrease in
participation, with under
enrollment common among
older adults and rural
residents.
Data sources: Utah Department of Health and Human Services, Utah Department
of Workforce Services, United States Department of Agriculture, Utah Foundation
Health Assessment
101
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Access to Education
Key Takeaways
→Educational access improves health through
school proximity, graduation rates, and use of
public libraries, especially in underserved
areas.
→Graduation rate increased statewide from
84% in 2023 to 86% in 2025.
→Westside communities continue to face
limited access to educational resources that
support long-term health.
Geographic Focus Salt Lake County, with
variation by census tract. Library* data provided
by Salt Lake County Library Services.
Area of Access Why It Matters Community Example
Educational
Attainment
Higher levels of education are
linked to better literacy, more
use of preventive care, and
longer life expectancy.
The Utah Health Progress Index shows that
tracts with higher high school completion
rates have longer life expectancy across
Salt Lake County.
Proximity to
Schools
Access to schools within walking
distance supports physical
activity, social development,
and mental wellness.
The Utah Environmental Public Health
Tracking Program reports the age of
children living within 0.5 miles of a school
and tracks conditions for active
commuting. In 2023, 62% of children lived
within 0.5 miles of a school and in 2025 it
increased to 63%.
Library Access
and Use
Libraries reduce stress, improve
digital access, and connect
people to community and
health resources.
A University of Utah study shows library
use in multilingual communities improves
well-being and access to services.
Data sources: Utah State Board of Education; Utah Environmental Public Health Tracking
Program; Salt Lake County Library Services
*Library definition: Includes permanent library branches and mobile units operated by county
or municipal systems
Health Assessment
102
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Access to Parks and Open Space
Key Takeaways
→Access to parks and green spaces supports
physical, mental, and social health, while reducing
environmental health risks.
→Despite modest gains in access, green space
equity remains a challenge. Access to parks and
green spaces remain lower in Westside census
tracts.
→Investment is in progress, but many Westside
neighborhoods continue to face environmental
health burdens.
Geographic Focus Salt Lake City, with emphasis on
Westside neighborhoods.
Area of Access Why It Matters Community Example
Physical Activity Parks support walking and
recreation, reducing the risk of
obesity, diabetes, and heart
disease.
Surveys report that 70% of park
users in Salt Lake City walk for
exercise.
Mental Health Green spaces lower stress,
improve mood, and support
emotional regulation.
Residents consistently rate
“access to nature” as a top factor
influencing personal well being.
Social Cohesion Parks promote community
gatherings, youth activities, and
neighborhood trust.
Parks on the Westside host
cultural events and programs that
strengthen social connections.
Heat and
Environment
Trees and open space help
reduce heat exposure and filter
air pollutants.
Westside neighborhoods with
fewer trees show higher asthma
rates and more heat-related
illnesses.
Data sources: Utah Healthy Places Index, Utah
Department of Health and Human Services, Utah
Environmental Public Health Tracking, Salt Lake City
Parks and Public Lands, Sharecare Well-Being Index,
Utah Foundation
Health Assessment
103
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Access to Transit
Key Takeaways
→Public transportation enhances physical activity,
access to resources, and mental health.
→From 2023 to 2025, Salt Lake County saw modest
gains in public transit use, affordability, and stop
access.
→Westside communities experience the longest
commute times and less reliable service coverage.
Geographic Focus Salt Lake County, with data
comparisons for Salt Lake City, West Valley City,
Ogden, and Provo.
Indicator 2023 Baseline 2025 Current Key Findings
Public transit ridership
(Salt Lake County)
6.2% of commuters
used public transit
(American Community
Survey)
6.5% of
commuters used
public transit
Transit use increased slightly overall.
Salt Lake City continues to have the
highest ridership within the county.
Walk or bike to work 2.8% of commuters
walked or biked to work
(Utah Environmental
Public Health Tracking
Program)
2.6% of
commuters
walked or biked
to work
Slight decline in active commuting.
Westside neighborhoods still have
higher walking rates than rural areas.
Average commute time via
transit
41 minutes (Utah
TravelWise Program)
42 minutes Commute time increased slightly.
Westside residents report average
transit trips over 50 minutes in some
areas.
Access to transit stops
within 0.5 miles
71% of Salt Lake County
residents lived within
0.5 miles of a fixed
transit stop (Utah
Transit Authority
Network Plan)
72% of residents
had access to a
stop within 0.5
miles
Slight improvement. Westside access
still trails behind. Poplar Grove
exceeds 80% coverage, while
Glendale is below 60%.
Reduced fare program
enrollment (Utah Transit
Authority)
18,000 riders enrolled in
reduced fare programs,
including low income,
seniors, and individuals
with disabilities
20,500 riders
enrolled
Increased enrollment improved
affordability and access for priority
populations in both urban and
suburban areas.
Data sources: Utah Transit Authority, Utah Department of Health
and Human Services, Utah Environmental Public Health Tracking
Program, and Utah TravelWise
Health Assessment
104
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Water Quality
Key Takeaways
→From 2023 to 2025, Utah saw progress in lead
testing and PFAS monitoring, but gaps remain in
private well oversight, seasonal E. coli exposure,
and fluoride access.
→Continued investment is needed in rural testing,
education, and system upgrades.
Quick Facts
→Utah DEQ launched the Lead-Free Learning
program to test school drinking water.
→Statewide alerts issued for harmful algal blooms
and E. coli in waterbodies, such as Utah Lake and
Jordanelle Reservoir.
→A study in Millard County found elevated arsenic
levels among residents using private wells.
Geographic Focus Utah public and private water
systems, including statewide monitoring programs.
Indicator 2023 Baseline 2025 Current
Estimate
Key Findings
Schools tested for lead in
water
35% of public
schools
70% of public schools Progress toward Utah DEQ’s goal of
100% testing under Lead-Free
Learning.
PFAS detection in public
water
2 wells in Salt Lake
City showed low
PFAS levels
No new exceedances
reported
Ongoing monitoring under the
federal Unregulated Contaminant
Monitoring Rule Version 5.
E. coli recreational water
advisories
8 public locations
with active health
warnings
5 current advisory
locations
Seasonal improvements observed,
but public health alerts still issued
annually.
Private well testing
(voluntary)
Approximately
22,000 private
wells registered
Approximately 24,000
private wells
registered
Participation is growing but testing
and education remain inconsistent,
especially in rural counties.
Fluoridated public water
systems
48% of public
water systems
fluoridated
50% of public water
systems fluoridated
Slight increases. Counties like Salt
Lake and Davis continue consistent
fluoridation, improving oral health
outcomes.
Data sources: Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Utah Department of Health
and Human Services, and federal Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR5)
Health Assessment
105
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Air Quality
Key Takeaways
→Air pollution in Utah remains a significant
public health threat.
→From 2023 to 2025, air quality worsened
slightly in Salt Lake County.
→Areas near industrial corridors, highways,
and proposed inland port development
face elevated exposure risks.
→Communities near major transportation
corridors and proposed freight
development areas may face greater
environmental health risks in the future.
Geographic Focus Salt Lake County and Utah
statewide data, with attention to seasonal and
regional trends.
Area of Impact Why It Matters Utah Example
Respiratory Health Poor air quality increases the risk of
asthma, chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease, and lung
infections.
The Utah Indicator Based Information
System shows seasonal spikes in
emergency room visits for asthma and
bronchitis during winter inversion and
wildfire seasons.
Cardiovascular
Health
Exposure to fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) is linked to higher risk of
heart attacks, strokes, and elevated
blood pressure.
Data from the Utah Department of Health
and Human Services shows increases in
heart-related hospitalizations during
winter inversion events.
Chronic Disease and
Mortality
Long-term exposure to polluted air
is associated with premature death,
dementia, and low birth weight in
infants.
Salt Lake County is consistently ranked
among the worst in the United States for
both PM2.5 and ground level ozone
according to AirNow and Axios air quality
reports.
Data sources: Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Utah Department
of Health and Human Services, and AirNow
Health Assessment
106
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Climate Vulnerability
Key Takeaways
→From 2023 to 2025, Salt Lake County made modest
improvements in cooling center availability and tree
canopy.
→Extreme heat disproportionately affect residents in
tree-scarce neighborhoods, including Westside areas
near proposed inland port development.
Quick Facts
→The Salt Lake County Health Department evaluated
Millcreek Library and other civic buildings as
community cooling centers during extreme heat
events.
→The Salt Lake City Forest Report shows that Westside
neighborhoods with the highest heat exposure have
the lowest tree canopy coverage.
Geographic Focus Salt Lake County, with emphasis on
urban Westside.
Indicator 2023 Baseline 2025 Current Key Findings
Heat-related
emergency
department visits
(Salt Lake
County)
490 visits due
to heat illness
515 visits due
to heat illness
Emergency department visits are
rising, particularly in areas with
limited shade and low tree
canopy.
Public cooling
centers (open in
summer)
5 designated
public cooling
locations
8 designated
public cooling
locations
More sites have opened, but
access remains limited in lower
income and Westside
neighborhoods.
Tree canopy
coverage (urban
Westside)
8% of land
area with tree
cover
9% of land
area with tree
cover
Slight increases. Still below the
citywide average of
approximately 15% tree cover.
Surface heat
difference (urban
versus tree
canopy zones)
7 degrees
Fahrenheit
higher surface
temperature
8 degrees
Fahrenheit
higher surface
temperature
Heat differential between shaded
and unshaded areas has grown,
increasing exposure for unshaded
communities.
Data sources: Utah Department of Health and Human Services, Salt Lake County
Health Department, and Salt Lake City Urban Forestry Division
Health Assessment
107
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Noise
Key Takeaways
→Noise pollution affects hearing, heart health, sleep,
mental wellness, and child development.
→Communities near highways, construction zones,
and busy commercial corridors face the greatest
risk.
→From 2023 to 2025, noise levels in many Utah
communities remained a source of health concern.
→More investment is needed in mitigation,
monitoring, and protection for sensitive areas like
schools and housing near highways.
Geographic Focus Utah statewide, with local data
from Salt Lake County, Springdale, Summit County,
and urban highway corridors.
Health Area Impact on Health Utah Example or Insight
Hearing damage and
tinnitus
Long term exposure above 85
decibels can cause permanent
hearing loss and ringing in the ears
Construction zones and highway
corridors in Utah frequently exceed
safe noise levels for extended
periods.
Cardiovascular
conditions
Noise exposure at or above 65
decibels increased risk of high blood
pressure, heart attacks, and elevated
stress hormones
Utah Department of Transportation
studies highlight elevated
cardiovascular risk in communities
near major highways.
Sleep disruption Nighttime noise increases cortisol,
disrupts deep sleep, and leads to
fatigue and blood pressure changes
Salt Lake County enforces quiet
hours from 10 PM to 7 AM to
support healthy sleep patterns.
Mental health Ongoing exposure contributes to
anxiety, irritability, depression, and
cognitive decline
Surveys conducted by AARP Utah
and the town of Springdale link
persistent noise with chronic stress
in residents.
Child learning and
cognition
Traffic and aircraft noise reduce
concentration, memory, and
academic performance
Studies in Salt Lake and Summit
counties cite noise as a barrier to
student focus and achievement in
high traffic areas.
Data sources: Salt Lake County Health Department, Utah Department of
Transportation, and local municipality codes
Health Assessment
108
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Justice System Involvement
Key Takeaways
→From 2023 to 2025, health risks for
incarcerated and reentering individuals
remained high.
→Expanding behavioral health care, improving
continuity of treatment, and increasing
access to education are key steps for better
outcomes.
→Reentry programs are improving but major
health gaps remain.
Quick Fact
→The Utah Department of Corrections
partners with Salt Lake Community College
and Snow College to offer in-prison
education pathways for reentry success.
Geographic Focus Utah corrections system,
including prison health services and reentry
programs.
Indicator 2023 Baseline 2025 Current Key Findings
Women in prison with
serious mental illness
77% recidivism
within 3 years
No new rate
published
Women with serious mental illness
face significantly higher recidivism
compared to peers.
Health literacy in
incarcerated settings
60% of incarcerated
adults had low health
literacy
No new data
released
Low health literacy limits disease
self-management and post-release
care success.
Chronic disease in prison
population
High rates of
hypertension,
diabetes, and asthma
Remains high Chronic conditions remain difficult
to manage due to delayed care,
limited access, and short
sentences.
Enrollment in prison
education programs
Active in several
Department of
Corrections facilities
Expanded statewide Education is linked to improved
reentry outcomes and lower rates
of return to prison.
Post-release overdose
mortality
Elevated, especially
in first 2 weeks after
release
Still under review Overdose remains a leading cause
of death post release, signaling
urgent need for expanded
substance use treatment and
follow up care.
Data sources: Utah Department of Corrections, Department of Health and
Human Services, and Utah Women and Justice Initiative
Health Assessment
109
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Voter Turnout
Key Takeaways
→From 2023 to 2025, Utah experienced a slight
decline in voter turnout and persistent gaps by age,
income, and geography.
→Gaps in participation reflect and reinforce health
inequities in Utah communities.
→Civic health strategies through healthcare settings
are emerging as promising tools to increase
participation and address health equity.
Quick Facts
→Turnout gap narrowed slightly, but lower income
ZIP codes continue to vote at lower rates from 2023
to 2025.
→Health clinics are increasingly used to promote civic
engagement, especially in underserved
populations.
Geographic Focus Utah statewide, with focus on
participation gaps by age, income, and race.
Area of Impact Why It Matters Community Example
Physical and mental
health
Civic participation is associated
with stronger self-rated health,
greater social trust, and
reduced mortality risk
National studies show that people
who vote regularly report higher
well-being and lower depression
rates.
Health equity Groups with low voting rates
often experience poorer health
and reduced access to care and
representation
Black, Indigenous, and low-
income residents in Utah are
underrepresented in elections and
policy outcomes.
Social cohesion Civic involvement fosters
stronger community ties,
safety, and collective problem
solving
Local town hall participation and
neighborhood voting have been
linked to higher perceptions of
safety and mutual trust.
Policy-driven health
access
Elections shape decisions on
Medicaid, reproductive health,
housing, and public health
funding
States with higher voter turnout
adopted Medicaid expansion
earlier and expanded access to
other health programs.
Data Sources: Utah Lieutenant Governor’s Office, Vot-ER,
U.S. Census Current Population Survey, and state health
clinics
Health Assessment
110
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Voter Turnout
Key Takeaways
→From 2023 to 2025, Utah experienced a slight
decline in voter turnout and persistent gaps by age,
income, and geography.
→Gaps in participation reflect and reinforce health
inequities in Utah communities.
→Civic health strategies through healthcare settings
are emerging as promising tools to increase
participation and address health equity.
Quick Facts
→Turnout gap narrowed slightly, but lower income
ZIP codes continue to vote at lower rates from 2023
to 2025.
→Health clinics are increasingly used to promote civic
engagement, especially in underserved
populations.
Geographic Focus Utah statewide, with focus on
participation gaps by age, income, and race.
Area of Impact Why It Matters Community Example
Physical and mental
health
Civic participation is associated
with stronger self-rated health,
greater social trust, and
reduced mortality risk
National studies show that people
who vote regularly report higher
well-being and lower depression
rates.
Health equity Groups with low voting rates
often experience poorer health
and reduced access to care and
representation
Black, Indigenous, and low-
income residents in Utah are
underrepresented in elections and
policy outcomes.
Social cohesion Civic involvement fosters
stronger community ties,
safety, and collective problem
solving
Local town hall participation and
neighborhood voting have been
linked to higher perceptions of
safety and mutual trust.
Policy-driven health
access
Elections shape decisions on
Medicaid, reproductive health,
housing, and public health
funding
States with higher voter turnout
adopted Medicaid expansion
earlier and expanded access to
other health programs.
Data Sources: Utah Lieutenant Governor’s Office, Vot-ER,
U.S. Census Current Population Survey, and state health
clinics
Health Assessment
111
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Northwest Valley Datapoints: Northwest Salt Lake County Health (Study from The University of Utah)
Study Overview
The University of Utah’s Kem C. Gardner
Policy Institute published a study in January
2026 in response to the University’s first
off-campus hospital, located in Northwest
Salt Lake County. Through this study, the
researchers sought to share health-related
data for the Northwest Salt Lake County
region with community stakeholders.
The study shares data on health care,
health outcomes, and social drivers of
health. The next four slides includes
information from this study.
About Northwest Salt Lake County
Northwest Salt Lake County is a region
which includes West Valley City, Kearns,
Magna, Taylorsville, and the western
portion of Salt Lake City. Located west of I-
15, this region makes up one-quarter of the
state’s most populous county.
Health Assessment
112
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Northwest Valley’s Uninsured Rate
Key Takeaways
→When individuals can afford and access
healthcare, they are more likely to experience
positive health outcomes. However, there are
many access barriers at play for Northwest
Valley residents.
Quick Facts
→In Northwest Salt Lake County, racial and
ethnic minority residents are more likely to
be uninsured compared to White residents.
→In Rose Park and Glendale, 1 in 5 residents
lack health insurance coverage – these areas
have the highest uninsured rates of the
Northwest Valley.
→Residents who are considered below the
poverty line are three times more likely to be
uninsured.
Geographic Focus Northwest Valley with focus
on equity and public health planning.
Data source: Northwest Valley Datapoints: Northwest Salt Lake County Health
(The University of Utah)
Health Assessment
113
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
Sc
e
n
a
r
i
o
mode share.
Community Health – Access to Healthy Food, Reliable Transportation, and Supportive Social Relationships
Key Takeaways
→Access to healthy food, reliable transportation, and
supportive social relationships can enhance
personal health and quality of life.
→Northwest Valley residents are more likely to cite
difficulty in obtaining food, finding social supports,
and having reliable transportation for necessities
such as accessing health care and supportive
resources.
Quick Facts
→1 in 4 households in the Northwest Valley worry
about affording nutritious food.
→Glendale residents participate in food assistance
programs more than residents in other Northwest
Valley communities.
→Hispanic/Latino and non-White, non-Hispanic
residents are less likely to receive needed social and
emotional support.
Geographic Focus Northwest Valley with focus on equity and
public health planning.
Data source: Northwest Valley Datapoints: Northwest Salt Lake County Health (The
University of Utah)
Health Assessment
114
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Reported Rates of Mental and Physical Health
Key Takeaways
→The reported rates of poor mental and physical
health are reported to be higher for Northwest
Valley residents.
Quick Facts
→Over 1 in 10 Northwest Salt Lake County
residents live with diagnosed diabetes.
→Over 1 in 3 Northwest Salt Lake County residents
live with diagnosed depression.
→About 6% of Northwest Salt Lake County
residents have experienced cancer.
→About 1 in 3 Northwest Salt Lake County adults
live with a disability, a figure that is above county
and state levels.
→Obesity affects nearly half of adults in Kearns and
Magna.
Geographic Focus Northwest Valley with focus on
equity and public health planning.Data source: Northwest Valley Datapoints: Northwest Salt Lake
County Health (The University of Utah)
Health Assessment
115
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Community Health – Life Expectancy
Key Takeaways
→Life expectancy provides insight into a
community’s health and well-being. The life
expectancy for Northwest Valley residents is
lower than the county and state average.
Quick Facts
→The life expectancies of Kearns (74.7 years)
and Glendale (74.8 years) residents are
notably lower than the county (79.1 years)
and state (79.4 years) life expectancies.
Geographic Focus Northwest Valley with focus on
equity and public health planning.
Data source: Northwest Valley Datapoints: Northwest
Salt Lake County Health (The University of Utah)
Phase I Engagement Summary and
Findings
•Online Survey
•Community Meetings
•Stakeholder Working Sessions
•Findings Analysis
Public Involvement &
Communications
Community Engagement
117
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
→Community input is a key component of the Baseline Study. The following
community engagement events and activities informed the preparation of the study
and supplemented technical data sources.
→Online Survey
→Tabling Events
→NWQ Review Group Meeting
→Transportation and Health Working Sessions
Community Engagement
118
Online Survey
Survey Content allowed community members to provide feedback from June through October 2025
on concerns and priorities, environmental outcomes, health and quality of life, transportation, and
economic aspirations for the area. There was also an opportunity for the community to add
comments to a map of the area.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Community Engagement
119
Online Survey Results
Key Takeaways
→Top Health and Quality of Life Issues: Clean air and water were top priorities, followed by safe
parks and green spaces, affordable housing, traffic and transportation, and noise and light
pollution.
→Environmental Concerns: Respondents expressed strong worries about air pollution, threats to
wetlands and wildlife, urban heat from increased pavement, and the lack of environmental and
health impact studies.
→Development Impacts: Rapid expansion of warehouses and rail infrastructure, traffic
congestion, and concerns over low-wage jobs were highlighted. There were mixed feelings
about incentives and industrial growth.
→Governance Issues: Criticism was directed at tax increment financing, perceived misuse of
public funds, lack of transparency, political influence, and loss of local oversight and tax revenue
for Salt Lake City.
→Community Engagement: There was frustration over insufficient public input, confusion about
UIPA’s purpose, and a desire for greater transparency and responsiveness.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Community Engagement
120
Northwest Quadrant Review Group Meeting
A meeting with the NWQ Review Group was held on July 17, 2025 to introduce the Baseline
Study and provide an overview of the methodology and data sources to be included.
Key Takeaways
→Water: Salt Lake City provided additional water data sources and participated in follow-up
meetings to discuss the City’s water conservation plan.
→Environment: Participants invited project team members on a tour of the wetland areas in the
northern portion of the NWQ. The tour provided value insight into the environmental conditions
and value of the wetland area.
→Public Safety: Participants identified public safety as a growing concern in the NWQ and noted
the need for additional security and code enforcement.
→Health: Participants provided contacts at the University of Utah for inclusion in the health and
quality of life workshop.
→Engagement: Additional contacts and organizations to include in community engagement were
provided.
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
S
t
u
d
y
Community Engagement
121
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Transportation Technical Workshop
Attendees:
→Local Industry Employees
→Wasatch Front Regional Council Staff
→Utah Department of Transportation Staff
→Salt Lake City Transportation Staff
→Fairpark Community Council Member
A transportation technical workshop was held virtually on August 7, 2025.
Topics discussed included:
→Transit service expansion, accessibility, and innovations
→Road and traffic management, parking solutions
→Pollution and air quality initiatives
→Workforce development and access
→Infrastructure for clean transportation
→Infrastructure upgrades
→Technology and future planning
Community Engagement
122
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Transportation Technical Workshop
Key Takeaways
→Transit: Employees rely on transit but operating
hours and connectivity (first/last mile) are barriers to
greater usage. Need alternative and innovative
transit options in NWQ.
→Roads and traffic: Limited east-west connectivity,
increasing traffic congestion, safety concerns with
truck traffic. Need dedicated freight lanes and
improved active transportation network.
→Air quality: Idling vehicles contribute to poor air
quality. Need electrified truck parking and incentives
to transition to electric fleets.
→Workforce development: Opportunity to explore
workforce development in the field of electric
vehicles.A workshop summary, including breakout room notes, is
attached.
Community Engagement
123
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Health and Quality of Life Workshop
Attendees:
→University of Utah staff
→Utah Department of Health and Human Services
staff
→West Side Coalition
→University Neighborhood Partners
→Salt Lake County Health Department staff
Topics discussed included:
→Increasing number of people without
insurance
→Limited access to preventive and behavioral
healthcare
→Food insecurity
→Housing affordability
→Displacement
→Localized health data
→Climate risks
→Workforce development
→Digital equity
→Land use and environment
A health and quality of life workshop was held virtually on September 4, 2025.
Community Engagement
124
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
mode share.
Health and Quality of Life Workshop
Key Takeaways (full summary attached)
→Health Assessment and Equity
→Clinics serving Westside families are
overextended and lack interpreters and liaisons.
→Preventive care, screening, and behavioral health
services are underutilized due to cost and
mistrust.
→Data, Research, Community Input
→State level data is inadequate for capturing
Westside community conditions.
→Need to use local surveys, emergency service
data, and community level sources.
→Environmental, Land Use, and Nature Access
→Need buffers between NWQ and nearby
neighborhoods.
→Land use decisions need to account for air quality
or environmental hazards.
→Long-term monitoring of air and groundwater
should be funded by industry and overseen by
independent parties.
→Climate Resilience and Public Safety
→Cooling centers are poorly advertised, lack
overnight availability and backup power.
→Need to increase tree canopy and restore native
vegetation.
→Housing, Food Access, and Community
Development
→Stable and affordable housing is essential for
physical and mental well-being.
→Food insecurity is the most frequently reported
social determinant of health among University of
Utah Health patients.
→Noise, Transit, and Infrastructure
→Freight, highways, and construction are nuisances
and health concerns.
→Long commutes and limited transit burden low-
income and minority communities.
→Internet access is a barrier to telehealth and reliable
health information.
Baseline Findings and Key Takeaways
•Economic
•Transportation
•Environmental and Health
Conclusion
Key Economic Takeaways
126
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
The NWQ project area is designed to be an employment center. Juxtaposed between underserved neighborhoods,
critical natural resources and habitat, SLC International Airport, and other industrial activities.
→In recent years, development has returned to more historic levels with more than half of the project area remaining
available for development.
→Roughly 15% of the area is set aside for open space, agriculture, or other uses.
The portion of the project area inside Salt Lake City is home to some 10,000 jobs.
→The transportation sector accounts for about one-third of the jobs, with a quarter being in manufacturing, and 20% in
professional/scientific/technical services.
→The NWQ workforce is largely white and has at least some college education.
→Roughly two-thirds of jobs in the NWQ pay more than $40,000 per year; over half do not require a college degree.
Neighborhoods on the west side of Salt Lake City have a different economic profile than the city as a whole.
→According to Census data, all four communities have lower employment levels than the city overall.
→Three of the four neighborhoods have per capita incomes at/near 50% below the city’s level.
Key Economic Takeaways
127
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
Opportunities/challenges exist for enabling Westside communities to share in the economic benefits in the NWQ.
→Although the four neighborhoods include portions of the NWQ, none of the neighborhoods’ residential areas are
adjacent to the NWQ (aside from the strip near SLC International Airport).
→Car ownership levels in the area, the availability of services (e.g., childcare, grocery stores, and medical care) in and
around the NWQ, and other factors, may make the NWQ a less desirable work location than other parts of the city.
→With less than half the jobs in the project area requiring a college degree and more than two-thirds paying more than
$40,000 per year, the NWQ could be a source of low-barrier-to-entry jobs.
The industrial real estate markets that include the NWQ provide a good indication of baseline future activity.
→The industrial market in northwestern Salt Lake City has been largely dominated by warehousing and distribution
uses.
→The greater the value of the development in the NWQ, the more tax increment will be generated.
→While much of the area’s activity has been in warehousing, as mentioned earlier, the project area has attracted
advanced manufacturing and biotechnology companies.
→These types of facilities typically generate greater property tax revenue due to a higher valuation of the facility and
capital equipment.
Key Transportation Takeaways
128
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
→Grade-crossing safety: Train movements are expected to climb 35% and vehicle-miles traveled 45% by 2045,
sharply increasing the likelihood of vehicle-train collisions in the NWQ and surrounding corridors unless crossings
are upgraded or separated.
→Chronic congestion and access barriers: Longer and more frequent gate closures will stall Westside arterials,
slowing emergency response, isolating neighborhoods, and widening socioeconomic gaps.
→Environmental-justice exposure: Industrial growth without zero-emission requirements will concentrate additional
diesel exhaust and particulate matter in Westside communities that already face poor air quality.
→Roadway capacity and connectivity: Rising truck volumes threaten to overburden routes, such as 7200 West and
SR 201, while limited east-west links will further restrict access to jobs, healthcare, and education unless new
transit options or grade separations are added.
→Maintenance conditions: Increased truck traffic will lead to accelerated breakdown of pavement conditions,
requiring more frequent resurfacing and other state of good repair projects.
→Active transportation connectivity and safety: Crashes involving vulnerable road users (bicyclists and pedestrians)
may become more of a concern as the area develops if the active transportation network is not expanded.
Increased truck traffic can increase the severity of crashes, especially for vulnerable road users.
→Transit service: The area largely lacks direct transit service and existing transit service is primarily oriented around
peak commuting trips.
Key Environmental and Health Takeaways
129
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
St
u
d
y
→Wetland preservation: Wetland and floodplain preservation should be a key consideration as future development
occurs. There is a greater concentration of wetlands and floodplain south of I -80.
→Water conservation: Water conservation measures since 2001 have reduced overall water demand, including
residential and industrial use. However, additional conservation measures are still needed to ensure supply can
support future demand and support healthy water levels in the Great Salt Lake.
→Water quality: Ensuring federal, state, and local water quality standards are met is an important consideration for
future development. Additional stormwater infrastructure is needed along with adherence to stormwater best
management practices to minimize pollutants.
→Great Salt Lake and Shoreline: Considered one of North America’s most important interior wetlands, the Great Salt
Lake, serves as a nesting and migration stopover location for millions of birds.
→Natural areas: Approximately 11% of the UIPA jurisdictional area is designated Open Space and is not developable.
This includes the Lee Kay Wildlife Conservation Area that is owned and managed by the Utah Division of Wildlife
Resources.
→Air quality: Westside neighborhoods are disproportionally impacted by air pollution. Ozone concentrations near
the NWQ have fluctuated over time but remain above national ambient air quality standards.
→Community and health facilities: Westside neighborhoods lack access to community and health facilities.
→Health outcomes: Many Westside neighborhoods report health-related data that can lead to worse health
outcomes compared to Salt Lake County and the State, including greater rates of uninsured individuals, food
insecurity, and lower life expectancy.
•Phase II: Preferred Scenario
•Identify a preferred development scenario and recommendations based on baseline findings.
•Identify projects, programs, policies, and partnerships to address potential impacts associated
with future development.
•Conduct community workshops to prioritize recommendations for UIPA investment.
•Identify metrics to evaluate future investments.
Next Steps
UIPA Preferred Scenario
Summary Report
March 2026
Area Context
2
→UIPA area covers
approximately 16,000 acres in
northwest Salt Lake City and
parts of northern West Valley
City and Magna City.
→Baseline study covers the
portion of the UIPA
jurisdictional land within Salt
Lake City.
Baseline Study Findings
3
The Baseline Study included the following topics and areas of analysis:
Economics and Community
→Economic development and opportunities
Transportation
→Road, rail, bike and pedestrian, transit
Environment and Human Health
→Land and habitat, air, water, and community health
Community Engagement and Communications
→Stakeholder and community engagement
→Reviewed and compiled existing data for the project area to inform baseline
conditions and future trends
Baseline Methodology & Resources
4
Existing Plans &
Studies
Environmental
Data
Current Zoning
Census Data
Transportation
Data
Community &
Stakeholder
Engagement
5
Preferred Scenario Report Key
→Economic Development
→Transportation
Key Findings
from the baseline study
Opportunities
for the preferred scenario
Preferred Scenario Investment & Policy Recommendations
→Immediate Actions
→Long Term Considerations
→Metrics
→Environment
→Community & Health
Baseline Study
6
Environment
KEY FINDINGS
from the baseline study
OPPORTUNITIES
for the preferred scenario
→Wildlife areas provide nesting and migration stopover
for millions of birds.
→Wetlands and floodplains exist throughout the project
area, with greater concentration south of I-80.
→Groundwater and soil contamination at North Temple
Landfill site.
→Preserve and protect valuable wetlands
and sensitive lands.
→Partner to improve stormwater facilities in
the area that drain to the Great Salt Lake.
→Ongoing support for remediation of the
North Temple Landfill site.
→Water conservation measures implemented since
2001 have reduced overall demand.
→Area geography leads to challenges with managing
stormwater runoff.
→Great Salt Lake water elevation is below healthy
levels.
→Support water conservation measures to
ensure supply can support future demand.
→Support low water use developments.
→Support compliance with water quality
standards.
→Partner to improve stormwater facilities
and water quality.
→Explore opportunities for water leasing and
shepherding to the Great Salt Lake.
→Westside neighborhoods are disproportionately
impacted by air pollution from industrial operations
and proximity to busy roads.
→Support programs that increase awareness
of poor air quality and overall air quality.
→Support technology enhancements that
drive air quality improvement.
→Support programs for public transit to
reduce commuter impacts.
7
Community & Health
KEY FINDINGS
from the baseline study
OPPORTUNITIES
for the preferred scenario
→The NWQ area and Westside neighborhoods lack essential
community facilities and services, such as grocery,
medical, and childcare services for workers in the NWQ
and residents.
→Westside neighborhoods have limited access to
educational resources.
→Westside neighborhoods have lower access to parks and
green space.
→Concerns regarding public safety in the NWQ.
→Partner to add essential amenities in the NWQ.
→Support community facility development in
Westside neighborhoods.
→Partner with local colleges to provide
education opportunities to Westside area.
→Support access to open and green space in
NWQ.
→Partner with SLC to increase public safety
resources in the NWQ.
→Barriers to access healthcare, healthy food, reliable
transportation, social support
→Poor mental and physical health rates
→Lower than average life expectancy
→Identify partners to address health-related
disparities
→Westside neighborhoods are disproportionately impacted
by air pollution from industrial operations and proximity
to busy roads.
→Westside neighborhoods experience the longest commute
times and less reliable transit service coverage.
→Opportunities for efficiencies in air cargo
→Support programs that increase awareness of
poor air quality as well as improve overall air
quality.
→Seek opportunities to mitigate emissions in
the area, such as technology enhancements
that drive air quality improvement and
programs for public transit to reduce
commuter impacts.
8
Economic Development
KEY FINDINGS
from the baseline study
OPPORTUNITIES
for the preferred scenario
→Area is a mix of residential areas, critical natural
resources and habitat, SLC Airport, and other
industrial activities.
→2/3 of the NWQ is vacant land, much of which is
zoned for industrial and manufacturing use.
→Roughly 15% of the area is set aside for open
space, agriculture, or other uses.
→Opportunities to attract businesses
that provide low barrier to entry and
higher wage jobs.
→Need to balance development with
preserving and sustaining environmental
resources.
→The NWQ hosts more than 10,000 jobs, including:
34% in Transportation, 25% in Manufacturing,
and 20% in professional/scientific/technical
services.
→Workforce is largely white with at least some
college education.
→2/3 of jobs in the NWQ pay more than $40,000
per year.
→Over half of the jobs do not require a college
degree.
→Support existing low barrier to entry
jobs.
→Opportunities to attract higher-wage
jobs in advanced manufacturing and
biotech.
→Support workforce training programs to
enable residents to train for future
higher-skilled opportunities.
9
Economic Development
KEY FINDINGS
from the baseline study
OPPORTUNITIES
for the preferred scenario
→Westside neighborhoods have lower employment
levels than the city overall.
→Jordan Meadows, Poplar Grove, and Glendale
have per capita incomes at/near 50% below the
city’s level.
→Low car ownership levels in the area and lack of
services (childcare, grocery stores, medical care,
etc.) in and around the NWQ.
→Facilitate opportunities for those who
live near NWQ to get jobs in the area.
→Address transportation access and
services.
→Support workforce and development
opportunities for Westside residents.
→The industrial market in the NWQ area is largely
dominated by warehousing and distribution uses.
→The NWQ area has attracted advanced
manufacturing and biotechnology companies.
→Proximity to SLCIA provides opportunities for
efficiencies in air cargo
→The greater the value of the
development in the NWQ, the more tax
differential will be generated.
→Opportunities to maximize air cargo
payloads for current operations
10
Transportation
KEY FINDINGS
from the baseline study
OPPORTUNITIES
for the preferred scenario
→Multi-hour roadway delays at blocked at-grade
rail crossings occur along Union Pacific lines near
I-15 and I-80.
→Daily freight-train movement is expected to rise
about 35% by 2045.
→Increase in vehicle miles traveled by about 45%
by 2045.
→Support upgrades/separate train
crossing to mitigate conflict and delays.
→Partner to address safety concerns
from increased truck traffic.
→NWQ lacks active transportation facilities such as
bike lanes and sidewalks.
→NWQ lacks direct transit service and existing
transit service is primarily oriented around peak
commuting trips.
→Advocate for improve bike lanes and
sidewalks in the NWQ.
→Partner to improve transit access to job
sites in the area.
→Increased truck traffic will lead to accelerated
breakdown of pavement conditions.
→Work with UDOT, SLC Transportation,
and others to plan for resurfacing and
other maintenance projects.
Terminology Key
→Investment: Recommendation that will require a portion of the tax differential
→Policy: Recommendation that will require coordination and/or advocacy to support a new or
amended policy or business initiative. Tax differential is not required for policy
recommendations.
→Priority: Recommendation is supported to be implemented immediately with identified
partners.
→Long-term consideration: Recommendation could be implemented in the 3 to 10+ year
timeframe and may require additional partnership planning.
→Metrics: Methods to measure progress towards reaching intended outcomes. Reporting
metrics will be determined as the tax differential is distributed. Regular reports (i.e., quarterly,
annually), will be required from the receiving entity.
11
Priority Investment / Funding Committed
→Baseline opportunity identified: Preserve
and protect valuable wetlands and sensitive
lands.
→Preferred scenario recommendation:
Partner with Utah Department of Natural
Resources to support Great Salt Lake
wetland conservation.
→Key areas addressed: Environment
(increased water conservation, support
wetland health)
12
Immediate Investment Actions
→Provide a portion of the tax differential to
support wetland restoration in and around
the Northwest Quadrant
→Baseline opportunity identified: Partner
with Salt Lake City to increase public safety
resources in the NWQ.
→Preferred scenario recommendation:
Public safety partnership with Salt Lake City
departments to address public safety
concerns and provide adequate resources.
→Key areas addressed: Community &
Health (public safety), Economic
Development (business growth and
recruitment)
Immediate Investment Actions
→Provide a portion of the tax differential to
support public safety improvements
→Note: UIPA and Salt Lake City have agreed to support funding these two recommended programs as part of a future
update to their interlocal agreement.
Priority Investment and Policy
→Baseline opportunity identified: Support water conservation measures to ensure supply can support future
demand and support healthy water levels in the Great Salt Lake.
→Preferred scenario recommendation: Partner with Salt Lake City to develop and implement programs that
support water conservation.
→Key areas addressed: Environment (increased water conservation), Community & Health (community
awareness)
13
Immediate Investment Actions
→Provide a portion of the tax differential to support
expansion of Salt Lake City’s water usage
assessment program.
Immediate Policy Actions
→Through UIPA’s property tax rebate incentive,
provide business incentives to new or expanding
companies for water efficiency improvements for
interior (industrial processes) and exterior
(landscaping).
Long Term Considerations
→Provide a portion of the tax differential to support
a marketing/educational campaign, in partnership
with Salt Lake City, related to best practices for
water conservation.
→Provide a portion of the tax differential to support
expansion of Salt Lake City’s landscape conversion
rebate program.
→Provide a portion of the tax differential to support
Salt Lake City with development of a pilot micro-
grant program to offer additional funding for
landscape conversion.
Key Metrics
→Number of businesses engaged
→Number of water usage audits conducted
→Number of businesses adopting efficiency measures
Priority Investment
→Baseline opportunity identified: Support community facility development in Westside neighborhoods.
→Preferred scenario recommendation: Partner with local businesses, non-profits, or other organizations to
address health-related disparities.
→Key areas addressed: Community & Health (improved community amenities and services, improved health
outcomes), Economic Development (access to services, economic resiliency)
14
Immediate Investment Actions
Partner with Community Organizations to use a portion of
the tax differential to support capacity building initiatives,
such as:
→Providing matching funds to University Neighborhood
Partners as part of the Aspen Institute’s Weaver Award.
→Working with Salt Lake County Health to support a new
coalition focused on health outcomes in Westside
communities
→Working with the University of Utah to support a
community health worker program to connect Westside
communities to health-related resources
→Working with University Neighborhood Partners to
support the ongoing work of the Environmental Justice
Resident Committee
→Provide funding for SLC’s Community Food Microgrant
Program to improve access to fresh, healthy, affordable
and culturally relevant food
Long Term Considerations
→Continue exploring opportunities for partnerships
→Partner with Salt Lake County Health Department to use a
portion of the tax differential to expand radon assessments
and mitigation
→Use a portion of the tax differential to expand Salt Lake
County’s program subsidizing recreation passes for
Westside youth
→Partner with University Neighborhood Partners to use a
portion of the tax differential to support the Hartland Youth
Center to continue the center’s youth and community
programs
Key Metrics
→Amount of grant funding distributed
→Number of new partners identified
Priority Investment
→Baseline opportunity identified: Support workforce training programs to enable residents to train for future
higher-skilled opportunities.
→Preferred scenario investment recommendation: Partner with organizations to support education and
workforce training.
→Key areas addressed: Economic Development (workforce development, job training, education),
Community & Health (programming that supports Westside residents, increased educational opportunities)
15
Immediate Investment Actions
Provide a portion of the tax differential to support
educational partners with workforce training, which
could include:
→Supporting Salt Lake Community College (SLCC) to
provide scholarships for Westside residents to pursue
additional education or training in aviation/advanced
air mobility, healthcare, or manufacturing.
→Supporting SLCC to fund program expansion,
specifically for programs related to aviation/advanced
air mobility, healthcare, manufacturing, and
vocational English as a second language (ESL).
→Working with Salt Lake School District to support their
career and technical center.
Long Term Considerations
→Explore additional partnerships with local educational
organizations
→Explore additional partnerships with local businesses
to develop business-specific training/education
programs.
→Identify opportunities within future developments for
additional on the job training facilities or classroom
space.
Key Metrics
→Scholarship recipients
→Program registration
applications
→Completed
certificates/degrees
→New program offerings
→Enrollment capacity increase (%)
→ESL completion certificates
→Operational on-site training
facilities
→Participants using on-site
training
Priority Investment
→Baseline opportunity identified: Partner to improve transit access to job sites in the area.
→Preferred scenario investment recommendation: Partner with Utah Transit Authority (UTA) or others to
expand vanpool or other transit opportunities in the Northwest Quadrant.
→Key areas addressed: Transportation (Additional transit/mobility options), Environment (reduce vehicle
miles traveled and associated greenhouse gas emissions and criteria air pollutants), Economic Development
(workforce and job access)
16
Immediate Investment Actions
Provide a portion of the tax differential toward
vanpool expansion and/or on-demand transit service
for Westside neighborhoods to businesses within the
NWQ, which could include:
→Funding for drivers through existing programs
→Subsidizing first/last mile program within the
Northwest Quadrant
→Funding for additional on-demand transit services
Long Term Considerations
→Work with local businesses to establish a
Transportation Management Area that could
support additional transit options
→Continue coordination with UTA to explore
opportunities for UIPA to support the purchase of
vanpool fleet vehicles
Key Metrics
→Vanpool vehicles in service in NWQ
→Daily riders
→Development of new programs
→Vehicles purchased/operated
→Annual ridership tracking
Priority Policies
→Baseline opportunity identified: Partner to address safety concerns from increased truck traffic.
→Preferred scenario recommendation: Provide support for truck parking and onsite queuing within the
Northwest Quadrant.
→Key areas addressed: Environment (reduced emissions/improved air quality due to reducing truck idling),
Transportation (improved freight mobility), Community & Health (reduced truck parking and idling within
residential areas)
17
Immediate Policy Actions
→Work with Utah Department of Transportation
(UDOT) to identify opportunities for truck parking
and onsite queuing within the Northwest
Quadrant.
→Work with Salt Lake City to explore amendments
to development regulations to provide adequate
truck parking/queuing.
→Work with Salt Lake City to enforce current truck
parking regulations.
Long Term Considerations
→Provide a portion of the tax differential to support
maintenance or private operation of a truck
parking facility.
→Provide land to accommodate truck parking within
the Northwest Quadrant.
Key Metrics
→Parking spaces created/available
→New developments with parking provision
→Funds provided to private parking operators
→Reduction in undesignated parking incidents
within specific geographic areas
→Acres dedicated to truck parking
Priority Policy
→Baseline opportunity identified: Support water conservation and other sustainability measures as NWQ
develops.
→Preferred scenario policy recommendation: Develop business incentives related to sustainable building
practices (energy efficiency, water conservation, stormwater management, etc.).
→Key areas addressed: Environment (increased sustainability and energy efficiency, reduced emissions)
18
Immediate Policy Actions
Through UIPA’s property tax rebate incentive, provide
additional business incentives to new or expanding
companies that implement sustainable building
practices, such as:
→Use of energy efficient building materials and
building performance through an “Efficiency
Criteria” (as defined by the University of Utah’s
Industrial Assessment Center).
→Installation of electric vehicle charging
infrastructure and stations.
→Installation of lighting that is dark sky compliant.
Long Term Considerations
→Partner with Salt Lake City and other organizations
to develop a program to support opportunities for
building retrofits, sustainable redevelopment, and
conversion of existing buildings.
Key Metrics
→Number of participating businesses/buildings
→Number of retrofit projects completed
Priority Policy
→Baseline opportunity identified: Partner to improve stormwater facilities in the area that drain to the Great
Salt Lake.
→Preferred scenario recommendation: Partner with Salt Lake City to improve stormwater facilities, discharge
treatment and overall water quality.
→Key areas addressed: Environment, Community & Health (improved water quality, reduced pollutants to
the Great Salt Lake)
19
Immediate Policy Action
→Through UIPA’s property tax rebate incentive,
provide business incentives to new or expanding
companies to assist businesses with
implementation of stormwater best management
practices.
Long Term Considerations
→Provide a portion of the tax differential to support
a marketing/educational campaign, in partnership
with Salt Lake City, related to best management
practices for sewer system discharges, onsite
pretreatment and other water quality
improvements.
Key Metrics
→Number of projects implemented
→Number of workshops held
→Number of participants
→Acres restored/enhanced
Priority Policy
→Baseline opportunity identified: Opportunities to maximize air cargo payloads for current operations
→Preferred scenario policy recommendation: Partner with Salt Lake City International Airport (SLCIA) to
attract air cargo shippers to the Northwest Quadrant and identify and implement efficiency opportunities.
→Key areas addressed: Economic Development (employment opportunities), Community & Health (air
traffic/cargo efficiency), Transportation (efficient use of existing resources)
20
Immediate Policy Actions
→Continue partnerships and discussions with SLCIA
related to air cargo efficiency within existing cargo
capacity.
→Become actively involved in the region's cargo
community.
→Leverage strategic partnerships with NWQ and
regional businesses.
Long Term Considerations
→Partnership with SLCIA for marketing campaign
related to air cargo.
→Support SLCIA in the implementation of more
efficient use of existing air cargo and potential
expansion of air cargo capacity.
→Explore opportunities to use a portion of the tax
differential to support air cargo related facilities.
→Explore opportunities to support the use of
sustainable aviation fuel (SAF).
Key Metrics
→Number of partnership meetings
→Cargo tonnage handled through NWQ
→Number of operators participating in SAF programs
Recommendations for Future Consideration
→Baseline opportunity identified: Support upgrades/separated train crossing to mitigate conflict and delays.
→Preferred scenario investment recommendation: Provide support for rail crossing improvements.
→Key areas addressed: Transportation (reduced rail/car and truck conflicts, improved freight mobility, reduced
collision risk, improved access and circulation), Environment (reduced emissions/improved air quality due to
reduced idling)
21
Long Term Considerations
→Continue to provide a portion of the tax differential to fund Trainfo, including potential to expand locations
→Work with Salt Lake City and UDOT to identify opportunities to advance capital improvement projects
including separated rail crossings, signal upgrades, and queue management
→Integrate upgrades into long-term freight and mobility plans
Key Metrics
→Number of Trainfo locations in NWQ
→Safety incident data tracked
→Traffic congestion data at supported crossings
→Grade separation projects funded/permitted/completed
→Signal upgrades implemented
→Amount of funding secured
Recommendations for Future Consideration
→Baseline opportunity identified: Ongoing support for remediation of the North Temple Landfill site.
→Preferred scenario investment recommendation: North Temple Landfill waste remediation
→Key areas addressed: Environment (removal of toxic waste), Community & Health (lower environmental
toxins), Economic Development (community amenities)
22
Long Term Considerations
→Continued support of ongoing waste remediation efforts of the landfill. Assistance under this program is
limited to the cleanup of hazardous or challenging materials that were not initially identified in assessment of
materials requiring remediation.
→After site cleanup, explore opportunities to use the land for community amenities, programs, and other
environmentally supportive uses.
Key Metrics
→Remediation milestones achieved
→Tracking amount distributed for hazardous/challenging cleanup
Finalize and Advance Recommendations
→Incorporate UIPA Board feedback and finalize priority recommendations
→Advance recommendations through additional discussions and formalized agreements with
partners
Tracking Metrics
→Regular (i.e., quarterly, annual) reports from Partners that receive a portion of tax differential
→UIPA internal tracking on policy implementation and partner engagement
Ongoing UIPA Community Engagement
→Annual State of the Port to report on port activities
→Town Hall meetings to facilitate community discussion
→Presence at community events in the region
Next Steps
DRAFT PREFERRED SCENARIO PRIORITY MATRIX
Key
Investment:recommendation that will require a portion of the tax diAerential.
Policy:recommendation that will require coordination and/or advocacy to support a new or amended policy or business incentive. Tax diAerential is not required for policy recommendations.
Priority:recommendation is supported to be implemented immediately with identified partners.
Metrics: methods to measure progress towards reaching intended outcomes (not listed in matrix but will be included in final summary).
Program/Policy
Recommendation Policy or Investment Addressed
Department of Natural
Resources to support Great
Salt Lake wetland
conservation
(funding committed):
Provide a portion of the tax diAerential to support wetland
restoration in and around the Northwest Quadrant.
Ongoing support for wetland restoration.Environment
Increased water conservation
Support wetland health
Public safety partnership
with Salt Lake City
departments to address
public safety concerns and
provide adequate resources
(funding committed):
Provide a portion of the tax diAerential to support public
safety improvements.
Continued support for public safety
improvements.
Community & Health
Public safety
Economic Development
Business growth and recruitments
Partner with Salt Lake City
to develop and implement
programs that support water
conservation.
:
Provide a portion of the tax diAerential to support
expansion of Salt Lake City’s water usage assessment
program.
Priority Policy:
Through UIPA’s property tax rebate incentive, provide
business incentives to new or expanding companies for
water eAiciency improvements for interior (industrial
processes) and exterior (landscaping).
Provide a portion of the tax diAerential to support
a marketing/educational campaign, in
partnership with Salt Lake City, related to best
practices for water conservation.
Provide a portion of the tax diAerential to support
expansion of Salt Lake City’s landscape
conversion rebate program.
Provide a portion of the tax diAerential to support
Salt Lake City with development of a pilot micro-
grant program to oAer additional funding for
landscape conversion.
Environment
Increased water conservation and
community awareness
Community & Health
Community awareness
Program/Policy
Recommendation Policy or Investment Addressed
businesses, non-profits, or
other organizations to
address health-related
disparities.
:
Partner with community organizations to use a portion of
the tax diAerential to support capacity building initiatives,
such as:
o Providing matching funds to University Neighborhood
Partners as part of the Aspen Institute’s Weaver Award.
o Working with Salt Lake County Health to support a new
coalition focused on health outcomes in Westside
communities.
o Working with the University of Utah to support a
community health worker program to help connect
Westside communities to health-related resources.
o Working with University Neighborhood Partners to
support the ongoing work of the Environmental Justice
Resident Committee.
o Provide funding for Salt Lake City’s Community Food
Microgrant Program to improve access to fresh,
healthy, aAordable and culturally relevant food.
Continue exploring opportunities for partnerships
Partner with Salt Lake County Health Department
to use a portion of the tax diAerential to expand
radon assessments and mitigation.
Use a portion of the tax diAerential to expand Salt
Lake County’s program subsidizing recreation
passes for Westside youth.
Partner with University Neighborhood Partners to
use a portion of the tax diAerential to support the
Hartland Youth Center to continue the center’s
youth and community programs.
Community & Health
Improved community amenities and
services
Improved health outcomes
Economic Development
Access to services
Economic resiliency
Partner with organizations
to support education and
workforce training.
:
Provide a portion of the tax diAerential to support
educational partners with workforce training, which could
include:
o Supporting SLCC to provide scholarships for Westside
residents to pursue additional education or training in
aviation/advanced air mobility, healthcare, or
manufacturing.
o Supporting SLCC to fund program expansion.
Specifically for programs related to aviation/advanced
air mobility, healthcare, manufacturing, and vocational
English as a second language (ESL).
o Working with the Salt Lake School District to support
their career and technical center.
Explore additional partnerships with local
educational organizations
Explore additional partnerships with local
businesses to develop business-specific
training/education programs.
Identify opportunities within future developments
for additional on the job training facilities or
classroom space.
Economic Development
Workforce development
Job training
Community & Health
Programming that supports Westside
residents
Increased educational opportunities
Partner with Utah Transit
Authority (UTA) or others to
expand vanpool or other
transit opportunities in the
Northwest Quadrant.
:
Provide a portion of the tax diAerential toward vanpool
expansion and/or on-demand transit service for Westside
neighborhoods to businesses within the Northwest
Quadrant, which could include:
o Funding for drivers through existing programs.
o Subsidizing first/last mile program within the
Northwest Quadrant.
o Funding for additional on-demand transit services.
Work with local businesses to establish a
Transportation Management Area that could
support additional transit options.
Continue coordination with UTA to explore
opportunities for UIPA to support the purchase of
vanpool fleet vehicles.
Transportation
Additional transit/mobility options
Environment
Reduce vehicle miles traveled and
associated greenhouse gas emissions and
criteria air pollutants
Economic Development
Workforce and job access
Program/Policy
Recommendation Policy or Investment Addressed
parking and onsite queuing
within the Northwest
Quadrant.
:
Work with Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) to
identify opportunities for truck parking and onsite queuing
within the Northwest Quadrant.
Work with Salt Lake City to explore amendments to
development regulations to incentivize or require new
developments to provide adequate truck parking/queuing
in NWQ.
Work with Salt Lake City to enforce current truck parking
regulations.
Provide a portion of the tax diAerential to support
maintenance or private operation of a truck
parking facility.
Provide land to accommodate truck parking
within the Northwest Quadrant.
Environment
Reduced emission/improved air quality
due to reduced truck idling
Transportation
Improved freight mobility
Community & Health
Reduced truck parking and idling within
residential areas
Develop business
incentives related to
sustainable building
practices.
:
Through UIPA’s property tax rebate incentive, provide
additional business incentives to new or expanding
companies that implement sustainable building practices,
such as:
o Use of energy eAicient building materials and
building performance through an "EAiciency
Criteria" (as defined by the University of Utah’s
Industrial Assessment Center).
o Installation of electric vehicle charging
infrastructure and stations.
o Installation of lighting that is dark sky compliant.
Partner with Salt Lake City and other
organizations to develop programming to support
opportunities for building retrofits, sustainable
redevelopment, and conversion of existing
buildings.
Environment
Increased sustainability and energy
eAiciency
Reduced emissions
Partner with Salt Lake City
to improve stormwater
facilities, discharge
treatment and overall water
quality.
Through UIPA’s property tax rebate incentive, provide
business incentives to new or expanding companies to
assist businesses with implementation of stormwater best
management practices.
Provide a portion of the tax diAerential to support
a marketing/educational campaign, in
partnership with Salt Lake City, related to best
management practices for sewer system
discharges, onsite pretreatment and other water
quality improvements.
Environment, Community & Health
Improved water quality
Reduced pollutants to the Great Salt Lake
Partner with Salt Lake City
International Airport (SLCIA)
to attract air cargo shippers
to the Northwest Quadrant
and identify and implement
eAiciency opportunities.
:
Continue partnerships and discussions with SLCIA related
to air cargo eAiciency and expansion within existing cargo
capacity.
Become actively involved in the region’s cargo community.
Leverage strategic partnerships with NWQ and regional
businesses.
Partnership with SLCIA for marketing campaign
related to air cargo
Support SLCIA in the implementation of more
eAicient use of existing air cargo capacity.
Explore opportunities to use a portion of the tax
diAerential to support air cargo related facilities.
Explore opportunities to support the use of
sustainable aviation fuel.
Economic Development
Employment opportunities
Community & Health
Air traAic/cargo eAiciency
Transportation
EAicient use of existing resources
Program/Policy
Recommendation Policy or Investment Addressed
crossing improvements.
No immediate actions recommended. See future investment
potential in Longer Term Considerations.
Continue to provide a portion of the tax
diAerential to fund Trainfo, including potential to
expand locations.
Work with Salt Lake City and UDOT to identify
opportunities to advance capital improvement
projects including separated rail crossings, signal
upgrades, and queue management.
Integrate upgrades into long-term freight &
mobility plans
Transportation
Reduced rail/car and truck conflicts
Improved freight mobility
Reduced collision risk
Improved access and circulation
Environment
Reduced emission/improved air quality
due to reduced idling
North Temple Landfill waste
remediation
No immediate actions recommended. See future investment
potential in Longer Term Considerations.
Continued support of ongoing waste remediation
eAorts of the landfill . Assistance under this
program is limited to the cleanup of hazardous or
challenging materials that were not initially
identified in assessment of materials requiring
remediation.
After site cleanup, explore opportunities to use
the land for community amenities, programs, and
other environmentally supportive uses
Environment
Removal of toxic waste
Community & Health
Lower environmental toxins
Economic Development
Community amenities
UIPA Preferred Scenario
Salt Lake City Council
March 24, 2026
Area Context
2
→UIPA area covers
approximately 16,000 acres in
northwest Salt Lake City and
parts of northern West Valley
City and Magna City.
→Baseline study covers the
portion of the UIPA
jurisdictional land within Salt
Lake City.
Community Engagement
3
Community input was a key component of the Baseline Study. The following events and
activities informed the preparation of the study and supplemented technical data sources:
→Online survey
→Tabling events
→NWQ Review Group Meetings
→Transportation and Health Working Sessions
→Open House event with participatory activity
Engagement Key Takeaways
4
Topics of discussion from the range of engagement activities included:
→Environmental concerns like preservation and quality of wetlands and wildlife, urban
heat, air pollution, and water quality
→Public health concerns such as access to healthcare, food insecurity, housing
affordability, digital equity and climate risks that impact quality of life
→Concerns about public safety in the NWQ
→Impacts of development, expansion of warehouses and low-wage jobs
→Lack of transit options in the NWQ and traffic management concerns
→Workforce development topics such as access to jobs, training and career
opportunities
Baseline Resources & Methodology
5
Existing Plans
& Studies
Environmental
Data
Current Zoning
Census Data
Transportation
Data
Community &
Stakeholder
Engagement
Economic
Development TransportationEnvironmentCommunity &
Health
6
Preferred Scenario Report Key
→Economic Development
→Transportation
Key Findings
from the baseline study
Opportunities
for the preferred scenario
Preferred Scenario Investment & Policy Recommendations
→Immediate Actions
→Long Term Considerations
→Metrics
→Environment
→Community & Health
Baseline Study
7
SAMPLE FINDINGS
from the baseline study
SAMPLE OPPORTUNITIES
for the preferred scenario
Environment →Wetlands and floodplains exist throughout the
project area, with greater concentration south
of I-80.
→Water conservation measures implemented
since 2001 have reduced overall demand.
→Great Salt Lake water elevation is below healthy
levels.
→Westside neighborhoods are disproportionately
impacted by air pollution from industrial
operations and proximity to busy roads.
→Preserve and protect valuable wetlands and
sensitive lands.
→Partner to improve stormwater facilities in the area
that drain to the Great Salt Lake.
→Support water conservation measures to ensure
supply can support future demand.
→Support low water use developments.
→Explore opportunities for water leasing and
shepherding to the Great Salt Lake.
→Support technology enhancements that drive air
quality improvement.
→Support programs for public transit to reduce
commuter impacts.
Community &
Health
→The NWQ area and Westside neighborhoods
lack essential community facilities and services,
such as grocery, medical, and childcare services
for workers in the NWQ and residents.
→Concerns regarding public safety in the NWQ.
→Barriers to access healthcare, healthy food,
reliable transportation, social support.
→Support community facility development in
Westside neighborhoods.
→Partner with local colleges to provide education
opportunities to Westside area.
→Partner with SLC to increase public safety resources
in the NWQ.
→Seek opportunities to mitigate emissions
8
SAMPLE FINDINGS
from the baseline study
SAMPLE OPPORTUNITIES
for the preferred scenario
Economic
Development
→2/3 of the NWQ is vacant land, much of which is
zoned for industrial and manufacturing use
→Roughly 15% of the area is set aside for open
space, agriculture, or other uses
→The NWQ hosts more than 10,000 jobs, including:
34% in Transportation, 25% in Manufacturing, and
20% in professional/scientific/technical services
→Over half of the jobs do not require a college
degree
→Opportunities to attract businesses that provide
low barrier to entry and higher wage jobs
→Need to balance development with preserving
and sustaining environmental resources
→Support workforce training programs to enable
residents to train for future higher-skilled
opportunities
Transportation →NWQ lacks direct transit service and existing
transit service is primarily oriented around peak
commuting trips.
→Increased truck traffic will lead to accelerated
breakdown of pavement conditions.
→Multi-hour roadway delays at blocked at-grade
rail crossings occur along Union Pacific lines near
I-15 and I-80.
→Daily freight-train movement is expected to rise
about 35% by 2045.
→Partner to improve transit access to job sites in
the area.
→Support upgrades/separate train crossing to
mitigate conflict and delays.
→Partner to address safety concerns from increased
truck traffic.
→Work with UDOT, SLC Transportation, and others
to plan for resurfacing and other maintenance
projects.
Priority Investments
9
Preferred Scenario Recommendation Immediate Investment Actions
Partner with Utah Department of Natural Resources to
support Great Salt Lake wetland conservation.
Provide a portion of the tax differential to support wetland
restoration in and around the Northwest Quadrant
Public safety partnership with Salt Lake City departments
to address public safety concerns and provide adequate
resources.
Provide a portion of the tax differential to support public safety
improvements
Partner with Salt Lake City to develop and implement
programs that support water conservation.
Provide a portion of the tax differential to support expansion of Salt
Lake City’s water usage assessment program.
Partner with local businesses, non-profits, or other
organizations to address health-related disparities.
Partner with Community Organizations to use a portion of the tax
differential to support capacity building initiatives
Partner with organizations to support education and
workforce training.
Provide a portion of the tax differential to support educational
partners with workforce training
Partner with Utah Transit Authority (UTA) or others to
expand vanpool or other transit opportunities in the
Northwest Quadrant.
Provide a portion of the tax differential toward vanpool expansion
and/or on-demand transit service for Westside neighborhoods to
businesses within the NWQ
Priority Policy Actions
10
Preferred Scenario Recommendation Immediate Policy Actions
Partner with Salt Lake City to develop and implement
programs that support water conservation.
Through UIPA’s property tax rebate incentive, provide business
incentives to new or expanding companies for water efficiency
improvements for interior (industrial processes) and exterior
(landscaping).
Provide support for truck parking and onsite queuing
within the Northwest Quadrant.
→Identify opportunities for truck parking and onsite queuing.
→Explore amendments to development regulations to provide
adequate truck parking/queuing.
→Enforce current truck parking regulations.
Develop business incentives related to sustainable
building practices (energy efficiency, water conservation,
stormwater management, etc.).
Through UIPA’s property tax rebate incentive, provide additional
business incentives to new or expanding companies that
implement sustainable building practices
Partner with Salt Lake City to improve stormwater
facilities, discharge treatment and overall water quality.
Through UIPA’s property tax rebate incentive, provide business
incentives to new or expanding companies to assist businesses
with implementation of stormwater best management practices.
Partner with Salt Lake City International Airport (SLCIA) to
attract air cargo shippers to the Northwest Quadrant and
identify and implement efficiency opportunities.
→Continue partnerships and discussions with SLCIA related to air
cargo efficiency within existing cargo capacity.
→Become actively involved in the region's cargo community.
→Leverage strategic partnerships with NWQ and regional
businesses.
Long Term Recommendations
11
Preferred Scenario Recommendation Long Term Considerations
Provide support for rail crossing improvements.
→Continue to provide a portion of the tax differential to fund
Trainfo, including potential to expand locations
→Work with Salt Lake City and UDOT to identify opportunities to
advance capital improvement projects including separated rail
crossings, signal upgrades, and queue management
→Integrate upgrades into long-term freight and mobility plans
North Temple Landfill waste remediation
→Continued support of ongoing waste remediation efforts of the
landfill. Assistance under this program is limited to the cleanup
of hazardous or challenging materials that were not initially
identified in assessment of materials requiring remediation.
→After site cleanup, explore opportunities to use the land for
community amenities, programs, and other environmentally
supportive uses.
Advance Recommendations
→Advance recommendations through additional discussions and formalized agreements with
partners
Tracking Metrics
→Regular (i.e., quarterly, annual) reports from Partners that receive a portion of tax differential
→UIPA internal tracking on policy implementation and partner engagement
Ongoing UIPA Community Engagement
→Annual State of the Port to report on port activities
→Town Hall meetings to facilitate community discussion
→Presence at community events in the region
Next Steps
Item E8
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM:Allison Rowland, Senior Policy Analyst
DATE:March 24, 2026
RE: FUNDING ALLOCATIONS FOR FEDERAL HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT GRANTS AND CITY FUNDING OUR FUTURE HOUSING PROGRAMS
MOTION 1 – CLOSE AND DEFER
I move that the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council Meeting.
MOTION 2 – CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING
I move that the Council continue the public hearing to a future Council Meeting.
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM:Allison Rowland, Senior Policy Analyst
DATE:March 24, 2026
RE: FUNDING ALLOCATIONS FOR FEDERAL HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT GRANTS AND CITY FUNDING OUR FUTURE HOUSING PROGRAMS
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
Each year the Council is responsible for allocating millions of dollars in grants from the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) among local organizations that serve Salt Lake City residents. The
organizations are primarily non-profits that specialize in providing services to the most economically vulnerable
City residents. For Fiscal Year 2026-27 (FY27), just over $8.9 million dollars is expected to flow from four main
HUD programs—Community Development Block Grants (CDBG); Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG); the
HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME); and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS
(HOPWA)—through the Division of Housing Stability to community service providers selected by the Council.
In addition, beginning this year, the City’s annual Funding Our Future (FOF) housing program will also form
part of this annual allocation process. As part of the FY2025-26 budget, the Council approved nearly $2.4
million in FOF housing funding, which will be available to local non-profit service providers for housing
activities. During the budget process, the Council opted to provide the bulk of these housing funds for Tenant-
based Housing Assistance as well as Equity and Homeownership Assistance. Details on the proposed funding
that make up the totals listed below can be found in Attachment C1.
Estimated FY27 Housing Funds
Source Grant Total
Community Development Block Grants $5,118,278
Emergency Solutions Grants $299,065
HOME Investment Partnership Program $2,542,913
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS $972,032
Federal
Funds
Subtotal $8,932,288
Equity and Homeownership Assistance $350,000
Tenant-based Housing Assistance $2,020,500City Funds
Subtotal $2,370,500
Grand Total $11,302,788
Schedule:
Set Date: March 10, 2026
Briefing 1 and Public Hearing: March 24, 2026
Briefing 2: April 7, 2026
Briefing 3: April 14, 2026 (if needed)
Action: April 21, 2026
Goal of the briefing: Discuss the Council’s federal and local housing funding priorities, ask questions about
applications, and ultimately, award funding to eligible programs and projects.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. Does the Council have any questions about the funding recommendations from the Advisory Board and the
Mayor?
2. Would Council Members like to suggest any potential funding shifts among applications? As a reminder,
some categories have percentage caps on the total amount awarded, so additional funds cannot be shifted
to them. Instead, funds can only be shifted among uses within that category (Public Services and
Administrative categories).
ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The Funding Recommendation Process. The Council bases its selection of final HUD and FOF awards on
information from the Division of Housing Stability (which is part of CAN, the Department of Communities and
Neighborhoods), combined with the reviews and recommendations of the Community Development and Capital
Improvement Program (CDCIP) resident advisory board, and the Mayor. These recommendations are presented
in Attachment C1. An additional source of information is the public hearing held during a Formal Meeting early
in the deliberation process.
1.Recommendations for the Council. In preparation for the Council’s decisions on award
amounts to specific organizations, each application receives a score and a funding
recommendation from the CDCIP Advisory Board. These scores and recommendations are
provided to the Mayor, who adds funding recommendations of her own. Attachment C2 shows
each FY27 application ranked by score within each program category. These scores are
calculated by combining the advisory board’s raw score with City staff’s administrative and risk
assessment scores.
The Advisory Board also provides recommendations for funding contingencies for Federal grants, which
are applied in the event that actual funding available is more or less than estimated. These contingencies
are listed further below. They are also subject to Council approval, and are necessary because the final
number is not known until after the Council is required to adopt its allocations.
Additional details for applications for all four annual HUD grants are provided in Attachment C1. These
details include project and program descriptions and prior-year award amounts for returning
applications.
2.Competitive Process. Typically, the combined amount of total funding requested by
applicants significantly exceeds available funds. For FY27, requests total 154% of available
funding with $12.3 million requested, and an estimated $8.9 million available (see table below).
These funding amounts combine entitlement (new) funding, recaptured funds, and anticipated
program income. HUD has not yet confirmed the City’s final award amounts, so at this stage the
City works with estimates of available funding that are based on the previous year’s amounts.
Estimated FY27 Available Funding versus Requests
Program
Available
Funds*
Total
Requests
Requests as
Share of
Available Funds
CDBG $5,118,278 $7,814,006 153%
HOME $2,542,913 $2,636,507 104%
HOPWA $972,032 $1,025,479 105%
ESG $299,065 $780,142 261%
FOF $2,370,500 $5,198,897 219%
Total $11,302,788 $17,455,031 154%
3.Minimum Funding Threshold. The minimum funding threshold for HUD Grant applicants
is $50,000 annually, in conformance with best practices. This floor was changed for FY26 for
the new five-year Consolidated Plan and future Annual Action Plans.
Overview of FY27 Funding Recommendations.
1.Mayoral versus Board Recommendations. As in most other years, the Advisory Board and the
Mayor agree on the great majority of their recommendations for FY27. The only difference between
them is for the two items listed below. See Attachment C2 for the FY 2026-27 Recommendations by
score.
CDBG #14 and #20. The Board recommends fully funding the $207,412 requested for
CDBG #14 Wasatch Homeless Health Care, Inc. (DBA Fourth Street Clinic), while the
Mayor recommends using $50,000 of that amount for CDBG #20 Fit to Recover.
2.Disqualified Applications. No applications were determined to be ineligible this year.
3.Returning Project Applications Not Recommended for FY27 Funding. There are five
returning applications that received grant awards last year but did not receive a funding
recommendation this year.
CDBG#22. International Rescue Committee, ESL & Financial Readiness. Requested
$60,000.
CDBG#27. Wasatch Community Gardens, Green Team Job Training. Requested $50,000.
ESG#10. The Road Home, Rapid Re-housing. Requested $100,000
FOF#3. SL Neighborhood Housing, Down Payment Assistance. Requested $262,500.
FOF#21. First Step House, Housing Case Management. Requested $679,513.
FOF#22. The Road Home, Landlord Assurance. Requested $185,246.
4.New Applications. This year there are ten funding applications which are recommended
which did not request funding from the same category last year. Note that some of these
applications are for new programs that would be offered by returning organizations.
CDBG#17. South Valley Services, Case Management. Recommended for $60,000.
CDBG#18. Big Brothers Big Sisters of Utah, Site-based Mentoring. Recommended for
$50,000.
ESG#8. YWCA of Utah, Housing Stability Through Survivor-Centered Case Management.
Recommended for $60,000.
HOME#4. Community Development Corporation of Utah, Emeril Avenue Apartments.
Recommended for $200,000.
HOME#5. Community Development Corporation of Utah, Community Development Land
Trust. Recommended for $400,000.
HOPWA#2. Housing Connect, Housing Assistance. Recommended for $737,508.
HOPWA#3. Utah Community Action, FY26 SLC HOPWA. Recommended for $205,363.
FOF#11. Family Support Center, Transitional Housing, Child & Family Support at LifeStart
Village. Recommended for $76,200. (Recommended for less than requested this year.)
FOF#13. Wasatch Community Gardens, Green Team Case Management. Recommended
for $52,600. (Recommended for less than requested this year.)
5.Projects Recommended for More Funding than was Requested. One application, for
Funding Our Future funds, received recommendations from both the Board and the Mayor for
more funding than they had requested. Housing Stability Division staff confirmed with the
organization that they can make use of the additional funding amount.
FOF#1. Community Development Corporation of Utah, Homebuyer Cohort and Matched
Savings. Requested $100,000; recommended for $150,000.
6.Organizations with Multiple Applications. Some organizations submit a single
application for a program for which they seek funding from multiple funding sources. Others
submit multiple applications for different programs which are narrowly tailored to each funding
source. Organizations with multiple applications are listed alphabetically in Attachment C3,
with total funding requested and the recommended award amounts.
Sources of Annual Funds. Grants offered through HUD provide substantial funding amounts to local
organizations that serve people with low- and moderate-income levels; people experiencing or on the verge of
homelessness; potential homeowners; and people with AIDS/HIV who qualify for affordable housing. Most of
the funds are “passed through” the City to specific recipients or programs, including several programs that are
administered by the City through an annual competitive grant process.
FOF Housing funds, which are allocated during the annual budget process, come from the City’s ½-cent local
sales tax increment. This source also provides some of the funding for Transit, Streets, Public Lands
Maintenance and Public Safety. Adding Funding Our Future dollars to the allocation process does increase the
City’s flexibility in responding to applications, since Federal guidelines do not apply to FOF dollars. Still, this
practice may increase challenges in the future if the City decides to divert FOF dollars to other uses (as allowed)
and organizations have come to rely on them.
For FY27, the Division of Housing Stability estimates that the total amount available in HUD funding for use in
housing and related activities is $8.9 million. These grants are considered “entitlement” funds—that is, Federal
money provided on a recurring basis, with amounts linked to formulas that consider population and other
demographic variables. In addition, the amount available to the City also varies each year because it draws not
only from annual funding, but also recaptured funds, and program income. The total estimate here is the sum of
the grants all three funding sources (see below).
1.New Funding (FY27 HUD Award). Because the precise amount of new grants is typically not
determined before the Council discussion and allocation process, the Division of Housing Stability
provides estimates based on awards from the previous funding year. The funding amounts are updated
by the Division once final notification is received from HUD, and these are adjusted for each grantee
based on contingencies approved by the Council as part of the allocation process (see below).
Approximately $5,333,355 in new funds is estimated to be available through the four HUD programs for
FY27.
Estimated FY27 HUD Awards (New Funding)
Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)$3,250,831
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)$972,032
HOME Investment Partnership Program $817,318
Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG)$293,174
Total $5,333,355
2.Recaptured Funds. At the close of each HUD program year, once agreements expire or
projects are completed, funds available for “recapture” are identified. This occurs when, for
example, a project is completed under budget, contracts expire before funds are used, or a
project or program is somehow unsuccessful. The City can use these funds in the next round of
allocations, subject to federal requirements, eligibility criteria, and limitations of the original
federal funding source. They are not allowed to be used for City administration and planning
activities, or for CDBG Public Services programs. For FY27, recaptured funds total $1,848,933,
significantly more than the $772,000 recaptured in FY26. Details of specific programs, activities
and funding amounts can be found on page 5 of the transmittal.
Estimated FY27 Recaptured Funding Available
HOME Investment Partnership Program $925,595
Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)$917,447
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)$0
Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG)$5,891
Total $1,848,933
In response to a staff question, Housing Stability explained the unusually high level of recaptured funds
for FY27 as follows:
“A major factor in the increase was the implementation of new federal regulations,
particularly the Build America, Buy America Act, which requires projects receiving
federal funding above certain thresholds to purchase American-made construction
materials. This requirement has increased some project costs.
As a result, several programs from the 2024–2025 program year, including ICAST
and Alliance House, later chose not to use their awarded funds.
We consistently encourage awardees to spend their funds fully and as quickly as
possible. To support this, we have begun working with a University of Utah
program to develop a comprehensive dataset of American manufacturers,
prioritizing those in Utah and the Mountain region. This resource will help
programs more easily identify compliant suppliers. Additionally, Housing Stability
intends to incorporate more detailed explanations of these new federal
requirements in our future grant application trainings, so that potential applicants
will be fully aware of the potential setbacks and costs associated with certain
projects.”
3.Program Income. Several income-generating programs are funded by CDBG and HOME,
including downpayment assistance, first-time homebuyer mortgages, and certain home
rehabilitation programs. The amount collected fluctuates from year to year. All program income
generated by HUD funding must be spent before any entitlement (annual) funds are drawn
down, so the City typically allocates anticipated program income at the same time as annual
entitlement funding. Contingencies are built in for differences between the estimates and actual
revenue, since the amount of program income allocated is based on estimates of revenue not yet
received.
For FY27, the estimated amount of Program Income available for allocation is $1,750,000. The Division
of Housing Stability attributes the 9% increase from FY26 primarily to loan repayments for over $9
million in HUD funding which was loaned to affordable housing developers in recent years, which is
now beginning to be repaid. For this reason, the increases in program income are likely to continue for
some years.
The Division also notes that, as was the case in FY26, “Due to changes at the federal level, evolving
program requirements, and increased administrative workload, we are requesting to utilize the full
20% [of program income] allowable for administration to ensure the City has sufficient resources to
manage these programs effectively.” Because administrative costs for Funding Our Future are budgeted
separately, as part of the annual City budget process, and include funding for one FTE position, FOF
funds are used only for client services and community funding, and not for administrative expenses.
Estimated FY27 Program Income Available
Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)$950,000
HOME Investment Partnership Program $800,000
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)$0
Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG)$0
Total $1,750,000
4.Funding Our Future (FOF) Housing Funds. The amount of FOF funding designated for
housing is set each year by the Council during the previous year’s budget discussions, so
estimates are not needed. As mentioned earlier, the FOF funds are the product of the City’s ½-
cent local sales tax increment which also includes funding for Transit, Streets, Public Lands
Maintenance and Public Safety. Additional FOF Housing funds are transferred to the
Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA) for their annual notice of funding availability, which
the Council reviews and approves in their capacity as CRA Board Members.
FY26 FOF Housing Funds Allocated
Equity and Homeownership Assistance $350,000
Tenant-based Housing Assistance $2,020,500
Total $2,370,500
Estimated FY27 Funding by Program Category and Source. The City allocates all available funds (new,
recaptured, program income, and FOF) through an open and competitive process. Applications are evaluated
based on HUD and City requirements and how well they align with the City’s Five-Year Consolidated Plan goals
(see below), as well as the City’s Housing SLC Plan goals. The Council considers all public comments received,
along with the recommendations from the Mayor and the CDCIP advisory board before making funding
decisions. All HUD funding decisions made by the Council are subject to HUD approval. Trends in program
funding for Salt Lake City over recent years can be found below.
Estimated FY27 Funding
Program Estimated Total
CDBG $5,118,278
HOME $2,542,913
HOPWA $972,032
ESG $299,065
FOF $2,370,500
Total $11,302,788
1.Community Development Block Grants (CDBG). This program provides annual grants to states,
cities, and counties to create safe and affordable housing opportunities, expand neighborhood
transportation and economic opportunities, invest in social service programs, and more. As noted in the
chart above, in FY27 approximately $5,118,278 is available for allocation to CDBG programs. CDBG
grants focus on community development with an emphasis on physical improvements. CDBG funds are
allocated to organizations in three categories, listed below. City administration fees are limited to 20% of
the annual grant award and program income received during the program year.
Housing.
Neighborhood Improvements: This category funds transportation and economic
development infrastructure within the designated target area (see Attachment C4 for map).
Public Services: This category focuses on services for individuals in need, and not
necessarily on physical improvements, in contrast to other CDBG categories, and it is
typically the most competitive category. Its total amount is limited to 15% of the annual
CDBG award, and the recommendations for funding requests from the CDCIP Board and
Mayor add up to this maximum. This means that if the Council would like to allocate money
to any application beyond the Mayor’s recommended funding in this category, those funds
must be shifted from another Public Services application.
2.HOME Investment Partnership (HOME). This is the only grant program entirely focused
on expanding the supply of quality, affordable housing for low-to-moderate-income residents. It
allows states and municipalities to fund a wide range of activities, such as building, buying, or
rehabilitating affordable housing for rent or homeownership. It also may provide direct rental
assistance to renters. As noted in the chart above, approximately $2,542,913 is available for
FY27 allocation to CDBG programs. HOME funds are allocated to organizations providing
services in two categories (below). City administration fees are limited to 10% of the annual
grant award and program income received during the program year.
Standard HOME Funds.
Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDO). This program reserves 15% of
the annual HOME grant award for certified projects which create or develop affordable
rental or homebuyer housing. Rental assistance, homeowner rehabilitation, and down
payment assistance are not eligible expenses. For this reason, the Housing Stability Division
works with the Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA) to include these funds in the CRA’s
annual Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) process for funding affordable housing
development. The Community Development Corporation of Utah is seeking certification as
a CHDO in Salt Lake City, but the Housing Stability Division reports that expanding the
number of CHDOs remains challenging, and that other areas of the country have similarly
struggled to meet the certification criteria.
3.Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA). The HOPWA Program is the
only Federal program dedicated to the housing needs of people living with HIV/AIDS. It
provides funding for
projects that address the needs of individuals living with HIV/AIDS and their families. As noted in the
chart above, approximately $972,032 is available in FY27 for allocation to CDBG programs. City
administration fees are limited to 3% of the annual grant award.
4.Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG). The ESG program focuses on preventing homelessness
and providing services to individuals who are experiencing homelessness. Examples are street
outreach, emergency shelter, prevention efforts, and rapid re-housing assistance. As noted in
the chart above, in FY27 approximately $299,065 is available for allocation to ESG programs.
These funds are allocated to organizations providing services in two categories (below). City
administration fees are limited to 7.5% of the annual grant award.
ESG Part 1: Street Outreach and Emergency Shelter (limited to 60% of the total annual
grant award).
ESG Part 2: Homelessness Prevention, Rapid Re-Housing, and Homeless Management
Information Systems.
5.Funding Our Future (FOF) Housing Funds. As alluded to earlier, in each annual budget
process the Council sets the amount of FOF housing funding and also chooses general categories
for its use. For FY26, the Council opted to provide these housing funds for two categories:
Tenant-based Housing Assistance, and Equity and Homeownership Assistance.
Funding Contingencies. Annual HUD program funding is allocated by the Council on the basis of estimates
of funding that has not yet been received. For this reason, contingencies are needed to compensate for
differences between estimates and actual grant amounts received. Each year the advisory board recommends
specific contingencies, which are summarized in the table below. The Council may wish to review the
contingencies listed below and identify any changes they wish to make in case HUD’s confirmation of final
funding amounts is not available by the scheduled vote on April 21.
FY27 Council Funding Contingencies
If MORE funding is available If LESS funding is available
CDBG
Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award
to program administration. Allocate 15%
of the annual award and estimated 2026-
27 CDBG Program Income to Public
Services. Add additional funding to the
highest-scoring applications up to and in
excess of the full ask before moving to the
next highest-scoring application. As much
as practicable, round to the nearest
$1,000 or $10,000.
Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program
administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and
estimated 2026-27 CDBG Program Income to Public Services.
Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities down to the
minimum amount required to run the program, moving up
from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you reach the top
of the programs and funding still needs to be decreased,
remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and reallocate the
funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's
recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round to the
nearest $1,000 or $10,000.
ESG
Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to
program administration. Do not exceed
the 60% Part 1 funding cap. Add
additional funding to the highest-scoring
applications up to or in excess of the full
ask before moving to the next highest-
scoring application. As much as
practicable, round to the nearest $1,000.
Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program
administration. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring
activities down to the minimum amount required to run the
program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity.
If you reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to
be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and
reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the
board's recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round
to the nearest $1,000.
HOME
Allocate 10% of the annual HOME award
to program administration. Allocate 15%
of the annual award for the CHDO Set-
Aside. Add additional funding to the
highest-scoring applications up to or in
excess of the full ask before moving to the
next highest-scoring application. As much
as practicable, round to the nearest
$1,000 or $10,000.
Allocate 10% of the annual HOME award to program
administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of
the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public
Services. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities
down to the minimum amount required to run the program,
moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you
reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to be
decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and
reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the
board's recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round
to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000.
HOPWA
Allocate 3% of the annual HOPWA award
to program administration. Add
additional funding to the highest-scoring
applications up to the full ask before
moving to the next highest-scoring
application. As much as practicable,
round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000.
Allocate 3% of the annual HOPWA award to program
administration. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring
activities down to the minimum amount required to run the
program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity.
If you reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to
be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and
reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the
board's recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round
to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000.
FOF
Add additional funding to the highest-
scoring applications up to the full ask
before moving to the next highest-scoring
application. As much as practicable,
round to the nearest $100 or $1,000.
Because the FOF funding amount is appropriated in the
previous year’s City budget, contingencies only arise when an
applicant declines or withdraws from an award. This inevitably
makes more funding available to be redistributed to other
applicants, rather than less.
FY27 HUD Entitlement Allocations and the FY25-29 Consolidated Plan. HUD requires that the City’s
longer-run funding goals and strategies for using Federal funds be guided by a five-year Consolidated Plan. The
updated Plan, which was drafted by the Division of Housing Stability for the period FY2025 to 2029, was
adopted by the Council in 2025. The plan spells out the goals and strategies that determine eligibility for HUD
grant funding and identifies geographic target areas for the CDBG neighborhood improvement category funding.
A city which does not fund applications that advance the five-year plan could be considered as
“underperforming,” which could lead to reductions in future grant awards and audits of the program. The target
area delineates the geographic boundaries for spending CDBG funding on economic development and public
infrastructure improvements (Attachment C4). Focusing federal grants in specific target areas is intended to
maximize community impact and stimulate investments from other entities in these neighborhoods. These
applications are included in the CDBG Neighborhood Improvements category on the funding log. Examples of
these project types include small business façade improvement grants, public transit improvements, and
creation of ADA ramps. FOF funding is not subject to HUD geographic restrictions and may be used anywhere in
the City.
Trends in City Housing Funding. As seen in the chart below, HUD Grant funding remained relatively stable
through recent years. However, from FY25 to FY27, the total amount of funding available for CDBG grants grew
by 56% and HOME grants more than doubled. There are two main sources for these changes:
A sharp increase over FY26 in the amount of recaptured funds in CBDG and HOME funding
categories. (See section on recaptured funds above.)
The City’s policy change which includes the past year’s program income in the current year’s
CBDG and HOME funding for allocation.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment C1. Recommended Uses of FY2026-27 Federal Funding and FY2025-26 FOF Housing Funding.
Attachment C2. FY2026-27 Program Recommendations by Score.
Attachment C3. Organizations with Multiple Applications.
Attachment C4. Target Area Map for CDBG Neighborhood Improvements (2025-2029 Consolidated Plan).
$0
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27*
CDBG
ESG
HOME
HOPWA
All data provided by the Housing Stability Division.
*Allocation for FY27 is an estimate based on previous years' funding.
YEAR
FY25-26 Request 650,166.20$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 650,166.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 650,166.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 215,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 215,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 215,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 720,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 720,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 720,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 400,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 400,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 400,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
SALT LAKE CITY 2026-2027 HUD & 2025-2026 FOF RECOMMENDATIONS
Funding Log Supplement
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
#AGENCY/PROJECT NAMES
PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS
REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION CON PLAN
ALIGNMENTAMOUNT
City Adminsitration
1
Salt Lake City Corporation Staff
Funding for salaries and operational expenses to administer and monitor the federal grants,
and to conduct the community processes. Funding may be utilized by:
- Attorney's Office
- Finance Department
- Housing Stability Division
$830,116
Yes
$667,155
Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's
Office
$679,552
$2,176,823
Neighborhood, Housing and Infrastructure
2
YWCA Utah
While many housing programs are designed for families or general populations, single
survivors, particularly those without children, are frequently excluded from family-focused
transitional housing models. This project fills that gap by creating 24 self-contained studio
apartments that provide autonomy and stability while connecting residents to trauma-
informed support.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: $155,127.96 (41% of awarded funds)
Did not apply
Yes
$221,000
Transitional Housing Conversion
Did not apply
$221,000
3
NIS Team
This program provides façade improvements to businesses in the West Side Target Area. This
includes any work on the outside of the building that promotes community engagement or a
welcoming atmosphere. Priority points are given to projects that are increasing their ADA
accessibility or adding a mural to their façade. Salt Lake City provides a grant of up to $50,000
to do façade work. The business owner can contribute 25% to the project to earn a priority
point.
$600,000
Yes$708,000
Neighborhood Business Improvement Program $925,000
$2,233,000
4
Habitat for Humanity
The Habitat Critical Home Repair Program (CHiRP) tackles urgent housing needs by delivering
essential repairs that enhance safety, accessibility, and energy efficiency. Projects may include
structural repairs that strengthen a home’s integrity—such as roofing, plumbing, and electrical
work—as well as accessibility upgrades like wheelchair ramps, widened doorways, and
bathroom modifications for seniors or individuals with disabilities. In addition, energy-saving
improvements like weatherization, energy-efficient windows, and HVAC replacements help
lower utility costs and extend the life of the home.
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: N/A
$450,000
Yes
Did not apply
Critical Home Repair Program
Did not apply
$450,000
FY25-26 Request 402,500.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 402,500.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 402,500.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 315,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 315,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 315,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 900,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 900,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 900,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 300,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 300,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 300,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 460,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 460,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 460,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 750,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 125,488.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 125,488.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 240,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
5
Salt Lake City Neighborhood Housing Services
(DBA NeighborWorks)
The primary goal of this project is to help current homeowners stay in their homes and
preserve their equity, addressing the community's critical need for housing stability. They plan
to accomplish this by offering financial assistance for home repairs, empowering homeowners
to maintain and improve their properties, and allowing them to continue living in their homes
safely and comfortably. These funds will support essential repairs that might otherwise be
unaffordable, preventing issues such as deterioration, safety hazards, and potential
foreclosure.
FY22-FY25 Unspent funds: $231,437.75 (20% of awarded funding)
$200,000
Yes
$358,000
Home Ownership Promotion Services
$406,267
$964,267
6
Odyssey House
This funding will be used to address facility improvements to Odyssey House's Adolescent
residential facility. The improvements are all geared towards the comfort of the clients and
lowering utility expenses through a new roof, a makeup air unit, and by installing air handler
unit that will efficiently distribute air throughout the facility.
FY22-FY25 Unspent funds: $266.75 (<1% of awarded funding)
$250,000
Yes
$80,000
Adolescent Residential Facility Upgrades
$0
$330,000
7
Assist Inc.
ASSIST's program serves households at or below 80% area median income, and specifically
focuses on persons with physical and cognitive disabilities and aging/senior households. They
provide critical home repairs and strategic design interventions at no cost to income-qualifying
households. Activities include: roof repair/replacement; repair/replacement of malfunctioning
electrical, HVAC, and plumbing systems; environmental remediation (radon, extermination);
minor structural repairs; and accessibility retrofits.
FY22-FY25 Unspent funds: $122,744.54 (5% of awarded funding)
$650,000
Yes$747,547
Emergency Home Repair, Accessibility, &
Community Design
$926,766
$2,324,313
8
First Step House
These funds will be used to make the following improvements to the treatment facility at 411
N Grant Street: replace all flooring; repaint building interior; replace 20 inoperable/water
damaged window;, replace original interior door frames on the north side of the building;
repair or replace trim, molding, and wainscotting; replace landscape sprinkler system and
remove some turf.
FY22-FY25 Unspent funds: $473,577.34 (21% of awarded funding)
$280,000
Yes
$290,000
Building Improvements
$379,703
$949,703
9
NIS Team
FTB helps preserve affordable housing and upkeep the current housing stock in SLC by
remediating unreinforced masonry (URM) homes. There are over 30,000 URM buildings in SLC.
A URM is a brick home that was built before 1970 and poses a significant seismic risk since the
roof is not connected to the walls. FTB connects the roof to the walls with helical pins and
metal strapping as well as chimney bracing. This provides additional time for the individuals
who may be in the home to escape during an earthquake. Although this improvement is not
meant to save the structure, it was found that during the large earthquake in 2020 the
majority of the homes that had this work done did not collapse.
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $633,737.41 (22% of awarded funds)
$728,040
Yes
$220,000
Fix the Bricks (FTB)
Did not apply
$948,040
10
Community Development Corporation of Utah
CDCU’s Making Homeownership a Reality program creates a cohort-based pathway to
sustainable ownership for LMI households. Participants engage in six months of HUD-certified
mortgage readiness. Peer support and accountability ensure stronger outcomes, with each
graduate leaving “mortgage-ready” and equipped with a personalized plan. Graduates gain
trust homes.
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $173,209.29 (39% of awarded funds)
Did not apply
Yes
Did not apply
Homebuyer Education and Downpayment
Assistance
Did not apply
$0
11
Upwards Care, Inc.
The Boost Program serves low- and very low-income microenterprise owners who run
entrepreneurs, many of whom are the sole or primary income earners in their households.
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: N/A
$0
Yes
$0
Boost Program
$0
$0
FY25-26 Request 60,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 60,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 60,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 80,500.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 80,500.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 80,500.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 207,412.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 207,412.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 157,412.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 50,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 50,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 50,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 50,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 60,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 60,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 60,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
Public Services
12
Salt Lake Donated Dental Services
This project targets the homeless and those experiencing extreme poverty, providing them
with access to dental services. They create a Dental Home for the underserved in our
community. Considerable time is spent educating each patient on the importance of a healthy
smile and how to maintain good oral health. Program services are free to the homeless and
those living in poverty.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: $0 (spent all awarded funds during this time frame)
$55,000
Yes
$55,000
Community Dental Project
$49,692
$159,692
13
YWCA Utah
This project will support the continued expansion of housing-focused services at the Salt Lake
Area Family Justice Center. Funding will allow YWCA Utah to maintain and deepen its survivor-
centered, housing-first response to domestic violence. They anticipate an even greater
funds become available.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: $155,127.96 (41% of awarded funds)
$30,000
Yes
$30,000
Housing and Stability Access
$56,249
$116,249
14
Wasatch Homeless Healthcare Inc. (DBA Fourth
Street Clinic)
The HHoT program addresses social determinants of health, including access to healthcare
and housing stability. The team works with residents of Magnolia and Palmer Court
apartments housed within the last twelve months, as well as tenants at risk of eviction,
focusing particularly on those with behavioral health needs. Program staff conduct
individualized assessments to determine health, behavioral health, and housing support
needs and develop shared care plans using a multi-team, multidisciplinary approach. The
team provides follow-up and ongoing support to ensure residents maintain housing stability
and improve overall well-being
$112,000
Yes
$33,000
Health and Housing Transition Team (HHoT)
$40,456
$185,456
15
The Road Home
Housing Navigators focus on guiding clients through the housing search process, assisting with
rental applications, communicating with landlords and property managers, coordinating unit
viewings, and supporting move-in logistics. Meanwhile, Case Managers work alongside clients
process. CMs also help reduce barriers by connecting clients to benefits, employment
opportunities, and other services that promote long-term stability.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: $4,211.04 (less than 1% of awarded funds)
$30,000
Yes
$66,000
Housing Staffing
$105,450
$201,450
16
THRIVE Center for Survivors of Torture
THRIVE is the only organization that provides services to refugees who have been in the U.S.
for longer than 5 years, and the only low-barrier, culturally appropriate provider in Utah. Many
of their clients are under- or uninsured, making mainstream mental health services
inaccessible. Organization wide they will serve at least 320 individuals, and 30 specifically with
services, case management, medical advocacy, and psychiatry services.
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: N/A
$30,000
Yes
Did not apply
Integrated Services for Torture Survivors
Did not apply
$30,000
17
South Valley Services
The requested funds would be used to support the Shelter Director and the Community
Resource Center Director. Both Positions will undertake the following CDBG-funded activities:
them with system navigation, supporting life skills development, and securing long-term, safe,
stable housing) and Community Service Delivery (includes time spent providing one-on-one
supportive service delivery designed to increase survivors' access to essentials such as food,
healthcare, and affordable childcare)
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $19,254.60 (3% of awarded funds)
$0
Yes
$30,000
Case Management
$30,489
$60,489
FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 50,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 50,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 100,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 72,212.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 72,212.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor 50,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 72,486.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 60,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
18
Big Brothers Big Sisters of Utah
In this curriculum-based mentoring program, BBBSU staff facilitate programming for all
mentoring matches at a school or business office where they can meet their mentors and
learn about potential careers. The curriculum includes non-cognitive skills such as mental
health, gratitude, healthy relationships, skills to cope with bullying as well as specialized skills
such as financial literacy, nutrition, and internet safety.
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: N/A
$0
Yes
Did not apply
Site-based Mentoring
Did not apply
$0
19
The Road Home
The Road Home will utilize funds to support direct service staff at the Gail Miller Resource
Center. Funds will support frontline and facilities staff, including Housing Advocates and Case
Managers, who work to connect participants with housing and other community resources
while rapidly ending their housing crisis.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: $4,211.04 (less than 1% of awarded funds)
$30,000
Yes
$66,000
Gail Miller Resource Center (GMRC)
$105,450
$201,450
20
Fit to Recover
Funds from this grant will go towards transportation to and from the youth and homeless
youth and homeless programming, and equipment and supplies for these programs. Funds
from this grant will also be used to purchase food for community cooking classes attended by
the temporary residents of the Gail Miller Resource Center and Youth VOA.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A
Did not apply
Yes
Did not apply
Free Meals, Scholarships, & Recovery Resources
for Unhoused Adults and At-risk Youth
Did not apply
$0
21
First Step House
This program will address the lack of wraparound supportive services people often face when
exiting homelessness and substance use treatment. Case managers use assessments, one-on-
one counseling, and community connections to help clients transition to stable housing.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: $473,577.34 (21% of awarded funds)
$0
Yes
$113,000
Housing Case Management
$60,000
$173,000
22
International Rescue Committee
The program will enroll adult students in VESL programming which combines targeted
vocational English lessons with specialized training in workforce readiness, financial literacy,
and digital literacy, each delivered by the respective program area. VESL instruction will target
foundational English language skills and will be provided by TESOL-certified ESL teachers who
are already part of the IRC UT staff. Workforce Development staff will lead vocational skills and
job coaching, FinCap staff will deliver financial literacy and coaching, and both teams will
collaborate to integrate digital literacy into classroom practice.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: $30,489.00 (43% of awarded funds)
$40,000
Yes
$0
ESL & Financial Readiness
$30,489
$70,489
23
Catholic Community Services
The CCS Housing Locator will work with 200 clients who are prepared to move into their own
housing. Each client typically requires several meetings to go through the entire housing
location process, which can take several days to several weeks depending on unit availability,
how fast they hear back from landlords, and whether any last-minute obstacles crop up for
clients.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: $0.03 (less than 1% of awarded funds)
$0
Yes
$60,000
Housing Locator
$91,090
$151,090
24
Catholic Community Services
The Employment & Client Specialist provides different types of services to cater to the unique
circumstances and specific needs of each client with the goal of helping clients obtain living-
wage jobs. These services include helping students at the Kitchen Academy find externships
and providing ongoing employment support for up to one year after graduation from the
academy. They likewise work one-on-one with clients not enrolled in the Kitchen Academy and
hold job fairs twice a month.
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $0.03 (less than 1% of awarded funds)
$0
Yes
$60,000
Employment & Client Specialist
$91,090
$151,090
FY25-26 Request 55,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 240,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 60,321.58$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 150,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 215,842.84$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
25
Disability Law Center
This program helps level the playing field by ensuring that Utahns with disabilities, particularly
those from economically vulnerable backgrounds, have access to free legal advocacy and
representation. These services empower clients to challenge unfair treatment, request
necessary accommodations, and retain employment that supports their independence and
well-being. With continued funding, DLC will work to close the justice gap for low- and
moderate-income individuals and advance workplace equity across Utah.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A
Did not apply
Yes
Did not apply
Jobs for All
Did not apply
$0
26
Utah Community Action
This program will provide high-quality early childhood education to support academic,
physical, social, emotional, and all other aspects of development in a research-based model.
We also engage parents and caregivers in their child’s development, providing resources to
learn how to actively support their child’s education as well as participating in the case
management process to improve their overall stability and self-reliance.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: $24,682.66 (2% of awarded funds)
$0
Yes
Did not apply
Early Childhood Services
Did not apply
$0
27
Wasatch Community Gardens
The Job Training Green Team program directly addresses barriers to housing and employment
services by providing transitional employment, job training, housing support, and access to
healthy food.
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $0 (spent all awarded funds during this time frame)
$33,366
Yes$30,000
Green Team
$30,489
$93,855
28
English Skills Learning Center
This project seeks to improve economic stability by expanding career exploration and
Workplace English instruction at various partner sites within the service area. Companies
contract ESLC to provide general workplace English courses or ask for a focus on specific
outcomes, such as increasing safety performance in a warehouse or learning the English
needed to answer questions during an audit.
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $0 (spent all awarded funds during this time frame)
$0
Yes
Did not apply
Workplace English and Career Pathways for
Limited English Speakers
Did not apply
$0
29
Odyssey House
This program provides free bus passes for low- to extremely low-income clients. By giving
clients access to the public transit system, they support increased transportation accessibility
as well as helping clients attain life skills that will help them find long-term success and self-
sufficiency.
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $266.75 (less than 1% of awarded funds)
$0
Yes$155,173
Bus Passes
$30,000
$185,173
30
Women of the World
Women of the World supports women and their families in overcoming the steep barriers to
safe, stable housing. Case managers walk clients step-by-step through lease applications,
systems. They also help families secure rental and utility assistance to prevent eviction and
displacement. Flexible financial aid covers urgent costs such as housing application fees,
deposits, and first month’s rent—often the only barrier between a mother and her children
moving from homelessness into stable housing
FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A
Did not apply
Yes
Did not apply
Self-sufficiency Services
Did not apply
$0
31
Asian Association of Utah
The SOAR program will provide targeted housing stability services and case management for
survivors of human trafficking in Salt Lake City who are at risk of homelessness or already
experiencing housing instability. Specifically, the grant will support services such as rent
payments to prevent eviction, utility payments to prevent service cutoff, rent arrears, utilities,
application fees, late fees, deposit fees, administrative fees, eviction fees, and lease initiation
fees.
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $5,499.33 (17% of awarded funds)
$0
Yes
Did not apply
Stability, Opportunity, Assistance, & Resilience for
Survivors of Trafficking (SOAR)
$32,318
$32,318
FY25-26 Request 75,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 30,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 219,777.21$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 75,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 150,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 100,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
32
A Tall Order HomeInn Rio Grande
A Reentry Case Manager creates an Individual Participant Plan (IPP) with each participant that
includes all evidence-based screening tools and assessments. The IPP is a modified
biopsychosocial (BPS) document that provides comprehensive plans for housing, education,
employment, medical, and food assistance priorities.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A
Did not apply
Yes
Did not apply
Reentry Services Program
Did not apply
$0
33
Salt Lake American
The community-based Social Service Facilitator is available to on call 24/7 and to walk-ins to
the office to current of former Somali refugees who face language and cultural barriers in
conducting vital daily task or face emergency situations. This service consists of language
interpretation and/or translation and guidance through the process that is being dealt with in
the relevant situation.
FY22-25 Unpsent funds: $0 (spent all awarded funds during this time frame)
$0
Yes
$30,000
Refugee Services for Survival
$30,000
$60,000
34
Spy Hop Productions
Spy Hop will implement Phase 2 Productions’ Advanced Apprenticeship for young adults ages
19 to 25, providing structured, hands-on technical training in camera operation, lighting, and
sound. Apprentices will earn Utah Film Commission-endorsed certifications while contributing
to professional client projects, primarily serving small businesses and local nonprofits.
Activities include pre-production planning, production shoots, and post-production editing,
alongside mentorship from alumni professionals employed at Phase 2.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A
Did not apply
Yes
Did not apply
Advanced Apprenticeship
$0
$0
35
Asian Association of Utah
The Rental Assistance for Vulnerable Refugee and Immigrant Populations project will provide
targeted housing support exclusively to eligible households within municipal Salt Lake City
boundaries. The program will serve approximately 60 very low-income households (180
individuals), including homeless persons, refugees, immigrants, asylees, and illiterate adults.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: $5,499.33 (17% of awarded funds)
$0
Yes
Did not apply
Refugee Rental Assistance & Housing Stability
$32,318
$32,318
36
A Tall Order HomeInn Rio Grande
The Employment Initiative creates an Employment Action Plan using evidence-based screening
tools and assessments which determines priorities and intervention level. Participants will
complete the 90-day Employment Initiative and this includes Orientation, Education,
Application, and then Employment Placement.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A
Did not apply
Yes
Did not apply
Employment Initiative Program
Did not apply
$0
37
Odyssey House
This program provides stable housing for clients as they transition from residential treatment
to transitional housing. The transitional housing program allows clients to procure stable
housing while re-integrating into the community by teaching them life skills that will sustain
them beyond the program. Objectives in the program include: teaching life skills, rental
assistance, community partnerships, house meetings, recreational activities, budgeting, and
case-management support.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: $266.75 (less than 1% of awarded funds)
$0
Yes
$155,173
Transitional Housing
$30,000
$185,173
38
Advantage Services
Advantage Services will provide Supportive Employment opportunities up to $1500 in wages,
On the Job training, Job Coaching/Mentoring, Assistance in eliminating barriers to outside
employment, referrals to community partners, and Job development/placement to outside
employes.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: $0 (spent all awarded funds during this time frame)
$0
Yes
$63,164
Homeless Employment Program
Did not apply
$63,164
YEAR
FY25-26 Request 21,988.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 21,988.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 21,988.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 62,200.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 60,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 60,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 60,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 57,076.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 57,076.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 74,750.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 50,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 50,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 52,488.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT (ESG)
#AGENCY/PROJECT NAMES
PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS
REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION CON PLAN
ALIGNMENTAMOUNT
City Administration
1
Salt Lake City Corporation Staff
Funding for salaries and operational expenses to administer and monitor the federal grants,
and to conduct the community processes. Funding may be utilized by:
- Attorney's Office
- Finance Department
- Housing Stability Division
21,988.00$
Yes
22,396.00$
Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's
Office
22,732.00$
$45,128
ESG PART 1
2
Volunteers of America
The VOA’s Youth Resource Center (YRC) provides unaccompanied youth ages 15 - 22
experiencing or at risk of homelessness with emergency shelter, diversion, and housing-
focused case management. It provides immediate access to safe shelter, meals, and basic
housing through comprehensive housing case management. Support services include mental
health and medical care, legal assistance, employment services, and training & education
services.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 5.82% ($27,949.39 of awarded funds)
50,000.00$
Yes
49,739.00$
Youth Resource Center
30,408.00$
$80,147
3
First Step House
FSH’s Resource Center Program improves treatment access for shelter guests and unsheltered
a behavioral health team within the Gail Miller Resource Center, RCP helps bridge this gap to
homeless services and remove barriers such as benefits eligibility, record transfers, and
reluctance to engage in care. This approach ensures that people with co-occurring behavioral
health conditions, who are often overlooked by traditional systems, can access the services
necessary to achieve stability and reduces the reliance on emergency systems while
interrupting the cycle of recurring homelessness, and improving long-term housing and health
outcomes.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 17% ($339,888.32 of awarded funds)
30,000.00$
Yes
39,437.00$
Resource Center Program
40,636.00$
$80,073
4
Volunteers of America
The VOA’s Women’s Resource Center provides immediate access to shelter, support for long-
term housing stability, and individualized services to an at-risk population of women 18 and
older who face co-occurring challenges, including behavioral health conditions, domestic
violence, and chronic homelessness. Comprehensive services such as individualized case
management, access to health services, and connections to community resources ensure that
women are empowered to exit homelessness and achieve lasting self-reliance.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 5.82% ($27,949.39 of awarded funds)
34,141.00$
Yes
30,000.00$
Geraldine E. King Women's Resouce Center
30,408.00$
$60,408
5
Ruff Haven
Ruff Haven’s Street Outreach services are a vital component of insuring that unhoused
for companion animals allows individuals and families the ability to more quickly leave abusive
solutions. The program’s unique approach of assisting unhoused individuals and caring for
their companion animals allows Ruff Haven to educate unhoused individuals on how they can
access care for themselves without losing the emotional support of their pets.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: N/A
30,000.00$
Yes
-$
Ruff Haven Street Outreach
-$
$30,000
FY25-26 Request 50,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 80,500.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 60,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 60,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 158,256.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 50,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 50,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 100,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 120,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board -$
FY23-24 Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
6
Family Promise
As a shelter program designed specifically for families, FPSL provides a continuum of care
through its Emergency Shelter Program, Transitional Housing Program, and Graduate Services
Program. These services are tailored to help families not only exit homelessness but also
maintain long-term housing stability. By focusing on families—particularly those with young
children—FPSL fills a critical gap in Salt Lake City's homeless response system, particularly the
community needs for safe, family-appropriate shelter options, transitional support to bridge
the gap to permanent housing, and ongoing case management and wraparound services to
prevent recurrence.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 5.74% ($6,930.39 of awrded funds)
-$
Yes
30,000.00$
Fmaily Promise Direct Family Services
50,000.00$
$0
ESG PART 2
8
YWCA of Utah
YWCA’s program offers a comprehensive response to domestic violence-related homelessness
by integrating housing navigation, safety planning, financial assistance, and systems advocacy.
The program embeds case management within emergency shelter and transitional housing.
Case Managers provide the intensive, survivor-centered support required to overcome
challenges and expand pathways for survivors of domestic violence to access long-term
permanent housing solutions.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 41% ($155,127.96 of awarded funds)
-$
Yes-$
Housing Stability Through Survivor-Cenered Case
Management
-$
$0
9
Utah Community Action
UCA’s Rapid Re-Housing (RRH) program focuses on providing clients experiencing
homelessness with re-housing assistance and addresses the gap of assisting a population that
is shelter resistant. It has been operating for 10 years out of the Weigand Center, assisting
populations at risk of eviction or experiencing homelessness who have experienced a recent
crisis. This funding will support the efforts outlined in Salt Lake City’s Anti-Displacement
Strategy, including protecting clients from displacement, and strengthening partnerships and
collaborations to impact this program.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 1.9% ($24,682.66 of awarded funds)
$67,045
Yes
$34,368
UCA FY 26 SLC ESG
$31,853
$133,266
10
The Road Home
TRH’s Rapid Re-Housing (RRH) program provides short-term rental assistance and intensive
case management to very low-income households who have experienced homelessness and
helps participants secure and maintain safe, affordable housing while receiving support to
stabilize and work toward long-term self-sufficiency. The program covers participant’s upfront
housing costs such as security deposits and application fees, along with ongoing rental and
utility assistance. These supports are designed to help families quickly stabilize in permanent
housing and reduce the likelihood of returning to homelessness.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 0.33% ($4,211.04 of awarded funds)
$30,000
Yes
$32,687
Rapid Re-Housing
$34,337
$97,024
11
Asian Association
AAU’s Refugee and Immigrant Homeless Prevention & Rapid Re-Housing Program directly
addresses challenges to housing for immigrants and refugees by providing rapid re-housing,
rental and utility assistance, case management, and tailored supportive services. By removing
barriers to stable housing, the program prevents eviction, promotes timely placement, and
strengthens long-term stability, self-sufficiency, and well-being.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 17% ($5,499.33 of awarded funds)
-$
Yes-$
Refugee and Immigrant Homeless Prevention &
Rapid Re-Housing Program
32,318.00$
$0
YEAR
FY25-26 Request 139,182.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 139,182.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 139,182.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 350,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 350,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 350,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 176,194.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 176,194.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 176,194.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 200,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 200,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 200,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 400,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 400,000.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 400,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 326,055.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 326,055.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 326,055.00$
TOTAL City Council
HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM (HOME)
#AGENCY/PROJECT NAMES
PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS
REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION CON PLAN
ALIGNMENTAMOUNT
City Administration
1
Salt Lake City Corporation Staff
Funding for salaries and operational expenses to administer and monitor the federal grants, and to
conduct the community processes. Funding may be utilized by:
- Attorney's Office
- Finance Department
- Housing Stability Division
152,325.80$
Yes
82,356.00$
Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's
Office
102,366.00$
$184,722
ALL APPLICATIONS
2
The Road Home
UCA will provide holistic case management services to income-eligible households seeking
prevent instances of homelessness and promote long-term housing stability.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 0.33% ($4,211.041 of awarded funds)
336,432.00$
Yes
350,000.00$
TBRA
349,839.00$
1,036,271.00$
3
Volunteers of America
The Youth Resource Center reaches unaccompanied youth aged 18-24 through a
comprehensive outreach strategy focused on connecting youth to the Tenant-Based Rental
Assistance (TBRA) program.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 5.82% ($174,867 of awarded funds)
174,867.00$
Yes
350,000.00$
Youth Resource Center TBRA
99,372.00$
624,239.00$
4
Community Development Crop of Utah
This project provides 140 new apartments for households between 30% and 70% Area Median
Income, which addresses the gap in the number of apartments that are affordable to incomes
AMI.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 39% ($173,209.29 of awarded funds)
-$
Yes
-$
Emeril Avenue Apartments
-$
-$
5
Community Development Crop of Utah
This project will create 8 new, owner-occupied single-family homes (2 Three-bedroom homes,
6 two-bedroom homes) that will be sold to households at or below 80% of the area median
income.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 39% ($173,209.29 of awarded funds)
-$
Yes
-$
Community Development Land Trust
-$
-$
6
First Step House
TBRA provides short-term rental and deposit assistance, enabling clients to transition directly
into stable housing. This is a pivotal step toward long-term recovery and self-sufficiency.
FY22-25 Unspent Funds: 17% ($339,888.32 of awarded funds
283,119.00$
Yes
-$
TBRA
-$
283,119.00$
FY25-26 Request 294,075.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 294,075.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 294,075.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 276,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 183,722.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 183,722.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 475,000.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 473,684.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 473,684.00$
TOTAL City Council
YEAR
FY25-26 Request 28,356.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 28,356.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 28,356.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 737,508.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 737,508.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 737,508.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY25-26 Request 258,810.00$
FY24-25 CDCIP Board 205,363.00$
FY23-24 Mayor 205,363.00$
TOTAL City Council
7
Utah Community Action
Utah Community Action provides short-term rental assistance and case management to
households experiencing a temporary crisis.
FY22-25 Unspent funds 1.91% ($24,682.66 of awarded funds
287,141.00$
Yes233,142.00$
TBRA 208,757.00$
729,040.00$
8
Neighborworks
NeighborWorks’ Homeownership Promotion Services (HOPS) Down Payment Assistance
promotes homeownership and prevents displacement of long-term residents. By providing
financial support to low- and moderate-income households, HOPS reduces the barriers to
homeownership that many families face in today's competitive housing market.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 20% ($231,437.75 of awarded funds
-$
Yes-$
Homeonwership Promotion Services -$
-$
CHDO APPLICANTS
9
Community Development Corp of Utah
Capacity Building funding will be used for any eligible use, such as hiring or training staff for
development, financial management, or compliance, obtaining technical assistance or
consulting related to housing development, board training, strategic planning, or systems
development to improve housing delivery. The funding for Emeril Ave will be used for a
portion of the construction costs of this project, which includes the foundations, framing,
HVAC, electrical, plumbing, and other multifamily construction items.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 39% ($173,209.29 of awarded funds)
473,684.00$
Yes
-$
CHDO Capicty Building and Emeril Ave New
Construction
-$
$473,684
HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS (HOPWA)
#AGENCY/PROJECT NAMES
PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS
REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION CON PLAN
ALIGNMENTAMOUNT
City Administration
1
Salt Lake City Corporation Staff
Funding for salaries and operational expenses to administer and monitor the federal grants,
and to conduct the community processes. Funding may be utilized by:
- Attorney's Office
- Finance Department
- Housing Stability Division
28,356.00$
Yes
28,356.00$
Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's
Office
27,985.00$
56,341.00$
ALL APPLICATIONS
2
Housing Connect
HC’s HOPWA program provides TBRA and PHP services that make housing affordable for
people living with HIV/AIDS who are either currently homeless or housing insecure. When
their monthly income toward rent. The remainder of the rent is paid by Housing Connect.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 5% ($89,363.21 of awarded funds)Yes
199,714.00$
Housing Assistance
172,835.00$
372,549.00$
3
Utah Community Action
Utah Community Action’s (UCA) HOPWA program provides STRMU (short term rent, mortgage,
and utility assistance), PHP (permanent housing placement) and holistic case management for
households with at least one member with an HIV/AIDS diagnosis. UCA has administered
HOPWA funds for the past 12 years, and the program provides housing assistance to eligible
households at risk of housing instability in order to support stable housing in an effort to
prevent homelessness.
FY22-25 Unspent funds: 1.91% ($24,682.66 of awarded funds)
Yes
534,211.00$
FY26 SLC HOPWA
629,102.00$
1,163,313.00$
YEAR
FY24-25 Request 100,000.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 150,000.00$
Mayor 150,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 200,000.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 200,000.00$
Mayor 200,000.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 262,500.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$
Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 185,000.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 165,700.00$
Mayor 165,700.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 449,408.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 355,200.00$
Mayor 355,200.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 171,811.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 135,800.00$
Mayor 135,800.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 269,100.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 210,200.00$
Mayor 210,200.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 198,079.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 154,700.00$
Mayor 154,700.00$
TOTAL City Council
FUNDING OUR FUTURE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES (FOF)
#AGENCY/PROJECT NAMES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION HOUSING SLC
ALIGNMENTAMOUNT
Equity and Home Ownership Assistance
1
Community Development Corporation of Utah CDCU will use this program to fund match savings for approximately 6-to-10 first-time buyers
earning up to 120% of AMI in Salt Lake City. Participants will also participate in counseling and
homebuyer education staffed and funded by this award. The project will prioritize working
households, veterans, refugees and immigrants, individuals with disabilities, and communities
of color.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 0% of funds unspent
652,100.00$
Yes
522,000.00$
Homebuyer Cohort & Matched Savings $1,174,100
2
Community Development Corporation of Utah CDCU provides financial assistance and housing counseling to help first-time homebuyers
achieve sustainable homeownership in Salt Lake City. Assistance will be for up to $39,000 per
household, pairing assistance with innovative products such as silent second mortgages and
shared equity models. The project will serve approximately 7 low- to moderate-income
with disabilities, and communities of color.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 0% of funds unspent
652,100.00$
Yes
522,000.00$
Down Payment Assistance $1,174,100
3
SL Neighborhood Housing (NeighborWorks)SL Neighborhood Housing will provide down payments, closing costs, and home improvement
assistance as forgivable loan/grants. Funding will also cover client participation in financial
education and financial counseling. The program will serve 7 West Side, vulnerable and low-
income clients.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 0% of funds unspent
150,000.00$
No
100,000.00$
Down Payment Assistance & Home Improvements $250,000
Tenant-based Housing Assistance
4
The INN Between The INN Between provides medical supportive housing and services to homeless/unsheltered
adults in need of end-of-life care and/or medical respite care in Salt Lake City. The program
including individuals with serious medical conditions, disabilities, and those in need of end-of-
life or medical respite care.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 0% of funds unspent
80,000.00$
No*
-$
Medical Supportive Housing for the Homeless $80,000
5
Utah Community Action
UCA assists low-income tenants at risk of eviction due to disputes or non-payment, providing
Tenant Education classes and mediation training statewide, and offers rental assistance for up
to 4 months. The project will serve approximately 83 households experiencing homelessness,
living with disabilities, elderly adults, single parents, large households with three or more
children, or individuals fleeing domestic violence.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 5% of funds unspent ($77,848.26)
207,900.00$
Yes
250,000.00$
Landlord Tenant Mediation $457,900
6
The Road Home
TRH Shared Housing program provides immediate housing interventions for low-income single
adults, enabling individuals who may not ordinarily qualify as homeless to find housing and to
choose suitable roommates. The program estimates service of 45 individuals.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 7% of funds unspent ($67,336.50)
315,000.00$
Yes435,000.00$
Shared Housing $750,000
7
The Road Home This program provides supportive housing, including individualized, high-touch case
Lake City. TRH provides this housing at several of their own properties. The project will serve
approximately 75 individuals.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 7% of funds unspent ($67,336.50)
315,000.00$
Yes
435,000.00$
Supportive Housing Case Management $750,000
8
Odyssey House The Odyssey House funds provides rental assistance and staff support for clients in
transitioning from residential treatment to transitional housing. This program serves 50 low-
income vulnerable individuals struggling with substance use and mental health issues, often
court-referred or facing chronic homelessness.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: NA
-$
Yes
-$
Transitional Housing $0
FY24-25 Request 200,626.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 154,800.00$
Mayor 154,800.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 150,000.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 114,300.00$
Mayor 114,300.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 100,000.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 76,200.00$
Mayor 76,200.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 280,000.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 213,400.00$
Mayor 213,400.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 69,000.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 52,600.00$
Mayor 52,600.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 250,000.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 96,900.00$
Mayor 96,900.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 229,032.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 96,900.00$
Mayor 96,900.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 248,029.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 96,900.00$
Mayor 96,900.00$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 239,253.45$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board 96,900.00$
Mayor 96,900.00$
TOTAL City Council
9
The Road Home TRH House 20 program provides 20 participants with direct housing assistance and ongoing,
intensive case management as they pursue other housing opportunities. The project will serve
low-income individuals who are unhoused, service-averse, and the most frequent users of
emergency services such as fire, police, and medical response.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 7% of funds unspent ($67,336.50)
315,000.00$
Yes
435,000.00$
House 20 $750,000
10
International Rescue Committee The IRC provides financial assistance, culturally and linguistically accessible case management,
and immigrants from a variety of countries, with a particular focus on single parents, large
families with limited wage earners, and households with disabilities or significant medical
needs.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 1% of funds unspent ($1,975.74)
100,000.00$
Yes
-$
New American Rental Assistance $100,000
11
Family Support Center The FSC-managed LifeStart Village program houses single-parent families recovering from
homelessness, domestic violence, substance abuse, and other challenging circumstances. This
program funding will serve 170 low-income residents who are recovering from homelessness,
domestic violence, or substance abuse.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: NA
-$
No*
-$
Child & Family Support at LifeStart Village $0
12
South Valley Services SVS provides trauma-informed, one-on-one, wraparound homelessness case management
services to about 175 city residents, and direct rental assistance to about 20 households. SVS
will serve survivors of domestic violence at or below 80% AMI, many who are living with a
disability or identify as a racial minority.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 1% of funds unspent ($2,117.40)
189,000.00$
Yes
172,100.00$
Wraparound Case Management $361,100
13
Wasatch Community Gardens
With this project, WCG will provide rental assistance and one-on one continuum of care case
project will serve only the participants in this program: low-income female adults experiencing
homelessness in Salt Lake City, particularly those with complex behavioral health challenges.
The project will serve 36 women.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: NA
-$
Yes
-$
Green Team Case Management $0
14
Community Development Corporation of Utah
CDCU will cover rental payments for at-risk households and staff costs for community
Resource Center. The program will serve approximately 600 low-income tenants through
community navigation, provide rental assistance to 30 households and deliver counseling to
50 participants, helping families remain housed and move toward financial self-sufficiency.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 0% of funds unspent
652,100.00$
Yes
522,000.00$
Community Navigation & Rental Assistance
$1,174,100
15
Asian Association of Utah
AAU will provide comprehensive rental assistance and supportive services to trafficking
survivor residents within Salt Lake City. The project will serve approximately 35 very low-
income survivors of sex or labor trafficking who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. This
also includes minor trafficking victims and their non-offending family members.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 22% of funds unspent ($212,974.43)
299,600.00$
Yes
166,300.00$
Rental Assistance for Human Trafficking Survivors $465,900
16
Volunteers of America
With the House 20 program, VOA provides intensive, client-centered case management and
housing navigation services, and financial assistance to individuals experiencing chronic
Salt Lake City, particularly those with complex behavioral health challenges. The project will
serve 20 individuals identified as high utilizers of emergency shelter services.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 0% of funds unspent
150,000.00$
Yes
-$
House 20
$150,000
17
Asian Association of Utah AAU will provide financial assistance, case management, and financial/employment assistance
for refugees, immigrants, and asyless at risk of homelessness. This program attempts to
prevent eviction and stabilize households. Approximately 80 households will be served by this
program. This is separate and distinct from their programming for human trafficking survivors.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 22% of funds unspent ($212,974.43)
299,600.00$
No*
166,300.00$
Rental Assistance for Vulnerable Refugee and
Immigrant Populations $465,900
FY24-25 Request 150,000.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$
Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 347,300.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$
Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 185,000.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$
Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 679,513.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$
Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 185,246.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$
Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
FY24-25 Request 50,000.00$
FY23-24 CDCIP Board -$
Mayor -$
TOTAL City Council
*Did not directly cite Housing SLC plan, but appears to align with plan goals
18
Women of the World WOW will provide housing navigation, landlord mediation, tenant rights education, benefits
enrollment, financial assistance, and on-site childcare. This project will serve low-income
refugee, immigrant, and asylum-seeking women in Salt Lake City. The project will serve 120
women who are primarily single mothers, survivors of violence, and seniors facing isolation
and health challenges.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: NA
-$
Yes
-$
Assistance for Refugee, Immigrant, and Asylum-
Seeking Women $0
19
YWCA Utah YWCA will serve the public with the following four programs: the Residential Self-Sufficiency
Pilot project will provide secure housing and case management focused on employment,
education, and financial planning. This project will serve low-income residents. The Survivor-
Driven Housing project will provide flexible financial assistance for rental deposits and
intensive housing coordination for very-low income households. The KRH Incentivized Rent
Assistance project provides rent support and case management for 36 low-income families. All
projects are managed at YWCA properties, and serve those at risk of homelessness, including
survivors of abuse, former foster youth, veterans, and other vulnerable community members
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 5% of funds unspent ($15,523.81)
-$
Yes
315,000.00$
Residential Self-Sufficiency Pilot, Survivor Driven
Housing, and KRH Incentivized Rent Assistance $315,000
20
Catholic Community Services of Utah CCS provides direct emergency rental assistance to low-income refugee individuals and
families who find their housing at risk due to a temporary financial crisis. The project will serve
approximately 100 refugee individuals and families previously resettled by CCS. Due to
changes in federal policies, only those previously resettled by CCS can be served. This includes
those with cooccurring factors, such as PTSD and past trauma associated with their
emigration.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: NA
-$
Yes
-$
Refugee Resettlement Assistance $0
21
First Step House The FSH Housing Case Management program provides housing and ongoing support for low-
income individuals at risk of homelessness, including direct rent/utility assistance. FSH will
serve 750 low-income clients with case management services and 130 low-income clients with
financial assistance. Clients are all at risk of homelessness, including veterans, seniors, and
people with disabling mental illness.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: ~0% of funds unspent ($6,329.03)
498,300.00$
Yes
543,500.00$
Housing Case Management $1,041,800
22
The Road Home TRH Landlord Assurance program provides targeted financial assistance to low-income tenants
and landlords to prevent returns to homelessness by addressing financial barriers and
incentivizing landlord participation. Landlord incentivies includes covering costs of "high risk"
tenants and encouraging participation in the Good Landlord program. The program estimates
service for 50 households.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: 7% of funds unspent ($67,336.50)
315,000.00$
Yes
435,000.00$
Landlord Assurance $750,000
23
Utah Housing Coalition This UHC program will expand renter/tenant education, deliver landlord education, and
release updated housing counseling resources in English and Spanish. The primary impact
group will be very-low income renters, and the potential scope will impact up to 5000
households.
FY23-25 Program Spenddown: NA
-$
Yes
-$
Renter, Tenant, and Landlord Education $0
$3,250,831
$950,000
$917,447
$5,118,278
ALLOCATION CAP ($); OR (%)TOTAL
APPLICANTS
n/a n/a 10
$630,124.65 15%27
$650,166.20 20%1
38
If funding is GREATER than estimated:
If funding is LESS than estimated:
SALT LAKE CITY 2026-2027 HUD & 2025-2026 FOF RECOMMENDATIONS
Simplified Funding Log
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
ESTIMATED GRANT AWARD TOTAL ACTUAL GRANT AWARD TOTAL TBD
ESTIMATED PROGRAM INCOME ACTUAL PROGRAM INCOME TBD
FUNDING CATEGORIES
CATEGORY NAME AMOUNT REQUESTED AMOUNT AWARDED
(CONTINGENCY)
Neighborhoods, Housing and Infrastructure $4,702,500 TBD
REALLOCATED FUNDING MAXIMUM POSSIBLE SCORE 100%
TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ESTIMATE)TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ACTUAL)TBD
TOTAL $7,814,005.83 TBD
COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS
COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS
Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and estimated
CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Add additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to and in
excess of the full ask before moving to the next highest-scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the
nearest $1,000 or $10,000.
Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and estimated
CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities down to the minimum
amount required to run the program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you reach the top of the
programs and funding still needs to be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and reallocate the
funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's recommended amounts, moving down the list. Round to the
nearest 1,000 or 10,000.
Public Services $2,461,340 TBD
Administration $650,166.20 TBD
CDCIP BOARD MAYOR
1 Salt Lake City Corporation Staff Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's
Office n/a 650,166.20$ 650,166.20$ 650,166.00$
650,166.20$ 650,166.20$ 650,166.00$
2 YWCA Utah Transitional Housing Conversion 79%215,000.00$ 215,000.00$ 215,000.00$
3 NIS Team Neighborhood Business Improvement Program
(NBIP)74%720,000.00$ 720,000.00$ 720,000.00$
4 Habitat for Humanity Critical Home Repair Program 74%400,000.00$ 400,000.00$ 400,000.00$
5 (DBA NeighborWorks)Homeownership Promotion Services 71%402,500.00$ 402,500.00$ 402,500.00$
6 Odyssey House Adolescent Residential Facility Upgrades 71%315,000.00$ 315,000.00$ 315,000.00$
7 Assist, Inc. Emergency Home Repair, Accessibility, and Community
Design 71%900,000.00$ 900,000.00$ 900,000.00$
8 First Step House Building Improvements 71%300,000.00$ 300,000.00$ 300,000.00$
9 NIS Team Fix the Bricks 68%460,000.00$ 460,000.00$ 460,000.00$
10 Community Development Corporation of Utah Homebuyer Education and DPA 63%750,000.00$ 125,488.00$ 125,488.00$
11 Upwards Care, Inc.Boost Program 58%240,000.00$ -$ -$
4,702,500.00$ 3,837,988.00$ 3,837,988.00$
12 Salt Lake Donated Dental Services Community Dental Project 84% $ 60,000.00 60,000.00$ 60,000.00$
13 YWCA Utah Housing and Stability Access 79% $ 80,500.00 80,500.00$ 80,500.00$
14 Wasatch Homeless Health Care, Inc. (DBA
Fourth Street Clinic)Health and Housing Transition Team (HHoT)79% $ 207,412.00 207,412.00$ 157,412.00$
15 The Road Home Housing Staffing 79% $ 50,000.00 50,000.00$ 50,000.00$
16 THRIVE Center for Survivors of Torture Integrated Services for Torture Survivors 79% $ 50,000.00 50,000.00$ 50,000.00$
17 South Valley Services Case Management 76% $ 60,000.00 60,000.00$ 60,000.00$
18 Big Brothers Big Sisters of Utah Site-Based Mentoring 76% $ 50,000.00 50,000.00$ 50,000.00$
19 The Road Home Gail Miller Resource Center (GMRC)76% $ 100,000.00 72,212.00$ 72,212.00$
20 Fit to Recover Free Meals, Scholarships, & Recovery Resources
for Unhoused Adults and At-risk Youth 74% $ 50,000.00 -$ 50,000.00$
21 First Step House Housing Case Management 74% $ 72,486.00 -$ -$
APPLICATIONS
#APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST
RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
CONTINGENCY
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
City Administration
TOTAL
Neighborhoods, Housing and Infrastructure
TOTAL
Public Services
CDCIP BOARD MAYOR
22 International Rescue Committee ESL & Financial Readiness 74%60,000.00$ -$ -$
23 Catholic Community Services Housing Locator 74%50,000.00$ -$ -$
24 Catholic Community Services Employment & Client Specialist 74%50,000.00$ -$ -$
25 Disability Law Center Jobs for All 71%55,000.00$ -$ -$
26 Utah Community Action Early Childhood Services 71%240,000.00$ -$ -$
27 Wasatch Community Gardens Green Team 71%50,000.00$ -$ -$
28 English Skills Learning Center Workplace English and Career Pathways for
Limited English Speakers 71%60,321.58$ -$ -$
29 Odyssey House Bus Passes 71%50,000.00$ -$ -$
30 Women of the World Self-Sufficiency Services 68%150,000.00$ -$ -$
31 Asian Association of Utah Stability, Opportunity, Assistance, & Resilience
for Survivors of Trafficking (SOAR)68%215,842.84$ -$ -$
32 A Tall Order HomeInn Rio Grande Reentry Services Program 68%75,000.00$ -$ -$
33 Salt Lake American Refugee Services for Survival 68%30,000.00$ -$ -$
34 Spy Hop Productions Advanced Apprenticeship 66%50,000.00$ -$ -$
35 Asian Association of Utah Refugee Rental Assistance & Housing Stability 66%219,777.21$ -$ -$
36 A Tall Order HomeInn Rio Grande Employment Initiative Program 66%75,000.00$ -$ -$
37 Odyssey House Transitional Housing 63%150,000.00$ -$ -$
38 Advantage Services Homeless Employment Program 63%100,000.00$ -$ -$
2,461,339.63$ 630,124.00$ 630,124.00$
7,814,005.83$ 5,118,278.20$ 5,118,278.00$
$293,174.00
$0.00
$5,890.00
$299,064.00
ALLOCATION CAP ($); OR (%)TOTAL
APPLICANTS
$179,438.40 60%5
n/a n/a 4
$21,988.00 7.5%1
10
#APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST
ESTIMATED GRANT AWARD TOTAL ACTUAL GRANT AWARD TOTAL TBD
ESTIMATED PROGRAM INCOME ACTUAL PROGRAM INCOME $0
RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
CONTINGENCY
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT (ESG)
FUNDING CATEGORIES
CATEGORY NAME AMOUNT REQUESTED AMOUNT AWARDED
(CONTINGENCY)
ESG Part 1 $299,398.00
REALLOCATED FUNDING MAXIMUM POSSIBLE SCORE 100%
TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ESTIMATE)TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ACTUAL)TBD
TOTAL $780,142.00
ESG Part 2 $458,756.00
Administration $21,988.00
If funding is GREATER than estimated:
If funding is LESS than estimated:
CDCIP BOARD MAYOR
1 Salt Lake City Corporation Staff Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's
Office n/a 21,988.00$ 21,988.00$ 21,988.00$
21,988.00$ 21,988.00$ 21,988.00$
CDCIP BOARD MAYOR
2 Volunteers of America Youth Resource Center 82%62,200.00$ 60,000.00$ 60,000.00$
3 First Step House Resource Center Program 79%60,000.00$ 57,076.00$ 57,076.00$
4 Volunteers of America Geraldine E. King Women's Resource Center 79%74,750.00$ 50,000.00$ 50,000.00$
5 Ruff Haven Ruff Haven Street Outreach 66%52,448.00$ -$ -$
6 Family Promise Family Promise Direct Family Services 63%50,000.00$ -$ -$
299,398.00$ 167,076.00$ 167,076.00$
7 YWCA of Utah YWCA Utah: Housing Stability Through Survivor-
Centered Case Management 79%80,500$ 60,000$ 60,000$
8 Utah Community Action UCA FY26 SLC ESG 74%158,256$ 50,000$ 50,000$
9 The Road Home TRH - ESG RRH - FY27 (Rapid Re-housing)74%100,000$ -$ -$
10 Asian Association Refugee and Immigrant Homeless Prevention &
Rapid Re-Housing Program 71%120,000$ -$ -$
458,756.00$ 110,000.00$ 110,000.00$
780,142.00$ 299,064.00$ 299,064.00$
COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS
COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS
Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Do not exceed the 60% Part 1 funding cap. Add
additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to or in excess of the full ask before moving to the next
highest-scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000.
Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities
down to the minimum amount required to run the program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you
reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and
reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's recommended amounts, moving down the list.
Round to the nearest $1,000.
APPLICATIONS
#APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE* REQUEST
RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
CONTINGENCY
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
City Administration
TOTAL
#APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE* REQUEST
RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
CONTINGENCY
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
ESG Part 1
TOTAL
ESG Part 2
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
$817,318.00
$800,000.00
$574,508.00
$2,542,912.00
ALLOCATION CAP ($); OR (%)
n/a n/a 7
$473,680.00
15% +
Reallocated 1
$139,182.60 10%1
9
If funding is GREATER than estimated:
If funding is LESS than estimated:
CDCIP BOARD MAYOR
1 Salt Lake City Corporation Staff n/a 139,182.65$ 139,182.00$ 139,182.00$
139,182.65$ 139,182.00$ 139,182.00$
2 The Road Home 82%350,000.00$ 350,000.00$ 350,000.00$
3 Volunteers of America Youth Resource Center’s Tenant-Based Rental 82%176,194.00$ 176,194.00$ 176,194.00$
4 Community Development Corp of Utah Emeril Avenue Apartments 76%200,000.00$ 200,000.00$ 200,000.00$
5 Community Development Corp of Utah Community Development Land Trust (CDLT)74%400,000.00$ 400,000.00$ 400,000.00$
6 First Step House TBRA 74%326,055.00$ 326,055.00$ 326,055.00$
7 Utah Community Action UCA FY26 SLC TBRA 71%294,075.00$ 294,075.00$ 294,075.00$
8 Neighborworks Homeownership Promotion Services 63%276,000.00$ 183,722.00$ 183,722.00$
2,022,324.00$ 1,930,046.00$ 1,930,046.00$
HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM (HOME)
ESTIMATED GRANT AWARD TOTAL ACTUAL GRANT AWARD TOTAL TBD
ESTIMATED PROGRAM INCOME ACTUAL PROGRAM INCOME $700,000.00
FUNDING CATEGORIES
CATEGORY NAME AMOUNT REQUESTED (CONTINGENCY)
HOME Projects $2,022,324.00
REALLOCATED FUNDING MAXIMUM POSSIBLE SCORE 100%
REALLOACTED CHDO
TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ESTIMATE)TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ACTUAL)TBD
TOTAL $2,636,506.65
COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS
COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS
Allocate 10% of the annual HOME award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award for the CHDO Set-
Aside. Add additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to or in excess of the full ask before moving to the
next highest-scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000.
Allocate 10% of the annual HOME award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the
estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities down
to the minimum amount required to run the program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you reach
the top of the programs and funding still needs to be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and
reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's recommended amounts, moving down the list.
Round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000.
HOME CHDO $475,000.00
Administration $139,182.65
City Administration
TOTAL
HOME Projects
TOTAL
APPLICATIONS
#APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST
RECOMMENDATIONS
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
CDCIP BOARD MAYOR
9 Community Development Corp of Utah CHDO Capacity Building and Emeril Ave New
Construction 63%475,000.00$ 473,684.00$ 473,684.00$
475,000.00$ 473,684.00$ 473,684.00$
2,636,506.65$ 2,542,912.00$ 2,542,912.00$
$972,032.00
$0
$0
$972,032.00
ALLOCATION CAP ($); OR (%)TOTAL
APPLICANTS
n/a n/a 2
$29,160.96 3%1
3
If funding is GREATER than estimated:
If funding is LESS than estimated:
CDCIP BOARD MAYOR
1 Salt Lake City Corporation Staff Office n/a 29,160.96$ 29,160.00$ 29,160.00$
29,160.96$ 29,160.00$ 29,160.00$
2 Housing Connect Salt Lake City HOPWA – Housing Connect 79%737,508.00$ 737,508.00$ 737,508.00$
3 Utah Community UCA FY26 SLC HOPWA 74%258,810.00$ 205,363.00$ 205,363.00$
996,318.00$ 942,871.00$ 942,871.00$
1,025,478.96$ 972,031.00$ 972,031.00$
#APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST
RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
CONTINGENCY
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
TOTAL
REALLOCATED FUNDING MAXIMUM POSSIBLE SCORE 100%
TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ESTIMATE)TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ACTUAL)TBD
GRAND TOTAL
HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS (HOPWA)
ESTIMATED GRANT AWARD TOTAL ACTUAL GRANT AWARD TOTAL TBD
ESTIMATED PROGRAM INCOME ACTUAL PROGRAM INCOME $0
City Administration $29,160.96
TOTAL $1,025,478.96
FUNDING CATEGORIES
CATEGORY NAME AMOUNT REQUESTED AMOUNT AWARDED
(CONTINGENCY)
HOPWA Projects $996,318
COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS
COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS
Allocate 3% of the annual HOPWA award to program administration. Add additional funding to the highest-scoring
applications up to the full ask before moving to the next highest-scoring application. As much as practicable, round to
the nearest $1,000 or $10,000.
Allocate 3% of the annual HOPWA award to program administration. Remove funding from the lowest-scoring activities
down to the minimum amount required to run the program, moving up from the lowest-scoring, funded activity. If you
reach the top of the programs and funding still needs to be decreased, remove the lowest scoring, funded activity, and
reallocate the funding to the highest scoring activity up to the board's recommended amounts, moving down the list.
Round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000.
APPLICATIONS
#APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
CONTINGENCY
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
City Administration
TOTAL
HOPWA Projects
$2,370,500.00
n/a
n/a
$2,370,500.00
ALLOCATION CAP ($); OR (%)TOTAL
APPLICANTS
$350,000.00 n/a 3
$2,020,500.00 n/a 20
23
If available funding is INCREASED:
CDCIP BOARD MAYOR
1 Community Development Corporation of Utah Homebuyer Cohort & Matched Savings 69%100,000.00$ 150,000.00$ 150,000.00$
2 Community Development Corporation of Utah Down Payment Assistance 67%200,000.00$ 200,000.00$ 200,000.00$
3 SL Neighborhood Housing (NeighborWorks Down Payment Assistance & Home
Improvements 62%262,500.00$ -$ -$
562,500.00$ 350,000.00$ 350,000.00$
4 The INN Between Medical Supportive Housing for the Homeless 90%185,000.00$ 165,700.00$ 165,700.00$
5 Utah Community Action Landlord Tenant Mediation 79%449,408.00$ 355,200.00$ 355,200.00$
6 The Road Home Shared Housing 79%171,811.00$ 135,800.00$ 135,800.00$
7 The Road Home Supportive Housing Case Management 78%269,100.00$ 210,200.00$ 210,200.00$
8 Odyssey House Transitional Housing 78%198,079.00$ 154,700.00$ 154,700.00$
9 The Road Home House 20 77%200,626.00$ 154,800.00$ 154,800.00$
10 International Rescue Committee New American Rental Assistance 76%150,000.00$ 114,300.00$ 114,300.00$
11 Family Support Center Child & Family Support at LifeStart Village 76%100,000.00$ 76,200.00$ 76,200.00$
South Valley Services Wraparound Case Management
13 Wasatch Community Gardens Green Team Case Management 76%69,000.00$ 52,600.00$ 52,600.00$
14 Community Development Corporation of Utah Community Navigation & Rental Assistance 75%250,000.00$ 96,900.00$ 96,900.00$
FUNDING OUR FUTURE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES (FOF 2025-2026)
APPROPRIATED FUNDING TOTAL APPROPRIATED FUNDING TOTAL $2,370,500.00
TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE (ACTUAL)$2,370,500.00
FUNDING CATEGORIES
CATEGORY NAME AMOUNT REQUESTED AMOUNT AWARDED
(CONTINGENCY)
ESTIMATED PROGRAM INCOME ACTUAL PROGRAM INCOME n/a
REALLOCATED FUNDING MAXIMUM POSSIBLE SCORE 100%
TOTAL $5,198,897.45
COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS
COMMITTEE CONTINGENCY PLANS Add additional funding to the highest-scoring applications up to the full ask before moving to the next highest-scoring
application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $100 or $1,000.
Equity and Home Ownership Assistance $562,500.00
Tenant-based Housing Assistance $4,636,397.45
Equity and Home Ownership Assistance
TOTAL
Tenant-based Housing Assistance
#APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST
COUNCIL
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
CONTINGENCY
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
CDCIP BOARD MAYOR
15 Asian Association of Utah Rental Assistance for Human Trafficking
Survivors 75%229,032.00$ 96,900.00$ 96,900.00$
16 Volunteers of America House 20 75%248,029.00$ 96,900.00$ 96,900.00$
17 Asian Association of Utah Rental Assistance for Vulnerable Refugee and
Immigrant Populations 75%239,253.45$ 96,900.00$ 96,900.00$
18 Women of the World Assistance for Refugee, Immigrant, and Asylum-
Seeking Women 74%150,000.00$ -$ -$
19 YWCA Utah Residential Self-Sufficiency Pilot, Survivor Driven
Housing, and KRH Incentivized Rent Assistance 73%347,300.00$ -$ -$
20 Catholic Community Services of Utah Refugee Resettlement Assistance 73%185,000.00$ -$ -$
21 First Step House Housing Case Management 71%679,513.00$ -$ -$
22 The Road Home Landlord Assurance 70%185,246.00$ -$ -$
23 Utah Housing Coalition Renter, Tenant, and Landlord Education 69%50,000.00$ -$ -$
4,636,397.45$ 2,020,500.00$ 2,020,500.00$
5,198,897.45$ 2,370,500.00$ 2,370,500.00$
#APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
Attachment C3. Organizations with Multiple Applications. Where funding recommendations are the same for the Board
and the Mayor, a single dollar figure appears. Exceptions are noted.
Application Funding
Requested
Recommended
for funding?
continued on next page
Application Funding
Requested
Recommended
for funding?
CDBG #8 Building Improvements $300,000 $300,000
CDBG #22 Housing Case Management $72,486 $ -
ESG #3 Resource Center Program $60,000 $57,076
HOME #6 Tenant Based Rental Assistance $326,055 $326,055
First Step House
FOF #21 Housing Case Management $679,513 $ -
CDBG #23 ESL & Financial Readiness $60,000 $ - International Rescue
Committee FOF #10 New American Rental Assistance $150,000 $114,300
CDBG #3 Neighborhood Business Improvement Program
(NBIP)
$720,000 $720,000
NIS Team
CDBG #9 Fix the Bricks $460,000 $460,000
CDBG #6 Adolescent Residential Facility Upgrades $315,000 $315,000
CDBG #29 Bus Passes $50,000 $ -
CDBG #37 Transitional Housing $150,000 $ -
Odyssey House
FOF #8 Transitional Housing $198,079 $154,700
HOME #8 Homeownership Promotion Services $276,000 $183,722
CDBG #5 Homeownership Promotion Services $402,500 $402,500
Salt Lake Neighborhood
Housing Services, Inc.
(DBA NeighborWorks)
FOF #3 Down Payment Assistance & Home Improvements $262,500 $ -
CDBG #18 Case Management $60,000 $60,000
South Valley Services
FOF #12 Wraparound Case Management $280,000 $213,400
continued on next page
Application Funding
Requested
Recommended
for funding?
CDBG #16 Housing Staffing $50,000 $50,000
CDBG #20 Gail Miller Resource Center (GMRC) $100,000 $72,212
ESG #9 TRH - ESG RRH - FY27 (Rapid Re-housing) $100,000 $ -
HOME #2 TRH - HOME - Tenant-Based Rental Assistance
- FY27
$350,000 $350,000
FOF #6 Shared Housing $171,811 $135,800
FOF #7 Supportive Housing Case Management $269,100 $210,200
FOF #9 House 20 $200,626 $154,800
The Road Home
FOF #22 Landlord Assurance $185,246 $ -
HOPWA #3 UCA FY26 SLC HOPWA $258,810 $205,363
CDBG #27 Early Childhood Services $240,000 $ -
ESG #8 UCA FY26 SLC ESG $158,256 $50,000
HOME #7 UCA FY26 SLC Tenant Based Rental Assistance $294,075 $294,075
Utah Community Action
FOF #5 Landlord Tenant Mediation $449,408 $355,200
ESG #2 Youth Resource Center $62,200 $60,000
ESG #4 Geraldine E. King Women's Resource Center $74,750 $50,000
HOME #3 Youth Resource Center’s Tenant-Based Rental
Assistance Program
$176,194 $176,194 Volunteers of America
FOF #16 House 20 $248,029 $96,900
CDBG #28 Green Team $50,000 $ - Wasatch Community
Gardens FOF #13 Green Team Case Management $69,000 $52,600
CDBG #31 Self-Sufficiency Services $150,000
Women of the World FOF #18 Assistance for Refugee, Immigrant, and Asylum-
Seeking Women
$150,000 $ -
continued on next page
Application Funding
Requested
Recommended
for funding?
ESG #7 YWCA Utah: Housing Stability Through Survivor-
Centered Case Management
$80,500 $60,000
CDBG #2 Transitional Housing Conversion $215,000 $215,000
CBDG #13 Housing and Stability Access $80,500 $80,500
YWCA of Utah
FOF #19 Residential Self-Sufficiency Pilot, Survivor Driven
Housing, and KRH Incentivized Rent Assistance
$347,300 $ -
HUD LMI 2016-2020
Eligible Block Groups and Consolidated Plan Target Area, Salt Lake City, UT
"' ~ ~
L ~;_w,.;;, q,,. 1"" 1 ~;Q~b~J!W,,t,~~~~~~~~;C;:~~I r-llifllilii...._liiiiii~lil::!-~~"'m~~,--------,w.-2.1/00 s, ______ ...,~...._.b....J=!~;::
(/)
W 2 3 20 S
Eligible Block Groups
c::::J Proposed Target Area
c::::J Current Plan Target Area
:s:
0
0
0)
(/)
:s:
0
0 co
(/)
W 2700 S
So
E
County of Sal
Garmin , SafeGra J.b---1oFF~k, • o L--•
w USF '3 g
-w O r--,r---'!,,-..!.....-L.I...L..l.. ~
(/) 0 0 t---
C O "' (/) (/) (/)
D ata Source : HUD Exchange, ACS 5-Year 20 16-2020 Low-and Mo derate-Income Summary Data, 2024
Erik Fro nberg, Salt Lake City Hou sing Stability Division 9/25/2024
Community and Neighborhoods Department
Housing Stability Division
FY 26-27 HUD Applications
FY 25-26 FOF Applications
March 24, 2026
Advancing the Goals & Strategies
of the HUD 5-Year Consolidated Plan
Housing Priorities Homeless Services Transportation
Business and
Workforce
Development
Environmental
Remediation
Community
Services
HUD & FOF APPLICATIONS
Advancing the Goals & Strategies
of the Housing SLC Plan
Increasing
Housing Stability
Increasing Home
Ownership &
Equity Building
HUD & FOF APPLICATIONS
Timeline & Next Steps
•Mayor’s Funding Recommendations –March 10th
•Public Comment Period for HUD Funding –March 11th through April 14th
•First Funding Briefing –March 24th
•Public Hearing for HUD Program Year 26-27 Funding –March 24th
•Second Funding Briefing –April 7th
•Third Funding Briefing, If Needed –April 14th
•Council Final Vote & Adoption of Allocations –April 21st
•Submission Deadline for HUD programs –May 15th
HUD & FOF APPLICATIONS
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Austin Kimmel
Public Policy Analyst
DATE:March 24, 2026
RE: ORDINANCE: ZONING MAP AMENDMENT AT 1073 SOUTH NAVAJO STREET
(PLNPCM2025-01015)
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will be briefed on a proposal to amend the zoning map for one parcel at 1073 South Navajo Street in
Council District Two. The proposed zoning map amendment would rezone the property from R-1/5,000 (single-
family residential) to RMF-30 (low density multifamily residential). The parcel is approximately 0.49 acres, or
21,000 square feet.
If approved, the applicant’s stated objective is to retain the existing two-bedroom single-family home and
construct additional for-sale family-sized homes on the property. No rendering or development proposal has
been submitted at this stage.
Planning staff recommended approval, and the Commission voted 6-1 to forward a positive
recommendation for the proposed zoning map amendment to the City Council. Details from the
Planning Commission’s January 14, 2026 meeting are provided below.
Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed zoning map amendment and determine if the Council supports
moving forward. The Council will then hold a public hearing and consider adopting the zoning map
amendment at future meetings.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. The Council may wish to ask the applicant if they anticipate providing off-street parking for the planned
new units they intend to construct.
2. The applicant states the additional units will be for-sale, family-sized homes. If the Council is interested
in ensuring those units are owner-occupied, they may wish to ask the administration how the city can
ensure they will not become rentals.
Page | 2
3. The Council may wish to ask if the administration has discussed with the applicant using the Affordable
Housing Incentives ordinance to provide some affordable housing at this location.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The current R-1/5,000 zone allows one
single-family dwelling per 5,000 square feet
of lot area and 50 feet of lot width, so the
21,000-square-foot property could
accommodate up to four single-family
homes. However, site constraints and
zoning standards make infill development
difficult. The RMF-30 district allows greater
flexibility in development style and housing
types, including row homes, multiple single-
family dwellings, small-scale multi-family
housing, and lots without direct public
street frontage.
As shown in the image on the right, the
subject property is adjacent to R-1/5,000
zoning to the north, east, and south, with R-
1/7,000 across the street to the west.
Salt Lake City Code Chapter 21A.50.050
states that a proposed zoning amendment
must satisfy the consideration factors,
including compliance with citywide policies,
goals, and adopted plans, as well as
demonstrating a community benefit that
would not be achievable without the
amendment.Area zoning map with subject parcel outlined in blue.
Image courtesy of Salt Lake City Planning Division
In this case, an identified option for community benefit includes providing housing that meets current or future
community needs as identified by the general plan. The applicant proposes to maintain the existing single-
family home and build additional family-sized units that are smaller in size and scale, and compatible with the
existing neighborhood, in line with the Westside Master Plan. Each new unit would be on its own lot intended
for ownership.
If the Council adopts the zoning map amendment, there is no guarantee the proposed development will be
constructed. The property could be redeveloped with any use allowed within the zone or sold to another party.
The Council is only being asked to consider rezoning the property. Because zoning can outlast the life of a
building, any rezoning application should be considered on the merits of changing the zoning of that property,
not simply based on a potential project.
SUMMARY OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at its January 14, 2026, meeting and held a public hearing,
during which three people spoke. Two commenters expressed a desire that the neighborhood’s existing
character and scale be retained. Concerns were raised about the potential increased density and its impact on
traffic, especially given the property’s proximity to a school and children walking nearby. A third commenter
Page | 3
questioned the type of housing proposed and whether the units would be owner-occupied or could be sold and
rented out.
The applicant husband and wife spoke in support of the project, emphasizing their intention to build attainable,
for-sale housing. They noted that home ownership is increasingly difficult because of rising prices and believe
this street is well-suited for additional density and is near a bus line. The applicants stated the city needs higher-
density, for-sale housing and that this project helps provide it.
The Commissioner who voted against the proposal questioned the appropriateness of rezoning a single parcel in
an otherwise fairly uniform neighborhood, especially given the property’s location near the middle of the block,
and expressed a preference for neighborhood densification when it transitions from the edges of a block. The
commissioner also expressed difficulty in evaluating the zoning map amendment without a detailed
development proposal. Some Commissioners agreed with these points but ultimately voted to forward a positive
recommendation.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CONDITIONS
The proposed ordinance included in the administrative transmittal requires the petitioner to enter into a
development agreement with Salt Lake City that includes the following conditions:
a. The existing primary home on the site be retained.
b. Any additional dwelling units over four units must be for-sale.
KEY CONSIDERATIONS
In its staff report to the Planning Commission, Planning staff identified four key considerations, summarized
below. The complete analysis is on pages 3-7 of the report, linked in the ATTACHMENTS section below.
Consideration 1 – How the Proposal Helps Implement City Goals & Policies Identified in
Adopted Plans
Planning staff found the proposed amendment generally aligns with the goals identified in adopted plans listed
below.
Page | 4
Plan Salt Lake (2015): The proposal aligns with the citywide
plan, which encourages infill development in areas with
existing infrastructure and services. The Plan also supports
increased moderate density within existing neighborhoods
where appropriate. Planning staff finds the 20,000 sq. ft. lot
underutilized because it currently has only one single-family
home. The proposed RMF-30 district would allow the
petitioner to increase medium-density housing.
Housing SLC (2013): The proposed rezone aligns with Housing
SLC’s objectives to increase homeownership opportunities,
family-sized units, and missing middle housing to address
housing needs citywide.
Westside Plan (2014): The proposal aligns with the Westside
Plan, which supports compatible infill density and encourages
incremental density, including “allowing two- or multi-family
development on lots that are zoned for only single-family where
appropriate. Appropriate cases include lots that have unique
shapes or where the impact on adjacent properties would be
negligible due to the unique properties of the parcels.”
Neighborhood Nodes identified by the Westside
Plan – Image courtesy of Salt Lake City
Planning Division
The property is within one-third of a mile of a Neighborhood Node along Indiana Avenue and one-quarter mile
of a Neighborhood Node on Glendale Drive. Increased housing at the property would be serviced by these nodes.
Consideration 2 – Neighborhood Context
Single-family homes make up a significant portion of the Glendale neighborhood, where the subject property is
located. The neighborhood also contains several duplexes, triplexes, and small multi-family buildings, many
built before current zoning standards, reflecting a historic pattern of incremental density.
Planning staff finds the subject property's large lot size and proximity to bus routes, schools, neighborhood
commercial corridors, and Jordan Park make it well-suited for residential infill. The flexibility of RMF-30
zoning would allow additional homes to be built in a manner consistent with the neighborhood's existing scale
and character, without requiring an additional Planned Development review.
Consideration 3 – Development Potential Comparison R-1-,5000 vs RMF-30
Under the existing R-1/5,000 zoning, the site could realistically accommodate two single-family lots with a flag
lot configuration. The Affordable Housing Incentives option could allow up to four units with affordability
restrictions.
Under the proposed RMF-30 zoning, the site could accommodate up to 14 units, depending on the housing type.
The proposed zone would permit single-family homes, two-family dwellings, multifamily buildings, row houses,
cottages, and tiny houses. Given the lot’s shape and the applicant’s intention to retain the existing home, the site
is likely to accommodate five to eight additional housing units. Any development would be subject to all
applicable setback, height, design, and parking requirements.
Consideration 4 – Proposed Community Benefit
The applicant's identified community benefit is “Providing housing that aligns with the current or future needs
of the community as determined by the general plan. Needs could include the level of affordability in excess of
the number of dwellings that exist on the site, size in terms of number of bedrooms, or availability of housing for
purchase,” per Salt Lake City Code 21A.50.50.C.
Page | 5
About 70 percent of housing in Glendale is renter-occupied, compared to about 52 percent citywide.
Homeownership rates in Glendale are lower than in nearby neighborhoods such as Poplar Grove and Rose Park.
The neighborhood also has a higher proportion of mid- to high-rise apartment buildings than other missing
middle housing types. The proposed rezone would allow housing types that are underrepresented in Glendale
and expand homeownership opportunities.
CURRENT AND PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT COMPARISON
R-1/5,000 (Single-Family Residential District): The purpose of the existing R-1/5,000 zoning district is to
accommodate single-family residential development on lots of at least 5,000 square feet, with limited allowance
for up to four units under affordable housing incentives. The district is intended to preserve neighborhood
character, compatible with existing scale and intensity, and provide safe, sustainable living environments.
RMF-30 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential District): The purpose of the proposed RMF-30 zoning district
is to provide area for various small-scale multi-family housing types that serve as a transition between single-
family housing and larger multi-family housing. The intent of the district is to allow incremental residential
growth while maintaining the existing physical character of established neighborhoods. RMF-30 also
emphasizes walkability, support for nearby neighborhood-serving commercial uses, and access to alternative
transportation modes.
Attachment D of the Planning Commission staff report (pages 13-15) provides a complete table comparing the
zoning standards and design standards for both the current and proposed zones.
ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS
Attachment E of the Planning Commission staff (pages 16-19) report outlines the following zoning map
amendment standards for decision-makers to consider. The standards and findings are summarized in the chart
below.
Zoning Map Amendment
Factor Finding
Complies
Complies
Complies
N/A
Complies; though the
applicant will be required
to provide waste-
removal facilities with
Page | 6
any development
application.
The status of existing transportation facilities, any planned changes to the
transportation facilities, and the impact that the proposed amendment may have
on the city’ s ability, need, and timing of future transportation improvements.
Complies
The proximity of necessary amenities such as parks, open space, schools, fresh
food, entertainment, cultural facilities, and the ability of current and future
residents to access these amenities without having to rely on a personal vehicle.
Complies
The potential impacts to public safety resources created by the increase in
development potential that may result from the proposed amendment.
Complies
The potential for displacement of people who reside in any housing that is within
the boundary of the proposed amendment and the plan offered by the petitioner
to mitigate displacement.
Complies; the applicant
does not intend to
demolish the existing
single-family home
The potential for displacement of any business that is located within the
boundary of the proposed amendment and the plan offered by the petitioner to
mitigate displacement
Complies; no existing
businesses on property
The community benefits that would result from the proposed map amendment.Complies
CITY DEPARTMENT AND DIVISION REVIEW
The proposal was reviewed by several Salt Lake City Departments and Divisions; none of which opposed the
proposed rezone. The following departments and divisions responded to this proposal: Fire Department, Police
Department, Department of Public Utilities, Department of Sustainability, Engineering Division (Department of
Community & Neighborhoods), Urban Forestry Division (Department of Public Lands).
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
October 9, 2025 – Application for a Zoning Map Amendment reviewed for pre-screen.
November 4, 2025 – Application for a Zoning Map Amendment was accepted.
November 11, 2025 – Petition PLNPCM2025- 01015 for a zoning map amendment was assigned to Olivia
Cvetko, Principal Planner, for staff analysis and processing.
October 1, 2025 –
Notice was sent to the Glendale Community Council Recognized Community Organization (RCO)
informing them of the petition. Early notification of the project was also sent to property owners and
residents within 300 feet of the proposal. The proposal was posted for an online open house. The
proposal can still be viewed online.
An Early Notification sign was posted on the properties by the applicant.
January 1, 2026 –
The 45-day public comment period for Recognized Organizations ended.
Planning Staff posted notices on City and State websites and sent notices via the Planning list serve for
the Planning Commission meeting. Public hearing notices were mailed.
Page | 7
Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of the Planning Commission public
hearing physically posted on the property.
Page | 7
January 8, 2026 – Planning Commission Staff Report was posted.
January 14, 2026 – Planning Commission held a public hearing and made a recommendation to the City Council
to approve the proposed map amendment.
January 16, 2026 – Requested Final Draft of Ordinance from Attorney’s Office.
February 2, 2026 – Final Draft of Ordinance received from Attorney’s Office.
February 24, 2026 – Transmittal received in City Council Office
ATTACHMENTS
A.Planning Commission Staff Report
B.Stream January 14, 2026 Planning Commission Briefing
Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning
City Council Hearing March 24, 2026
PLNPCM2025-01015 Zoning Map Amendment
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
AT 1073 S. NAVA JO ST.
Salt Lake City //Planning Division
Zoning Map Amendment
R-1-5,000 to RMF-30
REQUEST
Quick Facts
Property Address: 1073 S Navajo Street
Size: 0.49 Acres | 21,000 sq ft
Existing Use: One single-family home
Proposed Use: Preserved existing 1940s single-
family home, additional for-sale homes
Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning
ANALYSIS
Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning
PLAN AND POLICY COMPLIANCE
HOUSING SLC (2023)
•Enable housing types that are conducive to ownership and family
occupancy
WEST SIDE PLAN (2014)
•Promote reinvestment and redevelopment in the Westside
community through changes in land use, improved public
infrastructure and community investment to spur development
that meets the community’s vision while maintaining the character
of Westside's existing stable neighborhoods.
•Protect and encourage ongoing investment in existing, low-density
residential neighborhoods while providing attractive, compatible
and high-density residential development where needed,
appropriate or desired.
Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning
NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT
Parks and Open Space
•0.1 miles from round-about park, Navajo Circle Park
•1/3 of a mile from the Jordan Park and Peace Gardens
Schools
•The subject site is located within a short walk of an
elementary school
•The closest middle school is roughly a half mile away
•East High School is over 3 miles away and not
reasonably accessible by bike or foot
Fresh Food, Entertainment, and Cultural Facilities
•Smiths roughly 0.6 miles to the east
•Roughly 900 ft from a small shopping center The
Glendale Branch Library is roughly a half-mile to the
south
Active Transportation
•Located along Bus Route 9 and near the Nine Line
Trail
Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning
Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning
COMMUNITY BENEFIT
Community Benefit A – Housing
Providing housing that aligns with the
current or future needs of the
community as determined by the general
plan.
Needs could include the level of
affordability in excess of the number of
dwellings that exist on the site, size in
terms of number of bedrooms, or
availability of housing for purchase
Renter Occupied
70%
Owner Occupied
30%
GLENDALE COMMUNITY
Renter Occupied
52%
Owner Occupied
48%
SALT LAKE CITY
Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning
BUILDING TYPES COMPARISON
•Single-family dwelling
(5,000 sq. ft./lot)
•Single-family dwelling
(2,000 sq. ft./unit)
•Two-family dwelling
(2,000 sq. ft./unit)
•Cottage Development
(1,500 sq. ft./unit)
•Row House
(2,000 sq. ft./unit)
•Multi-Family Residential
(2,000 sq. ft./unit)
(1,500 sq. ft./unit)
R-1/5,000 RMF-30
Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning
Planning Commission Voted to forward a positive
recommendation to City Council for the Zoning Map
Amendment with the identified community benefit with details
stipulated in a Development Agreement.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning
Olivia Cvetko// Principal Planner
Olivia.Cvetko@slcgov.com
801-535-7285
Salt Lake City // Planning Division www.slc.gov/planning
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT CONSIDERATIONS*
•Consistency with adopted plans and policies
•Impacts on surrounding properties
•Impacts on infrastructure and services
•Proposed community benefit
•Residential and commercial tenant displacement
*Considerations have been paraphrased for the purposes of this presentation
STANDARDS OF APPROVAL
SALT LAKE CITY TRANSMITTAL
To:
Salt Lake City Council Chair
Submission Date:
02/04/2026
Date Sent to Council:
02/24/2026
From:
Department *
Community and Neighborhood
Employee Name:
Cvetko, Olivia
E-mail
Olivia.Cvetko2@slc.gov
Department Director Signature
Director Signed Date
02/06/2026
Chief Administrator Officer's Signature
Chief Administrator Officer's Signed Date
02/24/2026
Subject:
Zoning Amendment at 1073 S Navajo Street
Additional Staff Contact:Presenters/Staff Table
Document Type
Ordinance
Budget Impact?
Yes
No
Recommendation:
Adopt the ordinance as recommended by staff
Background/Discussion
See first attachment for Background/Discussion
Public Hearing
Is there a City or State statutory requirement to hold a public hearing for this item?*
Yes
No
The City Council reserves the option to hold and notice for a public hearing pursuant to their practices for public engagement.
Does the City have a general practice to hold a public hearing for this item?*
Yes
No
Public Process
This page has intentionally been left blank
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Tammy Hunsaker
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The applicant and owner, Mark Overdevest, is requesting approval from the City to amend the zoning
map for the property located at 1073 S Navajo Street from the R-1/5,000 (Single-Family Residential)
District to the RMF-30 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential) District. If approved, the applicant
intends to retain the existing single-family home and construct additional future for-sale homes on the
lot which is roughly 0.49 acres (21,000 sq. ft.) in size.
Under the requested RMF-30 (Low-Density Multi-Family) zoning, the property would allow greater
flexibility in unit type and configuration. The district permits single-family homes, two-family
dwellings, multifamily buildings, and row houses, generally requiring 2,000 square feet of lot area per
unit. The property could accommodate 10-14 units depending on building form based on minimum lot
size requirements; however, retention of the existing home along with setbacks, open space, and
parking requirements will likely reduce the number of dwelling units the site can accommodate.
Council Considerations
The proposed amendments should meet the consideration factors outlined in Chapter 21A.50.050 of
the Salt Lake City Code. Included in these factors are compliance with citywide policies, goals, and
adopted plans; and to identify a community benefit that would not otherwise be provided without the
amendment. One of the identified options for a community benefit includes “Providing housing that
aligns with the current or future needs of the community as determined by the general plan. Needs
could include the level of affordability in excess of the number of dwellings that exist on the site, size in
terms of number of bedrooms, or availability of housing for purchase”.
The property owners have proposed to maintain the existing single-family home and build additional
family-sized housing units similar in size, scale, and compatibility to the existing neighborhood in
accordance with the Westside Master Plan. In addition, each home would be on its own lot allowing for
the opportunity for ownership opportunities.
This item was reviewed by the Planning Commission in a public hearing on January 14th, 2026. The
Planning Commission forwarded a positive recommendation of the Zoning Map Amendment to the
City Council in a six to one vote. Details regarding the community benefit requirements will need to be
finalized as part of the development agreement but were deemed sufficient.
PUBLIC PROCESS:
The following is a list of public meetings that have been held, and other public input
opportunities, related to the proposed project since the applications were submitted:
•November 17, 2025 Early Engagement Outreach
o The Glendale Community Council was sent the 45-day required notice for recognized
community organizations. The council did not provide comments.
o Property owners and residents within 300 feet of the development were provided early
notification of the proposal.
o The project was posted to the Online Open House webpage.
•January 1, 2026 Notice of the Planning Commission Public Hearing
o Public hearing notice sign posted on the property
o Public hearing notice mailed
o Public notice posted on City and State websites and Planning Division list serve
•January 14, 2026 Planning Commission Public Hearing
o The petition was heard by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. The Planning
Commission voted six to one to forward a recommendation of approval for the request,
with the following conditions of approval:
1.The following provisions be incorporated into a development agreement
for the zoning map amendment:
1.The existing primary home on the site be retained.
2.Any additional dwelling units over four units must be for-sale.
Planning Commission (PC) Records
a)PC Agenda of January 14, 2026 (Click to Access)
b)PC Minutes of January 14, 2026 (Click to Access)
c)Planning Commission Staff Report of January 14, 2026 (Click to Access Report)
EXHIBITS:
1.Ordinance
2.Project Chronology
3.Notice of City Council Public Hearing
4.Original Petition
5.Mailing List
This page has intentionally been left blank
2. PROJECT
CHRONOLOGY
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Tammy Hunsaker
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Petition: PLNPCM2025-01015
October 9, 2025 Application for a Zoning Map Amendment reviewed for pre-screen.
November 4, 2025 Application for a Zoning Map Amendment was accepted.
November 11, 2025 Petition PLNPCM2025-01015 for a zoning map amendment was
assigned to Olivia Cvetko, Principal Planner, for staff analysis and
processing.
November 17, 2025 Notice was sent to the Glendale Community Council Recognized
Community Organization (RCO) informing them of the petitions. Early
notification of the project was also sent to property owners and residents
within 300 feet of the proposal. The proposal was posted for an online
open house. The proposal can still be viewed online.
November 17, 2025 An Early Notification sign was posted on the properties by the applicant.
January 1, 2026 The 45-day public comment period for Recognized Organizations ended.
January 1, 2026 Planning Staff posted notices on City and State websites and sent notices
via the Planning list serve for the Planning Commission meeting. Public
hearing notices were mailed.
January 1, 2026 Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of the
Planning Commission public hearing physically posted on the property.
January 8, 2026 Planning Commission Staff Report was posted.
January 14, 2026 Planning Commission held a public hearing and made a recommendation
to the City Council to approve the proposed map amendment.
January 16, 2026 Requested Final Draft of Ordinance from Attorney’s Office
February 2, 2026 Final Draft of Ordinance received from Attorney’s Office
This page has intentionally been left blank
3. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC
HEARING
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2025-01015
Zoning Map Amendment at 1073 S Navajo Street - Mark Overdevest is requesting approval from the
City to amend the zoning at 1073 S Navajo Street From the R-1-5000 Single Family Residential
District to the RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District to allow for the construction of
additional for-sale homes on the 0.49 acre lot.
As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments
regarding the petition. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning
this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be held:
DATE:
PLACE: Electronic and in-person options.
451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah
** This meeting will be held via electronic means while also providing an in-person opportunity
to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at 451 South
State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, including WebEx
connection information, please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings. Comments may also
be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at 801.535.7654 or sending an email to
council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the
Council and added to the public record.
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Olivia
Cvetko at 801-535-7285 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, or by
e-mail at Olivia.Cvetko@slc.gov. The application details can be accessed at
https://www.slc.gov/planning/2025/10/17/openhouse2025-00704/
The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for
reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids
and services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please
contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slc.gov, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711.
This page has intentionally been left blank
4. ORIGINAL
PETITION
Property Address: 1073 S Navajo St SLC UT 84104
Parcel ID: 15113010080000
Master Plan: Westside Master Plan
Current Zoning District: R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential
Proposed Zoning District: RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential
Additional items submitted concurrently with this letter:
1. Photos of Historical Development Pattern and Built Environment
2. Supporting goals, objectives, and policies of the City
3. Comparable Approved Zoning Amendments
4. Redevelopment potential under RMF-30 and R-1/5,000
Request: This application seeks to amend the zoning classification for the parcel located at 1073 S Navajo
St, Salt Lake City, UT 84104 (the “Project” or “Subject Property”) from R -1/5,000 to RMF-30.
The current R-1/5,000 zoning, established in the 1990s, no longer aligns with the purposes, goals,
objectives, and policies of Salt Lake City (the “City”) as outlined in Plan Salt Lake, Housing SLC, and the
Westside Master Plan (WSMP). Updating the zoning for this property will harmonize land use regulations
with the City's stated goals. The RMF-30 Zone is a low-density residential zone that permits slightly higher
density than the existing R-1/5,000 Zone. Additionally, the development regulations for RMF-30 are
similar to the current zone in terms of bulk, setbacks, and building height.
In support of rezoning the property to RMF-30, the applicant respectfully requests that the City balance
existing rules and regulations with the flexibility needed for change and growth, as established in the
WSMP. Entry-level home ownership used to be more attainable for young families, but today, many SLC
residents are not afforded this same opportunity due to the scarcity of family-sized housing and generally
unfavorable market conditions. We believe the RMF-30 zone is pivotal in helping address this ongoing
market disconnect.
Property Information: The parcel is 0.49 acres (over 21,000 square feet) of highly underutilized space,
currently featuring only a small 2-bedroom home built in the 1940s. This home contributes minimally to
the City’s housing stock.
The graphic below outlines the subject parcel and adjacent properties. Notably, the parcels along Navajo
are significantly larger, being over five times the size of the properties along 1300W and Concord St.
The owners are looking to, bring investment to the community, and are looking to utilize the newly
created RMF-30 zone that allows unique infill development opportunities within an existing
neighborhood in line with historical development patterns of the community, Westside Master Plan
(WSMP), and City housing plans.
While it is theoretically possible to try and subdivide the property into flag lots under the R -1/5000 zone,
it is not the most practical option as the flag requirements and lot restrictions established in SLC code
hinder development potential and functionality. The property owners believe they can create a
development in line with the stated goals of the Westside Master Plan with RMF-30.
Proposed Map Amendment: Following the historical development pattern and built environment of the
neighborhood, the property owners plan to maintain the existing single-family home and build
supplemental single-family homes similar in size, scale, and compatibility to the existing neighborhood in
accordance with the Westside Master Plan. The RMF-30 zone, with its less restrictive lot size minimum
requirements, is in line with the historical development pattern and built environment, adheres to City
plans and guidance, and is documented in sections (a) – (h) below with accompanying attachments.
(a) The Project will not materially affect adjacent properties.
The Project will in no way fundamentally change the residential nature of the neighborhood as the land
use will continue to be low density residential. The property owners have already and will continue to
engage with the community council and the City to ensure any project will be context sensitive to the
existing character of the neighborhood while providing opportunities for new growth and to enhance the
sense of place.
(b) Consistent Land Use.
The land use of the Property will remain residential, not mixed use, and will be consistent with land use in
the surrounding neighborhood. Additionally, a drive through the surrounding neighborhood shows small
lots and homes throughout. There are multiple duplexes, triplexes, and apartments (some with an R-
1/5,000 or 7000 zoning assignment) within close proximity to the proposed Project, including multiple
duplexes on Navajo St. Attached within the application is a document that outlines the historical and
existing development pattern in the area, which demonstrates the reasonability of the rezone request.
*See attachment 1. “Photos of Historical Development Pattern and Built Environment”
While much of Glendale was assigned R-1/5,000 zoning in the 1990s when the zoning code was adopted,
the historical development pattern of the area and existing built environment demonstrates a higher
density with some homes built as early as the 1870s. Most of the community and its single-family homes
would not be permitted under the burdensome lot minimum requirements of the R-1/5,000 zone, as is
evidenced by the attached map and highlights (*attachment 1.). R-1/5,000 has the second smallest
minimum lot size requirement in the City, and it is still larger in scale than the historical development
pattern. The RMF-30 zone was created to provide a variety of housing types that are small in scale
suitable for low-density housing, including single-family, and two-family. Smaller homes and lots are part
of what gives the community an identity and differentiates it from other parts of the City and has kept it
as a more affordable option for many SLC residents.
(c) Implementation of the Westside Master Plan, Housing SLC, and Plan Salt Lake.
The property owners recognizes that the Property is in the Westside district and subject to, among other
planning documents, the Westside Master Plan. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map is intended
to support appropriately scaled housing choices as recommended by the Westside Master Plan which
provides for Special Single-Family Allowances.
The master plan details the challenges it faces in developing the community and the “barriers in and out
of Glendale underscore the community’s need to grow from within”.
The subject property (highlighted in yellow with bright red outline) is located within proximity (less than
1000 feet) from a designated neighborhood node. The Westside Master Plan states the following:
“Neighborhood nodes rely on the neighboring residential properties because they are not intended to
bear a heavy load of new residential development”. In addition to the neighborhood node, a community
node and a regional node are within walking distance. Nodes are intended to increase the stability of
existing neighborhoods by providing necessary daily or discretionary retail and service options, and by
providing opportunities for employment and recreation within the community. “The viability of the nodes
relies on people to access their activities and services. To support these uses, more residents are needed
within the vicinity”.
Page 34 of the WSMP states the following-
Special Single-Family Allowances: The Salt Lake City Planning Division should explore regulatory options for
permitting unique, single-family residential development within the existing single-family zoning districts.
Examples of special single-family developments include small-lot, detached, single-family residential units
on parcels that are currently considered too small for development and attached single -family residential
units.
Multi-Family Infill Allowances: The Salt Lake City Planning Division should explore regulatory options for
allowing two- or multi-family development on lots that are zoned for only single-family where appropriate.
Appropriate cases include lots that have unique shapes or where the impact on adjacent properties would
be negligible due to the unique properties of the parcels. Regulations such as these can help add even a
small amount of additional density without impacting on the prevailing single-family character of the
Westside.
The unique size (.49 acres) and characteristics of the subject property make it an ideal candidate to build
from within.
*See attachment 2. “Supporting goals, objectives, and policies of the City” for additional
adherence to Westside Master Plan, Housing SLC, and Plan Salt Lake.
(d) Comparable Zoning Amendments granted.
Similar Zoning Amendments have been granted throughout Salt Lake City, with the most recent and
similar request being granted for the City owned parcel at 1050 W 1300 S, which rezoned an R-1/5,000
lot surrounded by single family homes, near the Jordan River, within the “riparian corridor” (which
subject property is not) to RMF-30. The same Master Plan and City policies apply to both this property as
well as the Subject Property. Another is 238 S concord which was changed from R-1/5000 to RMF-30.
*See attachment 3. “Comparable Approved Zoning Amendments”
(e) Future Developments.
Just a few hundred feet to the south, a proposed large townhome development has been proposed at the
old Tejeda’s market fronting Navajo St and Glendale Dr. Below are preliminary renderings of the project.
https://buildingsaltlake.com/townhomes-in-glendale-to-be-for-sale-and-energy-efficient/
Another infill project close by is located at 1549 South 1000 West where the plans show 46 townhomes
on 2.2 acres detailed below.
(f) Adequate Public Facilities and Services.
The Project is small scale and limited to residential units/lots, which will have a minimal impact on traffic
and other required public facilities.
(g) Affordable Housing Incentives consideration.
The property owners have closely followed the AHI developments for years. While the plan is a good step
in the right direction, the property owners have not been able to make the AHI work or pencil for this
project. If the AHI path were to be taken, you really could only add 3 additional units of density.
In theory, the property owners could build 1 large 4-Plex on the existing lot; however, they do not believe
this is a desirable outcome as the goal is to create modest family sized housing which the City is
significantly lacking.
Ignoring the AHI and any rezone, as it stands today, a flag lot parcel could be created, the existing home
could be demolished, and 2 large homes (4000 sq ft+) with 2 detached ADUs could be built while still
meeting all setback and lot coverage requirements of R-1/5,000 without requiring any public input. This
would not fit the character of the neighborhood or achieve the goals of the community and City; further,
this demonstrates how the current zoning rules do not fit with the historical development pattern of the
community. Salt Lake City needs more people in houses, not less
We need more people in houses, not less people in bigger houses.
*See attachment 4. Redevelopment potential under RMF-30 and R-1/5,000
(h) Community Benefit Analysis.
Housing: Provision of affordable or family-sized housing.
Throughout the application, the petitioners demonstrate alignment with stated city and community goals
and plans. See *Att.2 Supporting goals, objectives, and policies of the City
Following the historical development pattern and built environment of the neighborhood, the property
owners would plan to maintain the existing single-family home and build additional family sized housing
units similar in size, scale, and compatibility to the existing neighborhood in accordance with the
Westside Master Plan. In addition, each home would be on its own lot allowing for the opportunity for fee
simple ownership opportunities. The RMF-30 zone, with its increased options and flexibility would allow
for a much better overall future development, that would be in line with the historical development
pattern, built environment, and City plans and guidance.
While formal plans and renderings have not been pursued or included in this application, RMF-30 allows
for a variety of housing types and forms not included in R/1-5000. SLC is in dire need of missing middle
housing options as is identified and highlighted in Housing SLC Plan 2023-2027. This was a major driver to
the creation of the RMF-30 zone. An increase in density and development will help the identified nodes in
the West Side Master Plan thrive.
Looking at comparable comp sales in the neighborhood, as well as the characteristics of the lot location,
modest family sized housing units built in this project are not anticipated to sell for greater than the area
median priced house.
Modernizing the zoning on the property to RMF-30 will bring land use regulations into agreement with
stated city goals while incrementally increasing the density allowance. The RMF-30 Zone much like the R-
1/5000 zone is a low-density residential zone in addition, development regulations are similar regarding
bulk, setbacks, and building height.
Support for Local Businesses: While local business would not be directly allowed on RMF-30 Parcels, the
WSMP notes that identified nodes within the neighborhood need local residential support to thrive.
Rental History: Over the past 5 years, the home has been rented at market rate and tenants are
responsible for utilities.
Current Occupants- As of the time of this application, only one tenant lived at the property.
In closing: Recent City plans and documents have recognized that as the population of Salt Lake City
grows, prices are spiking, leaving folks with fewer housing options and pushing some people out
altogether. Family sized housing is desired and needed. This rezone provides the unique opportunity to
build in an area where it will cause minimal disruption, and with the increased density of the project will
come increased attainability in pricing. Creative infill projects are needed if Salt Lake City wants to create
attainable family housing.
Implementing these various goals, objectives, and policies, as reflected in the adopted planning
documents, requires a unique approach of balancing the existing rules and regulations while exercising
flexibility to achieve real and responsive changes that will encourage the market to develop the diverse
and affordable housing needed to accommodate the growing community.
We believe the Rezone Request is consistent with the City’s development goals and objectives to provide
diversity of housing types and to support attractive and well-maintained neighborhoods. We appreciate
the City’s consideration of these matters and look forward to working with you.
Existing neighborhood development pattern examples:
Throughout the Glendale community, there are homes on very narrow lots with small structures.
These homes would not meet the lot size requirements or the mandatory street frontage
requirements of R-1/5,000 today. Many pockets of Glendale have a historical development
pattern that closely resembles RMF-30 zoning.
On Navajo as well as Glenrose, there are multiple Duplex structures demonstrating a higher
historical pattern of higher density than existing R1 zoning.
Below is a representation of built environment with smaller homes with lower setbacks.
(YELLOW lot 305-010 is .08 acres)
(YELLOW lot 306-021 is .05 acres)
(YELLOW lot 334-025 is .05 acres)
(BLUE lot 258-004 is .06 acres)
(1200 W Yellow .07 acres)
KEY CONSIDERATIONS
The key considerations listed below were identified through the analysis of the project:
1. Implementation of the Westside Master Plan, Housing SLC, and Plan Salt Lake
2. Neighborhood Compatibility & Impact
3. Development Potential
Key Consideration 1: Implementation of the Westside Master Plan, Housing SLC,
and Plan Salt Lake
Westside Master Plan (2014)
The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map is intended to support appropriately scaled
housing choices as recommended by the Westside Master Plan. This plan was adopted in 2014
and focuses on land use related opportunities. The plan covers the area that is generally between
I-15 and I-215 on the east and west, the city boundary on the south, and I-80 on the north. The
subject property on Navajo is within the Westside Master Plan area.
In general, the Westside Master Plan supports incremental increase in density by allowing
different housing types provided the general scale and characteristics of the surroundings are
respected. The policies that relate to neighborhoods identify that there is ‘some opportunity for
incremental additions to density and minor adjustments to the development pattern within the
Glendale and Poplar Grove neighborhoods.’ The plan specifically calls for different types of
housing options, including ADU’s, duplexes and cottage developments. The plan also
emphasizes that future housing should be compatible in terms of building height, bulk, setbacks,
architecture, landscaping, and building materials. The plan specifically identifies vacant and
underutilized parcels as opportune places for infill development and, depending on their size,
opportune places for multi-family projects.
The Westside Master Plan envisions: “The established and stable neighborhoods of the Westside
will remain the core of the community, retaining traditional development patterns while also
providing new housing opportunities.”
The Glendale neighborhood can be considered stable as there are limited opportunities for
large-scale changes to the character and development pattern, but the larger lots and blocks
provide flexibility for infill projects. As with many established communities, neighborhood
stability is greatly valued by its residents. However, that does not mean there are no
opportunities for growth. Nor does it imply that changes are neither desired nor anticipated. For
example, some change within the neighborhoods will be required to attract more businesses and
services. Although stable areas expect to see minor changes, development should be consistent
with the scale of the surrounding structures and new zoning regulations should aim to maintain
the existing development characteristics of the neighborhood while allowing appropriately
scaled infill development.
Nodes
Nodes, or intersections, are defined in this plan as ‘integrated centers of activity. The subject
property is located within proximity (less than 1000 feet) from a designated neighborhood node.
The Westside Master Plan states the following: “Neighborhood nodes rely on the neighboring
residential properties because they are not intended to bear a heavy load of new residential
development”. In addition to the neighborhood node, a community node and a regional node
are within walking distance. Nodes are intended to increase the stability of existing
neighborhoods by providing necessary daily or discretionary retail and service options, and by
providing opportunities for employment and recreation within the community. “The viability
of the nodes relies on people to access their activities and services. To support
these uses, more residents are needed within the vicinity”.
Proposed
The proposal supports neighborhood stability by increasing density at a vacant property, since
increasing density by expanding is not an option for the Glendale neighborhood or the Westside
as a whole. Its size (.25 acres) and shape with access to multiple streets allow for flexibility in
site layout and housing types. The development regulations for the RMF-30 are similar to the
existing zone in regard to bulk, setbacks, and building height. Additionally, any new
development will be bound by design standards for building materials, ground floor glass, and
building entrances, which will ensure high quality design and compatibility with the
neighborhood.
Housing SLC (2023- 2027)
The City has recently adopted a citywide 5-year housing plan includes goals to increase the
overall supply of housing through-out Salt Lake City. The goal of the plan is to respond to the
ongoing housing crisis by increasing housing stability throughout the City. The plan provide
initiatives to “create sustainable, mixed-use, mixed-income neighborhoods with access to jobs,
transit, greenspace, and basic amenities.” The proposal would allow more density and housing
type options in an existing neighborhood.
Plan Salt Lake (2015)
Plan Salt Lake is a Citywide vision for the City for the next 25 years and includes guiding
principles for the City related to sustainable growth and development. The goal of the plan is to
create a city that is resilient, inclusive, and economically viable. With this in mind, the plan
outlines goals and initiatives to support a mix of housing types and increased density. Applicable
initiatives from the plan are below:
Growth:
• Promote infill and redevelopment of underutilized land.
• Accommodate and promote an increase in the City’s population.
Housing:
• Increase the number of medium density housing types and options.
• Enable moderate density increases within existing neighborhoods where appropriate.
The proposed rezone aligns with Plan Salt Lake’s goals for housing and growth. The proposal will
allow infill development of an underutilized parcel while increasing the number of housing types
and options.
Further Excerpts supporting the zoning amendment.
The Project is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the City. The Citywide vision,
City Housing Plan, HUD Plan, Westside Master Plan, Affordable Residential Guide and Ordinances all
recognize, support, and call for increasing the housing supply and expanding housing opportunities
throughout the city, including removing local barriers to housing development.
Below is supporting verbiage taken directly from adopted city plans and guidance supporting this type of
request:
Westside Master Plan
Goals pg. 4
• Promote reinvestment and redevelopment in the Westside community through changes in land use,
improved public infrastructure and community investment to spur development that meets the
community’s vision while maintaining the character of Westside's existing stable neighborhoods.
• Protect and encourage ongoing investment in existing, low-density residential neighborhoods
Opportunities pg. 26
Neighborhoods: There are opportunities for incremental additions to density and minor
adjustments to the development pattern to make them more efficient and sustainable. The
neighborhoods will see changes through modifications to how Salt Lake City regulates and promotes
infill development
Neighborhoods pg. 30
Vision: The established and stable neighborhoods of the Westside will remain the core of the
community, retaining traditional development patterns while also providing new housing opportunities.
Glendale can be considered stable in the sense that there is limited opportunity within the neighborhoods
for large-scale changes to the character and development pattern. That does not mean, however, that
they are without any opportunities for growth. Nor does it imply that changes are neither desired nor
anticipated by the residents of the neighborhood or by the city itself. For example, some change within the
neighborhoods will be required to attract more businesses and services.
The Potential pg. 33
The current zoning in the majority of the Westside, and in nearly the entirety of the neighborhoods, is for
Single-Family residential, which prohibits multi-family development. Another option is a zoning ordinance
modification that allows for duplexes in single-family zones provided the infill parcel is over a certain size
and the development meets certain design standards to ensure compatibility. Small lot single-family
residential infill development, both attached and detached, are also options for adding new
residential uses within the neighborhoods. A third option is to create zoning-based incentives to
encouraging small-lot development. Can a community that is over 90 percent single-family with little
room for large-scale infill development achieve the vision that its residents desire? Throughout the
process of developing the Westside Master Plan, it appeared that the residents and stakeholders
recognized that the answer is no unless there were substantial changes to the development pattern of the
Westside. One of the aims of this plan is to demonstrate that localized changes in the community’s
development patterns can bring about the desired vision despite the perceived limitations.
Moving Forward pg. 34
Special Single-Family Allowances: The Salt Lake City Planning Division should explore regulatory options
for permitting unique, single-family residential development within the existing single-family zoning
districts. Examples of special single-family developments include small-lot, detached, single-family
residential units.
Multi-Family Infill Allowances: The Salt Lake City Planning Division should explore regulatory options for
allowing two- or multi-family development on lots that are zoned for only single-family where appropriate.
Appropriate cases include lots that have unique shapes or where the impact on adjacent properties would
be negligible due to the unique properties of the parcels. Regulations such as these can help add even a
small amount of additional density without impacting the prevailing single-family character of the
Westside and potentially introduce unique housing types and designs to the community or the city
Plan Salt Lake Citywide Vision (adopted 2015)
Growth Initiatives:
1. Locate new development in areas with existing infrastructure and amenities, such as transit and
transportation corridors.
2. Encourage a mix of land uses.
3. Promote infill and redevelopment of underutilized land.
Housing Initiatives:
1. Ensure access to affordable housing citywide (including rental and very low income).
2. Increase the number of medium density housing types and options.
3. Encourage housing options that accommodate aging in place.
4. Direct new growth toward areas with existing infrastructure and services that have the potential to
be people-oriented.
5. Enable moderate density increases within existing neighborhoods where appropriate.
Salt Lake 5-year housing plan 2023-2027
Key Finding:
There is a mismatch between the types of housing the market is producing and the needs of the
community. Residents perceive that most new housing is “luxury” while many desire more affordability
throughout the city. Additionally, residents want more “missing middle” housing and more family-sized
housing.
Pg 10: Family Sized Unit shortfall
Salt Lake City has a declining proportion of family households, decreasing from 56 percent in 2000 to 43
percent in 2021 (USCB, 2001, 2022). Among regional peer cities, Salt Lake City has the lowest percentage
of family-sized housing units (3+ bedrooms) with only 41 percent of all units.
Public Engagement Results:
There is a mismatch between the types of housing the market is producing and the needs of the
community. Residents perceive that most new housing is “luxury” while many desire more affordability
throughout the city. Additionally, residents want more “missing middle” housing and more family-sized
housing. When asked where they would like to see more affordable housing built, respondents expressed
desires to have affordability throughout the city
Thriving in Place Study:
Displacement in Salt Lake City is significant and getting worse. It is an issue of high concern in the
community; nearly everyone reported directly experiencing its impact in their lives and neighborhoods.
There are no “more affordable” neighborhoods in Salt Lake City where lower income families can move
once displaced.
Salt Lake City is growing and there are not enough housing units at every price level, and a significant lack
of affordable units for low-income families. There is a consensus view in the community that creating
more affordable housing should be a high priority while also protecting renters from being displaced.
The patterns of displacement reflect historic patterns of discrimination and segregation, with many areas
experiencing high displacement risk being the same as areas that were redlined in the past.
Guiding Principles:
Increase housing everywhere.
In addition, the plan says the city will keep pushing to create more tiny homes and accessory
dwellings in existing neighborhoods as well as raising permitted density and building heights
around its transit corridors and job centers.
Comp #1
PLNPCM2023-00609 - Zoning Map Amendment at 1050 W 1300 S
MASTER PLAN: Westside Master Plan
Former ZONING DISTRICT: R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District
Approved ZONING DISTRICT: RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District
This request is for a Zoning Map Amendment for city-owned property at 1050 West 1300 South.
Requested to rezone the property from the R-1/5,000 Single Family Residential Zone to the RMF-30 Low
Density Multi-Family Residential Zone. The purpose of the proposal is to accommodate future
residential development and the proposed RMF-30 zone would allow an incremental increase in density
and more options for housing types – including duplexes, townhomes, multi-family, and cottage style
development. Development within the R-1/5,000 zoning district is limited to primarily single-family
dwellings. There is no current development plan or concept for future development. If the proposed
rezone is adopted by the City Council, the City would then issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) for
development of the property.
This proposal is very similar to the Subject Property as it is also surrounded by single-family homes.
While the parcel is larger, a good portion of it is in the riparian corridor , which cannot be built on.
Comp #2
PLNPCM2024-00389- 238 s Concord st
MASTER PLAN: Westside Master Plan
Former ZONING DISTRICT: R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District
Approved ZONING DISTRICT: RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District
Petition to amend the zoning map for 238 S Concord St and 1255 W Pierpoint Ave. The proposed
amendment would change the zoning of these properties from R-1/5,000 Single Family Residential to
RMF-30 Low Density Multifamily Residential. The applicant has stated that they intend to build family
sized housing units on individual lots. Currently between the two lots, there are 10,700 square feet and
one single family home.
Comp #3
PLNPCM2023-00452 – Zoning Amendment at 450 East 700 South – RMF-35 Moderate Density Multi
Family to RMF-30 Low Density Multi Family Residential
This request, while already in a higher zoned area, is a good comparison. It shows a similar plan to the
Subject Property, where a lot is very underutilized and can accommodate infill development allowed
with RMF-30.
RMF-30 Development Potential
Any future development on the property would be designed to utilize the deep nature of the parcel and
minimize impact to the existing street. The RMF-30 zone was primarily created to enable new options
for missing middle development that the R1 zones do not allow.
Types of housing allowed: Single Family Detached, Single Family Attached, Row housing, Tiny Homes,
Cottage Developments, Twin Homes, and more.
Below are potential redevelopment ideas for the property. These are simply ideas, not plans or
renderings, and are intended to show the possibilities under RMF-30.
Detached Single Family Tiny Homes
Cottage Homes Attached Single Family
Mixed Project
R/1-5000 Option
As the parcel is today, 2 large single-family homes with ADU’s could be built using a flag lot
configuration. We estimate, they could have each home be over 4000 Square feet while meeting bulk,
height, and setback requirements under the R/1-5000 zone. While not interested in going this route, it
goes to show how the current zone is incentivizing larger houses with less density.
AHI Option
There is the potential to do a 4-Plex Unit on the parcel while building within the buildable box as is
required under the AHI. The property owners are not looking to enter the highly competitive and
saturated multi-family rental housing market and instead wish to develop family sized housing, which
this city needs greatly. The intent of this example is to simply demonstrate what is allowed on the
parcels under the AHI. As was demonstrated above, RMF-30 would provide more flexibility regarding
building forms, while still having similar lot, height, and bulk requirements.
This page has intentionally been left blank
5. MAILING LIST
OWN_FULL_NAME OWN_ADDR own_unit OWN_CITY OWN_STA OWN_ZIP
CHARLES H VIOLETTE (JT); CLARENCE W VIOLETTE (JT); HELEN I VIOLET3346 RIVERCREST DR GRANTS PASS OR 97527
KAYLEIGH MULLEN 1042 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
LANCE LANGTON 1052 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
M FM TRST 434 ZINFANDEL CIR CLAYTON CA 94517
RACHAEL HALL (JT); ALISON SCHEIG (JT)1066 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
CARL B STENHOLM (TC); GERRYANNE F MOREAU (TC)1084 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
MAKAH INVESTMENTS, LLC 10681 S TRAIL RIDGE CIR SANDY UT 84092
HSIAO-AN HUO; DYNASTY EMPIRE PROPERTY, LLC 10013 S ROCKVIEW DR SANDY UT 84092
EMMA F LAMBERT (JT)1434 STONEWALL BND MESQUITE NV 89027
DYNASTY EMPIRE PROPERTY LLC 10013 S ROCKVIEW DR SANDY UT 84092
FIRST FIDELITY MORTGAGE CORP PO BOX 17172 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84117
GREG J GARCIA (JT); REBA MONTOYA (JT)1078 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
SYNDETIC INC PO BOX 17172 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84117
TYLER HADFIELD 1035 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
FRANCINE M KOHART 1043 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
MARK REITER 1053 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
EARL M SUTTON 1061 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
NAVAJO REAL ESTATE, LLC 2162 S BELAIRE DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109
HTOE WAY (JT); MA LET (JT)1083 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
SALT LAKE COUNTY PO BOX 144575 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114
ROBERTO CARRILLO; RC & MAV FAM REV TR 1091 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
SCOSHI CAHOON 1101 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
DEAN SCHINDLER 1119 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
RUSSELL S FRANKLIN (JT); MINDY J FRANKLIN-BOWEN (JT); JODI L FRA1129 S NAVAJO ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
GONZALO H SANCHEZ (JT); CONCEPCION S ALVAREZ (JT)1040 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
GURMINDER SINGH PARMAR; KIRANJIT PARMER 2205 E CHAPARRAL OAK C COTTONWOOD HTS UT 84121
ROSEMARIE HERNANDEZ 1054 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
CHRIS FRECKLETON 1062 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
LUCIA G PHAM 1068 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
GRAYSON M SMITH 1076 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
CLAUDIA MARGARITA TROCHEZ (JT); RENE BENJAMIN VAZQUEZ (JT)1084 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
LISSETTE D LOPEZ AQUINO (JT); WILLIAM ENRIQUE HERNANDEZ MOR 1090 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
JENNIFER WILSON DAVIS 1096 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
AMANDA PARRANTO 1106 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
ANNA MARIA CAPUTO LIVING TRUST 06/25/2021 1112 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
WARREN GERRITSEN TRUST 08/02/2017 1126 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
UDIT CHAUHAN (JT); SHEELU KUMARI (JT)1043 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
ELIZABETH LANGTON 1053 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
DONALD E CLAUS (JT); ANDREA C ASH (JT)1061 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
OLEN D JR TURNER (JT); IRACI TURNER (JT)1067 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
GERALDINE GRIMSDELL TRUST 5/16/15 1075 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
JOSE LUIS LOPEZ AGUILAR (JT); EDGAR LOPEZ (JT)1083 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
EMILY THOMAS 1089 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
REBECCA RAY 1095 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
THULINH PHAM 1105 S 1300 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
1326 PARAMOUNT PROPERTIES LLC 1326 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
NICHOLAS JAMES SALMON 1062 S CONCORD ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
SANTANA VILLANUEVA (JT); JULIA VILLANUEVA (JT)1068 S CONCORD ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
ESMERALDA OROZCO SENCION 1076 S CONCORD ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
HALANI UTUONE (JT); VALENITAINE UTUONE (JT)1084 S CONCORD ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
LAZARO BUZOT (JT); SANDRA CEDENO (JT)1090 S CONCORD ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
Current Occupant 1036 S NAVAJO ST Salt Lake City UT 84104
Current Occupant 1058 S NAVAJO ST Salt Lake City UT 84104
Current Occupant 1094 S NAVAJO ST Salt Lake City UT 84104
Current Occupant 1112 S NAVAJO ST Salt Lake City UT 84104
Current Occupant 1118 S NAVAJO ST Salt Lake City UT 84104
Current Occupant 1102 S NAVAJO ST Salt Lake City UT 84104
Current Occupant 1078 S NAVAJO ST NFF1 Salt Lake City UT 84104
Current Occupant 1082 S NAVAJO ST NFF2 Salt Lake City UT 84104
Current Occupant 1067 S NAVAJO ST Salt Lake City UT 84104
Current Occupant 1073 S NAVAJO ST Salt Lake City UT 84104
Current Occupant 1086 S 1300 W Salt Lake City UT 84104
Current Occupant 1044 S 1300 W Salt Lake City UT 84104
Current Occupant 1111 S 1300 W Salt Lake City UT 84104
This page has intentionally been left blank
1
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. of 2026
(Amending the zoning map pertaining to property located at 1073 S Navajo Street to rezone the
parcel from R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District to RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family
Residential District)
An ordinance amending the zoning map pertaining to property located at 1073 S. Navajo
Street from R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District to RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family
Residential District pursuant to petition number PLNPCM2025-01015.
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a
public hearing on January 14, 2026 to consider a petition from Mark Overdevest to rezone a
parcel of property located at 1073 S Navajo Street from R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential
District to R-1/7,000 Single-Family Residential District pursuant to petition number
PLNPCM2025-01015; and
WHEREAS, at its January 14, 2026 meeting, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing and voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City
Council on the petition; and
WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter, the City Council has determined that
adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Amending the Zoning Map. The Salt Lake City zoning map, as adopted
by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be and
hereby is amended to reflect that the parcel located at 1073 S Navajo Street (Tax ID No. 15-11-
2
301-008-0000), identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto, shall be and hereby is rezoned from R-
1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District to RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential
District.
SECTION 2. Condition. This ordinance is conditioned upon the owner(s) of the property
entering into a development agreement with the city requiring:
a. The existing primary home on the site be retained.
b. Any additional dwelling units over four units must be for-sale.
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
first publication.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ___ day of ____________, 2026.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2026
Published: ______________.
Ordinance rezoning 1073 S Navajo St.
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date: ___2/2/2026______________________
By: ___________________________________
Courtney Lords, Senior City Attorney
3
Exhibit “A”
Legal description of the property
Tax ID No. 15-11-301-008-0000
GLENDALE PARK PLAT A" 0729,BEG 500 FT S FR NW COR LOT 61 GLENDALE PARK
PLAT A S 70 FT E,306 FT N 70 FT W 306 FT TO BEG. 5110-1241, 5147-1358 ,5151-1080
7153-404 8647-4013 8741-8382 09161-6940 11208-0239"
This page has intentionally been left blank
SALT LAKE CITY BOARD MEMBER TRANSMITTAL
To:
Salt Lake City Council Chair Submission Date:
02/10/2026
Date Sent To Council:
02/12/2026
From:
Otto, Rachel
Subject: Board appointment Recommendation: Business Advisory Board
Recommendation:
The Administration recommends the Council approve the appointment of Kim Stowe to the Business Advisory Board for a 4 year term starting
on the date of City Council advice and consent and ending on the last Monday in December.
Kim Stowe currently lives outside the City.
Approved:*
Otto, Rachel
DEPARTMENT of ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ERIN MENDENHALL
MAYOR DIRECTOR
TO: Mayor Mendenhall
FROM: Will Wright, Salt Lake City Economic Development
RE: Business Advisory Board Appointment Recommendation
Dear Mayor Mendenhall:
The Department of Economic Development would like to recommend Kim Stowe, Managing Director of
Partnerships at Visit Salt Lake, for a non-voting position on the Business Advisory Board. Kim is
passionate about the local economy, tourism, dining, and hospitality and has experience with the Salt Lake
Chamber of Commerce, the South Valley Chamber of Commerce, and Chamber West.
Kim is willing to give her time and talents to the Business Advisory Board and lend her voice to issues
impacting dining, hospitality, and tourism.
We strongly support Kim’s application to the Business Advisory Board as a non-voting member. Please
find attached his resume and application. Feel free to reach out if you have any further questions.
Sincerely,
Will Wright
Business Development Project Manager
Liaison to the Business Advisory Board
Salt Lake City Department of Economic Development
801-535-7936
william.wright@slcgov.com
Item G3
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLC.GOV/COUNCIL
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet
Deputy Director
DATE:March 24, 2026
RE: MOTION SHEET – Title 17 - Limitation on Daily Water Use for New, Non-Residential
Uses
MOTION 1 – I move the Council adopt an ordinance amending Title 17, pertaining to limits on daily water
use for new commercial, industrial, and institutional developments.
MOTION 2– I move the Council reject the ordinance.
1
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2026
(Amending the text of Title 17 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to limits on daily water use
for new commercial, industrial, and institutional developments)
An ordinance amending Title 17 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to limits on daily
water usage for new commercial, industrial, and institutional developments.
WHEREAS, the city provides drinking water to nearly 386,000 people and has seen
significant commercial, industrial and institutional development in the past 10 years;
WHEREAS, current snowpack conditions are at only 60% of the median for this point in
the season;
WHEREAS, current data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture indicates that
statewide snowpack is at the worst levels ever recorded since data has been collected;
WHEREAS, the city’s ability to provide water service is directly impacted by such
snowpack conditions;
WHEREAS, decreased snowpack also decreases the amount of water reaching the Great
Salt Lake and exposed lakebed poses risks to human health through dust inhalation and exposure
to dust-borne contaminants such as heavy metals;
WHEREAS, immediate steps are appropriate to limit use of the city’s water resources by
water consumers that would consume very large quantities of water that would exacerbate the
pressures on the city’s water resources and the Great Salt Lake system;
WHEREAS, this measure is intended to place reasonable limits on new development or
enlargements to existing development to protect and preserve the availability of the city to
2
provide water to its current customers and to future development in the city’s water service area
that will promote public health, safety and general welfare;
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council has determined that the following ordinance
promotes the health, safety, and public welfare of the citizens of the city; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s
best interests.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Amending Subsection 17.16.010.C of the Salt Lake City Code. That
Subsection 17.16.010.C of the Salt Lake City Code (Public Services: Culinary Water System:
Furnishing of Water; Application Required), is hereby amended as follows:
C. The City will deny water service in the City's designated water service area and areas
where the City is providing water under surplus water sales agreements under the following
conditions:
1. New development: Any new non-residential development that consumes or uses more
than an annual average of two hundred thousand (200,000) gallons of potable water per day
within the City's designated water service area and under circumstances where the City is
providing water under a surplus water sales agreement. The use and consumption limit is based
on the total use from all water meters that serve the new development.
2. Expansions of Existing Uses: Any non-residential development that expands to an extent
that increases its daily potable water consumption or use to exceed an annual average of two
hundred thousand (200,000) gallons of potable water per day. Notwithstanding the provisions of
the City Code, an existing water customer that currently exceeds the water use threshold of two
hundred thousand (200,000) gallons of potable water per day will not receive water service from
the City if the expansion will result in a net increase in water consumption or use. The use and
consumption limit is based on the total use from all water meters that serve the water customer.
3. The Director of the Department of Public Utilities may also deny water service to a new
or existing water customer for water use that exceeds an average of two hundred thousand
(200,000) gallons of potable water per day over less than a year, if the proposed use would
exceed the anticipated water availably for a particular location within the City's designated water
service area or within areas where the City is providing water under surplus water sales
agreements.
4. Water Use Report Required: A new or existing water customer shall certify the
anticipated daily water use of a proposed development or expansion of existing use in a manner
satisfactory to the Department of Public Utilities. The Department of Public Utilities may require
3
an anticipated daily water use report of any water customer for a new use or expansion of an
existing use.
5. Exemption: Agricultural, schools, government owned or operated facilities that primarily
provide social services, places of worship, and hospitals.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately after it has
been published in accordance with Utah Code § 10-3-711 and recorded in accordance with Utah
Code § 10-3-713.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________,
2026.
______________________________
Alejandro Puy, Council Chair
ATTEST:
______________________________
Keith Reynolds, City Recorder
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
Erin Mendenhall, Mayor
______________________________
Keith Reynolds, City Recorder
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2026.
Published: ______________.
Ordinance Amending Daily Water Cap
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:__March 23, 2026__________________
By: __________________________________
Katherine D. Pasker, Senior City Attorney
1
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE 1
No. _____ of 2026 2
3
(Amending the text of Title 17 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to limits on daily water use 4
for new commercial, industrial, and institutional developments) 5
6
An ordinance amending Title 17 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to limits on daily 7
water usage for new commercial, industrial, and institutional developments. 8
WHEREAS, the city provides drinking water to nearly 386,000 people and has seen 9
significant commercial, industrial and institutional development in the past 10 years; 10
WHEREAS, current snowpack conditions are at only 60% of the median for this point in 11
the season; 12
WHEREAS, current data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture indicates that 13
statewide snowpack is at the worst levels ever recorded since data has been collected; 14
WHEREAS, the city’s ability to provide water service is directly impacted by such 15
snowpack conditions; 16
WHEREAS, decreased snowpack also decreases the amount of water reaching the Great 17
Salt Lake and exposed lakebed poses risks to human health through dust inhalation and exposure 18
to dust-borne contaminants such as heavy metals; 19
WHEREAS, immediate steps are appropriate to limit use of the city’s water resources by 20
water consumers that would consume very large quantities of water that would exacerbate the 21
pressures on the city’s water resources and the Great Salt Lake system; 22
WHEREAS, this measure is intended to place reasonable limits on new development or 23
enlargements to existing development to protect and preserve the availability of the city to 24
2
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
provide water to its current customers and to future development in the city’s water service area 25
that will promote public health, safety and general welfare; 26
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council has determined that the following ordinance 27
promotes the health, safety, and public welfare of the citizens of the city; and 28
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s 29
best interests. 30
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 31
32
SECTION 1. Amending Subsection 17.16.010.C of the Salt Lake City Code. That 33
Subsection 17.16.010.C of the Salt Lake City Code (Public Services: Culinary Water System: 34
Furnishing of Water; Application Required), is hereby amended as follows: 35
C. The City will deny water service in the City's designated water service area and areas 36
where the City is providing water under surplus water sales agreements under the following 37
conditions: 38
1. New development: Any new commercial or industrialnon-residential development that 39
consumes or uses more than an annual average of two hundred thousand (200,000) gallons of 40
potable water per day within the City's designated water service area and under circumstances 41
where the City is providing water under a surplus water sales agreement. The use and 42
consumption limit is based on the total use from all water meters that serve the new 43
development. 44
2. Expansions of Existing Uses: Any commercial or industrialnon-residential development 45
that expands to an extent that increases its daily potable water consumption or use to exceed an 46
annual average of two hundred thousand (200,000) gallons of potable water per day. 47
Notwithstanding the provisions of the City Code, an existing water customer that currently 48
exceeds the water use threshold of two hundred thousand (200,000) gallons of potable water per 49
day will not receive water service from the City if the expansion will result in a net increase in 50
water consumption or use. The use and consumption limit is based on the total use from all water 51
meters that serve the water customer. 52
3. The Director of the Department of Public Utilities may also deny water service to a new 53
or existing water customer for water use that exceeds an average of two hundred thousand 54
(200,000) gallons of potable water per day over less than a year, if the proposed use would 55
exceed the anticipated water availably for a particular location within the City's designated water 56
service area or within areas where the City is providing water under surplus water sales 57
agreements. 58
3
LEGISLATIVE DRAFT
4. Water Use Report Required: A new or existing water customer shall certify the 59
anticipated daily water use of a proposed development or expansion of existing use in a manner 60
satisfactory to the Department of Public Utilities. The Department of Public Utilities may require 61
an anticipated daily water use report of any water customer for a new use or expansion of an 62
existing use. 63
5. Exemption: Agricultural, residential, and institutional water customers are not subject to 64
the regulations of this subsection. For purposes of this section, an institutional water customer 65
includesschools, government owned or operated facilities that primarily provide social services, 66
places of worship, and hospitals. 67
68
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately after it has 69
been published in accordance with Utah Code § 10-3-711 and recorded in accordance with Utah 70
Code § 10-3-713. 71
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________, 72
2026. 73
74
______________________________ 75
Alejandro Puy, Council Chair 76
ATTEST: 77
78
______________________________ 79
Keith Reynolds, City Recorder 80
81
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. 82
83
84
Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. 85
86
87
______________________________ 88
Erin Mendenhall, Mayor 89
90
91
92
______________________________ 93
Keith Reynolds, City Recorder 94
95
(SEAL) 96
97
Bill No. ________ of 2026. 98
Published: ______________. 99
Ordinance Amending Daily Water Cap 100
101
Item G1
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLC.GOV/COUNCIL
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Kate Werrett
Budget & Policy Analyst
DATE:March 24, 2026
RE: RESOLUTION: SUGAR HOUSE STREETCAR (S-LINE) EXTENSION INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT
MOTION 1 – ADOPT RESOLUTION
I move that the Council adopt a resolution to approve the Sugar House Streetcar (S-Line) Extension Interlocal
Agreement between Salt Lake City, the Salt Lake City Community Reinvestment Agency, and the Utah Transit
Authority.
MOTION 2– NOT ADOPT
I move that the Council not adopt the resolution.
SALT LAKE CITY TRANSMITTAL
To:
Salt Lake City Council Chair
Submission Date:
03/11/2026
Date Sent to Council:
03/12/2026
From:
Department *
Community and Neighborhood
Employee Name:
Lundmark, Susan
E-mail
susan.lundmark@slc.gov
Department Director Signature
Director Signed Date
03/12/2026
Chief Administrator Officer's Signature
Chief Administrator Officer's Signed Date
03/12/2026
Subject:
Sugar House Streetcar (S-Line) Extension Interlocal Agreement (ILA)
Additional Staff Contact:
Lynn Jacobs, lynn.jacobs@slc.gov
Presenters/Staff Table
Lynn Jacobs, lynn.jacobs@slc.gov
Document Type
Resolution
Budget Impact?
Yes
No
Budget Impact:
A financial commitment is made in the Interlocal Agreement, yet the appropriations previously approved by the Council are already sufficient to cover the costs. Costs for the City are $375,000 in Transportation funding and $20,000 in Public Lands funding.
Recommendation:
That the City Council approve a resolution (Exhibit 1) authorizing the Mayor to enter into the ILA with UTA and CRA (Exhibit 2) to construct the Sugar House Streetcar Extension.
Background/Discussion
The Sugar House Streetcar (S-Line) Extension is a transit design and construction project to extend the existing S-Line track approximately 0.25 miles to the east from its current terminus at Fairmont Station (approximately the intersection of McClelland Ave and Simpson Ave), with a new terminus at a new station to be built on privately-owned property at the Sugar House Shopping Center. The design and construction of the project is led by Utah Transit Authority (UTA) with collaboration from Salt Lake City (SLC) Transportation Division. Funding for the project comes from State funding, UTA, and SLC. Federal funding is not included in the project.
This transmittal presents the Sugar House Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement (ILA) that will allow the project to proceed into and through the construction phase. The parties to the ILA are UTA, the SLC Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA), and SLC. UTA has designed the project, and will own, operate, and maintain the future rail and rail envelope (“foul zone”), whereas both SLC and CRA own property/right-of-way that will be used for the extension.
Public Hearing
Is there a City or State statutory requirement to hold a public hearing for this item?*
Yes
No
The City Council reserves the option to hold and notice for a public hearing pursuant to their practices for public engagement.
Does the City have a general practice to hold a public hearing for this item?*
Yes
No
Public Process
The City’s Transit Master Plan, adopted by Council in 2017, discusses and recommends the S-Line Extension project and notes inclusion of the project in the Regional Transportation Plan. The Master Plan public process was very robust and included 16 stakeholder interviews, 18 mobile events, and over 2000 unique online comments. In addition, the S-Line Extension project has been presented to the UTA Board of Directors and the Utah Transportation Commission, and the project team has coordinated regularly with the Sugar House Community Council. The SLC Ombudsman is serving as a project liaison and communicates regularly with both the project team and the community and business stakeholders. SLC Transportation Division will remain involved with the project throughout construction.
This page has intentionally been left blank
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Tammy Hunsaker
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Sugar House Streetcar (S-Line) Extension is a transit design and
construction project to extend the existing S-Line track approximately 0.25 miles to the east from its
current terminus at Fairmont Station (approximately the intersection of McClelland Ave and Simpson
Ave), with a new terminus at a new station to be built on privately-owned property at the Sugar House
Shopping Center. The design and construction of the project is led by Utah Transit Authority (UTA) with
collaboration from Salt Lake City (SLC) Transportation Division. Funding for the project comes from
State funding, UTA, and SLC. Federal funding is not included in the project.
This transmittal presents the Sugar House Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement (ILA) that will allow
the project to proceed into and through the construction phase. The parties to the ILA are UTA, the SLC
Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA), and SLC. UTA has designed the project, and will own,
operate, and maintain the future rail and rail envelope (“foul zone”), whereas both SLC and CRA own
property/right-of-way that will be used for the extension.
PUBLIC PROCESS: The City’s Transit Master Plan, adopted by Council in 2017, discusses and
recommends the S-Line Extension project and notes inclusion of the project in the Regional
Transportation Plan. The Master Plan public process was very robust and included 16 stakeholder
interviews, 18 mobile events, and over 2000 unique online comments. In addition, the S-Line Extension
project has been presented to the UTA Board of Directors and the Utah Transportation Commission, and
the project team has coordinated regularly with the Sugar House Community Council. The SLC
Ombudsman is serving as a project liaison and communicates regularly with both the project team and the
community and business stakeholders. SLC Transportation Division will remain involved with the project
throughout construction.
Historic Planning Commission (HLC) Records Not applicable
Planning Commission (PC) Records Not applicable
EXHIBITS:
1) Resolution-Transportation.S-Line Extension Interlocal Agreement
2) UTA-SLC S-Line Extension Final Interlocal Agreement
a) ILA Exhibit A-Licensed Property Map
b) ILA Exhibit B-Design Drawings
This page has intentionally been left blank
1
RESOLUTION NO. ________ OF 2026
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUGAR HOUSE STREETCAR EXTENSION
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY, THE SALT LAKE CITY
COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AGENCY, AND THE UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) owns and operates the Sugar House
Streetcar (S-Line), which is a public transportation modern trolly line that runs easterly from
UTA’s North/South TRAX light rail corridor for approximately two miles through South Salt
Lake City and Salt Lake City at approximately 2200 South; and
WHEREAS, Salt Lake City (City) signed an Interlocal Agreement regarding the initial
development of the S-Line, dated December 13, 2011, for the construction and operation of the
S-Line in the City, and signed an additional Interlocal Agreement regarding the S-Line Corridor
Management, dated December 8, 2013, outlining management policies and providing for
reciprocal license agreements for the use of certain City-owned property for the project and use
of certain UTA-owned property by the City; and
WHEREAS, UTA is engaged in a project to design, construct, and operate the S-Line
Extension that will extend the existing S-Line from McClelland Street parallel to Sugarmont
Drive going east towards Simpson Avenue and across Highland Drive to the Sugar House
Shopping Center in Salt Lake City; and
WHEREAS, to facilitate the expansion of public transportation in the City through the S-
Line Extension, the City and the Salt Lake Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA) desire to
permit UTA to use certain portions of the rights-of-way and property required for the S-Line
Extension without cost to UTA; and
2
WHEREAS, the City, CRA, and UTA desire to enter into an Interlocal Agreement to
define the parties’ roles and responsibilities with respect to the use of City and CRA property,
and the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the S-Line Extension.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah that
the Sugar House Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement, in the form attached to this
resolution as Exhibit A, is hereby approved.
DATED this ______ day of ________________, 2026.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of
________________, 2026.
SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
By:___________________________
Alejandro Puy, Council Chair
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
______________________________
Keith Reynolds, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date: __________________________________
By: ___________________________________
Allison Parks, Deputy City Attorney
March 9, 2026
/s/ Allison Parks
This page has intentionally been left blank
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 1 of 16
SUGAR HOUSE STREETCAR EXTENSION INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
This Sugar House Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement (the “Agreement”) is entered into as
the day this Agreement is executed by both Parties (the “Execution Date”), by and between the UTAH
TRANSIT AUTHORITY, a large public transit district organized pursuant to the laws of the State of Utah
(hereinafter “UTA”), SALT LAKE CITY COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AGENCY, a Utah political
subdivision (hereinafter “CRA”), and SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, a Utah municipality and
political subdivision (hereinafter “City” ), each a “Party” and collectively the “Parties.”
RECITALS
WHEREAS, City, CRA, and UTA are public agencies as defined by the Interlocal Cooperation Act, Utah
Code Section 11-13-101 et seq., and as such, may enter into an agreement with one another to provide services
that they are each authorized by statute to provide; and
WHEREAS, the City owns and has jurisdiction over a network of streets within its municipal
boundaries; and
WHEREAS, UTA owns and operates the Sugar House Streetcar in the rail corridor known as the
“Sugar House Spur,” which runs easterly from UTA’s North/South TRAX light rail corridor for
approximately two miles through South Salt Lake City (“SSL”) and Salt Lake City at approximately 2200
South; and
WHEREAS, SSL is not a party to this Agreement as the limits of construction are outside of their
city limits; and
WHEREAS, UTA is engaged in a project to design, construct, and operate the S-Line Streetcar
Extension that will extend from McClelland Street parallel to Sugarmont Drive going east towards
Simpson Avenue and across Highland Drive to the Sugar House Shopping Center in Salt Lake City (the
“Project” or the “S-Line Streetcar Extension”), serving Salt Lake City; and
WHEREAS, the CRA currently owns property under a portion of the Project, but, shortly after
the execution of this Agreement, intends to convey the impacted property to the City; and
WHEREAS, a portion of the Project will be constructed within certain public rights-of-way and/or
property owned by the City, as generally identified in “Exhibit A” (“Licensed Property Map”), and as more
specifically depicted in the S-Line Streetcar Extension alignment illustrations attached hereto as Exhibit
“B” (“Design Drawings”); and
WHEREAS, the S-Line Extension will contain an exclusive alignment between McClelland Street
Crossing and the intersection of 1100 East & Simpson Avenue, and then operate in mixed-traffic
conditions until and across Highland Drive, with a terminus at Sugar House Shopping Center on privately-
owned property (as depicted in Exhibit “A”); and
WHEREAS, the Parties have collaborated on this Project for several years; and
WHEREAS, UTA is the contracting party for the Project and has retained a progressive design-
build contractor for the nearly-completed design and construction of the Project; and
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 2 of 16
WHEREAS, UTA will cause the Project to be designed and constructed, at a minimum, in
accordance with UTA’s Design Criteria Manual of standards and requirements, and, where applicable, in
accordance with the Manual of Standard Specifications and Standard Plans, as published by the Utah
Chapter of APWA, and the City Public Utilities Department Performance Specifications and Design
Criteria for culinary water, sanitary sewer and storm drain facilities, and the FHWA Manual of Uniform
Traffic Control Devices, and the Americans With Disabilities Act, and all applicable building codes, laws
and regulations; and
WHEREAS, the State has provided funding for the Project, and City has committed $395,000.00
towards the Project, and UTA will bear additional Project costs; and
WHEREAS, the City signed an Interlocal Agreement Regarding The Sugar House Streetcar
Project, dated December 13, 2011, for the construction and operation of the initial streetcar system along
the Sugar House Spur in Salt Lake City, and signed an additional Interlocal Agreement Regarding the Sugar
House Corridor Management, dated December 8, 2013, outlining management policies for the Streetcar Project
and providing for reciprocal license agreements for the use of certain City-owned property for the project and
use of certain UTA-owned property by the City (“Historic Agreements”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Historic Agreements, the City desires to permit UTA to use the rights-
of-way and property required for the S-Line Streetcar Extension; and
WHERAS, UTA and the City desire to define the Parties’ roles and responsibilities with respect to
the design and construction of the Project and with respect to the operation and maintenance of the
completed S-Line Streetcar Extension.
AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, based on the stated Recitals, which are incorporated herein by reference, and
for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, the mutual benefits
to the Parties to be derived here from, and for other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which the Parties acknowledge, it is hereby agreed as follows:
ARTICLE I
INCORPORATED TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
For purposes of this Agreement, the following definitions shall apply:
1.1 “City Facilities” means all City-owned surface, aerial, or subsurface public
improvements of any kind which are located on the City or CRA property, including, without limitation,
public utility facilities, water and sewer lines, gas lines, curbs and gutters, sidewalks, street paving, storm
drains, canals, trees and landscaping, traffic signals, streetlights, electrical wiring, controllers, poles and
related facilities, lighting facilities, and fire protection facilities.
1.2 “Communications Infrastructure” means UTA’s duct bank for fiber and other lines
necessary for the control of the track and station. This duct bank is located under the trackway, as shown in
Exhibit “B.”
1.3 “Foul Zone” means the area that is within ten (10’) feet of the center line of the S-Line
Streetcar Extension Trackway. When the S-Line Streetcar Extension Trackway crosses a signalized grade
crossing, the foul zone is reduced to four (4’) feet from the rail head, measured from the outer side of the
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 3 of 16
rail head that is facing away from the center of the tracks.
1.4 “Licensed Property” means the public right-of-way between the rail alignment curbs,
consisting of the McClelland Street Crossing, Exclusive Trackway, and Mixed-Flow segments as depicted
in Exhibits “A” and “B”. The Licensed Property includes any property owned by the CRA that CRA plans
to convey to the City.
1.5 “S-Line Streetcar Extension Trackway” means the sections of track and area within the
curb limits of the trackway to be constructed on or adjacent to Salt Lake City Streets as part of the Project.
1.6 “Salt Lake City Streets” means those public streets within the City’s municipal
boundaries that are not designated as State highways under Utah Code Ann. Title 72, Chapter 4. Until such
property is conveyed to the City, Salt Lake City Streets also means certain portions of CRA property under
the Licensed Property.
1.7 “Salt Lake City Street Improvements” means the land, roadway materials, curb, gutter,
sidewalks, traffic signal infrastructure and equipment and other improvements to be acquired, installed,
constructed, reconstructed, or relocated on Salt Lake City Streets as part of the Project, and which are
outside of the curb limits of the S-Line Streetcar Extension Trackway and are not considered UTA Facilities.
The Salt Lake City Street Improvements include relocated curb and gutter, relocated sidewalks, modified
roadway widths, added traffic signals and control devices for grade crossings, and other additional
appurtenances required for the Project.
1.8 “Party” and “Parties” means UTA or Salt Lake City, and UTA and Salt Lake City,
respectively.
1.9 “UTA Facilities” means the S-Line Streetcar Extension Trackway, appurtenant
improvements, and Communications Infrastructure serving the S-Line Streetcar Extension.
ARTICLE II
ALIGNMENT AND USE OF SALT LAKE CITY STREETS
2.1 The S-Line Streetcar Extension alignment is depicted on Exhibits “A” and “B” as attached
hereto and incorporated herein.
2.2 The City (and, as applicable, CRA) grants to UTA a license in, and authorizes UTA to use,
on a non-exclusive basis, the following portions of Salt Lake City Streets and land (collectively referred to
as the “Licensed Property”) for the use of UTA to construct, operate and maintain the Project in the City
right-of-way and property as depicted in the plans and maps attached as Exhibits “A” and “B”:
2.2.1 Such surface areas and air rights of City streets and property along the Project as
necessary for UTA to construct the trackwork, grade crossing, signals, Communication
Infrastructure, overhead contact system, and other appurtenances as necessary for the efficient
operation of the Project already occupied by existing or currently planned City streets or land.
UTA’s use of such property shall be strictly limited to the terms, conditions, limitations, and
restrictions contained herein.
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 4 of 16
2.2.2 Such subsurface areas of City streets and property along the Project alignment as are
necessary for UTA to install Communications Infrastructure such as duct banks, conduit, and fiber
as necessary for the efficient operation of the Project, but not to include such subsurface areas that
are already occupied by existing or currently planned utilities or other subsurface areas where the
location of the Project’s Communications Infrastructure would have an unreasonable negative
impact on existing or currently planned utilities.
2.2.3 Whenever the City undertakes or approves the planned maintenance or
construction of any facility owned, maintained, or operated by the City (including without
limitation, installation of traffic signals, streetlights, sidewalks and pedestrian amenities where the
improvement is so constructed or shall become a public facility owned, maintained, or operated
by the City) and such maintenance or construction impacts the Project, the City shall:
(a) Provide notice of such maintenance or construction to UTA at least one hundred
and twenty (120) days prior to the commencement of such work; and
(b) Provide UTA with copies of pertinent portions of the plans and specifications for
any street improvement project so that UTA may consider and comment on such
improvement project in regard to impacts on the S-Line.
(c) No later than thirty (30) days after receipt of such notice and such plans and
specifications, UTA shall complete its review of such facilities at no charge or expense to
the City so as to accommodate such maintenance or construction at least thirty (30) days
prior to commencement of such work.
(d) If any relocation of UTA’s Communication Infrastructure is required, UTA may,
within forty-five (45) days after receipt of written notice requesting such relocation, submit
to the City written alternatives to such relocation. Upon receipt, the City shall evaluate
such alternatives and shall advise UTA in writing if one or more of the proposed
alternatives are suitable to accommodate the work which would otherwise necessitate
relocation of UTA’s Communication Infrastructure. UTA agrees not to relocate
Communication Infrastructure outside of the S-Line Streetcar Extension Trackway. In the
event that the City is satisfied that there is no reasonable alternative, UTA shall relocate
its Communication Infrastructure as otherwise provided in this Section. The City’s
determination shall be conclusive and not subject to any review, provided the City has
acted in a non-discriminatory, non- arbitrary manner.
(e) If the City requires the relocation (temporary or permanent) of UTA’s
Communication Infrastructure for the purpose of repairing, maintaining, or constructing
any City Facility, UTA shall make such relocation and be responsible for all costs of such
relocation. UTA may propose alternatives to such relocation to the same extent and
subject to the same limitations as set forth in this Section.
(f) Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event of an emergency requiring
immediate attention or access by the City to City Facilities or City Occupied Property,
the City shall not be obligated to provide UTA prior notice, plans, or specifications as
required in this Section. The City will notify UTA of any emergency work as early as
practicable. In the event of such an emergency and upon request by the City, UTA agrees
to stop S-Line operations at a location prior to the emergency area to prevent any
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 5 of 16
conflicts between S-Line operations and the emergency situation.
2.3 UTA accepts the Licensed Property “as-is” and hereby acknowledges that City has made
no representation or warranty whatsoever with respect to the condition of the Licensed Property or fitness
for a particular purpose, including but not limited to title matters inconsistent with use of the Licensed
Property. As a provision of the Agreement, the City shall have the right to review and approve relevant
Project deliverables and improvements that will be the responsibility of the City to operate and maintain as
part of the Project. Should UTA fail to provide the City the right to review and approve relevant Project
deliverables, the City has the right to refuse to accept the responsibility to operate and maintain such
improvements. Such Project deliverables and improvements include UTA’s construction of a sidewalk
adjacent to the Licensed Property during construction of the Project, which will be maintained by City and
reconstructed by City to meet City standards. Upon satisfactory completion of the Project, the City shall
accept such improvements that the City approved.
2.4 The final, precise locations and boundaries of the Licensed Property, City Facilities, and
UTA Facilities shall be subject to change until delivery and acceptance of the final civil Design Drawings
by both Parties. Because the Project is primarily a betterment for the benefit of public use and furthers
specific goals and objectives set forth in the various City plans and official documents, and because UTA
shall, at its own expense, operate, maintain, repair, and restore the Licensed Property, including paying all
utilities and expenses associated with operation of the S-Line Streetcar Extension, the benefits to the City
under this Agreement are adequate to provide fair and adequate consideration for use of the Licensed
Property, without further compensation from UTA.
2.5 The City shall contribute $375,000.00 towards Project costs to be used for reconstructing
Simpson Ave including all associated paving, sidewalk improvements, landscaping, and utility work, and
up to an additional $20,000 for the replacement of a water meter servicing Fairmont Park.
2.6 The City shall own the Salt Lake City Street Improvements and will have no ownership
interest in the UTA Facilities.
2.7 The Parties do not intend that UTA be deemed a “tenant” pursuant to Utah Code Ann. §
78B-6-801 et seq. Rather, the Parties intend that the Parties’ rights and remedies under this Agreement be
determined solely by the express terms of this Agreement.
ARTICLE III
TERM
3.1 This Agreement is executed with the anticipation that UTA and the City will be able to
fund the project with local funding, sufficient to complete the Project.
3.2 The rights set forth above are for an initial term concluding on December 31, 2060. The
term may automatically renew for an additional term of twenty-five (25) years unless either Party provides
notice at least one hundred and eighty (180) days prior to the expiration of the initial term that it does not
intend to renew the Agreement. Because the forecasted use of the S-Line Streetcar Extension is expected
to exceed the initial term and subsequent renewals thereof, the Parties agree to cooperate in seeking from
the City’s governing body an extended term, reserving unto the City full legislative discretion.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, City may not terminate this agreement so long as UTA is providing public
transit service for City residents on the Licensed Property.
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 6 of 16
3.3 Notwithstanding section 3.2, the City may terminate this Agreement prior to the expiration
of the initial term if (i) UTA permanently terminates or abandons transit service on the Licensed Property,
(ii) UTA does not provide transit service on the Licensed Property for a period of two (2) years, except
when due to a force majeure event and any time necessary to reconstruct UTA Facilities, or (iii) UTA
commits an uncured material, continuing breach of this Agreement.
3.4 Prior to terminating the Agreement for one of the reasons stated in section 3.3, the City shall
provide UTA with written notice of its intent to terminate and its basis for doing so. If UTA does not
recommence transit service or cure the breach, as applicable, within six (6) months from the delivery date
of the City’s notice to UTA, the rights granted in the Agreement will terminate.
3.5 Upon the expiration of this Agreement or earlier termination of the of this Agreement, all
UTA Facilities located on the Licensed Property shall, at the option of the City, be removed, and the
Licensed Property shall be restored to a condition consistent with the then current condition of adjoining
streets or other public facilities with respect to grade, appearance, quality, finish and type of construction,
at the sole cost and expense of UTA. Restoration shall be performed within ninety (90) days of such
expiration or termination, or such longer period as shall be required by the nature of the work and agreed
to by the City. If UTA fails to restore the Licensed Property, the City may perform such work after thirty
(30) days prior written notice to UTA, and UTA hereby agrees to pay all costs of the City in connection
with such work, including any collection costs and attorney's fees.
ARTICLE IV
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
4.1 UTA shall operate the S-Line Streetcar Extension and provide regular service to the general
public in accordance with applicable Federal and State law.
4.1.1 In further consideration of UTA’s use of the Licensed Property and as part of UTA’s
operation and maintenance responsibilities, UTA shall pay all expenses associated with maintaining
the Project in an operable condition and Licensed Property, including, but not limited to, gas,
electrical, water, sewer, recycling, and trash service.
4.1.2 In recognition of the safety concerns, the Parties intend that no part of the S-Line
Streetcar Extension or S-Line Streetcar Extension Trackway will be considered public forums.
4.1.3 Without the prior written approval of the City, no commercial advertising shall be
allowed on UTA Facilities except that advertising for the S-Line Streetcar Extension itself shall be
allowed to the extent it conforms to the Salt Lake City Code, subject to UTA approval of any
advertising thereupon.
4.1.4 UTA shall obtain all required City agreements, permits, and property rights before
proceeding with constructing the Project, performing any maintenance or improvement on or near
City Facilities or Licensed Property, including but not limited to public way permits, Transportation
permits, and Department of Public Utilities permits.
4.1.5 As part of the Project, traffic signal systems along the S-Line Streetcar Extension
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 7 of 16
alignment will be programmed to give priority to S-Line Streetcar Extension vehicles (except that
the highest priority will always be given to emergency vehicles) where the Parties deem
appropriate, with the intent of striking an appropriate balance between S-Line Streetcar Extension
efficiency and other local and regional traffic needs. The initial signal timing will be determined by
the Parties as part of the design process. Once the S-Line Streetcar Extension is operational, upon
the request of one Party, the Parties shall meet to assess system performance and discuss potential
adjustments to the traffic signal priority system. S-Line Extension vehicles traveling on City streets
shall be subject to all generally applicable traffic control ordinances and regulations. The Parties
agree to work together to attempt to implement a solution that meets each Party’s needs to the
greatest extent possible and to take advantage of technologies to improve system performance for
both the S-Line Streetcar Extension and general traffic.
4.1.6 UTA shall maintain, repair, and replace the Project and Licensed Property as
necessary to keep the Project in good operating condition at UTA’s expense. The Project shall be
maintained consistent with the Design Drawings and any other applicable law. UTA shall be
responsible for all routine maintenance and long-term maintenance of the UTA Facilities and other
storm drainage, facilities and in the Foul Zone. UTA shall keep the Licensed Property free of weeds,
garbage, graffiti, and unsightly or deleterious objects or structures. UTA shall be responsible for
the concrete associated with trackage and shall be maintained as a smooth, safe, and consistent
surface, free of depression or obstructions and consistent with the grade of the public streets and
the City shall be responsible for the road pavement. The City shall be responsible for all routine
maintenance and long-term maintenance of the City Facilities, including City streets, sidewalks,
trails, and pedestrian crossings of the S-Line Streetcar Extension Trackway outside of the Foul
Zone. Notwithstanding, the City will maintain the landscape buffer within the Foul Zone so long
as there is adequate separation in place to satisfy the applicable safety requirements and allow City
staff to work freely.
4.1.7 The City shall be responsible for snow removal on City Facilities including any
pedestrian crossing of the S-Line Streetcar Extension Trackway.
4.1.8 The City shall also be responsible for all routine and long-term maintenance of any
new landscaping installed in either the City Facilities or Salt Lake City Street Improvements,
including the landscape buffer and sidewalk to the north of the S-Line Extension alignment.
4.1.9 UTA shall repair any damage to or disturbance of the City Facilities, surface or
subsurface of the Licensed Property or other City streets that may become damaged or disturbed in
connection with the installation, maintenance, removal, operation, or replacement of the S-Line
Streetcar Extension. Any such maintenance within the S-Line Streetcar Extension System will be
coordinated between the Parties to minimize disruption to the S-Line Streetcar Extension, other
traffic, and public utilities. Should any repair or maintenance work impact the City-owned canal
under Highland Drive, UTA shall not schedule or conduct any repair or maintenance work without
first obtaining written approval from the City’s Department of Public Utilities. Prior to UTA’s
performance of any maintenance or repair work, UTA will obtain any permits required by the City
in connection with such work including a permit to work in the right of way, and shall abide by the
reasonable requirements thereof. Any work impacting the City’s canal is limited to a seasonal
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 8 of 16
window from October 15th and March 1st.
4.1.10 In the event that City requires access to City Facilities for maintenance, repair,
upgrades, or other work on City Facilities, UTA shall cooperate with City to ensure City has full
access to the City Facilities. UTA agrees to prioritize City maintenance, repair, upgrades and other
work during the City’s preferred business hours of Monday through Friday from 7:00 AM to 5:00
PM. To the extent any UTA facilities or structures must be modified, relocated, or removed to
permit City access or to accommodate modifications to such City Facilities, UTA shall cooperate
with City to make such modifications at UTA’s cost.
4.1.11 The Parties shall in good faith endeavor to conduct their maintenance, repair,
replacement and other activities in a manner that will avoid disruption to other Parties' activities
whenever possible. By way of example, the City shall coordinate with UTA regarding maintenance
work on the City Streets, and may agree to perform such work when the Project is not operating, in
order to avoid disruption. Conversely, UTA shall coordinate with the City when performing
maintenance work on the Project within the City Streets, and may agree to perform such work in
off-peak traffic times to minimize disruptions to residents, businesses, and other traffic. In cases of
emergency or exigent circumstances, the Party effecting the repair shall immediately notify and
cooperate with the other party
4.1.12 To coordinate maintenance responsibilities, the Parties shall exchange routine and
emergency contact information and keep such information current on “Exhibit “C”, which exhibit
is intended by the Parties to be a living document to be updated periodically (“Exhibit C” is attached
hereto and hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement by reference).
4.2 UTA acknowledges the existence of public and private utility facilities under the S-Line
Streetcar Extension. The City reserves the right to enter the S-Line Streetcar Extension, and authorize other
utility owners to do the same, as and when reasonably necessary to inspect, maintain, repair, or replace
facilities located on, under, or adjacent to the S-Line Streetcar Extension. The City shall coordinate such
work with UTA in advance, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, in order to ensure safety and
to minimize disruption of S-Line Streetcar Extension operations and agrees wherever possible to perform
such work when the Project is not operating, in order to avoid disruption.
4.2.1 The City may grant additional franchises and permits in the future for utility facilities
under or over the S-Line Streetcar Extension, so long as such facilities do not unreasonably interfere
with operations of the S-Line Streetcar Extension. The City shall notify UTA of (i) any requests for
new crossings of the S-Line Streetcar Extension, and (ii) any applications for street cuts or work
permits near the S-Line Streetcar Extension. City permits over, under, across, or parallel to the S-
Line Streetcar Extension shall require a Right-of-Entry Agreement and TRAX Access Permits from
UTA prior to construction or maintenance of said utilities. UTA shall have four (4) weeks to review
and object to such requests or applications prior to work commencing. The Parties shall cooperate to
minimize disruption to S-Line Streetcar Extension service caused by the granting of any new
permits for new utility facilities.
4.3 UTA has selected and engaged a qualified firm to design and construct the S-Line Streetcar
Extension.
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 9 of 16
4.3.1 All construction within the City streets, but outside of the S-Line Extension
Trackway, shall comply with the City’s currently adopted engineering standards.
4.3.2 Throughout the construction process, the City will have continuous access to the
Project site to monitor Project construction and to ensure the construction meets applicable City
specifications and is performed in accordance with the final design documents.
4.4 Except for where the bollards and chain provide a necessary buffer, including the landscape
buffer, sidewalk to the north of the S-Line Extension alignment discussed herein, and adjacent utilities
managed by the City, the City shall obtain a Roadway Worker Protection permit from UTA, and a Right of
Entry license, if performing work within ten (10) feet of centerline of track, or within ten (10) feet of the
catenary lines.
ARTICLE V
WARRANTIES &
INDEMNITY
5.1 UTA agrees to warrant the materials and workmanship of the Project for a minimum of one
(1) year. If the Project includes work on the City canal under Highland Drive, the warranty is required to
cover two full, operating irrigation seasons. The warranty period shall commence upon the acceptance of
the City Facilities in writing by City Engineer. UTA’s responsibility under its warranty is limited to repair
or replacement of the defective condition, materials, or workmanship of the Project. The City will be
beneficiary of such warranty, and each Party shall bear its own legal costs and fees incurred while enforcing
such warranty. UTA will respond to any warranty request from the City within 48 hours, providing a
corrective work plan to protect the Canal, if necessary.
5.2 UTA shall use the Licensed Property at its own risk and agrees to indemnify, defend, and
hold harmless the City, CRA and their respective officers, officials, employees, and representatives for,
from, and against all liabilities, claims, damages, losses, suits, judgments, causes of action and costs
(including court costs and attorneys’ fees,) of any nature, kind or description (“Losses”) resulting from or by
reason of UTA’s use of the Licensed Property or any activities conducted thereon, including, but not limited
to: (a) negligence or fault on the part of UTA or any employees, officials, agents or contractors of UTA
related to the design, construction, maintenance or other work performed by or on behalf of UTA on the S-
Line Streetcar Extension within the Licensed Property; (b) negligence or fault on the part of UTA or any
employees, officials, agents, or contractors of UTA in the use or operation of the S-Line Streetcar Extension
within the Licensed Property; or (c) UTA’s breach of any provision of this Agreement. In the event any
Losses are caused by the joint or concurrent negligence of UTA and the City, UTA shall indemnify the City
only in proportion to UTA’s own negligence and/or fault. Likewise, the City agrees to indemnify, defend,
and hold harmless UTA and UTA’s officers, officials, employees, and representatives for, from, and against
all liabilities, claims, damages, losses, suits, judgments, causes of action and costs (including court costs
and attorneys’ fees,), of any nature, kind or description (“UTA Losses”) resulting from negligence or fault
on the part of the City or any or its employees, officials, or agents related to its involvement with the Project.
In the event any UTA Losses are caused by the joint or concurrent negligence of UTA and the City, the
City shall indemnify UTA only in proportion to the City’s own negligence. This Section shall survive
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 10 of 16
expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement.
5.3 Governmental Immunity: UTA, City, and CRA are governmental entities under the
Governmental Immunity Act of Utah, Section 63G-7-101 et seq. 1953 of the Utah Code (as amended) (the
“Governmental Immunity Act”). Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in this Agreement, (i) the
obligations to indemnify, defend and/or hold harmless in this Agreement are limited to the dollar amounts
set forth in the Governmental Immunity Act and are further limited only to the claims that arise from the
negligent acts or omissions or fault of the parties, and (ii) nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to be
a waiver of any Party of any defenses or limits of liability available under the Government Immunity Act.
ARTICLE VI
ENTIRE AGREEMENT – COUNTERPARTS
6.1 This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement and understanding of the Parties with
respect to the subject matter hereof, and shall supersede all offers, negotiations and other agreements with respect
thereto. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and executed by the authorized representatives
of each Party. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and by each of the Parties
hereto on separate counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be an original, but all
such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same instrument. Any signature page of this
Agreement may be detached from any counterpart and reattached to any other counterpart hereof. The
facsimile transmission of a signed original of this Agreement or any counterpart hereof and the
retransmission of any signed facsimile transmission hereof shall be the same as delivery of an original. To
facilitate execution of this Agreement, the Parties may execute and exchange and sign this agreement
through electronic or digital signatures, electronic mail or mailed counterparts of the signature pages, which
shall be valid, binding and admissible as though original.
6.2 This Agreement is binding upon all of the assigns, grantees and successors in interest to
each of the Parties and shall remain in full force and effect until amended as provided herein.
ARTICLE VII
FORUM SELECTION AND CHOICE OF LAW
7.1 This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted under the laws of the State of Utah and
the Parties agree that any action or proceeding brought concerning this Agreement may be brought only in
the courts of Salt Lake County, Utah, and each Party hereto hereby consents to the jurisdiction of such
courts.
ARTICLE VIII
NONWAIVER
8.1 No covenant or condition of this Agreement may be waived by any Party, unless done so in
writing, clearly stating such waiver. Forbearance or indulgence by any party in any regard whatsoever shall
not constitute a waiver of the covenants or conditions to be performed by the other.
ARTICLE IX
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 11 of 16
SEVERABILITY
9.1 This Agreement is executed by the Parties under current interpretation of any and all applicable
federal, state, county, municipal, or other local statutes, ordinances, or laws. Furthermore, each and every
separate division hereof shall have independent and severable status from each other division, or combination
thereof, for the determination of legality, so that if any separate division herein is determined to be
unconstitutional, illegal, violative of trade or commerce, in contravention of public policy, void, invalid or
unenforceable for any reason, that separate division shall be treated as a nullity but such holding or
determination shall have no effect upon the validity or enforceability of each and every other division, or other
combination thereof.
ARTICLE X
RECORDATION OF MEMORANDUM
10.1 The Parties agree that City may record a memorandum of this Agreement against City’s title
in the Official Records of the Salt Lake County Recorder’s Office. Such memorandum will be terminated
upon expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement.
ARTICLE XI DEFAULT
11.1 The failure to perform any provision of this Agreement by any Party, if such failure is not
cured within thirty (30) days after written notice specifying such failure has been given to the non-performing
party by the other party, shall constitute a default by the non-performing party. Provided, if a default cannot
reasonably be cured within said thirty (30) day period, the non-performing party shall not be in default of this
Agreement if it commences to cure the default within the thirty (30) day period, and diligently and in good
faith continues thereafter to cure the default.
11.2 Upon the occurrence of any of the aforesaid events of default, the non-defaulting party shall
have the option to pursue any remedy provided by law. Pursuit of any remedy hereunder shall not preclude
pursuit of any other remedy, nor shall pursuit of any remedy constitute a forfeiture or waiver of any of the
damages accruing to the non-defaulting party by reason of the violation of any of the terms, provisions and
covenants herein contained. The specific remedies to which the non-defaulting party may resort under the
terms of this Agreement are cumulative and are not intended to be exclusive of any other remedies or means
of redress to which the non-defaulting party may be lawfully entitled in case of any breach or threatened
breach of any provision of this Agreement by the other party and may include termination of the Agreement
consistent with Section 3. The failure of the non-defaulting party to insist in any one or more cases upon the
strict performance of any of the covenants of this Agreement or to exercise any option herein contained shall
not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment for the future of such covenant or option. A receipt by the
non-defaulting party of any money payment with knowledge of the breach of any covenant or agreement
hereof shall not be deemed a waiver of such breach. In addition to the other remedies provided in this
Agreement, the non-defaulting party shall be entitled to restrain by injunction the violation or attempted or
threatened violation by the defaulting party of any of the covenants, conditions or provisions of this
Agreement or to a decree compelling specific performance of any of such covenants, conditions or
provisions.
ARTICLE XII
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 12 of 16
INTERLOCAL PROVISIONS
12.1 In satisfaction of the Interlocal Cooperation Act and in connection with this Agreement, the Parties
agree as follows:
a. This Agreement shall be approved by each Party pursuant to § 11-13-202.5;
b. This Agreement shall be reviewed as to the proper form and compliance with applicable
law by an authorized attorney on behalf of each Party pursuant to § 11-13-202.5;
c. An executed original counterpart shall be filed with the keeper of records for each Party
pursuant to § 11-13-209;
d. The term of this Agreement does not exceed fifty (50) years pursuant to § 11-13-216 of
the Interlocal Act;
e. No separate legal entity is created by the terms of this Agreement. No real or personal
property shall be acquired jointly by the Parties as a result of this Agreement. To the
extent that a Party acquires, holds, or disposes of any real or personal property for use in
the joint or cooperative undertaking contemplated by this Agreement, such Party shall do
so in the same manner that it deals with other property of such Party; and
f. Except as otherwise specifically provided herein, each Party shall be responsible for its
own costs of any action taken pursuant to this Agreement, and for any financing of such
costs.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the
date this Agreement is signed by both Parties.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Tim Merrill
Assistant Attorney General
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
By:
Jay Fox
Executive Director
By:
Jon Larsen
Chief of Capital Services
By:
Acting Director of Capital Design & Construction
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 13 of 16
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
By: By:
City Recorder Erin Mendenhall
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM
By:
Allison Parks
Deputy City Attorney
SALT LAKE CITY COMMUNITY
REINVESTMENT AGENCY
By: By:
City Recorder Erin Mendenhall
Executive Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM
By:
Jennifer Huntsman
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 14 of 16
EXHIBIT A – Licensed Property Map
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 15 of 16
EXHIBIT B – Design Drawings
S-Line Streetcar Extension Interlocal Agreement Page 16 of 16
EXHIBIT “C” – EMERGENCY CONTACTS
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
CITY ENGINEER
Mark Stephens
Salt Lake City Engineering Division
(801) 535-6355
Mark.Stephens@slc.gov
TRANSPORTATION
Lynn Jacobs
Salt Lake City Transportation Division
(801) 367-3358
Lynn.Jacobs@slcgov.com
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES
Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities Dispatch
801-483-6700
MAINTENANCE OF FACILITIES
Allison Dupler
Urban Services Division Director
(801) 535-6006
allison.dupler@slc.gov
UTA
MAINTENANCE OF
FACILITIES
Guy Miner
(801) 448-2696
gminer@rideuta.com
LIGHT RAIL OPERATIONS
Kayleigh Hammerschmid
(385) 495-0987
kHammerschmid@rideuta.com
This page has intentionally been left blank
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
L
201+80
202+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
SIMPSON
A
V
E
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-R-8-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
3/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
a
n
s
k
r
u
t
i
.
j
o
s
h
i
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
r
-
8
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
R8001
SITE PLAN
WB STA 201+80.27 TO WB STA 206+50
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
F. NANNENGA
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
03-12-26
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
R
8
0
0
1
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
PROPOSED UTA RAIL
ALIGNMENT
EXISTING
PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING ROW
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY
EXISTING SIDEWALK
EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER
PROPOSED UTA RAIL ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED UTA RAIL
ALIGNMENT
EXISTING ROW
SIMPSON AV
E
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
S 1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGAR
M
O
N
T
D
R
I
V
E
L
L
L
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+00
211+0
0
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+00
211+0
0
212+00
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-R-8-002.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
3/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
a
n
s
k
r
u
t
i
.
j
o
s
h
i
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
r
-
8
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-R-8-002.dwg
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
R
8
0
0
1
R8002
SITE PLAN
WB STA 206+50 TO WB STA 211+50
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
F. NANNENGA
F.NANNENGA
1" = 20'
03-12-26
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
R
8
0
0
3
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
PROPOSED UTA
RAIL ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED UTA RAIL
ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED UTA RAIL
ALIGNMENT
PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY
EXISTING SIDEWALK
EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER
EXISTING ROW
PROPOSED UTA RAIL ALIGNMENT
EXISTING
ROW
STOP
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-R-8-003.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
3/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
a
n
s
k
r
u
t
i
.
j
o
s
h
i
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
r
-
8
-
0
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-R-8-003.dwg
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
R
8
0
0
2
R8003
SITE PLAN
WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+84.18
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
F. NANNENGA
F.NANNENGA
1" = 20'
03-12-26
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
EB TRACK ℄
WB TRACK ℄
PROPOSED UTA RAIL
ALIGNMENT
EXISTING CURB & GUTTER
EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY
EXISTING SIDEWALK
EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER
EXISTING ROW
PROPOSED UTA RAIL ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED UTA RAIL
ALIGNMENTPROPOSED UTA RAIL
ALIGNMENT
This page has intentionally been left blank
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
JANUARY 16, 2026UTA CONTRACT NO. 24-03849
100% DESIGN SUBMITTAL - CIVIL PACKAGE
SIMPSON AVE
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
PROJECT LOCATION
SUGARMONT DRSUGARMONT DR SUGARMONT DR SUGARMONT DR SUGARMONT DR
SUGARMONT DR
E SIMPSON AVE E SIMPSON AVE
S
M
c
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
S
M
c
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
S
M
c
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
ELM AVEELM AVEELM AVE
WILMINGTON AVE WILMINGTON AVE WILMINGTON AVE WILMINGTON AVE
SIMP
S
O
N
A
V
E
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
S
1
1
0
0
E
ASHTON AVE AVEASHTON
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
SUGAR HOUSE
STATION
FAIRMONT
STATION
S
1
1
0
0
E
LI
N
C
O
L
N
S
T
LI
N
C
O
L
N
S
T
SIMPSON AVE SIMPSON AVE SIMPSON AVE SIMPSON AVE SIMPSON AVE
HIDDEN HOLLOW
FAIRMONT PARK
FAIRMONT PARK
POND
S 1300 E
S
1
3
0
0
E
EL
I
Z
A
B
E
T
H
S
T
STRINGHAM AVE STRINGHAM AVE
AS
H
T
O
N
A
V
E
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-G-0-000.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
tr
k
\
c
a
d
\
0
0
_
c
o
v
e
r
_
i
n
d
e
x
\
s
l
-
c
-
g
-
0
-
0
0
0
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-G-0-000.dwg
G0000
COVER SHEET
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
SHARED USE TRACK
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-G-0-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
tr
k
\
c
a
d
\
0
0
_
c
o
v
e
r
_
i
n
d
e
x
\
s
l
-
c
-
g
-
0
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-G-0-001.dwg
G0001
INDEX OF DRAWINGS
SHEET 1 OF 3
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
D. TREADWELL
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
GENERAL
G0000 COVER SHEET
G0001 INDEX OF DRAWINGS SHEET 1 OF 3
G0002 INDEX OF DRAWINGS SHEET 2 OF 3
G0003 INDEX OF DRAWINGS SHEET 3 OF 3
G0010 STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS SHEET 1 OF 2
G0011 STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS SHEET 2 OF 2
G0012 STANDARD SYMBOLS
G0013 GENERAL NOTES
K0001 TRACK KEY MAP
R0201 SURVEY CONTROL DATA
TRACK TYPICAL SECTIONS
K4201 TRACK TYPICAL SECTIONS SHEET 1 OF 4
K4202 TRACK TYPICAL SECTIONS SHEET 2 OF 4
K4203 TRACK TYPICAL SECTIONS SHEET 3 OF 4
K4204 TRACK TYPICAL SECTIONS SHEET 4 OF 4
TRACK ALIGNMENT DATA
K6201 HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT DATA
TRACK PLAN AND PROFILE
K1201 TRACK PLAN AND PROFILE WB STA 201+80.27 TO WB STA 206+50
K1202 TRACK PLAN AND PROFILE WB STA 206+50 TO WB STA 211+50
K1203 TRACK PLAN AND PROFILE WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+84.18
TRACK & ROADWAY CROSS SECTIONS
K5201 TRACK CROSS SECTIONS WB STA 201+80.27 TO WB STA 204+50
K5202 TRACK CROSS SECTIONS WB STA 205+00 TO WB STA 206+50
K5203 TRACK CROSS SECTIONS WB STA 207+00 TO WB STA 208+50
K5204 TRACK CROSS SECTIONS WB STA 209+00 TO WB STA 210+50
K5205 TRACK CROSS SECTIONS WB STA 211+00 TO WB STA 212+50
K5206 TRACK CROSS SECTIONS WB STA 213+00 TO WB STA 214+50
K5207 TRACK CROSS SECTIONS WB STA 215+00 TO WB STA 215+84
TRACK CHART
K7001 TRACK CHART WB STA 202+92.17 TO WB STA 215+84.18
TRACKWORK STANDARD DRAWINGS
K3001 TRACKWORK RAIL LUBRICATOR
K3002 TRACKWORK TRACK SLAB TYPICAL SECTION
K3003 TRACKWORK TRACK SLAB DETAILS
K3004 TRACKWORK MISC DETAILS
K3005 TRACKWORK SIGNAL TRACK CONNECTION BOX
K3006 TRACKWORK STREETCAR DYNAMIC ENVELOPE AND LOADING DIAGRAM
K3007 TRACKWORK MISC. EMBEDDED TRACK SECTIONS AND DETAILS
K3008 TRACKWORK 6" INFILL SLAB DETAILS
K3009 TRACKWORK TRACK DRAINAGE DETAILS
K3010 TRACKWORK TRACK CONNECTION BOX
K3011 TRACKWORK DRAINAGE CATCH BASIN
K3012 TRACKWORK TRACK DRAIN ARRAY AND PLATFORM DRAIN DETAILS
K3013 TRACKWORK INSULATED JOINT DETAILS
K3014 TRACKWORK NO. 6 DOUBLE CROSSOVER RAIL LAYOUT
K3015 TRACKWORK NO. 6 DOUBLE CROSSOVER GEOMETRY AND LAYOUT 23'-0" TRACK CENTERS
K3016 TRACKWORK NO. 6 DIRECT FIXATION DOUBLE CROSSOVER LAYOUT
K3017 TRACKWORK NO. 6 DIRECT FIXATION DOUBLE CROSSOVER BLOCKOUT DETAILS
K3018 TRACKWORK SPECIAL TRACKWORK M-23A SWITCH MACHINE LAYOUT
K3019 TRACKWORK DF FASTENER DETAIL AND SECTION
K3020 TRACKWORK DIRECT FIXATION ON SLAB DETAILS
DEMOLITION PLANS
C4001 DEMOLITION PLAN WB STA 201+80.27 TO WB STA 206+50
C4002 DEMOLITION PLAN WB STA 206+50 TO WB STA 211+50
C4003 DEMOLITION PLAN WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+84.18
CIVIL AND ROADWAY DETAILS
C1001 SIMPSON PLAN AND PROFILE STA 100+00 TO STA 104+00
C1002 SIMPSON PLAN AND PROFILE STA 104+00 TO STA 108+00
C1003 SIMPSON PLAN AND PROFILE STA 108+00 TO STA 111+00
C1004 McCLELLAND ST PLAN AND PROFILE STA 10+00 TO STA 10+88
C1005 S 11TH E PLAN AND PROFILE STA 10+00 TO STA 11+00
C1006 HIGHLAND DR PLAN AND PROFILE STA 10+00 TO STA 11+63
C1007 EMERGENCY DRIVEWAY PLAN AND PROFILE STA 0+00 TO STA 1+50
C1101 SIMPSON CURB AND GUTTER PLAN AND PROFILE STA 0+00 TO STA 3+50
C1102 SIMPSON CURB AND GUTTER PLAN AND PROFILE STA 3+50 TO STA 7+00
C1103 SIMPSON CURB AND GUTTER PLAN AND PROFILE STA 7+00 TO STA 9+00
C1104 McCLELLAND ST NW CURB AND GUTTER PLAN AND PROFILE STA 0+00 TO STA 1+00
C1105 McCLELLAND ST NE CURB AND GUTTER PLAN AND PROFILE STA 0+00 TO STA 1+00
C1106 S 11TH E SW CURB AND GUTTER PLAN AND PROFILE STA 0+00 TO STA 1+00
C1107 S 11TH E SE CURB & GUTTER PLAN AND PROFILE STA 0+00 TO STA 1+00
C1108 HIGHLAND SE CURB AND GUTTER PLAN AND PROFILE STA 0+00 TO STA 4+50
C1109 PARKING LOT CURB AND GUTTER PLAN AND PROFILE STA 0+00 TO STA 3+50
C1201 SIMPSON SIDEWALK PLAN AND PROFILE STA 50+12 TO STA 54+00
C1202 SIMPSON SIDEWALK PLAN AND PROFILE STA 54+00 TO STA 57+25
C3001 ROADWAY CURB RETURN DETAILS
C3002 ROADWAY CURB RETURN DETAILS
C3003 ROADWAY CURB RETURN DETAILS
C3004 ROADWAY CURB RETURN DETAILS
C3005 ROADWAY CURB RETURN DETAILS
C3006 SUGAR HOUSE PLATFORM AREA PEDESTRIAN RAMP AND SIDEWALK PLAN
C3007 ROADWAY EMERGENCY DRIVEWAY GRADING
CIVIL STANDARD DRAWINGS
C3010 CIVIL BOLLARD AND SWING GATE DETAILS
C3011 CIVIL CURB TRANSITIONS AND DETAILS
C3013 CIVIL GATE DETAILS
C3014 CIVIL PEDESTRIAN SAFETY RAILING
DRAINAGE PLANS
D1201 DRAINAGE PLAN WB STA 201+80.27 TO WB STA 206+50
D1202 DRAINAGE PLAN WB STA 206+50 TO WB STA 211+50
D1203 DRAINAGE PLAN WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+84.18
TRAFFIC AND SIGNING
T1201 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLANS WB STA 201+60 TO WB STA 206+42
T1202 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLANS WB STA 206+42 TO WB STA 211+50
T1203 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLANS WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+85
T1204 STRIPING & SIGNING PLANS WB STA 201+60 TO WB STA 206+42
T1205 STRIPING & SIGNING PLANS WB STA 206+42 TO WB STA 211+50
T1206 STRIPING & SIGNING PLANS WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+85
T3201 MAST ARM DETAIL
T3202 MAST ARM POLE DETAIL
T3203 MAST ARM POLE FOUNDATION DETAILS
T3204 MAST ARM POLE POLE EXTENSION FOR LUMINAIRE DETAIL
T3205 SIGNAL HEAD FOR VEHICLES DETAIL
T3206 SIGNAL HEAD MOUNTING DETAIL
T3207 SIGNAL POLE BREAK AWAY TYPE DETAIL
T3208 SIGNAL HEAD FOR PEDESTRIANS DETAIL
T3209 SIGNAL PUSH BUTTON DETAIL
T3210 SIGNAL CONTROLLER FOUNDATION DETAIL
T3211 JUNCTION BOX AND BURIED RACEWAY DETAIL
T3212 UNDERGROUND SERVICE PEDESTAL DETAIL
T3213 PEDESTRIAN BLANK OUT SIGN AND RAISED PAVEMENT MARKER DETAILS
T7001 SIGNAL CIRCUIT DIAGRAM S MCCLELLAND STREET
T7002 SIGNAL CIRCUIT DIAGRAM 1100 EAST STREET
T7003 SIGNAL CIRCUIT DIAGRAM HIGHLAND DRIVE
PLATFORM AND CANOPY
P0201 STATION STRUCTURAL SYMBOLS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND NOTES
P1201 SUGAR HOUSE PLATFORM PLAN
P3201 STATION TYPICAL STRUCTURAL DETAILS
P3202 STATION STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS 20'-0" DOUBLE CANOPY
P3203 STATION SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM ELEVATION
P3204 STATION SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM ELEVATION & SECTION
P3205 STATION 20 FOOT DOUBLE CANOPY ELEVATIONS
P3206 STATION 20 FOOT DOUBLE CANOPY SECTION
P3207 STATION 20 FOOT STANDARD CANOPY FLOOR PLAN
P3208 STATION DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATION CANOPY DETAILS
SHEET NO. DWG NO.TITLE DESCRIPTION SHEET NO. DWG NO.TITLE DESCRIPTION
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-G-0-002.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
tr
k
\
c
a
d
\
0
0
_
c
o
v
e
r
_
i
n
d
e
x
\
s
l
-
c
-
g
-
0
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-G-0-002.dwg
G0002
INDEX OF DRAWINGS
SHEET 2 OF 3
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
D. TREADWELL
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
P3209 STATION 20 FOOT DOUBLE CANOPY DETAILS
P3210 STATION STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS CANOPY DETAILS
P3211 STATION 20 FOOT DOUBLE CANOPY REFLECTED CEILING & ROOF PLANS
P3212 STATION MISCELLANEOUS PLATFORM DETAILS
P3213 STATION MECHANICAL DETAILS
P3214 STATION STANDARD PLATFORM AND SNOWMELT DETAILS
P3215 STATION SNOWMELT DETAILS
P3216 FREEZELESS POST HYDRANT DETAIL
P3217 GRAPHIC SIGN STANDARDS STANDARD FONTS
P3218 GRAPHIC SIGN STANDARDS TYPE 4 - RAIL PLATFORM SIGN DETAILS
P3219 GRAPHIC SIGN STANDARDS TYPE 2B STATION IDENTIFICATION SIGN DETAILS
P3220 GRAPHIC SIGN STANDARDS PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND PRISM
P4201 STATION FOUNDATION PLAN AND SECTIONS
P4202 STATION RAMP FOUNDATION SECTIONS
PLATFORM ELECTRICAL
E0202 PLATFORM ELECTRICAL LEGENDS, NOTES AND ABBREVIATIONS
E0208 SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM JUNCTION BOX AND TRENCH DETAILS
E0209 PLATFORM ELECTRICAL SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM TVM BASE, CALL BOX, AND CARD READER
DETAILS
E0210 PLATFORM ELECTRICAL PLATFORM LIGHT INSTALLATION AND POLE FOUNDATION DETAILS
E1205 SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM ELECTRICAL PLAN
E3207 SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM PCC DETAILS
E7203 SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM ONE-LINE AND LIGHTING CONTROL DIAGRAMS
E8204 PLATFORM ELECTRICAL SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM PANEL SCHEDULE
RETAINING WALL PLAN AND PROFILE
W0001 GENERAL NOTES, STANDARD SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
W1201 RETAINING WALL 1 SITUATION AND LAYOUT
W1202 RETAINING WALL 2 SITUATION AND LAYOUT
W3001 WALL DETAILS
UTILITIES
U0100 UTILITIES GENERAL NOTES
U1201 EXISTING UTILITY PLAN WB STA 201+80.27 TO WB STA 206+50
U1202 EXISTING UTILITY PLAN WB STA 206+50 TO WB STA 211+50
U1203 EXISTING UTILITY PLAN WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+84.18
U1204 EXISTING UTILITY PLAN SUGARMONT AVENUE AND CRA PROPERTIES
U1205 EXISTING UTILITY MATRIX SHEET 1 OF 4
U1206 EXISTING UTILITY MATRIX SHEET 2 OF 4
U1207 EXISTING UTILITY MATRIX SHEET 3 OF 4
U1208 EXISTING UTILITY MATRIX SHEET 4 OF 4
U1209 EXISTING UTILITY TEST HOLE DATA
U1210 UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN STA 203+00 TO STA 205+00
U1211 UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN STA 205+00 TO STA 208+00
U1212 UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN STA 208+00 TO STA 210+00
U1213 UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN STA 210+00 TO STA 212+00
U1214 UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN STA 212+00 TO STA 215+84.18
U1220 PROPOSED SEWER HIGHLAND DRIVE SEWER BY-PASS
U1221 PROPOSED GAS LINE SUGAR HOUSE STATION
U1222 PROPOSED WATER LINE HIGHLAND DRIVE STATION
U1225 PROPOSED GAS LINE PLAN SIMPSON AVENUE
U1226 PROPOSED WATER LINE PLAN HIGHLAND DRIVE
U1227 PROPOSED WATER LINE PROFILE HIGHLAND DRIVE
U1231 PROPOSED WATER LINE PLAN SIMPSON AVENUE
U1232 PROPOSED WATER LINE PROFILE SIMPSON AVENUE
U1233 WATERLINE CATHODIC PROTECTION
U1234 CATHODIC PROTECTION DETAILS 1 OF 2
U1235 CATHODIC PROTECTION DETAILS 2 OF 2
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
Y0001 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES
Y0002 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM STANDARD SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES
Y3002 OCS POLE FOUNDATIONS
Y7005 OCS TECHNICAL SHEET UNIVERSAL PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE ENVELOPE
Y7006 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM DRAWING HIERARCHY AND CONTENT REQUIREMENTS
Y7009 OCS TECHNICAL SHEET MAX PERMISSIBLE MIDSPAN OFFSET, BLOW-OFF AND CATENARY DROOP
Y7010 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM TECHNICAL SHEET SCAT VERTICAL, WIND & RADIAL LOADS
Y7011 OCS TECHNICAL SHEET PANTOGRAPH SECURITY AND MAXIMUM STAGGERS FOR BALLASTLESS TRACK
Y7012 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM TECHNICAL SHEET HANGER LENGTH TABLE
Y7013 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM TECHNICAL SHEET INSTALLATION TENSIONS AND SAGS
Y7014 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM TECHNICAL SHEET TRACK MOVEMENT & STAGGER CHANGE
Y7015 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM CONDUCTOR PARTICULARS
Y7016 OCS VERTICAL ELECTRICAL CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS
Y7100 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM MASTER OVERLAP CHART AND SECTIONING DIAGRAM
Y7180 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM TYPICAL STANDARD SPANS
Y7182 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM TYPICAL ANCHOR SPANS
Y7183 OCS DIAMOND CROSSOVER
Y7190 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM TYPICAL CENTER POLE STRUCTURES
Y7191 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM TYPICAL SURGE ARRESTOR STRUCTURE
Y7192 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM BYPASS DISCONNECT SWITCH STRUCTURE
Y7194 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM TYPICAL HEADSPAN STRUCTURES
Y7201 TAPERED TUBULAR STEEL POLE ASSEMBLIES, TYPE PA, PB, PC, PD, & PE
Y7202 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM OCS POLE ID NUMBER ASSEMBLY SD-01 AND SCHEDULE
Y7203 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
Y7207 OCS POLE BRACKET ASSEMBLIES FOR TUBULAR POLES TYPES BC-XX AND TB-02-XX
Y7209 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM HEADSPAN ASSEMBLIES HS-1, HS-1A, HS-2, AND HS-2AX
Y7210 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM CONFIGURATION AND LOADING DIAGRAM TYPE HS-1 AND HS-2
Y7211 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY PULL-OFF TYPES CA-01L, CA-01M AND CA-01H
Y7212 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM CONFIGURATION AND LOADING DIAGRAM TYPES CA-01L, CA-01M, AND CA-01H
Y7213 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY PUSH-OFF CA-03L, CA-03M, AND CA-03H
Y7214 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM CONFIGURATION AND LOADING DIAGRAM TYPES CA-03L, CA-03M, AND CA-03H
Y7215 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY OUT-OF-RUNNING TYPES CA-05AM, AH AND CA-05BM, BH
Y7216 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM CONFIGURATION AND LOADING DIAGRAM TYPES CA-05AM, AH AND CA-05BM, BH
Y7220 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM TWO TRACK PULL-OFF PO-2 AND PO-2A
Y7221 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM CATENARY BRIDLE ASSEMBLY PULL-OFF TYPE BB-02D
Y7222 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM CONFIGURATION AND LOADING DIAGRAM TYPE BB-02D
Y7223 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM SECTION INSULATOR ASSEMBLY TYPE MLSI-01
Y7224 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM FIXED TERMINATION ASSEMBLY TYPE FT-01
Y7225 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM CATENARY BRIDLE TERMINATION ASSEMBLIES BT-01, BT-02 & BT-03
Y7226 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM MIDPOINT ANCHOR ASSEMBLY TYPE MP-01
Y7227 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM BALANCE WEIGHT FOR TUBULAR POLE TYPE BW-04
Y7228 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM SPRING TENSIONER
Y7231 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM FEEDER CONNECTION ASSEMBLY TYPE FR-04
Y7233 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM JUMPER ASSEMBLIES TYPES JF-1, JP-1 AND JS-1
Y7235 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM HANGER ASSEMBLIES TYPES HA-1 THROUGH HA-7
Y7236 OCS CUT-IN INSULATOR AND CONTACT BRIDGE ASSEMBLIES TYPE CI-01, CI-02, CC-01
Y7237 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM MULTI-CANTILEVER BRACKETS
Y7303 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM WIRING LAYOUT & ALLOCATION SCHEDULE WB STA 201+00 TO WB STA 207+00
Y7304 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM WIRING LAYOUT & ALLOCATION SCHEDULE WB STA 207+00 TO WB STA 211+17
Y7305 OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM WIRING LAYOUT & ALLOCATION SCHEDULE WB STA 212+00 TO WB STA 215+96.33
COMMUNICATIONS
Y0800 COMMUNICATIONS SYMBOLS, ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES
Y1801 COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMWIDE SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM
Y1802 COMMUNICATIONS SIGNAL FIBER OPTIC CABLE PLAN
Y3803 COMMUNICATIONS SIGNAL BETA INTERLOCKING FIBER ALLOCATION TABLE
Y3804 COMMUNICATIONS SIGNAL HIGHLAND DRIVE FIBER ALLOCATION TABLE
Y1810 COMMUNICATIONS IT FIBER OPTIC CABLE PLAN
Y3811 COMMUNICATIONS FAIRMONT PCC IT FIBER ALLOCATION TABLE
Y3812 COMMUNICATIONS SUGAR HOUSE PCC IT FIBER ALLOCATION TABLE
Y8813 COMMUNICATIONS SUGAR HOUSE STATION RISER DIAGRAM
Y8814 SUGAR HOUSE STATION PCC COMM CABINET RACK ELEVATION
Y3815 COMMUNICATIONS SUGAR HOUSE STATION CABLE SCHEDULE
SYSTEMWIDE ELECTRICAL
Y1235 DUCTBANK PLAN WB STA 201+00 TO WB STA 207+00
Y1236 DUCTBANK PLAN WB STA 207+00 TO WB STA 212+00
Y1237 DUCTBANK PLAN WB STA 212+00 TO WB STA 215+88.5
Y1238 ELECTRICAL PLAN STA 201+00 TO STA 207+00
Y1239 ELECTRICAL PLAN STA 207+00 TO STA 212+00
Y1240 ELECTRICAL PLAN WB STA 212+00 TO WB STA 215+85.29
SHEET NO. DWG NO.TITLE DESCRIPTION SHEET NO. DWG NO.TITLE DESCRIPTION
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-G-0-003.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
tr
k
\
c
a
d
\
0
0
_
c
o
v
e
r
_
i
n
d
e
x
\
s
l
-
c
-
g
-
0
-
0
0
3
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-G-0-003.dwg
G0003
INDEX OF DRAWINGS
SHEET 3 OF 3
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
D. TREADWELL
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
Y3215 SYSTEMWIDE ELECTRICAL PULLBOXES DETAILS AND SCHEDULE
Y3216 SYSTEMWIDE RACEWAY DETAILS AND SCHEDULE
Y4217 SYSTEMWIDE ELECTRICAL RACEWAY SECTIONS SHEET-1
Y4218 SYSTEMWIDE ELECTRICAL RACEWAY SECTIONS SHEET-2
Y7314 TRACTION POWER SYSTEM RACEWAY SECTIONS
Y1241 RMP UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN
Y1242 STREET LIGHTING PLAN
Y1243 TRENCH SECTION
SIGNALS
Z0001 SIGNALS SYMBOLS
Z0002 SIGNALS ABBREVIATIONS
Z7001 SIGNALS SYSTEM OVERALL SCHEMATIC WB STA 196+00 TO WB STA 207+65
Z7002 SIGNALS SYSTEM OVERALL SCHEMATIC WB STA 207+65 TO WB STA 216+00
Z7003 EASTBOUND CONTROL LINE PLAN STA. 186+00 TO STA. 203+00
Z7004 EASTBOUND CONTROL LINE PLAN STA. 203+00 TO STA. 215+85
Z7005 WESTBOUND CONTROL LINE PLAN STA. 186+00 TO STA. 203+00
Z7006 WESTBOUND CONTROL LINE PLAN STA. 203+00 TO STA. 215+85
Z7007 SIGNALS TRACK CIRCUIT ARRANGEMENT
Z7008 SIGNALS ROUTE AND ASPECT CHART BETA INTERLOCKING
Z7009 SIGNALS ROUTE AND ASPECT CHART HIGHLAND DRIVE INTERLOCKING
Z8001 SIGNALS TRACK AND CABLE PLAN 1 OF 2
Z8002 SIGNALS TRACK AND CABLE PLAN 2 OF 2
SIGNALS STANDARD DRAWINGS
Z3001 SIGNALS WAYSIDE SIGNALING DETAILS 1 OF 2
Z3002 SIGNALS WAYSIDE SIGNALING DETAILS 2 OF 2
Z3003 SIGNALS SWITCH HEATER LAYOUT
Z3004 SIGNAL TYPICAL BONDING DETAILS
Z3005 SIGNALS HOUSE INSTALLATION DETAILS
Z3006 SIGNALS TYPICAL WHEEL SENSOR INSTALLATION
Z3007 SIGNALS TYPICAL WHEEL SENSOR EMBEDDED TRACK INSTALLATION
Z3008 SIGNALS TYPICAL VEHICLE DETECTOR LOOP INSTALLATION
Z3009 SIGNALS PEDESTRIAN CROSSING BLANK OUT SIGN
SHEET NO. DWG NO.TITLE DESCRIPTION SHEET NO. DWG NO.TITLE DESCRIPTION
A
STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS
TRACK AND ROAD ALIGNMENT
HORIZONTAL
VERTICAL
D
C
B
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
GENERAL ABBREVIATIONS
DF
DG
DIP
DIA or
DIAG
DIM
DIST
DPSS
DRTK
DW
DWG
DWY
F
(F)
FB
FES
FF
FFE
FG
FH
FIN
or FL
FLG
FLR
FO
FOC
FPS
FWY
FS
FAM
FBC
FIP
FHWA
GGAGAL(S)GALVGMGND GRGSBGSCGVGRS
H or HTHCLHDHDPEHFHGHL
HP
DIRECT FIXATION
DIESEL GAS or DRY GAS
DUCTILE IRON
DUCTILE IRON PIPE
DIAMETER
DIAGRAM or DIAGONAL
DIMENSION
DISTRICT or DISTANCE
DRILL TRACK
DOMESTIC WATER
DRAWING
DRIVEWAY
FREIGHT
FREEBOARD
FLARED END SECTION
FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION
FIRE HYDRANT
FINISH
FLOWLINE
FLANGE
FLOOR
FIBER OPTIC LINE
FACE OF CURB
FOOT PER SECOND
FREEWAY
FLAGSTONE or FINISHED SURFACE
FOUND ALUMINUM MONUMENT
FOUND BRASS CAP
FOUND IRON PIN
FOOT or FEET
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
GASGAUGE (GAGE)GALLON (GALLONS)GALVANIZEDGAS METERGROUND GRADE, GROUND or GUARD RAIL PLATEGROUTED SLOPING BOULDERGALVANIZED STEEL CONDUITGATE VALVEGALVANIZED RIGID STEEL CONDUIT
HEIGHTHORIZONTAL CONTROL LINEHEADHIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENEHEEL OF FROGHEAD GATEHEEL LENGTH
HIGHWAY
AASHTO
ABC
ABND
ABUT
&
ACC.
ADA
AGG
ALIGN
A.R.E.M.A.
A/R
ASCEASMEASPHASTM@ATCATMSAVEAWG
BEBEGBETBITBK
BLDGBLVDBMBNSF
BRDGBRGBRKBTEL
BW BCR
D, d
DB
DEPT
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY
& TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS
AGGREGATE BASE COURSE
ABANDONED
ABUTMENT
AND
ACCESS
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
AGGREGATE
ALIGNMENT
AMERICAN RAILWAY ENGINEERING & MAINTENANCE OF WAY ASSOCIATIONAS REQUIRED
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERSAMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERSASPHALTAMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALSATAUTOMATIC TRAIN CONTROLADVANCED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEMAVENUEAMERICAN WIRE GAGE
BURIED ELECTRICBEGIN or BEGINNINGBETWEENBITUMINOUSBACKBASELINEBUILDINGBOULEVARDBENCH MARKBURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY
BRIDGEBEARINGBRICKBURIED TELEPHONEBURIED CABLE
BEGIN CURB RETURN
DEPTH
DIVERSION BOX
DEPARTMENT
DE
DRGW DENVER AND RIO GRANDE WESTERN RAILROAD
DOUBLE POINT SPLIT SWITCH
DRAGGING EQUIPMENT
FTA FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION
FRA FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION
DI or D.I.
BOT BOTTOM
FTG FOOTING
HWY
Hp
HS
HW
HORSEPOWER
HIGH STRENGTH STEEL
HEAD WALL
DEB
DED
DEF or DEFL
DETENTION BASIN
DECK DRAIN
DEFLECTION
A.S.AS SHOWN
APPROX APPROXIMATEAPWAAMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION
AC or A.C.ASBESTOS CEMENT
FT or FT.
BU CA or BCTV
FINISHED FLOOR or FAR FACE or FRONT FACE
FROG GAUGE PLATE or FINISH GRADE
HORIZONTAL
HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE
HAND HOLE
INTERMEDIATE HIGH PRESSURE
INDIVIDUAL HIGH RAIL LEVEL
INSULATED JOINT
INCH or INCHES
INCORPORATED
INVERT
IRON PIPE
IRRIGATION JUNCTION or DIVERSION BOX
IRRIGATION CULVERT
IRRIGATION DITCH
IRRIGATION PIPE
JUNCTION BOX
JOINT
JACK & BORE
KIP, 1000 POUNDS
KIP-FOOT
KIPS PER LINEAR FOOT
KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
KILOVOLTS
LINE or LENGTH
LEFT
POUND
LINEAR FOOT (FEET)
LEFT HAND
LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION
LOCATE, LOCATED or LOCATION
LOW PRESSURE or LIGHT POLE
LOW POINT
LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT
LIMITED
LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE
MAXIMUM
MECHANICAL
MANHOLE
0.001 INCH
MINIMUM
MISCELLANEOUS
MECHANICAL JOINT
MATCH LINE
MAINLINE
MONUMENT
MEDIUM PRESSURE/MILE POST
MILES PER HOUR
MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH
MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES
NORTH
NOT APPLICABLE
NORTHBOUND
NEAR FACE
NOT IN CONTRACT
NORTH OF NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
NORTH OF
NUMBER
NON-REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
NORTH OF SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
NOT TO SCALE
CS
D, Dc
DIA
ES
Ea
Eq
Eu
I
L
Lc
Ls
Ls1
Ls2
Ls IN
Ls OUT
L.T.
P
PC
PCC
PI
PITO
(PO)
POB
POC
POEPOSPOTPRCPT
PSQsRSCSSSTS.T.TTcT/OTsTLTSTTLXOXsYs
K
LPVCCPVCPVI
RPRVCPVTVCELEV
POINT OF CHANGE FROM CIRCULAR CURVE TO SPIRAL
DEGREE OF CURVE (CURVATURE BY ARC DEFINITION)
DELTA or DEFLECTION ANGLE (SPIRAL CURVE)
DIAMOND (CROSSOVER)
EXTERNAL DISTANCE
SUPERELEVATION, ACTUAL
SUPERELEVATION, TOTAL
SUPERELEVATION, UNBALANCED
TOTAL INTERSECTION ANGLE or TOTAL CENTRAL ANGLE
TOTAL CURVE LENGTH
TOTAL LENGTH OF CHORD
TOTAL LENGTH OF SPIRAL CURVE
SUFFIX (1) AT THE SYMBOL DENOTES THE DATA FOR THE FIRST
SPIRAL ON AN UNSYMMETRICAL SPIRALIZED CURVE
SUFFIX (2) - SAME AS ABOVE, SECOND SPIRAL
SUFFIX (IN) AT THE SYMBOL DENOTES THE DATA FOR THE LEADING
SPIRAL OF A SPIRALIZED CURVE
SUFFIX (OUT) AT THE SYMBOL DENOTES THE DATA FOR THE TRAILING
SPIRALIZED CURVE
LONG TANGENT
THROW
POINT OF CURVATURE or POINT OF CHANGE FROM TANGENT TO
CIRCULAR CURVE
POINT OF COMPOUND CIRCULAR CURVES
POINT OF INTERSECTION OF TWO TANGENTS
POINT OF INTERSECTION, TURNOUT
POWER OPERATED (REFERS TO TURNOUT)
POINT OF BEGINNING
POINT ON CIRCULAR CURVE
POINT OF ENDINGPOINT ON SPIRALPOINT ON TANGENTPOINT OF REVERSE CIRCULAR CURVEPOINT OF TANGENCY or POINT OF CHANGE FROM CIRCULAR CURVE TO TANGENTPOINT OF SWITCHCENTRAL ANGLE OF SPIRAL or SPIRAL ANGLERADIUS OF CIRCULAR CURVEPOINT OF CHANGE FROM SPIRAL TO CIRCULAR CURVEPOINT OF CHANGE FROM SPIRAL TO SPIRALPOINT OF SPIRAL TO TANGENTSHORT TANGENTTOTAL CURVE TANGENT LENGTH OF COMPLETE CURVETANGENT LENGTH FROM PC or PT TO PITURNOUTTANGENT DISTANCE FROM TS or ST TO PITOTAL LENGTH OF CURVE (SPIRAL & CIRCULAR PORTIONS)POINT OF CHANGE FROM TANGENT TO SPIRALTOTAL TANGENT LENGTH (SPIRALS & CIRCULAR PORTIONS)CROSSOVERTANGENT DISTANCE AT SC or CSTANGENT OFFSET AT SC or CS
RATE OF VERTICAL CURVATURE OR LENGTH OF CURVE PER PERCENT DIFFERENCE IN TWO ALGEBRAIC GRADESLENGTH OF VERTICAL CURVEPOINT OF COMPOUND VERTICAL CURVEPOINT OF VERTICAL CURVATUREPOINT OF VERTICAL INTERSECTION or POINT OF INTERSECTION OF TWO PROFILE TANGENTSRATE OF CHANGE IN CURVATUREPOINT OF REVERSE VERTICAL CURVEPOINT OF VERTICAL TANGENCYVERTICAL CURVEELEVATION
HORIZ
HGL
HH
ID
IHP
IHRL
IJ
IN
INC.
INV
IP
IRB
IRC
IRD
IRP
JB
JT
J&B
K
KF
KLF
KSF
KV
L
LT
LB
LF
LH
LLC
LOC
LP
LPT
LRT
LTD
LTG
BL
BOTTOM OF WALL or BACK OF WALL
DIT OPEN DITCH
FILL (WALL) or FIBER
MEDIUM DENSITY POLYETHYLENE
INSIDE DIAMETER or IDENTIFICATION
HIGH PRESSURE or HEEL PLATE
ALIGN ALIGNMENT
AI AREA INLET
C
CAS
CTV
CB
CBC
c-c
CD
CFS
C&G
CI or C.I.
CIP
CJ
℄ or CL
CLG
CLR
CMP
C/O
CO
COL
CONC
CONN
CONST or CONSTR
CONT
CSP
CNL
COORD
CORR
CP
CRK
CRV
C/S
CSW
CT
CULV or CUL
CU YD or C.Y. or CY
CWR
CUT (WALL)
CASING
CABLE TV LINE
CATCH BASIN
CONCRETE BOX CULVERT
CENTER TO CENTER
CHECK DAM
CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
CURB AND GUTTER
CAST IRON
CAST IRON PIPE
CONSTRUCTION JOINT or CONTROL JOINT
CENTER LINE
CEILING
CLEARANCE or CLEAR
CORRUGATED METAL PIPE
CARE OF
CLEANOUT, COUNTY or COMPANY
COLUMN
CONCRETE
CONNECT or CONNECTION
CONSTRUCT or CONSTRUCTION
CONTINUED, CONTINUOUS or CONTINUATION
CORRUGATED STEEL PIPE
CANAL
COORDINATE
CORRUGATE or CORRUGATED
CLAY PIPE or CONTROL POINT
CREEK
CURVE
COMMUNICATION/SIGNAL
CONCRETE SIDEWALK
COURT
CULVERT
CUBIC YARD
CONTINUOUS WELDED RAIL
E
EA
EB
E/E
EJ
ELEV
EMH
E/O
EOA
EOH
EOP
EQ
EQN
ESET
ETC
E/W
EXIST or EX
EXT
EAST or ELECTRIC
EACH
EASTBOUND or END OF BRIDGE
EAST OF EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
EXPANSION JOINT
ELEVATION
ELECTRICAL MANHOLE
EAST OF
EDGE OF ASPHALT
OVERHEAD ELECTRIC
EDGE OF PAVEMENT
EQUAL or EQUATION
EQUATION
EXTRA STRENGTH
END TRACK
ETCETERA
EAST OF WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
EXISTING
EXTERIOR
N
N/A
NF
NIC
N/N
N/O
NO. or #
NRCP
N/S
NTS
NB
MAINT
MAX or MAX.
MECH
MH
MIL
MIN or MIN.
MISC
MJ
M/L
ML
MON
MP
MPH
MSE
MUTCD
MDPE
N
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-G-0-010.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
tr
k
\
c
a
d
\
0
0
_
c
o
v
e
r
_
i
n
d
e
x
\
s
l
-
c
-
g
-
0
-
0
1
0
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-G-0-010.dwg
G0010
STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS
SHEET 1 OF 2
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
P
Q
S
T
U
R
X
V
W
GENERAL ABBREVIATIONS
STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS
PIPE
PASSENGER
PULL BOX
PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE
PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT
PROJECT CONTROL LINE
POLYETHYLENE
PEDESTRIAN
POINT OF FROG
PROFILE GRADE LINE
PARKING
PROPERTY LINE
POINT ON LINE
POWER POLE
PROPERTY
PROPOSED
POLYETHYLENE PIPE
POWER OPERATED
POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT
POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH
PETROLEUM
POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
PAVEMENT
QUANTITY
QUADRANT
RADIUS
REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX
REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
ROAD
RECTANGLE or RECTIFIER
REFERENCE
REINFORCE, REINFORCED or REINFORCEMENT
RETAINING
REVISE, REVISED or REVISION
RIGHT HAND
RAILROAD
RAILROAD SIGNAL
RAILROAD SIGNAL & COMMUNICATION
RIGHT
RETENTION SWALE
RETAINING WALL
RIGHT OF WAY
RIVER
RAILWAY
SOUTH or SLOPE
SOUTHBOUND
STORM DRAIN
STORM DRAIN CULVERT
STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN
STORM DRAIN CLEAN OUT
STORM DRAIN DITCH
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
STORM DRAIN PIPE
STORM DRAIN PUMP STATION
STORM DRAIN SWALE
STORM DRAIN VAULT
SECTION
SUB-GRADE LINE
SHEET
SIGNAL
SIMILAR
SEWER LATERAL
SALT LAKE CITY
SLOPE
SEWER MANHOLE
SOUTH OF NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
SOUTH OF
SPACE or SPACING or SIGNAL POLE or STATION POINT
SPECIFICATIONS
SQUARE
SOUTH OF SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
SMOOTH STEEL PIPE
STATION
STANDARD
STEEL
STORAGE
STRUCTURE
SWITCH or SIDEWALK
SANITARY SEWER
SYMMETRICAL
TELEPHONE
TANGENT
TOP OF BALLAST
TOP BACK OF CURB
TO BE DETERMINED
TO BE SURVEYED
TRAFFIC CONTROL BOX
TEMPERATURE or TEMPORARY
TERMINAL
TRACK FOOT
TOP OF GRADE or TOP OF GRATETEST HOLETHICK or THICKNESSTHROUGH
TRAFFIC LIGHT or TOE LENGTHTELEPHONE MANHOLE
TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENTTOP OF PIPETOP OF RAILTOE OF SLOPE
TRACKTRAFFIC SIGNAL TYPICAL SECTIONTOP OF SUB-BALLASTTRAFFIC SIGNAL CONDUITTELEVISIONTOP OF WALLTYPICAL
UNDERDRAINUTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
UNDERGROUND
UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISEUNKNOWNUNION PACIFIC RAILROAD
UNREINFORCED CONCRETE
UNITED STATES
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
VALVE or VELOCITY
VARIES or VARIABLE
VERTICAL CURVE
VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE
VERTICAL
VAULT
WEST or WATER or WIDTH
WITH
WESTBOUND
WEST OF EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
WROUGHT IRON PIPE
WATER LEVEL
WATER METER
WITHOUT or WEST OF
WATER SERVICE
WELDED STEEL PIPE
WATER
WATER VALVE
WEST OF WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
WATER SURFACE ELEVATION
WING WALL
CROSS DRAIN
CROSSING
CROSS SECTION
P
(P)
PB
PCC
PCCP
PCL
PE
PED
PF
PGL
PKG
PL
POL
PP
PROP
PR
PEP
(PO)
PSF
PSI
PET
PVMT
QTY
QUAD
R
RCB
RCP
RD
RECT
REF
REINF
RET
REV
RH
RR
RRS or RS
RSC
RT
RTS
ROW or R/W
RVR
RY
S
SB
SD
SDC
SDCB
SDCO
SDD
SDMH
SDP
SDPS
SDS
SDV
SECT
SGL
SHT
SIG
SIM
SL
SLC
SLP
SMH
S/N
S/O
SP
SPEC
S/S
SSP
ST
STA
STD
STL
STOR
SW
SWR OR SS
SYM
T or TEL
TAN
TB
TBC
TBD
TBS
TCB
TEMP
TERM
TF
TGTHTHKTHRU
TLTMH
TODTOPT/RTOS
TRKTST.S.TSBTSCTVT/WTYP
UDUDOT
UG
UNOUNKUPRR
URC
US
UTA
V
VAR
VC
VCP
VERT
VLT
W
W/
WB
W/E
WIP
WL
WM
W/O
WS
WSP
WTR
WV
W/W
WSE
WW
X-DRAIN
X-ING
X-SECT
REQ'D
RMP ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
RCH REACH
<
<
LESS THAN
LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
STR OR STRUCT
>GREATER THAN
GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO>
TOC TRAFFIC OPERATIONS CENTER
REQUIRED
O
ON CENTER or ON CENTERS
OUTSIDE DIAMETER
OC
OD or O.D.
OVEHEAD COAXIAL
OPPOSITEOPP
OVERHEAD TELEPHONEOHT
OHP OVERHEAD POWER
OHC
OVERHEAD FIBER OPTICOFO
PVC
RET W OR RW
SC STREET CAR
SH SUGAR HOUSE
SQ
STREET
TPSS TRACTION POWER SUBSTATION
UFO UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC
UGC UNDERGROUND COAXIAL
UGTUGP UNDERGROUND TELEPHONEUNDERGROUND POWER
TRAFFIC CONTROL BOX
TD TRACK DRAIN
THROUGHTITRACK INLET
PD PLATFORM DRAIN
UTBC UNTREATED BASE COURSE
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-G-0-011.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
tr
k
\
c
a
d
\
0
0
_
c
o
v
e
r
_
i
n
d
e
x
\
s
l
-
c
-
g
-
0
-
0
1
1
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-G-0-011.dwg
G0011
STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS
SHEET 2 OF 2
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
NOTE:SOME SYMBOLS/LINES MAY BE SHOWNENLARGED FOR CLARITY.
CURVE NUMBER:
CROSSOVER NUMBER:
EXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSEDEXISTINGPROPOSED
4737.33
RS
CXXX
STANDARD SYMBOLS
SXXX
RETAINING WALL
DRAINAGE DITCH OR SWALE
CULVERT
RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
EASEMENT LINE
CITY BOUNDARY
BUILDING LINE
FENCE
CURB AND GUTTER
CURB/WALL
BARRIER
SPOT ELEVATION (PHOTOGRAMMETRIC)
EDGE OF PAVEMENT
ACCESS ROAD
TOP OF CUT
TOP OF FILL
BUMPING POST
HIGH POINT
LOW POINT
FLOW DIRECTION
AERIAL CONTROL POINT
TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARM AND POLE
TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEAD
UTA SIGNAL HOUSE
COMMUNICATION/SIGNAL BOX
LH TURNOUT
RH TURNOUT
SINGLE CROSSOVER
DIAMOND CROSSOVER
POINT OF SWITCH (MANUALLY OPERATED)
POINT OF SWITCH (POWER OPERATED)
LH DOUBLE POINT SPLIT SWITCH (DPSS) DERAIL
RH DOUBLE POINT SPLIT SWITCH (DPSS) DERAIL
RAIL LUBRICATOR INFRASTRUCTURE
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
CROSSOVERS BY UTA
TREE
VEGETATION
EXISTING GROUND (SECTIONS)
RR SWITCH
BUSH
GAS PIPELINE MARKER
MARSH
PERMANENT MONUMENT
SECTION CORNER
STATION PLATFORM
PLATFORM WALKWAY
IMPACTED BUILDING, ROADWAY, PARKING LOT
FUTURE ROAD CROSSING
ROAD CROSSING
CHECK-IN LOOP
CHECK-OUT LOOP
LOOP NOT USED
MATRIX DETECTION ZONE
PEER CALL (DELAY SHOWN IF ANY)
TRACK DRAIN
OCS FOUNDATION
RS
X###
ABANDONED WATER
SEWER
STORM DRAIN
WATER
UNDERGROUND POWER
GAS
FIBER OPTIC
OVERHEAD POWER
TELEPHONE
OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
CABLE T.V. BOX
ELECTRIC BOX
GAS METER
STREET LIGHT BOX
WATER METER
TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX
TELEPHONE BOX
WATER BOX
FIBER OPTIC BOX
UTILITY BOX
IRRIGATION BOX
CLEANOUT
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
UTILITY MANHOLE
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
INTERCEPTOR MANHOLE
TELEPHONE MANHOLE
WATER MANHOLE
FIBER OPTIC MANHOLE
MONITORING WELL
WATER VALVE
GAS TEST VALVE
FIRE HYDRANT
STAND PIPE
EXISTING TRACK
PROPOSED UTA TRACK
DROP INLET
LARGE SIGN
SIGN
BOLLARD POST
FLAG POLE
POWER POLE
GUY
AREA LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
LIGHT VAULT: E-ELECTRIC, T-TELEPHONE, W-WATER
SD SD SD SD
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-G-0-012.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
tr
k
\
c
a
d
\
0
0
_
c
o
v
e
r
_
i
n
d
e
x
\
s
l
-
c
-
g
-
0
-
0
1
2
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-G-0-012.dwg
G0012
STANDARD SYMBOLS
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
GENERAL NOTES - S-LINE EXTENSION
1. ALL MATERIALS AND WORK REQUIRED WITHIN UTA RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL CONFORM TO UTA SPECIFICATIONS.
2. RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES SHOWN ARE BASED ON RECORDED SURVEY INFORMATION ON RECORD WITH SALT LAKE CITY AND SALT LAKE COUNTY.
3. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY VERTICAL CLEARANCES FROM THE PROPOSED TRACKS TO OVERHEAD FACILITIES (ELECTRIC, CABLE, TELEPHONE).
4. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND PLANIMETRICS ARE PRODUCED FROM AERIAL SURVEY AND TOPOGRAPHIC FIELD SURVEY. TOPOGRAPHY BELOW VEGETATION OR TREE
COVERAGE AND UNDER STRUCTURES IS APPROXIMATE AND REQUIRES CONFIRMATION.
5. "ORIGINAL GROUND" OR "EXISTING GROUND" SHOWN ON PROFILES REFERS TO THE APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND LINE AT THE DESIGNATED CENTERLINE OR
CONTROL LINE.
6. SEE SURVEY CONTROL DATA SHEETS FOR PROJECT HORIZONTAL CONTROL, VERTICAL DATUM, AND MONUMENT INFORMATION.
7. ALL HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL DISTANCES ARE IN FEET AND/OR DECIMALS OF A FOOT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
8. ALL GRADIENTS ARE IN PERCENT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
9. THE UTA STREETCAR TRACK IS DESIGNED PER THE UTA STREETCAR DESIGN CRITERIA, REVISION, NO. 1 APPROVED SEPTEMBER 2024.
10.STATIONING SHOWN ON TYPICAL SECTIONS IS APPROXIMATE. ALL STATIONING REFERS TO WB TRACK, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
11.GUIDELINES FROM THE AMERICAN RAILWAY ENGINEERING AND MAINTENANCE-OF-WAY ASSOCIATION'S (AREMA) "MANUAL FOR TRACK ENGINEERING", 2025 EDITION,
ARE USED FOR VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THE DESIGN.
12.GUIDELINES FROM THE FHWA "MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES" (MUTCD), 2023, 11th EDITION, AND UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
STANDARD DRAWINGS, LATEST REVISION, ARE USED FOR VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THE DESIGN.
13.UTA TRACK PROFILES REPRESENT TOP OF RAIL PROFILE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
14.THE RAIL PROFILE IS ALWAYS CARRIED ON THE LOW RAIL THROUGH SUPERELEVATED HORIZONTAL CURVES AND SPIRALS.
15.SUPERELEVATION IS ACCOMPLISHED BY MAINTAINING TOP OF INSIDE (LOW) RAIL AT PROFILE GRADE AND BY RAISING OUTSIDE (HIGH) RAIL AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO
THE SUPERELEVATION.
16.UTILITIES SHOWN ON THE PLAN SHEETS ARE BASED ON INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM MUNICIPALITIES, AGENCIES, AND PRIVATE COMPANIES. ALL EXISTING UTILITY
LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE AND REQUIRE FIELD VERIFICATION THROUGH POTHOLING AND FIELD SURVEY.
17.TRACKS ON PLAN AND PROFILE DRAWINGS ARE INDICATED BY CENTERLINE OF TRACK. EXCEPT WHERE INDICATED, OFFSET DISTANCES FROM TRACK TO OTHER
FACILITIES ARE MEASURED FROM CENTERLINE OF TRACK.
18.STATIONING THROUGH DIVERGING LEGS OF TURNOUTS IS MEASURED ON THE CENTERLINE OF TRACK AND ALONG THE TANGET EXTENSION LINES OF THE TURNOUT.
TRACK LENGTHS THROUGH THE TURNOUT RUN FROM THE POINT OF SWITCH (PT_SW) TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE TURNOUT (PITO) AND ALONG THE
TANGENT OF THE TURNOUT CLOSURE CURVE TO THE END OF THE TURNOUT CURVE AND BEYOND.
19.TURNOUT HEADBLOCK TIES AND SWITCH MACHINES SHALL BE INSTALLED ON THE SIDE OF TRACK INDICATED ON THE PLANS BY THE TRIANGLE SWITCH TARGET
SYMBOL.
20.THE TOP OF RAIL ELEVATIONS OF THE EASTBOUND TRACK SHALL BE EQUAL TO THE ADJACENT WESTBOUND TRACK TOP OF RAIL, EXCEPT AS NOTED. THE PROFILE
GRADE OF THE EASTBOUND TRACK IS PROJECTED RADIALLY IN CURVED SECTIONS AND PERPENDICULARLY IN TANGENT SECTIONS FROM THE PROFILE GRADE OF
WESTBOUND TRACK.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-G-0-013.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
tr
k
\
c
a
d
\
0
0
_
c
o
v
e
r
_
i
n
d
e
x
\
s
l
-
c
-
g
-
0
-
0
1
3
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-G-0-013.dwg
G0013
GENERAL NOTES
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT DRIVE
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
SIMP
S
O
N
A
V
E
SIMPSON AVE
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
S
1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT DRIVE
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-0-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
tr
k
\
c
a
d
\
0
0
_
c
o
v
e
r
_
i
n
d
e
x
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
0
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-0-001.dwg
K0001
TRACK KEY MAP
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
PROPOSED SUGAR HOUSE
STATION PLATFORM
K1201
K1202
SALT LAKE CITY
K1203
EXISTING FAIRMONT
STATION
POINT LATITUDE (N) LONGITUDE (W)NORTHING EASTING ELEVATION DESCRIPTION
101 40°43'18.87267" 111°51'34.59132" 7431908.164 1540734.983 4360.771'1.5" BC MON
102 40°43'21.49277" 111°51'55.24684" 7432179.826 1539145.332 4333.117'3.5" BC MON
103 40°43'21.43367" 111°51'38.11544" 7432168.490 1540464.627 4356.140'1.5" BC MON
104 40°43'23.87051" 111°51'32.76021" 7432143.495 1540878.033 4364.330'1.5" BC MON
105 40°43'18.87060" 111°51'30.35942" 7431906.647 1541060.892 4370.235'1.5" BC MON
500R 40°43'21.25256" 111°51'37.88085" 7432150.084 1540482.619 4357.911'REDCON SCRIBE
501R 40°43'21.14992" 111°51'42.87099" 7432141.247 1540098.277 4351.920'REDCON SCRIBE
502R 40°43'18.60183" 111°51'29.64744" 7431879.859 1541115.617 4374.707'REDCON R/C
503R 40°43'22.33323" 111°51'31.18303" 7432257.400 1540998.869 4369.340'REDCON MAG NAIL
101
102 103
104
105
500R
502R
503R
501R
S McCLELLAND STREET
SUGARMONT DRIVE
SIMP
S
O
N
A
V
E
SIMPSON AVE
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
S 1100 EAST STREET
S 900 E
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-R-0-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
7
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
0
0
_
c
o
v
e
r
_
i
n
d
e
x
\
s
l
-
c
-
r
-
0
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-R-0-201.dwg
R0201
SURVEY CONTROL DATA
S. JOSHI
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
PROJECT CONTROL (SPC)
HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL DATA WAS COLLECTED BY GPS AND CONVENTIONAL METHODS REFERENCING UTAH'S TURN GPS (VRS)
NETWORK. MAP SCALING PARAMETERS ARE DEFINED AS FOLLOWS:
PROJECT DATUM = NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (N.A.D. 83)
VERTICAL DATUM = N.A.V.D. 88 (REFERENCING GEOID MODEL 18)
COORDINATE SYSTEM = U.S. STATE PLANE 1983, UTAH CENTRAL ZONE (4302) PROJECTED TO GROUND COORDINATES.
UNITS = US SURVEY FOOT
FALSE NORTHING = 0000.00
FALSE EASTING = 0000.00
GROUND SCALE FACTOR = 1.0001871262
ELIPSOID HEIGHT = 4312.98'
SCALING LATITUDE = N 40°43'18.87249"
SCALING LONGITUDE = W 111°51'34.59096
SURVEY CONTROL COORDINATES WERE OBTAINED USING STANDARD RTK (RVS) OBSERVATION METHODS.
CONTROL POINTS ARE SUBJECT TO THE EFFECTS OF SURFACE ACTIVITY AND SEASONAL MOVEMENTS. POINTS MAY BE SUBJECT
TO INTENTIONAL OR UNINTENTIONAL DAMAGE OR REMOVAL. CONTROL POINT POSITIONS SHOULD BE FIELD VERIFIED PRIOR TO
ANY SUBSEQUENT SURVEY OR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
TAX ID NO: (REFER TO RECORD OF SURVEY)
LYING WITHIN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE 1 4) OF SECTION 17,
TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 1 EAST, SALT LAKE BASE AND MERIDIAN
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
050 100100 200
(1" = 100')
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-4-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
4
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-4-201.dwg
K4201
TRACK TYPICAL SECTIONS
SHEET 1 OF 4
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
1/4"=1'-0"
01-16-26
115 RE RAIL IN RUBBER BOOT, TYP.
CONCRETE TRACK SLAB, SEE NOTE 10, TYP.
℄
EB
TRACK
℄
WB
TRACK
6" MIN. ASPHALT ROADWAY, TYP.
SEE NOTE 4
6" MIN. AGGREGATE BASE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 4
EXISTING CONCRETE
CURB AND GUTTER
EXISTING
SIDEWALK
ROADWAY
CENTERLINE
SEE NOTE 5
OCS POLE
OCS FOUNDATION
3'-6"
(TYP)
13'-0"
3'-6"
(TYP)
6'-0"
10'-0" (MIN)
VARIES (SEE NOTE 9)
20'-0" (MIN)
VARIES (SEE NOTE 9)
2'-6"
7'-6"
MODIFIED TYPE B
CURB AND GUTTER
SEE NOTE 2
1'-10"
PROPOSED PLAZA AREA TRACK TYP. SECTION
WB STA 202+92.17 TO WB STA 205+50.00
PROPOSED EXCLUSIVE TRACK TYP. SECTION
WB STA 205+50.00 TO WB STA 208+72.00
NOTES:
1. SEE DWG NO. C3011 FOR GUIDEWAY CURB DETAILS.
2. SEE DWG NO. C3011 FOR CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER DETAILS.
3. IN APARTMENT PLAZA AREA, CONCRETE SHALL BE REMOVED TO THE NEAREST
CONTRACTION JOINT. MATCH EXISTING CONCRETE AND BASE COURSE. SEE DRAWING
C4001 FOR DETAILS.
4. SEE ROADWAY SHEETS FOR PAVEMENT RECONSTRUCTION LIMITS AND CROWN DETAILS.
5. FINAL LIFT OF AC PAVEMENT TO BE DELAYED UNTIL AFTER MAINTENANCE-OF-TRAFFIC
STRIPING IS REMOVED.
6. PROVIDE A 6" WIDE BREAK IN THE GUIDEWAY CURB AT STA 203+84 WB TO ALLOW
SIDEWALK DRAINAGE TO ACCESS TRACK AREA DRAIN.
7. BETWEEN STA 205+42.10 TO STA 205+83.50 DISCONTINUE BOLLARD, CABLE, AND CURB. SEE
DWG NO. K1201 FOR MORE DETAILS.
8. PROVIDE FULL DEPTH INFILL CONCRETE TO BOTTOM OF TRACK SLAB. SEE DWG NO. C3007.
9. SEE DRAWINGS T1201 AND T1202 FOR TRAFFIC LANE DETAILS.
10. SEE DWG NO. K3002 FOR TYPICAL TRACK SLAB DETAILS.
11. SEE DRAWINGS C1201 AND C1202 FOR SIDEWALK PLAN AND PROFILE.
3' BOLLARD AND
CABLE @ 6' OC
SEE NOTE 7
APWA TYPE Q CURB, 10" BASE WIDTH, 8"
GRADED AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 1
3' BOLLARD AND
CABLE @ 6' OC, TYP.
SEE NOTE 7
℄
EB
TRACK
℄
WB
TRACK
OCS POLE
13'-0"
3'-6"
(TYP)
6'-0"
2'-6"
9'-2"
5'-8"
ROADWAY CENTERLINE
SEE NOTE 5
115 RE RAIL IN RUBBER BOOT, TYP.
CONCRETE TRACK SLAB, SEE NOTE 10, TYP.OCS FOUNDATION
MATCH EXISTING GRADE
APWA TYPE Q CURB, 10" BASE WIDTH, 8"
GRADED AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, TYP.
SEE NOTES 1, 6, & 7
AGGREGATE OR SLURRY
BASE TO BOTTOM OF
TRACK SLAB, TYP.
0'-8"
(TYP)
EXISTING CONCRETE
CURB AND GUTTER
0' - 10'-8"
VARIES
2'-6"
13'-0" (MAX)
VARIES (SEE NOTE 9)
11'-0" (MAX)
VARIES (SEE NOTE 9)
13'-0" (MAX)
VARIES (SEE NOTE 9)
6" MIN. ASPHALT ROADWAY, TYP.
SEE NOTE 4
6" MIN. AGGREGATE BASE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 4
CONCRETE CURB AND
GUTTER, TYPE B, 3" MIN.
AGGREGATE BASE COURSE
SEE NOTE 2
2'-2"
6'-6"
SEE NOTE 3
VARIES VARIES
VARIES
6" CONCRETE INFILL, TYP.
4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK
SEE NOTE 11
LANDSCAPE BUFFER
BY OTHERS
1'
-
3
"
(T
Y
P
)
1'
-
3
"
(T
Y
P
)
6'-0"
2'-2"
COMPACTED AND PREPARED
SUBGRADE, TYP.
COMPACTED AND PREPARED
SUBGRADE, TYP.
AGGREGATE OR SLURRY
BASE TO BOTTOM OF
TRACK SLAB, TYP.
0'
-
8
"
0'
-
8
"
0'
-
9
"
3'-6"
(TYP)0'
-
8
"
VARIES
3'-0"
(TYP)
0'-8"
(TYP)
3'-0"
(TYP)
3'-0"
6" CONCRETE
INFILL, TYP.
SEE NOTE 8
HARDSCAPING
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-4-202.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
4
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-4-202.dwg
K4202
TRACK TYPICAL SECTIONS
SHEET 2 OF 4
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
1/4"=1'-0"
01-16-26
115 RE RAIL IN RUBBER BOOT, TYP.
CONCRETE TRACK SLAB
SEE NOTE 5, TYP.
COMPACTED AND PREPARED
SUBGRADE, TYP.
℄
EB
TRACK
℄
WB
TRACK
6" MIN. ASPHALT ROADWAY
SEE NOTES 2 & 3
CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, TYPE A, 3"
MIN. AGGREGATE BASE COURSE
SEE NOTE 1
4" CONCRETE
SIDEWALK
SEE NOTE 6
THROUGH LANE
SHARED USE
EXISTING STREET
PARKING TO BE
REMOVED
OCS POLE, TYP.
OCS FOUNDATION, TYP.
11'-0" (SEE NOTE 4)11'-0" (SEE NOTE 4)
THROUGH LANE
11'-0" (SEE NOTE 4)
LEFT TURN LANE
SHARED USE
2'-0"2'-6"
7'-0"4'-0"
3'-6"
(TYP)
3'-6"
(TYP)
PROPOSED SHARED USE TRACK TYP. SECTION
WB STA 208+72.00 TO WB STA 211+94.07
4'-6"6'-6"
115 RE RAIL IN RUBBER BOOT, TYP.
CONCRETE TRACK SLAB
SEE NOTE 5, TYP.
COMPACTED AND PREPARED
SUBGRADE, TYP.
℄
EB
TRACK
℄
WB
TRACK
ASPHALT ROADWAY, TYP.
SEE NOTE 2
AGGREGATE BASE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 2
HIGHLAND DRIVE
SEE NOTE 3
3'-6"
(TYP)
3'-6"
(TYP)
HIGHLAND INTERSECTION TRACK TYP. SECTION
WB 211+94.07 TO WB STA 212+92.38
22'-3" (MAX)
VARIES HIGHLAND DRIVE
SEE NOTE 3
15'-3" (MAX)
VARIES
3' BOLLARD
AND CABLE
@ 6' OC
7'-0"
0'-6"
NOTES:
1. SEE DWG NO. C3011 FOR CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER DETAILS.
2. SEE ROADWAY SHEETS FOR PAVEMENT RECONSTRUCTION LIMITS.
3. FINAL LIFT OF AC PAVEMENT TO BE DELAYED UNTIL AFTER MAINTENANCE-OF-TRAFFIC
STRIPING IS REMOVED.
4. SEE DRAWINGS T1202 AND T1203 FOR TRAFFIC LANE DETAILS.
5. SEE DWG NO. K3002 FOR TYPICAL TRACK SLAB DETAILS.
6. SEE DRAWINGS C1201 AND C1202 FOR SIDEWALK PLAN AND PROFILE.
VARIESVARIES
VARIES
2'-6"
2'-6"
(TYP)
FULL DEPTH CONCRETE
INFILL, TYP.
1'
-
3
"
(T
Y
P
)
1'
-
3
"
(T
Y
P
)
1%
6" MIN. AGGREGATE BASE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 2
EXISTING CONCRETE
CURB AND GUTTER
FULL DEPTH CONCRETE
INFILL, TYP.
NO CROWN,
TYP.
NO CROWN,
TYP.
HARDSCAPING
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-4-203.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
4
-
2
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-4-203.dwg
K4203
TRACK TYPICAL SECTIONS
SHEET 3 OF 4
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
1/4"=1'-0"
01-16-26
23'-0"
5'-7"
4'-0"
1'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
1'-0"
(TYP)
CONCRETE TRACK SLAB
SEE NOTE 4, TYP.
COMPACTED AND PREPARED
SUBGRADE, TYP.OCS FOUNDATION, TYP.
6" CONCRETE
INFILL, TYP.
WALL, TYP.
SEE NOTE 3
PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, TYPE
A - 24", 3" MIN. AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 2
VA
R
I
E
S
(S
E
E
N
O
T
E
7
)
VA
R
I
E
S
(S
E
E
N
O
T
E
7
)
TOP OF RAIL, TYP.
PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK
PROPOSED TRACK WEST OF PLATFORM TYP. SECTION
WB STA 214+77.76 TO WB STA 215+05.18
3' METAL RAILING
SEE DWG C3014,
TYP.
TYPE Q CURB, 8" TOP WIDTH, 8" GRADED
AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 1
3'-6"
(TYP)
6'-8"
NOTES:
1. SEE DWG NO. C3011 FOR GUIDEWAY CURB DETAILS.
2. SEE DWG NO. C3011 FOR CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER DETAILS.
3. SEE DRAWINGS W1201 AND W1202 FOR RETAINING WALL LIMITS.
4. SEE DWG NO. K3002 FOR TYPICAL TRACK SLAB DETAILS. SEE DWG NO. K3003 FOR
EXTENDED TRACK SLAB AT PLATFORM DETAIL.
5. SEE DRAWINGS K3019 AND K3020 FOR DETAILS.
6. FASTENER HARDWARE, DETAILS, SPACING, AND PLACEMENT TO MATCH SPECIAL
TRACKWORK SHOP DRAWINGS PROVIDED BY MANUFACTURER.
7. SEE DRAWINGS W1201, W1202, AND W3001 FOR WALL PLAN, PROFILE, AND DETAILS.
8. SEE DRAWINGS P4201 AND P4202 FOR DETAILS.
0'-10"
3' BOLLARD AND CABLE @ 6' OC
PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, TYPE
A - 24", 3" MIN. AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 2
3' METAL RAILING
SEE DWG C3014,
TYP.
5'-0"0'-8"4'-6"
23'-0"
VARIES VARIES VARIES
5'-9"0'-8"
0'
-
1
1
"
T
Y
P
.
(S
E
E
N
O
T
E
5
)
1'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
1'-0"
(TYP)
WALL, TYP.
SEE NOTE 3
SPECIAL TRACKWORK
DF FASTENER, TYP.
SEE NOTE 6
℄
WB TRACK
℄
CROSSOVER TRACK
℄
EB TRACK
℄
CROSSOVER TRACK
PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALKTOP OF RAIL, TYP.
CONCRETE TRACK SLAB, TYP.
SEE NOTE 5
VA
R
I
E
S
(S
E
E
N
O
T
E
7
)
VA
R
I
E
S
(S
E
E
N
O
T
E
7
)
5'-7 1/2"
NO. 6 DIRECT FIXATION DOUBLE CROSSOVER TYP. SECTION
WB STA 212+93.05 TO WB STA 214+77.76
115 RE RAIL, TYP.
5'-7 1/2"
1'-6"3'-2 1/2"2'-6"
115 RE RAIL IN
RUBBER BOOT, TYP.
OCS POLE
OCS POLE, TYP.
OCS FOUNDATION 3' BOLLARD AND CABLE @ 6' OCCOMPACTED AND
PREPARED SUBGRADE,
TYP.
℄
WB TRACK
℄
EB TRACK
1'
-
3
"
(T
Y
P
)
4" AGGREGATE BASE
4" AGGREGATE BASE
AGGREGATE OR SLURRY
BASE TO BOTTOM OF
TRACK SLAB, TYP.
0'
-
6
"
0'
-
6
"
1%1%
5'-7 1/2" (MAX)
VARIES
PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER,
TYPE A - 24", 3" MIN. AGGREGATE BASE COURSE
SEE NOTE 2
2:1 SLOPE
1%1%
1%
4'-0"
4'-6 3/4" MAX
SEE NOTE 4
(TYP)
4'-0"
FULL DEPTH CONCRETE
INFILL, TYP.
CONCRETE STEM WALL, TYP.
4" AGGREGATE BASE
PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK
4" AGGREGATE BASE
CONCRETE STEM WALL, TYP.
TYPE Q CURB, 10" BASE WIDTH,
8" GRADED AGGREGATE BASE
COURSE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 1
0'-8"
WB STA 213+16.00 TO WB STA 214+60.00
4" AGGREGATE BASE
CONCRETE STEM
WALL, TYP.
PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER,
TYPE A - 24", 3" MIN. AGGREGATE BASE COURSE
SEE NOTE 2
2:1 SLOPE 5'-0"0'-8"
TYPE Q CURB, 10" BASE WIDTH, 8" GRADED
AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 1
WB STA 213+13.00 TO WB STA 213+60.00
MAINTENANCE WALKWAY
6" CONCRETE INFILL
MAINTENANCE WALKWAY
6" CONCRETE INFILL
MAINTENANCE WALKWAY
6" CONCRETE INFILL
4" AGGREGATE BASE
0'
-
6
"
3' BOLLARD AND
CABLE @ 6' OC
1%
0'
-
8
"
0'
-
8
"
0'
-
8
"
0'-8"
1'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
1'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
NO CROWN, TYP.
EXPANSION JOINT, SEE DETAIL
A ON DWG K3002, TYP.
EXPANSION JOINT,
SEE DETAIL A ON
DWG K3002, TYP.
TOP OF RAMP
SEE NOTE 8
0"
T
O
8
"
VA
R
I
E
S
HANDRAIL SEE
DWG C3005,
TYP.
0'-3 3/4"
(TYP)
10'-6"
1%1%1%
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-4-204.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
4
-
2
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-4-204.dwg
K4204
TRACK TYPICAL SECTIONS
SHEET 4 OF 4
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
1/4"=1'-0"
01-16-26
13'-10 1/2"
23'-0"
5'-7"
4'-0"
1'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
1'-0"
(TYP)
CONCRETE TRACK SLAB
SEE NOTE 6, TYP.
COMPACTED AND PREPARED
SUBGRADE, TYP.
OCS FOUNDATION, TYP.
6" CONCRETE
INFILL, TYP.
WALL, TYP.
SEE NOTE 3
PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB
AND GUTTER, TYPE A - 24", 3" MIN.
AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 2
0'
-
8
"
(
T
Y
P
)
VA
R
I
E
S
(S
E
E
N
O
T
E
4
)
VA
R
I
E
S
(S
E
E
N
O
T
E
4
)
4'-6 3/4"
(TYP)
TOP OF RAIL, TYP.
PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK
PROPOSED TRACK AND PLATFORM TYP. SECTION
WB STA 215+05.18 TO WB STA 215+84.18
3' METAL RAILING
SEE DWG C3014,
TYP.
TYPE Q CURB, 8" TOP WIDTH, 8" GRADED
AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 1
3'-6"
(TYP)
6'-8"
0'-10"
3' BOLLARD AND CABLE @ 6' OC
5'-7 1/2"
1'-6"
3'-2 1/2"2'-6"
115 RE RAIL IN
RUBBER BOOT, TYP.
OCS POLE, TYP.
℄
WB TRACK
℄
EB TRACK
1'
-
3
"
(T
Y
P
)
AGGREGATE OR SLURRY
BASE TO BOTTOM OF
TRACK SLAB, TYP.
0'
-
6
"
PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB
AND GUTTER, TYPE A - 24", 3" MIN.
AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 2
4" AGGREGATE
BASE, TYP.
PROPOSED
SIGNAL HOUSE
PROPOSED PCC
CABINET
4'-0"
1%1%
1%
WB STA 215+31.00 TO WB STA 215+81.00
NOTES:
1. SEE DWG NO. C3011 FOR GUIDEWAY CURB DETAILS.
2. SEE DWG NO. C3011 FOR CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER DETAILS.
3. SEE DRAWINGS W1201 AND W1202 FOR RETAINING WALL LIMITS.
4. SEE DRAWINGS W1201, W1202, AND W3001 FOR WALL PLAN, PROFILE, AND DETAILS.
5. SEE DRAWINGS P4201 AND P4202 FOR DETAILS.
6. SEE DWG NO. K3002 FOR TYPICAL TRACK SLAB DETAILS. SEE DWG NO. K3003 FOR EXTENDED
TRACK SLAB AT PLATFORM DETAIL.
PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK
3' METAL RAILING
SEE DWG C3014,
TYP.
WALL, TYP.
SEE NOTE 3
6'-8"3'-1"4'-11"
2'-0 1/2"
VARIES
5'-0"1'-0"3'-0"
PROPOSED LANDSCAPING
0'
-
6
"
MAINTENANCE WALKWAY
6" CONCRETE INFILL
℄
STATION PLATFORM
MAINTENANCE WALKWAY
6" CONCRETE INFILL
4" AGGREGATE BASE
4" AGGREGATE BASE
0'
-
8
"
1'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
1'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
VA
R
I
E
S
(S
E
E
N
O
T
E
4
)
1%
EXPANSION JOINT, SEE DETAIL
A ON DWG K3002, TYP.
EXPANSION JOINT, SEE DETAIL
A ON DWG K3002, TYP.
SEE NOTE 5
1%1%
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-6-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
6
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-6-201.dwg
K6201
HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT DATA
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
EXTENSION - WB TRACK
CURVE / XO / TO
NUMBER DESCRIPTION STATION DEGREE OF CURVE
(ARC)RADIUS (FT) Lc (FT) Ls IN (FT) Ls OUT (FT) Eq (IN) Ea (IN) Eu (IN)DESIGN
V (MPH)CURVE DELTA NORTHING EASTING TANGENT
LENGTH (FT)BEARING
POB 202+92.17 7432222.415 1540210.550
20.88 S 89° 30' 24" E
TS 203+13.05 7432222.235 1540231.431
SC 203+44.05 7432221.648 1540262.424
C240 PI 205+28.47 11°27'33"500.00 349.31 31.00 31.00 1.78 0.00 1.78 15 40° 01' 41" RT 7432220.381 1540446.841
CS 206+93.36 7432091.871 1540579.114
ST 207+24.36 7432070.540 1540601.607
140.96 S 45° 55' 35" E
TS 208+65.33 7431972.488 1540702.882
SC 208+96.33 7431951.619 1540725.791
C250 PI 209+49.29 33°42'12"170.00 99.01 31.00 31.00 2.33 0.00 2.33 10 33° 22' 09" LT 7431914.087 1540763.203
CS 209+95.34 7431914.792 1540816.192
ST 210+26.34 7431913.712 1540847.162
557.84 S 89° 44' 37" E
PS 212+95.63 7431912.507 1541116.456
X130 S 89° 44' 37" E
PITO 213+16.88 7431912.412 1541137.706
137.05 S 89° 44' 37" E
PITO 214+53.93 7431911.799 1541274.747
X140 S 89° 44' 37" E
PS 214+75.18 7431911.704 1541295.997
109.00 S 89° 44' 37" E
POE 215+84.18 7431911.216 1541404.996
EXTENSION - EB TRACK
CURVE / XO / TO
NUMBER DESCRIPTION STATION DEGREE OF CURVE
(ARC)RADIUS (FT) Lc (FT) Ls IN (FT) Ls OUT (FT) Eq (IN) Ea (IN) Eu (IN)DESIGN
V (MPH)CURVE DELTA NORTHING EASTING TANGENT
LENGTH (FT)BEARING
POB 202+92.88 7432209.415 1540210.438
20.88 S 89° 30' 24" E
TS 203+13.76 7432209.236 1540231.318
SC 203+44.76 7432208.640 1540262.311
S240 PI 205+23.98 11°45'54"487.00 339.42 31.00 31.00 1.83 0.00 1.83 15 7432207.426 1540441.532
CS 206+84.18 7432082.524 1540570.067
ST 207+15.18 7432061.200 1540592.565
138.80 S 45° 55' 35" E
TS 208+53.99 7431964.651 1540692.288
SC 208+84.99 7431943.732 1540715.152
S250 PI 209+43.17 31°18'33"183.00 108.95 31.00 31.00 2.16 0.00 2.16 10 7431902.618 1540756.360
CS 209+93.94 7431903.232 1540814.567
ST 210+24.94 7431902.219 1540845.541
169.30 S 89° 44' 37" E
PC 211+94.24 7431901.461 1541014.843
S260 PI 212+08.91 38°11'50"150.00 29.25 0.00 0.00 2.64 0.00 2.64 10 7431901.396 1541029.516
PT 212+23.49 7431898.488 1541043.897
30.00 S 78° 34' 12" E
PC 212+53.49 7431892.543 1541073.302
S270 PI 212+68.17 38°11'50"150.00 29.25 0.00 0.00 2.64 0.00 2.64 10 7431889.635 1541087.684
PT 212+82.75 7431889.57 1541102.357
13.99 S 89° 44' 37" E
PS 212+96.74 7431889.507 1541116.353
X140 S 89° 44' 37" E
PITO 213+17.99 7431889.412 1541137.603
137.05 S 89° 44' 37" E
PITO 214+55.04 7431888.799 1541274.644
X130 S 89° 44' 37" E
PS 214+76.29 7431888.704 1541295.894
109.00 S 89° 44' 37" E
POE 215+85.29 7431888.216 1541404.893
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
SIMPSON
A
V
E
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
S240
C240
L
201+80
202+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
PO
B
=
W
B
2
0
2
+
9
2
.
1
7
TS
=
W
B
2
0
3
+
1
3
.
0
5
SC
=
W
B
2
0
3
+
4
4
.
0
5
BE
G
I
N
B
O
L
L
A
R
D
S
WB
2
0
3
+
7
2
.
3
8
TS
=
E
B
2
0
3
+
1
3
.
7
6
CS
=
E
B
2
0
6
+
8
4
.
1
8
SC
=
E
B
2
0
3
+
4
4
.
7
6
PO
B
=
E
B
2
0
2
+
9
2
.
8
8
EB
T
R
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
2
0
3
+
7
5
.
0
0
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
201+50
43
5
2
.
7
202+00
43
5
3
.
1
43
5
3
.
5
43
5
3
.
8
43
5
4
.
1
9
43
5
4
.
2
203+00
43
5
4
.
4
3
43
5
4
.
2
43
5
4
.
5
9
43
5
4
.
1
43
5
4
.
7
5
43
5
4
.
7
43
5
5
.
2
4
43
5
5
.
3
204+00
43
5
5
.
8
3
43
5
5
.
9
43
5
6
.
4
0
43
5
6
.
6
43
5
6
.
7
9
43
5
7
.
0
43
5
6
.
9
7
43
5
7
.
3
205+00
43
5
7
.
1
0
43
5
7
.
6
43
5
7
.
2
4
43
5
7
.
9
43
5
7
.
3
7
43
5
7
.
7
43
5
7
.
5
1
43
5
8
.
8
206+00
43
5
7
.
6
4
43
5
8
.
1
43
5
7
.
7
7
43
5
8
.
3
206+50
1.486%0.609%
2.347%
0.536%
PO
B
2
0
2
+
9
2
.
1
7
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
0
8
L = 20.00'
R = -0.04
PV
I
2
0
3
+
1
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
3
4
PV
C
2
0
3
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
1
9
PV
T
2
0
3
+
2
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
4
0
L = 50.00'
R = -0.04
PV
I
2
0
4
+
6
6
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
6
.
7
9
PV
C
2
0
4
+
4
1
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
6
.
2
0
PV
T
2
0
4
+
9
1
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
6
.
9
2
L = 20.00'
R = 0.09
PV
I
2
0
3
+
8
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
7
7
PV
C
2
0
3
+
7
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
7
1
PV
T
2
0
3
+
9
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
5
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
3
5
BE
G
I
N
X
I
N
G
2
0
3
+
1
3
.
1
4
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
5
5
EN
D
X
I
N
G
2
0
3
+
5
1
.
1
8
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-1-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
1
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-1-201.dwg
K1201
TRACK PLAN AND PROFILE
WB STA 201+80.27 TO WB STA 206+50
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
CURVE DATA - WB TRACK
ID NO.R (FT) D (ARC) V (MPH) Ea (IN) Eu (IN) Ls (FT) Lc (FT)
C240 500 11°27'33" 15 0.00 1.78 31.00 349.31
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
K
1
2
0
2
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
WB TRACK
TOP OF RAIL
EXISTING GROUND AT WB TRACK
CENTERLINE
PROPOSED EDGE OF
GUIDEWAY CURB
EXISTING CURB
MCCLELLAND
ST CROSSING
PROPOSED OCS
FOUNDATION (TYP)
RELOCATE EXISTING BUMPING
POSTS TO THE END OF LINE.
SEE DRAWING K1203
WB TRACK
TOP OF RAIL ELEVATION (TYP)
PROPOSED CURB
AND GUTTER
EXISTING GROUND
ELEVATION (TYP)
CURVE DATA - EB TRACK
ID NO.R (FT) D (ARC) V (MPH) Ea (IN) Eu (IN) Ls (FT) Lc (FT)
S240 487 11°45'54" 15 0.00 1.83 31.00 339.42
SIMPSON AVE ℄
13
'
VA
R
I
E
S
BOLLARD AND
CABLE (TYP)
6' SIDEWALK
NOTES:
1. SEE DRAWING G0013 NOTE 20 FOR EB PROFILE INFORMATION.
2. SEE DRAWINGS D1201-D1203 FOR DRAINAGE PLAN AND PROFILES.
3. SEE DRAWING C1204 FOR McCLELLAND ST CROSSING PLAN AND
PROFILE.
TRACK DRAIN (TYP)
SEE NOTE 2
AREA DRAIN (TYP)
SEE NOTE 2
EXISTING FAIRMONT STATION
6" WIDE BREAK IN GUIDEWAY CURB
TO ALLOW DRAINAGE TO INLET
DOUBLE SWING
GATE (SEE SHEET
C1007 AND C3010)
SIMPSON AV
E
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
S 1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGAR
M
O
N
T
D
R
I
V
E
S250
L
L
L
C250
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+00
211+0
0
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+00
211+0
0
212+00
WB
T
R
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
WB
2
0
7
+
2
5
.
0
0
TS
=
W
B
2
0
8
+
6
5
.
3
3
ST
=
W
B
2
0
7
+
2
4
.
3
6
ST
=
W
B
2
1
0
+
2
6
.
3
4
CS
=
W
B
2
0
6
+
9
3
.
3
6
CS
=
W
B
2
0
9
+
9
5
.
3
4
SC
=
W
B
2
0
8
+
9
6
.
3
3
EN
D
B
O
L
L
A
R
D
S
BE
G
I
N
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
WB
2
0
8
+
7
2
.
1
4
EN
D
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
WB
2
0
8
+
8
2
.
1
6
BE
G
I
N
SH
A
R
E
D
U
S
E
WB
2
0
9
+
5
6
.
0
1
TS
=
E
B
2
0
8
+
5
3
.
9
9
ST
=
E
B
2
0
7
+
1
5
.
1
8
ST
=
E
B
2
1
0
+
2
4
.
9
4
CS
=
E
B
2
0
6
+
8
4
.
1
8
CS
=
E
B
2
0
9
+
9
3
.
9
4
SC
=
E
B
2
0
8
+
8
4
.
9
9
EB
T
R
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
2
0
8
+
7
5
.
0
0
WB
T
R
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
WB
2
1
0
+
2
9
.
0
0
BE
G
I
N
S
H
A
R
E
D
U
S
E
2
0
9
+
1
4
.
6
5
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
43
5
7
.
7
7
43
5
8
.
3
206+50
43
5
7
.
9
1
43
5
7
.
6
43
5
8
.
0
4
43
5
7
.
9
207+00
43
5
8
.
1
8
43
5
7
.
9
43
5
8
.
3
1
43
5
8
.
0
43
5
8
.
4
9
43
5
8
.
2
43
5
8
.
8
9
43
5
8
.
5
208+00
43
5
9
.
4
2
43
5
8
.
9
43
5
9
.
9
5
43
5
9
.
5
43
6
0
.
4
7
43
6
0
.
0
43
6
1
.
0
2
43
6
0
.
9
209+00
43
6
1
.
6
4
43
6
1
.
7
43
6
2
.
2
8
43
6
2
.
4
43
6
2
.
9
2
43
6
3
.
2
43
6
3
.
5
6
43
6
3
.
9
210+00
43
6
4
.
2
0
43
6
4
.
6
43
6
4
.
8
4
43
6
5
.
2
43
6
5
.
5
2
43
6
5
.
9
43
6
6
.
3
4
43
6
6
.
6
211+00
43
6
7
.
1
7
43
6
7
.
5
43
6
8
.
0
0
43
6
8
.
3
211+50
2.559%
2.108%
L = 30.00'
R = 0.02
PV
I
2
0
9
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
6
1
.
0
0
PV
C
2
0
8
+
8
5
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
6
0
.
6
8
PV
T
2
0
9
+
1
5
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
6
1
.
3
8
L = 20.00'
R = 0.04
PV
I
2
1
0
+
7
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
6
5
.
3
5
PV
C
2
1
0
+
6
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
6
5
.
0
9
PV
T
2
1
0
+
8
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
6
5
.
6
8
L = 40.00'
R = 0.04
PV
I
2
0
7
+
8
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
8
.
4
7
PV
C
2
0
7
+
6
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
8
.
3
6
PV
T
2
0
8
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
8
.
8
9
0.536%
3.314%
EL
E
V
4
3
6
0
.
4
1
BE
G
I
N
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
2
0
8
+
7
2
.
2
5
EL
E
V
4
3
6
0
.
6
3
EN
D
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
2
0
8
+
8
2
.
2
5
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-1-202.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
1
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-1-202.dwg
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
K
1
2
0
1
CURVE DATA - WB TRACK
ID NO.R (FT) D (ARC) V (MPH) Ea (IN) Eu (IN) Ls (FT) Lc (FT)
C250 170 33°42'12" 10 0.00 2.33 31.00 99.01
K1202
TRACK PLAN AND PROFILE
WB STA 206+50 TO WB STA 211+50
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
CURVE DATA - EB TRACK
ID NO.R (FT) D (ARC) V (MPH) Ea (IN) Eu (IN) Ls (FT) Lc (FT)
S250 183 31°18'33" 10 0.00 2.16 31.00 108.95 MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
K
1
2
0
3
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
WB TRACK
TOP OF RAIL
EXISTING GROUND
AT WB TRACK
CENTERLINE
PROPOSED OCS
FOUNDATION (TYP)
WB TRACK
TOP OF RAIL ELEVATION (TYP)
PROPOSED CURB
AND GUTTER
EXISTING GROUND
ELEVATION (TYP)
PROPOSED EDGE OF
GUIDEWAY CURB
SIMPSON AVE ℄
13
'
VA
R
I
E
S
11
.
5
0
'
6' SIDEWALK
PROPOSED
PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING
SEE NOTE 3
BOLLARD AND
CABLE (TYP)
TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY
ERMA'S AT FAIRMONT
TRACK DRAIN (TYP)
SEE NOTE 2
AREA DRAIN (TYP)
SEE NOTE 2
NOTES:
1. SEE DRAWING G0013 NOTE 20 FOR EB PROFILE INFORMATION.
2. SEE DRAWINGS D1201-D1203 FOR DRAINAGE PLAN AND PROFILES.
3. SEE DRAWING C3003 FOR PEDESTRIAN CROSSING DETAILS.
4. SEE DRAWING T1202 FOR BLANKOUT SIGN LOCATION AND DETAILS.
CONCRETE SCORING
SEE NOTE 4
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
STOP
S260
S270
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
PS
N
O
6
T
/
O
WB
2
1
2
+
9
5
.
6
3
PI
T
O
WB
2
1
3
+
1
6
.
8
8
PI
T
O
WB
2
1
4
+
5
3
.
9
3
PS
N
O
6
T
/
O
WB
2
1
4
+
7
5
.
1
8
BE
G
I
N
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
WB
2
1
5
+
0
5
.
1
8
EN
D
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
WB
2
1
5
+
6
5
.
1
8
PO
E
=
W
B
2
1
5
+
8
4
.
1
8
EN
D
E
M
B
E
D
D
E
D
BE
G
I
N
D
F
WB
2
1
2
+
9
3
.
0
5
EN
D
D
F
BE
G
I
N
E
M
B
E
D
D
E
D
WB
2
1
4
+
7
7
.
7
6
PC
=
E
B
2
1
1
+
9
4
.
2
4
PC
=
E
B
2
1
2
+
5
3
.
4
9
PT
=
E
B
2
1
2
+
2
3
.
4
9
PT
=
E
B
2
1
2
+
8
2
.
7
5
PS
N
O
.
6
T
/
O
EB
2
1
2
+
9
6
.
7
4
PI
T
O
EB
2
1
3
+
1
7
.
9
9
PI
T
O
EB
2
1
4
+
5
5
.
0
4
PS
N
O
.
6
T
/
O
EB
2
1
4
+
7
6
.
2
9
PO
E
=
E
B
2
1
5
+
8
5
.
2
9
EN
D
E
M
B
E
D
D
E
D
BE
G
I
N
D
F
EB
2
1
2
+
9
4
.
1
6
EN
D
D
F
BE
G
I
N
E
M
B
E
D
D
E
D
EB
2
1
4
+
7
8
.
8
7
BE
G
I
N
E
X
C
L
U
S
I
V
E
TR
A
C
K
WB
2
1
2
+
8
0
.
3
7
BE
G
I
N
E
X
C
L
U
S
I
V
E
TR
A
C
K
2
1
2
+
6
9
.
6
0
EN
D
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
WB
2
1
4
+
8
8
.
4
2
BE
G
I
N
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
WB
2
1
4
+
7
8
.
4
2
BE
G
I
N
G
U
I
D
E
W
A
Y
C
U
R
B
WB
2
1
3
+
0
9
.
4
6
EN
D
G
U
I
D
E
W
A
Y
C
U
R
B
WB
2
1
3
+
6
0
.
0
0
BE
G
I
N
G
U
I
D
E
W
A
Y
C
U
R
B
EB
2
1
3
+
0
6
.
1
2
EN
D
G
U
I
D
E
W
A
Y
C
U
R
B
EB
2
1
4
+
6
1
.
1
1
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
43
6
8
.
0
0
43
6
8
.
3
211+50
43
6
8
.
8
3
43
6
8
.
8
43
6
9
.
6
6
43
6
9
.
4
212+00
43
7
0
.
4
8
43
7
0
.
2
43
7
1
.
1
0
43
7
0
.
9
43
7
1
.
6
0
43
7
1
.
8
43
7
2
.
1
0
213+00
43
7
2
.
6
0
43
7
3
.
1
0
43
7
4
.
8
43
7
3
.
6
0
43
7
5
.
0
43
7
4
.
1
0
43
7
5
.
5
214+00
43
7
4
.
6
0
43
7
6
.
0
43
7
5
.
1
0
43
7
6
.
7
43
7
5
.
6
0
43
7
7
.
8
43
7
6
.
1
0
43
7
8
.
9
215+00
43
7
6
.
6
0
43
8
0
.
2
43
7
7
.
1
0
43
8
1
.
8
43
7
7
.
6
0
216+00 216+50
2.000%
PO
E
2
1
5
+
8
4
.
1
8
EL
E
V
4
3
7
7
.
7
9
L = 30.00'
R = -0.04
PV
I
2
1
2
+
3
4
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
7
0
.
7
9
PV
C
2
1
2
+
1
9
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
7
0
.
2
9
PV
T
2
1
2
+
4
9
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
7
1
.
0
8
EL
E
V
4
3
7
2
.
0
2
PS
2
1
2
+
9
5
.
6
3
EL
E
V
4
3
7
5
.
6
1
PS
2
1
4
+
7
5
.
1
8
EL
E
V
4
3
7
6
.
2
1
BE
G
I
N
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
2
1
5
+
0
5
.
1
8
EL
E
V
4
3
7
7
.
4
1
EN
D
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
2
1
5
+
6
5
.
1
8
3.314%
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-1-203.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
1
-
2
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-1-203.dwg
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
K
1
2
0
2
CURVE DATA - EB TRACK
ID NO.R (FT) D (ARC) V (MPH) Ea (IN) Eu (IN) Ls (FT) Lc (FT)
S260 150 38°11'50" 10 0.00 2.64 0.00 29.25
S270 150 38°11'50" 10 0.00 2.64 0.00 29.25
K1203
TRACK PLAN AND PROFILE
WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+84.18
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
LIMITS OF NO. 6 DOUBLE CROSSOVER
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
PROPOSED SUGAR HOUSE
STATION PLATFORM
EB TRACK ℄
WB TRACK
TOP OF RAIL
EXISTING GROUND
AT WB TRACK
CENTERLINE
PROPOSED OCS
FOUNDATION (TYP)
WB TRACK
TOP OF RAIL ELEVATION (TYP)
PROPOSED CURB
AND GUTTER
TIE-IN TO EXISTING
C&G
EXISTING GROUND
ELEVATION (TYP)
SIMPSON AVE ℄
WB TRACK ℄
11
.
5
0
'
23
'
PROPOSED SUGAR
HOUSE STATION
PLATFORM
BUMPING POST (TYP)
(RELOCATED EXISTING)
PROPOSED
RETAINING
WALL (TYP)
PEDESTRIAN
SIDEWALK
X130
X140
VA
R
I
E
S
SIGNAL HOUSE
WB 215+43.00
OFFSET 14.17' LT
RAMP DOWN TO STATION PLATFORM
SLOPE = 2.00%
NOTES:
1. SEE DRAWING G0013 NOTE 20 FOR EB PROFILE INFORMATION.
2. SEE DRAWINGS D1201-D1203 FOR DRAINAGE PLAN AND PROFILES.
3. SEE DRAWING C1217 FOR PEDESTRIAN RAMP DETAILS.
4. AN OPERATOR RESTROOM AND BREAKROOM TO BE PROVIDED BY
THE DEVELOPER AT A LATER DATE.
PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK
SEE NOTE 3
5.
0
0
'
5.
6
3
'
MAINTENANCE WALKWAY
RETAINING
WALL (TYP)
PROPOSED EDGE OF
GUIDEWAY CURB
PROPOSED EDGE OF
GUIDEWAY CURB
ROADWAY CURB AND GUTTER
PCC CABINETSIMPSON AVE ℄
BOLLARD AND CABLE (TYP)
RAMP DOWN
TO PED XING
SLOPE: 5.98%
TIE-IN TO EXISTING
SIDEWALK
HIGHLAND DRIVE
INTERSECTION
TRACK DRAIN (TYP)
SEE NOTE 2
WB 203+00.00
4345
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4345
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 203+50.00
4345
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4345
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 204+00.00
4345
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4345
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 204+50.00
4345
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4345
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
5
4
.
1
9
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
5
5
.
2
4
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
5
6
.
4
0
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
5
4
.
5
9
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-5-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
5
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-5-201.dwg
K5201
TRACK CROSS SECTIONS
WB STA 201+80.27 TO WB STA 204+50
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
H: 1" = 5' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
℄ WB
TRACK
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
NOTES:
1. ALL STATIONING AND TOP OF RAIL (T/R) ELEVATIONS
REFERENCED HEREIN ARE BASED ON WB TRACK.
WB 205+00.00
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 205+50.00
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 206+00.00
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 206+50.00
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
5
6
.
9
7
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
5
7
.
2
4
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
5
7
.
5
1
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
5
7
.
7
7
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-5-202.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
5
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-5-202.dwg
K5202
TRACK CROSS SECTIONS
WB STA 205+00 TO WB STA 206+50
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
H: 1" = 5' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
NOTES:
1. ALL STATIONING AND TOP OF RAIL (T/R) ELEVATIONS
REFERENCED HEREIN ARE BASED ON WB TRACK.
WB 207+00.00
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 207+50.00
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 208+00.00
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 208+50.00
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
5
8
.
0
4
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
5
8
.
3
1
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
5
8
.
8
9
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
5
9
.
9
5
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-5-203.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
5
-
2
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-5-203.dwg
K5203
TRACK CROSS SECTIONS
WB STA 207+00 TO WB STA 208+50
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
H: 1" = 5' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
NOTES:
1. ALL STATIONING AND TOP OF RAIL (T/R) ELEVATIONS
REFERENCED HEREIN ARE BASED ON WB TRACK.
WB 209+00.00
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 209+50.00
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 210+00.00
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 210+50.00
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
6
1
.
0
2
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
6
2
.
2
8
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
6
3
.
5
6
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
6
4
.
8
4
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-5-204.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
5
-
2
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-5-204.dwg
K5204
TRACK CROSS SECTIONS
WB STA 209+00 TO WB STA 210+50
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
H: 1" = 5' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
NOTES:
1. ALL STATIONING AND TOP OF RAIL (T/R) ELEVATIONS
REFERENCED HEREIN ARE BASED ON WB TRACK.
WB 211+00.00
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 211+50.00
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 212+00.00
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 212+50.00
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
6
6
.
3
4
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
6
8
.
0
0
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
6
9
.
6
6
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
7
1
.
1
0
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-5-205.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
5
-
2
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-5-205.dwg
K5205
TRACK CROSS SECTIONS
WB STA 211+00 TO WB STA 212+50
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
H: 1" = 5' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK ℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
NOTES:
1. ALL STATIONING AND TOP OF RAIL (T/R) ELEVATIONS
REFERENCED HEREIN ARE BASED ON WB TRACK.
WB 213+00.00
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 213+50.00
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 214+00.00
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
WB 214+50.00
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
7
2
.
1
0
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
7
3
.
1
0
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
7
4
.
1
0
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
7
5
.
1
0
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-5-206.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
5
-
2
0
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-5-206.dwg
K5206
TRACK CROSS SECTIONS
WB STA 213+00 TO WB STA 214+50
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
H: 1" = 5' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
NOTES:
1. ALL STATIONING AND TOP OF RAIL (T/R) ELEVATIONS
REFERENCED HEREIN ARE BASED ON WB TRACK.
WB 215+00.00
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20-25
WB 215+50.00
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450-5-10-15-20-25-30
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
7
6
.
1
0
T/
R
E
L
E
V
:
4
3
7
7
.
1
0
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-5-207.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
5
-
2
0
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-5-207.dwg
K5207
TRACK CROSS SECTIONS
WB STA 215+00 TO WB STA 215+84
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
H: 1" = 5' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
℄ WB
TRACK
℄ EB
TRACK
NOTES:
1. ALL STATIONING AND TOP OF RAIL (T/R) ELEVATIONS
REFERENCED HEREIN ARE BASED ON WB TRACK.
4345
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4345
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
TR
A
C
K
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
(W
B
L
O
W
R
A
I
L
U
N
L
E
S
S
O
T
H
E
R
W
I
S
E
N
O
T
E
D
)
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
A
L
I
G
N
M
E
N
T
S
A
N
D
GE
N
E
R
A
L
A
R
R
A
N
G
E
M
E
N
T
S
TR
A
C
K
T
Y
P
E
,
T
Y
P
E
O
F
R
A
I
L
202+00 203+00 204+00 205+00 206+00 207+00 208+00 209+00 210+00 211+00 212+00 213+00 214+00 215+00 216+00
TS
W
B
2
0
3
+
1
3
.
0
5
SC
W
B
2
0
3
+
4
4
.
0
5
CS
W
B
2
0
6
+
9
3
.
3
6
ST
W
B
2
0
7
+
2
4
.
3
6
TS
W
B
2
0
8
+
6
5
.
3
3
SC
W
B
2
0
8
+
9
6
.
3
3
CS
W
B
2
0
9
+
9
5
.
3
4
ST
W
B
2
1
0
+
2
6
.
3
4
PO
E
W
B
2
1
5
+
8
4
.
1
8
PO
B
W
B
2
0
2
+
9
2
.
1
7
PO
B
E
B
2
0
2
+
9
2
.
8
8
TS
E
B
2
0
3
+
1
3
.
7
6
SC
E
B
2
0
3
+
4
4
.
7
6
CS
E
B
2
0
6
+
8
4
.
1
8
ST
E
B
2
0
7
+
1
5
.
1
8
TS
E
B
2
0
8
+
5
3
.
9
9
SC
E
B
2
0
8
+
8
4
.
9
9
CS
E
B
2
0
9
+
9
3
.
9
4
ST
E
B
2
1
0
+
2
4
.
9
4
PC
E
B
2
1
1
+
9
4
.
2
4
PT
E
B
2
1
2
+
2
3
.
4
9
PC
E
B
2
1
2
+
5
3
.
4
9
PT
E
B
2
1
2
+
8
2
.
7
5
PO
E
E
B
2
1
5
+
8
5
.
2
9
BE
G
I
N
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
WB
2
1
5
+
0
5
.
1
8
EN
D
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
WB
2
1
5
+
6
5
.
1
8
PS
N
O
6
T
/
O
W
B
2
1
2
+
9
5
.
6
3
PI
T
O
W
B
2
1
3
+
1
6
.
8
8
PI
T
O
W
B
2
1
4
+
5
3
.
9
3
PS
N
O
6
T
/
O
WB
2
1
4
+
7
5
.
1
8
PS
N
O
6
T
/
O
E
B
2
1
2
+
9
6
.
7
4
PI
T
O
E
B
2
1
3
+
1
7
.
9
9
PI
T
O
E
B
2
1
4
+
5
5
.
0
4
PS
N
O
6
T
/
O
E
B
2
1
4
+
7
6
.
2
9
END EMBEDDED
BEGIN DF
WB 212+93.05
END DF
BEGIN EMBEDDED
WB 214+77.76 END EMBEDDED
WB 215+84.18
BEGIN EMBEDDED
WB 202+92.17
BEGIN EMBEDDED
EB 202+92.88 END EMBEDDED
BEGIN DF
EB 212+94.16
END DF
BEGIN EMBEDDED
EB 214+78.87
END EMBEDDED
EB 215+85.29
POB 202+92.17
ELEV 4354.08
PO
E
2
1
5
+
8
4
.
1
8
EL
E
V
4
3
7
7
.
7
9
L = 20.00'
R = -0.04
PV
I
2
0
3
+
1
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
3
4
PV
C
2
0
3
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
1
9
PV
T
2
0
3
+
2
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
4
0
L = 50.00'
R = -0.04
PV
I
2
0
4
+
6
6
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
6
.
7
9
PV
C
2
0
4
+
4
1
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
6
.
2
0
PV
T
2
0
4
+
9
1
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
6
.
9
2
L = 30.00'
R = -0.04
PV
I
2
1
2
+
3
4
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
7
0
.
7
9
PV
C
2
1
2
+
1
9
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
7
0
.
2
9
PV
T
2
1
2
+
4
9
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
7
1
.
0
8
L = 20.00'
R = 0.09
PV
I
2
0
3
+
8
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
7
7
PV
C
2
0
3
+
7
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
4
.
7
1
PV
T
2
0
3
+
9
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
5
.
0
0
L = 30.00'
R = 0.02
PV
I
2
0
9
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
6
1
.
0
0
PV
C
2
0
8
+
8
5
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
6
0
.
6
8
PV
T
2
0
9
+
1
5
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
6
1
.
3
8
L = 20.00'
R = 0.04
PV
I
2
1
0
+
7
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
6
5
.
3
5
PV
C
2
1
0
+
6
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
6
5
.
0
9
PV
T
2
1
0
+
8
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
6
5
.
6
8
L = 40.00'
R = 0.04
PV
I
2
0
7
+
8
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
8
.
4
7
PV
C
2
0
7
+
6
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
8
.
3
6
PV
T
2
0
8
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
5
8
.
8
9
1.486%0.609%2.347%
3.314%
2.559%
2.000%
2.108%
0.536%
TR
A
C
K
D
R
A
I
N
WB
2
0
3
+
8
3
.
6
2
TR
A
C
K
D
R
A
I
N
WB
2
0
5
+
8
8
.
6
5
TR
A
C
K
D
R
A
I
N
WB
2
0
9
+
0
7
.
0
0
TR
A
C
K
D
R
A
I
N
EB
2
0
3
+
8
4
.
1
6
TR
A
C
K
D
R
A
I
N
EB
2
0
5
+
8
2
.
4
4
TR
A
C
K
D
R
A
I
N
EB
2
0
9
+
0
0
.
0
3
TR
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
WB
2
0
7
+
2
5
.
0
0
TR
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
WB
2
1
0
+
2
9
.
0
0
TR
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
EB
2
0
3
+
7
5
.
0
0
TR
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
EB
2
0
8
+
7
5
.
0
0
WB 208+64.33 WB 210+27.34
EB 208+52.99 EB 210+25.94
EB 211+62.24
EB 212+87.49
WB 208+64.33 WB 210+27.34
EB 208+52.99 EB 210+25.94
EB 211+94.24
EB 212+23.49 EB 212+53.49
EB 212+82.75
EB 212+21.49
IJ WB 212+87 IJ WB 214+82
IJ WB 215+75
IJ EB 212+88 IJ EB 214+83 IJ EB 215+76
WB 203+13.14 WB 208+72.14 WB 208+82.16WB 203+51.18
EB 212+55.49
WB 214+78.42 WB 214+88.42
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-7-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
7
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-7-001.dwg
K7001
TRACK CHART
WB STA 202+92.17 TO WB STA 215+84.18
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
H: 1" = 50' V: 1" = 10'
01-16-26
RADIUS
V
Ea
Eu
ID
KEY:
RADIUS
V
Ea
Eu
ID
500
15
0.00
1.78
C240
170
10
0.00
2.33
C250
487
15
0.00
1.83
S240
183
10
0.00
2.16
S250
150
10
0.00
2.64
S260
150
10
0.00
2.64
S270
RESTRAINING RAIL
RESTRAINING RAIL
RESTRAINING RAIL
HIGH STRENGTH HEAD-HARDENED RAIL, 115RE
HIGH STRENGTH HEAD-HARDENED RAIL, 115RE
RESTRAINING RAIL
WB TRACK
TOP OF RAIL
EXISTING GROUND
AT WB TRACK CENTERLINE
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
PRE-CURVED
PRE-CURVED
PRE-CURVED
13
'
VA
R
I
E
S
13
'
VA
R
I
E
S
11
.
5
0
'
VA
R
I
E
S
23
'BUMPING POST
(TYP)
HIGHLAND DRIVE
INTERSECTION
MCCLELLAND ST CROSSING 1100 E PED XING
EXCLUSIVE TRACK WB 209+56.01 SHARED USE EXCLUSIVE TRACK
EXCLUSIVE TRACK SHARED USE EXCLUSIVE TRACK
WB 212+80.37
EB 212+69.60EB 209+14.65
PED XING
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-001.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-001.dwg
K3001
TRACKWORK
RAIL LUBRICATOR
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
SL-C-K-3-002.dwg
K3002
TRACKWORK
TRACK SLAB TYPICAL SECTION
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-002.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-003.dwg
K3003
TRACKWORK
TRACK SLAB DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-003.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-004.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-004.dwg
K3004
TRACKWORK
MISC DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-005.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-005.dwg
K3005
TRACKWORK
SIGNAL TRACK CONNECTION BOX
J. MITCHELL
J. MITCHELL
D. NGUYEN
F. NANNENGA
AS NOTED
01-16-26
1
-PIN BRAZED TRACK CIRCUIT CONNECTIONS
BOLTED POWER RETURN CONNECTIONS
SCALE: NTS
1
-
NOTES:
1. INCREASE CUT-OUT SIZE TO ACCOMMODATE POWER RETURN CONNECTIONS.
ENLARGED CUT-OUT PART OF PURCHASED BOX OR MODIFY BOX IN FIELD.
2. TRACK CONNECTIONS SPACING BASED ON AREMA AND MANUFACTURER
RECOMMENDATIONS AND ADJUSTED TO FIT TRACK CONNECTION ACCESS CUTOUT
IN TRACK BOX.
3. AXLE COUNTER WHEEL SENSOR BOX AS REQUIRED BY DESIGN. LOCATION MAY
DIFFER FROM THAT SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING.
4. IMPEDANCE BOND BOX MAY BE LOCATED OUTSIDE OF TRACK AREA AS REQUIRED BY
DESIGN.
SCALE: 1" = 1'-0"
TRACK AND IMPEDANCE BOND BOX ARRANGEMENT
A
-
SIGNAL TRACK CONNECTION BOX
SCALE: 1" = 1'-0"
A
-
2" DIAMETER DRAIN HOLE
(TYPICAL)
NOTE 3
2
4
1'-0"2'-8"3'-10"5'-0"
1'-0"
3" DIAMETER TRACK WIRE
ENTRANCE (AS REQUIRED)
4" DIAMETER DRAIN HOLE
(TYPICAL)
4'
-
8
.
5
"
TRACK BOX AND CONDUIT MATERIAL SUMMARY
REF DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER*MANUFACTURER PART NUMBER*
1 60" x 48" x 20" EMBEDDED TRACK BOX
ASSEMBLY ARMORCAST PRODUCTS CO.A6004860A-S
2 32" x 15" x 8" EMBEDDED TRACK BOX
ASSEMBLY ARMORCAST PRODUCTS CO.A6003014A
3 2" PVC CONDUIT SCH. 40 VARIOUS VARIOUS
4 3" PVC CONDUIT SCH. 40 VARIOUS VARIOUS
NOTE 1
IMPEDANCE BOND
(TYPICAL)
SUGGESTED*
19
.
5
"
4
3
1
SUGARHOUSE
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-006.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
0
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-006.dwg
K3006
TRACKWORK
STREETCAR DYNAMIC ENVELOPE
AND LOADING DIAGRAM
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-007.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
0
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-007.dwg
K3007
TRACKWORK
MISC. EMBEDDED TRACK
SECTIONS AND DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-008.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
0
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-008.dwg
K3008
TRACKWORK
6" INFILL SLAB DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
A
--
A
K3002
A
K3002
A
K3002
B
--
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-009.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
0
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-009.dwg
K3009
TRACKWORK
TRACK DRAINAGE DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-010.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
1
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-010.dwg
K3010
TRACKWORK
TRACK CONNECTION BOX
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-011.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
1
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-011.dwg
K3011
TRACKWORK
DRAINAGE CATCH BASIN
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
AS NOTED
01-16-26
2'x2' FRAME & GRATE TO BE
PLACED HERE. THE FRAME
& GRATE ARE RATED TO
SUPPORT AN H-20 LOADING.
RISER HEIGHT
VARIES
OPTIONAL
RISER
NTS
PRECAST CONCRETE CATCH BASIN 2'x'2'x4'1
-
2'2'
4'
-
5
"
2'
2'-8"
5"
S
L
A
B
TH
I
C
K
N
E
S
S
2'
3'
2'
-
8
"
4" TY
PWALL
7
34"11
34"
.
NOTES:
1. VAULT DESIGN SHALL COMPLY WITH ASTM
C-858 & C-913 WITH LESS THAN 2' OF EARTH
COVER AND AN AASHTO HS-20 LOADING.
2. INLET SHOWN IS FROM GENEVA
PIPE/NORTHWEST PIPE COMPANY OR
APPROVED EQUAL.
KNOCKOUT PANEL,
TYP.2'-0"
2'-0 3/8"
6"
1'-10"
2'-3 3/4"
2'-11"
2"
2'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
3
/
8
"
6"
1'
-
1
0
"
2'
-
3
3
/
4
"
2'
-
1
1
"
2"
2'x'2 FRAME AND GRATE
2" = 1'-0"
2
-
B
-
A
-
SECTION
2" = 1'-0"
A
-
SECTION
2" = 1'-0"
B
-
NOTES:
1. GRATE SHOWN IS FROM NEENAH FOUNDRY CATALOG #3433.
2. GRATE IS AASHTO RATED FOR HS-20 LOADING.
3. ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE IN ENGLISH.
4. COMPONENT NO'S: FRAME 3210-2001, GRATE 3210-0002.
5. MATERIAL: CAST GRAY IRON ASTM A-48, CLASS 35B.
6. FINISH: NO PAINT.
7. WEIGHT: FRAME 164#, GRATE 166#.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-012.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
1
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-012.dwg
K3012
TRACKWORK
TRACK DRAIN ARRAY
AND PLATFORM DRAIN DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
GUIDEWAY CURB (TYP)
EXISTING GRADE 2%2%2%2%
45° ELBOW 45° ELBOW 45° ELBOW
45° ELBOW
45° WYE
45° WYE 45° WYE CONNECTION TO STORM SEWER
VARIES BY LOCATION
SEE D1201 TO D1203
AREA DRAIN (TYP)
SEE DETAIL 1 ON
DWG D1203
TRACK DRAIN
SEE K3009
TOP OF PLATFORM BEYOND
6" PVC TYP
CONNECTION TO
OUTFALL PIPE
SEE DWG D1203
8" PVC PIPE @
MIN 1.0% SLOPE
NTS
TYPICAL TRACK DRAIN ARRAY DETAIL 1
D1201, D1202, D1203
NTS
DRAIN DETAIL AT SUGAR HOUSE STATION 2
D1203
CONNECTION TO
OUTFALL PIPE
SEE DWG D1203
8" PVC PIPE @
MIN 1.0% SLOPE
AREA DRAIN.
SEE DETAIL 1
ON DWG D1203
8" PVC PIPE @
MIN 1.0% SLOPE
45° ELBOW
1%1%1%1%
PLATFORM RAMP DOWN
TO PED CROSSING
1%1%1%
STATION PLATFORM
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-013.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
1
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-013.dwg
K3013
TRACKWORK
INSULATED JOINT DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-014.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
1
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-014.dwg
K3014
TRACKWORK
NO. 6 DOUBLE CROSSOVER RAIL LAYOUT
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
GAUGE
LINES
PS
12" POINT OF FROG
TRANSVERSE ℄
OF CROSSING
NO. 6 DOUBLE CROSSOVER RAIL LAYOUT DIAGRAM
7'-3"
5'-7"
5'-7"
7'-3"
13'-0"
CURVED SWITCH
5'-6"
TOE
LENGTH
8'-3"
HEEL
LENGTH
49'-9" ACTUAL LEAD
49'-9" ACTUAL LEAD
80'-0" 12" POINT OF FROG TO 12" POINT OF FROG
137'-0" PI TO PI
179'-6" PS TO PS
23
'
-
0
"
49'-9" ACTUAL LEAD
5'-7"
5'-7"
49'-9" ACTUAL LEAD
7'-3"
5'-6"
TOE
LENGTH
8'-3"
HEEL
LENGTH
12" POINT OF FROG
PS
PSPS
PITOPITO
13'-0"
CURVED SWITCH8'-3"
21'-3" PS TO PI
7'-3"
PITO
8'-3"
21'-3" PS TO PI
PITO
28'-6"
12" POINT OF FROG 12" POINT OF FROG
28'-6"
BONDED INSULATED JOINTS
GAUGE
LINES
NOTES:
1. ALL RAIL AND COMPONENTS SHALL CONFORM TO THE 115RE RAIL SECTION.
2. ALL RAILS ARE HIGH STRENGTH.
3. CLOSURE RAIL LENGTHS ALLOW 1" FOR EACH WELDED JOINT AND 3 16" FOR EACH
INSULATED JOINT.
4. ALL SPECIAL TRACKWORK CROSSOVER PLATES MUST BE INSULATED.
5. BONDED INSULATED JOINTS VARY BY LOCATION. PLACE JOINTS IN ACCORDANCE
WITH TRAIN CONTROL DRAWINGS.
6. SUPPLY COMPLETE WITH RAIL CLIPS, SHOULDER, INSULATORS, AND PADS.
7. EXACT DIMENSIONS, LIMITS, SPACING, AND DETAILS OF CROSSOVER TO BE
DETERMINED BY SUPPLIER CROSSOVER SHOP DRAWING.
8. SEE DRAWING K3018 FOR M-23A SWITCH MACHINE LAYOUT.
89'-9"
TRANSVERSE ℄
OF CROSSING
LEGEND:
BONDED INSULATED JOINTS
(CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR
LOCATING INSULATED JOINTS IN THE
FIELD FOR THE JOINTS NOT PROVIDED BY
THE SUPPLIER)
FIELD WELDED JOINT
HEEL OF SWITCH HEEL OF SWITCH
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-015.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
1
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-015.dwg
K3015
TRACKWORK
NO. 6 DOUBLE CROSSOVER GEOMETRY
AND LAYOUT 23'-0" TRACK CENTERS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
NO. 6 DIRECT FIXATION DOUBLE CROSSOVER 23'-0" TRACK CENTERS
NOTES:
1. ALL RAIL AND COMPONENTS SHALL CONFORM TO THE 115RE RAIL SECTION.
2. ALL RAILS ARE HIGH STRENGTH.
3. CLOSURE RAIL LENGTHS ALLOW 1" FOR EACH WELDED JOINT AND 3 16" FOR EACH
INSULATED JOINT.
4. THE DESIGN CONFIGURATION AND LAYOUT ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES
ONLY, FINAL DIMENSIONS, LIMITS, GEOMETRY, DETAILS, AND FASTENER SPACING,
TO BE DETERMINED BY SUPPLIER TURNOUT/CROSSOVER SHOP DRAWING.
5. STANDARD SPECIAL TRACKWORK DIRECT FIXATION FASTENERS SHALL BE
FURNISHED WHERE SPECIAL TRACKWORK FASTENERS ARE NOT REQUIRED.
6. ALL SPECIAL TRACKWORK TURNOUT PLATES MUST BE INSULATED.
7. BONDED INSULATED JOINTS VARY BY LOCATION. PLACE JOINTS IN ACCORDANCE
WITH TRAIN CONTROL DRAWINGS.
8. SUPPLY COMPLETE WITH RAIL CLIPS, SHOULDER, INSULATORS, AND PADS.
10. CROSSOVER IS SYMMETRICAL ABOUT TRANSVERSE CL.
11. SEE DRAWING K3018 FOR M-23A SWITCH MACHINE LAYOUT.
7'-3"
13'-0" CURVED SWITCH
7'-3"
13'-0" CURVED SWITCH
21'-3"
49'-9" ACTUAL LEAD
28'-6"
8'-3"5'-6"
TOE LENGTH 8'-3" HEEL LENGTH
5'-7"
5'-7"
8'-3"
21'-3"28'-6"
5'-6"
TOE LENGTH 8'-3" HEEL LENGTH
49'-9" ACTUAL LEAD
4'
-
8
1
/
2
"
GA
U
G
E
4'
-
8
1
/
2
"
GA
U
G
E
23
'
-
0
"
PS
PS
12" POINT OF FROG
HEEL OF SWITCH 6 14"
HEEL OF SWITCH 6 14"
12" POINT OF FROG
PITO
PITO
POINT OF
COMPOUND CURVE
POINT OF
COMPOUND CURVE
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
X130 TRACK ℄
X140 TRACK ℄
GUARD RAIL
GUARD RAIL
GUARD RAIL ℄
GUARD RAIL ℄
TRANSVERSE ℄
OF CROSSING
THEORETICAL POINT
OF CENTER FROG
BONDED INSULATED JOINT (TYP)
FIELD WELD (TYP)
NO.6 WELDED BOLTLESS
MANGANESE FROG
NO.6 WELDED BOLTLESS
MANGANESE FROG
LEGEND:
CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING
INSULATED JOINTS IN THE FIELD FOR THE
JOINTS NOT PROVIDED BY THE SUPPLIER
FIELD WELDED JOINT
GUARD RAIL
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-016.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
1
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-016.dwg
K3016
TRACKWORK
NO. 6 DIRECT FIXATION DOUBLE CROSSOVER
LAYOUT
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
AS SHOWN
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. THE DESIGN CONFIGURATION AND LAYOUT ARE SHOWN FOR INFORMATIONAL
PURPOSES ONLY. FINAL LIMITS OF CROSSOVER, DIMENSIONS, DETAILS AND FASTENER
LOCATION AND SPACING TO BE DETERMINED BY SUPPLIER CROSSOVER SHOP
DRAWING.
2. CONTRACTOR TO ADJUST THESE DIMENSIONS AFTER SUPPLIED WITH FULL SET OF
TURNOUT SHOP DRAWINGS FROM THE SUPPLIER.
3. STANDARD DIRECT FIXATION FASTENER TO BE USED WHERE SPECIAL TRACKWORK
FASTENERS ARE NOT REQUIRED.
4. DRAINAGE BLOCKOUTS TO BE PLACED AT THE END OF DIRECT FIXATION AREA AND
ADJACENT TO SWITCH MACHINE TO COLLECT RUNOFF WATER. BLOCKOUTS TO NOT BE
PLACED IN CONFLICT WITH FASTENING SYSTEM.
5. SEE DRAWING K3017 FOR DRAINAGE BLOCKOUTS DETAIL.
6. SEE DRAWING K3018 FOR M-23A SWITCH MACHINE LAYOUT.
NTS
NO. 6 DIRECT FIXATION DOUBLE CROSSOVER LAYOUT
A
K3017
B
K3017
C
-
4'
-
1
1
/
2
"
3'
-
8
"
8"
2'-10"
SLAB CORNER NORTH WEST SIDE
SCALE: 1" = 2'
C
-
10
"
PS
PS
DIRECT FIXATION SLAB LIMITS - 181'-8" (SEE NOTE 1)
8"
2'-7"
8"
7'
-
0
"
7'
-
0
"
2'-7"
8"
5'
-
9
"
4'
-
6
"
5'
-
0
"
EB TRACK ℄
WB TRACK ℄
8"
10
"8"TYPE Q CURB
2'-7"
PS
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL
PEDESTRIAN
SIDEWALK
CONCRETE
STEM WALL
CONCRETE
STEM WALL
CONCRETE
STEM WALL
CONCRETE
STEM WALL
M-23A SWITCH MACHINE
ASSEMBLY (TYP, SEE NOTE 6)
X130 TRACK ℄
X130 TRACK ℄
X140 TRACK ℄
X140 TRACK ℄
MAINTENANCE
WALKWAY
2'-7"
PROPOSED CURB
AND GUTTER (TYP)
CONCRETE TRACK
SLAB (TYP)
PROPOSED DROP INLET
PROPOSED
DROP INLET
CONCRETE
STEM WALL
PS
WB TRACK ℄
CONCRETE
TRACK SLAB
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL
8"
23
'
-
0
"
6"
PROPOSED CURB
115RE RAIL
(TYP)
FASTENER ASSEMBLY
(TYP, SEE NOTE 1)
5'
-
7
1
/
2
"
34
'
-
0
3
/
4
"
5'
-
8
1
/
8
"
GUIDEWAY
CURB (TYPE Q)
LEGEND:
CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING
INSULATED JOINTS IN THE FIELD FOR THE
JOINTS NOT PROVIDED BY THE SUPPLIER
FIELD WELDED JOINT
CONCRETE
INFILL, TYP.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-017.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
1
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-017.dwg
K3017
TRACKWORK
NO. 6 DIRECT FIXATION DOUBLE CROSSOVER
BLOCKOUT DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
AS SHOWN
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. EXACT LIMITS AND DIMENSIONS OF BLOCKOUT MAY VARY FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THIS
DRAWING. CONTRACTOR TO ADJUST THESE DIMENSIONS BASED ON TURNOUT AND SWITCH
MACHINE SHOP DRAWINGS FROM THE SUPPLIER.
2. BLOCKOUTS SHALL BE PLACED TO AVOID CONFLICT WITH FASTENERS.
3. POWER CONNECTION BOXES AND BOX DRAINAGE IS SHOWN ILLUSTRATIVELY. ACTUAL
LOCATIONS TO BE COORDINATED IN THE FIELD WITH THE SYSTEMS CONTRACTOR.
23
'
-
0
"
6"
1'-2"
11"
9"
1'-1"
3'
-
6
3
/
4
"
2'-7"
2'-7"
3'
-
6
3
/
4
"
12
'
-
0
1
/
4
"
BLOCKOUT LAYOUT AT WEST END
1" = 2'-0"
A
K3016
5'
-
9
"
3'
-
8
"
3'
-
6
3
/
4
"
7'
-
9
1
/
2
"
11"
9"
1'-1"
8'-1 3/4"
5'-4 3/4"
3'
-
6
3
/
4
"
12
'
-
0
1
/
4
"
BLOCKOUT LAYOUT AT EAST END
1" = 2'-0"
B
K3016
PS
PSPS
PS
3'
-
2
"
3'
-
2
"
EB TRACK ℄EB TRACK ℄
WB TRACK ℄WB TRACK ℄
A1
K3019
B1
K3019
C
-
AREA DRAIN
SEE DETAIL 1
ON DWG D1203
6" PVC DRAIN OUTLET
WITH GRATE
SEE DWG D1203
SLOPE TO DRAIN (TYP)
SEE DWG K3019
SLOPE TO
DRAIN (TYP)
SEE DWG K3019
STEM WALL,
TYP.
LIMIT OF
THICKENED
SLAB
1'-8 1/4"
LIMIT OF THICKENED
SLAB - SEE DETAIL A
ON K3020
STEM WALL, TYP.
1'-0"
7'
-
9
1
/
2
"
5'
-
9
"
4'
-
6
"
6'-4 3/4"
4'
-
6
"
5'
-
9
"
1'-8"
1'
-
0
"
1'
-
1
"
10"
1'-2 1/2"
2" PVC DRAINAGE PIPE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 3
POWER CONNECTION BOX
SEE DWG K3005, TYP.
2" PVC DRAINAGE PIPE, TYP.
SEE NOTE 3
PROPOSED OCS
FOUNDATION
PROPOSED UTA
BEACON FOUNDATION
3'
-
2
"
IMPEDANCE BOX
SEE DWG K3005, TYP.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-018.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
1
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-018.dwg
K3018
TRACKWORK
SPECIAL TRACKWORK M-23A
SWITCH MACHINE LAYOUT
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. M-23A SWITCH MACHINES SHALL BE INSTALLED ON ALL POWER TURNOUTS
INDICATED ON TRACK PLAN SHEET.
2. PLAN SHEET INDICATES SIDE PLACEMENT FOR SWITCH MACHINE.
3. GAUGE PLATE EXTENSIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH SWITCH MACHINE.
4. GAUGE PLATES SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH ELASTOMERIC PADS PROVIDED
BY SWITCH MACHINE MANUFACTURER.
5. CONTRACTOR TO PLACE ALL FIELD WELDS IN BETWEEN DF CONNECTIONS.
ALL FIELD WELDS ARE SHOWN SCHEMATICALLY ON PLANS.
6. LH LAYOUT SHOWN. RH LAYOUT IS MIRROR IMAGE.
M-23A SWITCH MACHINE LH LAYOUT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-019.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
1
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
K3019
TRACKWORK
DF FASTENER DETAIL AND SECTION
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
1" = 1'-6"
01-16-26
REINFORCED
CONCRETE
TRACK SLAB
115 RE
RAIL, TYP.
℄
WB TRACK
℄
EB TRACK
6" PVC DRAIN OUTLET
WITH GRATE.
SEE DWG D1203.
WEST END SWITCH MACHINE BLOCKOUTS A1
K3017
EAST END SWITCH MACHINE BLOCKOUTS B1
K3017
SWITCH MACHINE ROD
BLOCKOUT, TYP.
SEE DWG K3017
℄
WB TRACK
℄
EB TRACK
℄
CATCH
BASIN
℄
CATCH
BASIN23'-0"
9'-5"13'-7"
TOP OF CONCRETE
SLAB BEYOND
23'-0"
13'-7"9'-5"4'-6"5'-9"
4'-6"5'-9"
2'-2 1/4"
11 1/4"
2'-2 1/4"
TOP OF RAIL, TYP.
NOTES:
1. SEE SHEET K3020 FOR SWITCH ROD BLOCKOUT REINFORCEMENT.
2. SWITCH ROD DEPTH VARIES AS INDICATED IN SECTION. MAINTAIN MINIMUM 6" BLOCKOUT
DEPTH.
3. MAINTAIN MINIMUM 0.5% SLOPE TOWARDS CATCH BASIN.
16'-9 1/2" WB BLOCKOUT12'-7 1/4" EB BLOCKOUT
12'-7 1/4" EB BLOCKOUT16'-9 1/2" WB BLOCKOUT
SEE NOTE 3SEE NOTE 3
8" STEM WALL
(TYP)
1'
-
2
"
M
I
N
.
(T
Y
P
)
6"
M
I
N
.
7"
M
I
N
.
3' CHAIN AND BOLLARD
@ 6' OC
115 RE
RAIL, TYP.TOP OF CONCRETE
SLAB BEYOND
TOP OF RAIL, TYP.
3' CHAIN AND BOLLARD
@ 6' OC
11 1/4"8" STEM WALL
(TYP)
1'
-
2
"
M
I
N
.
(T
Y
P
)
6"
(
T
Y
P
)
7"
(T
Y
P
)
SEE NOTE 3SEE NOTE 3
8"
8"
#4 @ 12",
TYP.
#4 @ 12",
TYP.
#4 AS SHOWN,
TYP.
#4 AS SHOWN,
TYP.
CONSTRUCTION
JOINT, TYP.
CONSTRUCTION
JOINT, TYP.
AREA DRAIN. SEE
DWG D1203.
SWITCH MACHINE ROD
BLOCKOUT, TYP.
SEE DWG K3017
REINFORCED
CONCRETE
TRACK SLAB
6" PVC MIN SLOPE 1.0%.
SEE DWG D1203
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-K-3-020.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
5
t
r
k
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
k
-
3
-
0
2
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-K-3-020.dwg
K3020
TRACKWORK
DIRECT FIXATION ON SLAB DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
A. DIGIROLAMO
AS NOTED
01-16-26
6"11"
ROD 0
1'-2"1'-1"
ROD 1
2"
(TYP)
9"
5'-1"
3"
(T
Y
P
.
)
CONCRETE
SLAB
EMBEDDED
TRACK SLAB ANCHOR BOLTS (SHOWN HERE FOR
INFO. ONLY, OMITTED ELSEWHERE
FOR CLARITY).
SECTION - SWITCH ROD BLOCKOUT REINFORCING
SCALE: 1" = 0'-6"
A
-
COMPACTED AND
PREPARED SUBGRADE (TYP)
TOP OF RAIL, TYP.
COMPACTED AND
PREPARED SUBGRADE,
TYP.
115 RE
RAIL, TYP.
℄
WB TRACK
SECTION - DIRECT FIXATION ON SLAB
SCALE: 1" = 2'-0"
B
-
NOTES:
1. FASTENER HARDWARE, DETAILS, SPACING, AND PLACEMENT
TO MATCH SPECIAL TRACKWORK SHOP DRAWINGS PROVIDED
BY MANUFACTURER.
2. ANCHOR INSERTS TO BE INSTALLED BY EITHER THE DRILL
AND GROUT METHOD OR CAST-IN-PLACE WITH CONCRETE.
3. FINAL CONFIGURATION OF FASTENER MUST ALLOW FOR 1 1/2"
MIN. CLEARANCE FROM BOTTOM OF RAIL TO TOP OF SLAB TO
ALLOW FOR ROUTING OF SYSTEMS CABLES.
4. UP TO 1/2" MAX. OF SHIMMING IS ALLOWED UNDER FASTENER
ASSEMBLY IF NEEDED. SHIMS TO BE HDPE OR APPROVED
EQUAL.
5. SWITCH ROD BLOCKOUT REINFORCING IS DETAILED FOR THE
SOUTHWEST SWITCH. USE SYMMETRICAL LAYOUT FOR THE
OTHER THREE SWITCHES.
6. RAIL AND FASTENERS OMITTED FROM SECTION "A" FOR
CLARITY.
7. DRAINAGE SLOTS SHALL CONNECT ALL SWITCH ROD
BLOCKOUTS AS SHOWN ON DWG K3019.
8. DEPTH OF SWITCH ROD BLOCKOUT VARIES, 6" MIN.
9. ADJUST REBAR SPACING AS NEEDED TO ALLOW FOR 2"
CLEAR AROUND ANCHOR BOLTS.
4'-6"
8"
VARIES
23'-0"
VARIES
33'-3"
8"
VARIES
11
"
5'-9"
℄
CROSSOVER TRACK
℄
CROSSOVER TRACK
℄
EB TRACK
REINFORCED CONCRETE
TRACK SLAB
#4 @ 12"
#5 @ 12"
4'-8 1/2" GAUGE
(TYP)
#4
AS SHOWN
SWITCH ROD BLOCKOUT (TYP)
DEPTH VARIES. SEE B1 ON K3019
8"
STEM WALL
#4 @ 12"
2"
(T
Y
P
)
#5 SPACED
AS SHOWN
OCS POLE, TYP.
OCS FOUNDATION,
TYP.
8"
CONSTRUCTION
JOINT (TYP.)
EXPANSION JOINT
SEE K3003 FOR DETAILS
1'
-
3
"
(T
Y
P
)
EMBEDDED TRACK SLAB
DIRECT FIXATION
TRACK SLAB
CONSTRUCTION JOINT
8"
DIRECT FIXATION FASTENER
ASSEMBLY (TYP, SEE NOTE 1)
1/2" SHIM (TYP)
SEE NOTE 9
7"
M
I
N
.
6"
M
I
N
.
1'
-
2
"
11
"
NOTE: DETAIL IS DRAWN FOR
WEST END. EAST END IS SIMILAR.
1'-8" THICKENED SLAB
BEYOND EDGE
1
1
1'-6"
1:1
1" DIAMETER SMOOTH
DOWEL BAR EVERY 12" OC
W
W W W W W W W W W W W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W W W
W
WWW
W
W
W
W
W W W W W W W W
W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W W W W
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
SIMPSON
A
V
E
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
SIMPSON
A
V
E
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
201+80
202+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
201+80
202+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
SIDEWALK REMOVAL,
SEE NOTE 8
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-4-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
4
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-4-001.dwg
C4001
DEMOLITION PLAN
WB STA 201+80.27 TO WB STA 206+50
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
01-16-26
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
C
4
0
0
2
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
7
30
3
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
4
8
5
30
4
30
30
7 7
30
6 6
6
6
SEE NOTE 4
SEE NOTE 4
2
2
3
16
16
30
30
30
30
NOTES:
1. RESTORE ALL DISTURBED GROUND SURFACES TO ORIGINAL CONDITION.
2. SAWCUT AND MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT.
3. PROTECT EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE NOT BEING REMOVED.
4. IN APARTMENT PLAZA AREA, CONCRETE SHALL BE REMOVED TO THE
NEAREST CONTRACTION JOINT.
5. FOR EXACT UTILITY TREATMENT DETAILS SUCH AS SALVAGE, REMOVE,
RELOCATE, AND PROTECT IN PLACE, SEE UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN
DRAWINGS U1210 AND U1211.
6. CURB REMOVAL IS TO BE TO THE NEXT CONTRACTION JOINT FROM THE
IMPACTED AREA AND IS TO REMAIN WITHIN THE LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION.
7. IN CRA, ALL EXISTING DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
BUILDINGS, DRIVEWAYS, PARKING AREAS, UTILITIES, SIGNS, POLES
FOUNDATIONS, ETC WILL BE REMOVED BY OTHERS OUTSIDE THIS
CONTRACT.
8. IT IS ANTICIPATED FOR THIS SUBMITTAL THAT THE LIMITS OF CRA DEMO ARE
THE PROPERTY LINES FROM BACK OF SIDEWALK TO BACK OF SIDEWALK.
9. ITEM TO BE SALVAGED AND RETURNED TO OWNER.
10. EXISTING BUILDINGS ON THE PROPERTY OWNED BY CRA ALONG SIMPSON
AVE. WILL ENCROACH OVER PROPERTY LINES. BUILDINGS THAT ENCROACH
INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WILL NEED TO BE DEMOLISHED PRIOR TO
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL.
11. COORDINATE WITH APARTMENT COMPLEX TO DETERMINE IF ITEM CAN BE
SALVAGED AND RETURNED TO OWNER, RELOCATED, OR REMOVED.
12. BEGIN REMOVAL AT INSULATED JOINTS, SEE K1201 FOR MORE DETAILS.
13. SEE DRAWINGS D1201 - D1203 FOR MORE INFORMATION.
LEGEND:
AC PAVEMENT REMOVAL
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
12
2
20
12 17
17
17
17
17
5
5
7
7
7
7
1
11
21
22
23
23
4
13
13
3
3
24
25
25
26
RELOCATE BUMPING POST TO END OF LINE
REMOVE CONCRETE
REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER
REMOVE SIGN AND PROVIDE TO OWNER
REMOVE TREE (SEE NOTE 11)
RELOCATE DECORATIVE LIGHTING (SEE NOTE 9)
REMOVE PLANTER
REMOVE DRAIN INLET (SEE NOTE 13)
PROTECT DRAINAGE MANHOLE IN PLACE (SEE NOTE 13)
PROTECT TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE IN PLACE (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
PROTECT LIGHT POLE IN PLACE
REMOVE SIDEWALK
SAWCUT ASPHALT/CONCRETE, TYP., SEE NOTE 2
REMOVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
REMOVE AND REPLACE TACTILE PAVING
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
12
13
14
DEMOLITION NOTES:
REMOVE BRICK CROSSWALK, REPLACE WITH BRICK TEXTURED EPOXY
REMOVE BENCH (SEE NOTE 9)
REMOVE DRAINAGE MANHOLE (SEE NOTE 13)
REMOVE AND RELOCATE LIGHT
REMOVE STEEL GUTTER PLATES
PROTECT BOLLARD IN PLACE
PROTECT OCS POLE/BOX IN PLACE
REMOVE OCS POLE
REMOVE TRACK (SEE NOTE 12)
REMOVE PEDESTRIAN RAMP
RELOCATE SIGN (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
PROTECT TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX IN PLACE (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
REMOVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
PROTECT DRAIN INLET IN PLACE (SEE NOTE 13)
SEE NOTE 515
11
10
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
27
28
29
30
26
25
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W
W
W W W W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+00
211+0
0
SIMPSON AV
E
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
S 1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGAR
M
O
N
T
D
R
I
V
E
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-4-002.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
4
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-4-002.dwg
C4002
DEMOLITION PLAN
WB STA 206+50 TO WB STA 211+50
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
01-16-26
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
C
4
0
0
1
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
C
4
0
0
3
30
30
3
30
26
30
30
30
30
30
9
30 12
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
CRA
PROPERTY
CRA
PROPERTY
CRA
PROPERTY
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')30
30
30
30
12
NOTES:
1. RESTORE ALL DISTURBED GROUND SURFACES TO ORIGINAL CONDITION.
2. SAWCUT AND MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT.
3. PROTECT EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE NOT BEING REMOVED.
4. FOR EXACT UTILITY TREATMENT DETAILS SUCH AS SALVAGE, REMOVE,
RELOCATE, AND PROTECT IN PLACE, SEE UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN
DRAWINGS U1210 - U1214, U1225, U1231, AND U1232.
5. CURB REMOVAL IS TO BE TO THE NEXT CONTRACTION JOINT FROM THE
IMPACTED AREA AND IS TO REMAIN WITHIN THE LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION.
6. IN CRA, ALL EXISTING DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
BUILDINGS, DRIVEWAYS, PARKING AREAS, UTILITIES, SIGNS, POLES
FOUNDATIONS, ETC WILL BE REMOVED BY OTHERS OUTSIDE THIS
CONTRACT.
7. SIDEWALK ALONG SIMPSON BETWEEN 1100 EAST STREET AND HIGHLAND
INTERSECTION MAY BE REMOVED AS PART OF CRA SITE DEMO. IF NOT, THIS
PROJECT WILL REMOVE IT.
8. EXISTING BUILDINGS ON THE PROPERTY OWNED BY CRA ALONG SIMPSON
AVE. WILL ENCROACH OVER PROPERTY LINES. BUILDINGS THAT ENCROACH
INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WILL NEED TO BE DEMOLISHED PRIOR TO
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL.
9. SEE DRAWINGS D1201 - D1203 FOR MORE INFORMATION.
SEE NOTE 7
3
13
13
4
3
3
12
RELOCATE BUMPING POST TO END OF LINE
REMOVE CONCRETE
REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER
REMOVE SIGN AND PROVIDE TO OWNER
REMOVE TREE
RELOCATE DECORATIVE LIGHTING
REMOVE PLANTER
REMOVE DRAIN INLET (SEE NOTE 9)
PROTECT DRAINAGE MANHOLE IN PLACE (SEE NOTE 9)
PROTECT TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE IN PLACE (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
PROTECT LIGHT POLE IN PLACE
REMOVE SIDEWALK
SAWCUT ASPHALT/CONCRETE, TYP., SEE NOTE 2
REMOVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
REMOVE AND REPLACE TACTILE PAVING
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
12
13
14
DEMOLITION NOTES:
REMOVE BRICK CROSSWALK, REPLACE WITH BRICK TEXTURED EPOXY
REMOVE BENCH
REMOVE DRAINAGE MANHOLE (SEE NOTE 9)
REMOVE AND RELOCATE LIGHT
REMOVE STEEL GUTTER PLATES
PROTECT BOLLARD IN PLACE
PROTECT OCS POLE/BOX IN PLACE
REMOVE OCS POLE
REMOVE TRACK
REMOVE PEDESTRIAN RAMP
RELOCATE SIGN (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
PROTECT TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX IN PLACE (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
REMOVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
PROTECT DRAIN INLET IN PLACE (SEE NOTE 9)
SEE NOTE 415
11
10
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
27
28
29
30
26
25
LEGEND:
AC PAVEMENT REMOVAL
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
SIDEWALK REMOVAL,
SEE NOTE 7
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
W W WWWW
W W
W
W W W W W W W W
W
W
W W W W W W W W W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-4-003.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
4
-
0
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-4-003.dwg
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
C
4
0
0
2
C4003
DEMOLITION PLAN
WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+84.18
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
01-16-26
11
.
5
0
'
23
'
10
26
14 18
8 3
3
5
5
5 30
30
5
3
830
30
9 29
30 30
14
5
15
30
10
30
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄PROPOSED PLATFORM
5
3
3
3 3
13
30
29
3
5
30
LEGEND:
AC PAVEMENT REMOVAL
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
SIDEWALK REMOVAL
12
NOTES:
1. RESTORE ALL DISTURBED GROUND SURFACES TO ORIGINAL CONDITION.
2. SAWCUT AND MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT.
3. PROTECT EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE NOT BEING REMOVED.
4. FOR EXACT UTILITY TREATMENT DETAILS SUCH AS SALVAGE, REMOVE,
RELOCATE, AND PROTECT IN PLACE, SEE UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN
DRAWINGS U1213, U1214, U1220 - U1222, U1225 - U1227, U1231, AND U1232.
5. CURB REMOVAL IS TO BE TO THE NEXT CONTRACTION JOINT FROM THE
IMPACTED AREA AND IS TO REMAIN WITHIN THE LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION.
6. IN CRA, ALL EXISTING DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
BUILDINGS, DRIVEWAYS, PARKING AREAS, UTILITIES, SIGNS, POLES
FOUNDATIONS, ETC WILL BE REMOVED BY OTHERS OUTSIDE THIS CONTRACT.
7. ITEM TO BE SALVAGED AND RETURNED TO OWNER.
8. EXISTING BUILDINGS ON THE PROPERTY OWNED BY CRA ALONG SIMPSON AVE.
WILL ENCROACH OVER PROPERTY LINES. BUILDINGS THAT ENCROACH INTO
THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WILL NEED TO BE DEMOLISHED PRIOR TO FINAL
PLAT APPROVAL.
9. SEE CIVIL SHEETS C1108 AND C1109 FOR DEMOLITION GEOMETRY.
10. SEE DRAWINGS D1201 - D1203 FOR MORE INFORMATION.
11. SEE DRAWINGS C1003 FOR THE LOCATIONS OF THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPING.
13
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
13
27
30
28
RELOCATE BUMPING POST TO END OF LINE
REMOVE CONCRETE
REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER
REMOVE SIGN AND PROVIDE TO OWNER
REMOVE TREE
RELOCATE DECORATIVE LIGHTING
REMOVE PLANTER
REMOVE DRAIN INLET (SEE NOTE 10)
PROTECT DRAINAGE MANHOLE IN PLACE (SEE NOTE 10)
PROTECT TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE IN PLACE (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
PROTECT LIGHT POLE IN PLACE
REMOVE SIDEWALK
SAWCUT ASPHALT/CONCRETE, TYP., SEE NOTE 2
REMOVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
REMOVE AND REPLACE TACTILE PAVING
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
12
13
14
DEMOLITION NOTES:
REMOVE BRICK CROSSWALK, REPLACE WITH BRICK TEXTURED EPOXY
REMOVE BENCH
REMOVE DRAINAGE MANHOLE (SEE NOTE 10)
REMOVE AND RELOCATE LIGHT (SEE ROADWAY PLANS)
REMOVE STEEL GUTTER PLATES
PROTECT BOLLARD IN PLACE
PROTECT OCS POLE/BOX IN PLACE
REMOVE OCS POLE
REMOVE TRACK
REMOVE PEDESTRIAN RAMP
RELOCATE SIGN (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
PROTECT TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX IN PLACE (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
REMOVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX (SEE TRAFFIC PLANS)
PROTECT DRAIN INLET IN PLACE (SEE NOTE 10)
SEE NOTE 4
REMOVE AND RESTORE LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION (SEE NOTE 11)
15
11
10
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
27
28
29
30
26
25
29
4
8
31
30
5
SD
SD
SD
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
SIMPSON
A
V
E
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
L
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
1
0
+
0
0
1
0
+
8
8
BP = 10+00.00
EP = 10+87.69
100+00
102+00
104+
0
0
BP
=
1
0
0
+
0
0
.
0
0
PC
=
1
0
1
+
0
4
.
6
0
CCTV
L=340.129,
R=446.622
5
0
+
0
0
5
0
+
2
0
50+40
50+60
50+80
51+0
0
51+2
0
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
207+
0
0
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
207+
0
0
0+00
1+00
2+00
3+00
4+00
4340
4350
4360
4370
4380
4360
4380
43
5
2
.
8
4
43
5
2
.
8
100+00
43
5
3
.
6
4
43
5
3
.
6
43
5
4
.
4
1
43
5
4
.
4
101+00
43
5
5
.
2
3
43
5
5
.
2
43
5
5
.
9
6
43
5
6
.
0
102+00
43
5
6
.
6
1
43
5
6
.
6
43
5
6
.
6
1
43
5
6
.
6
103+00
43
5
6
.
7
1
43
5
6
.
7
43
5
7
.
1
4
43
5
7
.
1
104+00
4370
4350
SSD = 554.06
LVC 150.00'
P
V
I
1
0
2
+
3
4
.
7
3
EL
4
3
5
6
.
6
0
P
V
C
1
0
1
+
5
9
.
7
3
EL
4
3
5
5
.
4
0
2
P
V
T
1
0
3
+
0
9
.
7
3
EL
4
3
5
6
.
7
6
PV
I
1
0
0
+
3
7
.
1
0
EL
=
4
3
5
3
.
4
4
4340
1.60%
0.21%CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
SL-C-C-1-001.dwg
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
1
0
4
+
0
0
SE
E
D
W
G
C
1
0
0
2
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
EXISTING GROUND
PROPOSED CENTERLINE GRADE
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
4
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
PROPOSED SIMPSON GUTTER
ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1101 FOR
CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
MATCH EXISTING
SEE RAMP 2 SHEET C3001
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
SEE RAMP 1 SHEET C3001
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLETTIE TO EXISTING
GUTTER EDGE
SAWCUT
McCLELLAND ST ℄
FENCE
SEE RAMP 3 & 4 SHEET C3002
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
PROPOSED SIDEWALK ALIGNMENT SEE SHEETS
C1201 & C1202 FOR MORE INFORMATION
FENCE
FENCE
PROPOSED EMERGENCY DRIVEWAY
SEE SHEETS C1007 & C3007
FOR MORE INFORMATION
BEGIN BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 203+72.38, OFF 6.33' LT
(WB TRACK)
SEE RAMP 2 SHEET C3001
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
BOLLARD & CABLE
BOLLARD & CABLE
BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 205+42.12, OFF 6.33' LT
(WB TRACK)
BEGIN BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 205+83.48, OFF 6.33' LT
(WB TRACK)
HARDSCAPING
3' LANDSCAPE BUFFER
PROPOSED CATCH
BASIN
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLETS PROPOSED
6' SIDEWALK
BOLLARD & CABLE
BEGIN BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 203+74.25, OFF 5.92' LT
(EB TRACK)
END BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 204+94.61, OFF 5.92' LT
(EB TRACK)
C1001
SIMPSON PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 100+00 TO STA 104+00
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
SEE SHEET C1004
END BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 205+85.18, OFF 23.30' LT
(WB TRACK)
HARDSCAPING
FENCE
DOUBLE SWING GATE
SEE SHEET C3010
BEGIN LANDSCAPE BUFFER
STA 205+88.5 (WB TRACK)
TIE TO EXISTING
AT 100+37.18
END EXISTING CROSS SLOPE
BEGIN TRANSITION TO PLANAR
CROSS SLOPE
STA 101+80 (SIMPSON AVE)
END CROSS SLOPE TRANSITION
BEGIN PLANAR CROSS SLOPE
STA 102+35 (SIMPSON AVE)
SIMPSON AVE
SIMP
S
O
N
A
V
E
S 1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
L
L
L
CCTV
10
+
0
0
10
+
7
5
PC = 105+97.06
PT
=
1
0
4
+
4
4
.
7
3
PT = 106+88.95
L=91.899,R=120.000
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+
0
0
211+
0
0
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+
0
0
51+00
52+00
53+00
54+00
55+0
0
4+00
5+00
6+00
7+00
8+00
104+00
105+00
106+00
107+
0
0
108+
0
0
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
105+00
43404340
4350
4360
4370
4380
4350
4360
4370
4380
43
5
7
.
1
4
43
5
7
.
1
104+00
43
5
7
.
4
8
43
5
7
.
5
43
5
7
.
7
3
43
5
7
.
7
43
5
8
.
6
3
43
5
8
.
6
43
5
9
.
8
9
43
5
9
.
9
106+00
43
6
1
.
4
8
43
6
1
.
5
43
6
2
.
9
3
43
6
2
.
9
43
6
4
.
1
9
43
6
4
.
2
43
6
5
.
5
7
43
6
5
.
6
108+00107+00
2.17%
3.89%
2.40%
2.56%
2.27%
HSD = 1584.71
LVC 145.00'
P
V
I
1
0
4
+
9
1
.
5
0
EL
4
3
5
7
.
1
5
P
V
C
1
0
4
+
1
9
.
0
0
EL
4
3
5
6
.
9
9
4
P
V
T
1
0
5
+
6
4
.
0
0
EL
4
3
5
8
.
7
2
LVC 20.00'
P
V
C
1
0
7
+
9
7
.
4
0
EL
4
3
6
5
.
0
9
4
SSD = 337.72
LVC 40.00'
P
V
I
1
0
6
+
3
3
.
6
2
EL
4
3
6
1
.
1
7
P
V
C
1
0
6
+
1
3
.
6
2
EL
4
3
6
0
.
2
9
2
P
V
T
1
0
6
+
5
3
.
6
2
EL
4
3
6
1
.
6
2
PV
I
1
0
5
+
8
5
.
8
1
EL
=
4
3
5
9
.
2
0
PVI 106+10.84
EL= 4360.17
PV
I
1
0
7
+
6
3
.
7
3
EL
=
4
3
6
4
.
2
3
PV
I
1
0
6
+
7
8
.
4
0
EL
=
4
3
6
2
.
1
8
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-002.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-1-002.dwg
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
1
0
4
+
0
0
SE
E
D
W
G
C
1
0
0
1
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
PROPOSED SIMPSON GUTTER
ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1102
FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
SEE RAMP 5 SHEET C3003
FOR PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING & ROADWAY
TABLE TOP INFORMATION
PROPOSED SIDEWALK
ALIGNMENT SEE SHEETS C1201 &
C1202 FOR MORE INFORMATION
SEE RAMP 5 SHEET C3003
FOR PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING INFORMATION
EXISTING GROUND
PROPOSED CENTERLINE GRADE
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
1
0
8
+
0
0
SEE
D
W
G
C
1
0
0
3
PROPOSED
6' SIDEWALK
TIE TO EXISTING
GUTTER EDGE
TIE TO EXISTING
GUTTER EDGE
SAWCUT
SEE RAMP 6 SHEET C3004
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
PROFILE CONTROLLED BY
PEDESTRIAN CROSSING & ROADWAY TABLE TOP
SEE RAMP 7 SHEET C3004
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
S 11TH E ℄
END BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 208+72.25, OFF 6.33' LT
(WB TRACK)
BEGIN BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 208+82.46, OFF 9.45' LT
(WB TRACK)
BOLLARD & CABLE
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLET
COORDINATE CONSTRUCTION OF BULBOUT WITH
FAIRMONT DEVELOPMENT ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER
OF SIMPSON/1100 EAST. BULBOUT CONSTRUCTION WILL
BE BY FAIRMONT DEVELOPMENT. CITY PROJECT INFO
NUMBER: PLNPCM2025-00742 AND BUILDING PERMIT
BLD2025-05782 (ADDRESS: 2257 S 1100 E)
SEE SHEET C1005 FOR
TIE IN INFORMATION
SAWCUT
PROPOSED CLEANOUT
C1002
SIMPSON PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 104+00 TO STA 108+00
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
END 3' LANDSCAPE BUFFER
BEGIN HARDSCAPE
STA 209+85 (WB TRACK)
3' LANDSCAPE BUFFER
2' HARDSCAPE
BOLLARD & CABLE
SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
STOP
8+00
9+
0
0
9
+
3
0
55+00
55+90
1
1
+
6
3
1
1
+
0
0
EP = 11+62.76
108+00 109+00
110+00
110+97
EP = 110+97.39
PI
=
1
0
9
+
3
6
.
2
2
215+84 211+00 212+00 213+00 214+00 215+00
215+85 211+00 212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
0
+
0
0
1+00 2+00 3+00
4
+
0
0
4
+
4
6
109+00 43504350
4360
4370
4380
4390
4360
4370
4380
4390
43
6
5
.
1
6
43
6
5
.
2
108+00
43
6
6
.
7
6
43
6
6
.
8
43
6
8
.
4
2
43
6
8
.
4
43
7
0
.
0
6
43
7
0
.
1
43
7
1
.
6
3
43
7
1
.
6
110+00
43
7
3
.
3
4
43
7
3
.
3
111+50
3.06%
4.01%
3.31%
3.23%
LVC 35.00'
P
V
I
1
1
0
+
3
1
.
0
5
EL
4
3
7
2
.
5
7
P
V
C
1
1
0
+
1
3
.
5
5
EL
4
3
7
2
.
0
4
0
P
V
T
1
1
0
+
4
8
.
5
5
EL
4
3
7
3
.
2
8
LVC 20.00'
P
V
I
1
0
8
+
0
7
.
4
0
EL
4
3
6
5
.
3
5
P
V
T
1
0
8
+
1
7
.
4
0
EL
4
3
6
5
.
6
8
MATCH EXISTING
PVI 110+82.30
EL= 4374.63
PV
I
1
0
9
+
3
6
.
2
2
EL
=
4
3
6
9
.
6
2
PV
I
1
0
9
+
6
9
.
8
9
EL
=
4
3
7
0
.
7
1
111+00
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-003.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
0
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-1-003.dwg
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
1
0
8
+
0
0
SE
E
D
W
G
C
1
0
0
2
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
PROPOSED SIDEWALK ALIGNMENT
SEE SHEETS C1201 & C1202 FOR
MORE INFORMATION
EXISTING GROUND PROPOSED CENTERLINE GRADE
SAWCUT
SAWCUT
TIE TO EXISTING
GUTTER EDGE
PROPOSED HIGHLAND SE
GUTTER ALIGNMENT SEE SHEET C1108
FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
HIGHLAND DR ℄
TIE TO EXISTING
GUTTER EDGE
SAWCUT
SAWCUT
BEGIN BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 212+93.49, OFF 6.08' RT
(EB TRACK)
END BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 214+78.87, OFF 6.08' RT
(EB TRACK)
BEGIN BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 214+89.53, OFF 5.92' RT
(EB TRACK)
END BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 215+85.29, OFF 5.92' RT
(EB TRACK)
BOLLARD & CABLE
BOLLARD & CABLE
END BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 211+47.59, OFF 9.00' LT
(WB TRACK)
BOLLARD & CABLE
STA 211+42.26, OFF 11.50' LT
(WB TRACK)
PROPOSED SWING GATE
SEE SHEET 3013
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLET
PROPOSED SIMPSON GUTTER
ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1103 FOR
CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
2' HARDSCAPING
MAINTENANCE
WALKWAY
SEE RAMP 9 SHEET C3005
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
SEE RAMP 8 SHEET C3005
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK
C1003
SIMPSON PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 108+00 TO STA 111+00
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
SEE SHEET C1108
FOR TIE IN INFORMATION
SEE SHEET C1109
FOR TIE IN INFORMATION
LANDSCAPING
LANDSCAPING BY OTHERS
LANDSCAPING
SEE SHEET C1108 FOR TIE IN INFORMATION
SEE SHEET C1006 FOR
BUS STOP INFORMATION
SEE SHEET C1106
FOR TIE IN INFORMATION
SEE SHEET C1108
FOR TIE IN INFORMATION
SD
SD
S MCCLELLAND STREET
SU
G
A
R
M
O
N
T
D
R
I
V
E
L
ST
O
P
ST
O
P
ST
O
P
ST
O
P
BP = 10+00.00 EP = 10+87.69
1
0
0
+
0
0
1
0
1
+
0
0
CC
T
V
2
0
3
+
0
0
2
0
4
+
0
0
2
0
3
+
0
0
2
0
4
+
0
0
10+00 10+88
43404340
4350
4370
4350
4360
4370
4380
4360
4380
10+00
43
5
4
.
4
8
43
5
4
.
5
11+00
-0.01%
-1.42%
2.79%
PV
I
1
0
+
1
8
.
4
3
EL
=
4
3
5
4
.
1
0
PV
I
1
0
+
5
6
.
0
6
EL
=
4
3
5
4
.
4
8
PROFILE TO MATCH EXISTING
ELEVATED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
PVI 10+59.53
EL= 4354.43
PV
I
1
0
+
3
6
.
0
6
EL
=
4
3
5
4
.
4
8
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
SL-C-C-1-004.dwg
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-004.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
0
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
McCLELLAND ST ℄
SAWCUT
42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
MATCH EXISTING TOP OF
ELEVATED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK
REMOVE EXISTING DRAIN PLATE AND
FILL CURB AND GUTTER GAP WITH CONCRETE
UP TO THE END OF THE EXISTING CROSSWALK.
PROPOSED WATERWAY
GUTTER
PROPOSED TACTILE STRIP
42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
SEE RAMP 1 SHEET C3001
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
SEE RAMP 4 SHEET C3002
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
SEE RAMP 2 SHEET C3001
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
SEE RAMP 3 SHEET C3002
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
PROTECT EXISTING TACTILE STRIP
BEGIN 42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
STA 202+92.42, OFF 5.00' RT
(EB TRACK)1
END 42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
STA 203+08.92, OFF 5.00' RT
(EB TRACK)2
BEGIN 42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
STA 203+57.82, OFF 5.35' RT
(EB TRACK)3
END 42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
STA 203+63.82, OFF 5.36' RT
(EB TRACK)4
BEGIN 42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
STA 202+91.70, OFF 5.21' LT
(WB TRACK)
END 42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
STA 203+12.21, OFF 5.35' LT
(WB TRACK)
BEGIN 42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
STA 203+53.46, OFF 5.41' LT
(WB TRACK)7
END 42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
STA 203+62.46, OFF 6.67' LT
(WB TRACK)8
42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
PROTECT-IN-PLACE
EXISTING CROSSWALK
C1004
McCLELLAND ST
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 10+00 TO STA 10+88
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
FOR RED BRICK FOR THERMAL PLASTIC
CROSSWALK, SALVAGE EXISTING BRICKS
AND DELIVER TO SLC TRANSPORTATION
5
BEGIN 42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
STA 202+82.92, OFF 6.97' RT
(EB TRACK)9
42" BLACK VINYL FENCE CORNER
STA 202+82.89, OFF 14.53' RT
(EB TRACK)10
6
END 42" BLACK VINYL FENCE
STA 202+92.44, OFF 14.48' RT
(EB TRACK)11
EXISTING GROUND
PROPOSED GRADE
PROPOSED WATERWAY GUTTER
PROPOSED SIMPSON SURFACE
5
6
7
8
3
4
2
1
910
11
OGS POLE SEE SHEET
Y7303 FOR INFORMATION
OGS POLE SEE SHEET
Y7303 FOR INFORMATION
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
S 1100 EAST STREET
L
CC
T
V
BP = 10+00.00 EP = 10+75.42
20
9
+
0
0
10
6
+
0
0
1
0
7
+
0
0
20
8
+
0
0
20
9
+
0
0
10+75 10+00
43404340
4350
4370
4350
4360
4370
4380
4360
4380
10+00
43
6
1
.
2
5
43
6
1
.
3
11+00
0.55%
SSD = 775.02
LVC 35.00'
P
V
I
1
0
+
3
9
.
4
3
EL
4
3
6
1
.
3
0
P
V
C
1
0
+
2
1
.
9
3
EL
4
3
6
1
.
1
9
9
P
V
T
1
0
+
5
6
.
9
3
EL
4
3
6
1
.
2
4
MATCH EXISTING
PVI 10+10.00
EL= 4361.13 MATCH PROPOSED SIMPSON SURFACE
PVI 10+59.49
EL= 4361.23
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
SL-C-C-1-005.dwg
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
EXISTING GROUND
PROPOSED GRADE
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-005.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
0
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
S 11TH E ℄
SAWCUT
SAWCUT
SEE RAMP 7 SHEET C3004
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
SEE RAMP 6 SHEET C3004
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
SEE RAMP 5 SHEET C3003 FOR PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING & ROADWAY TABLE TOP INFORMATION
C1005
S 11TH E PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 10+00 TO STA 11+00
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
TIE IN EXISTING
AT STA. 10+10.05
TIE IN EXISTING
AT STA. 10+22.31
HIGHLAND DRIVEHIGHLAND DRIVE
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
ST
O
P
BP
=
1
0
+
0
0
.
0
0
EP
=
1
1
+
6
2
.
7
6
2
1
2
+
0
0
2
1
3
+
0
0
2
1
2
+
0
0
2
1
3
+
0
0
10+00 11+00 11+63
1
0
9
+
0
0
1
1
0
+
0
0
0+00
9+
0
0
9+30
4350 4350
4370
4390
4360
4370
4380
4390
4360
4380
10+00
43
7
0
.
8
3
43
7
0
.
8
43
7
0
.
8
5
43
7
0
.
9
11+00 12+00
0.85%-0.79%-1.72%
MATCH EXISTING
PVI 10+27.47
EL= 4370.64
PV
I
1
0
+
7
5
.
2
1
EL
=
4
3
7
1
.
0
5
PV
I
1
1
+
0
2
.
9
6
EL
=
4
3
7
0
.
8
3
MATCH EXISTING
PVI 11+45.71
EL= 4370.09
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
EXISTING GROUND
PROPOSED GRADE
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-006.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
0
0
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
TIE INTO EXISTING
GUTTER EDGE
HIGHLAND DR ℄
SAWCUT
SAWCUT
PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT SEE SHEET C1101 TO
C1103 FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
PROPOSED HIGHLAND SE
GUTTER ALIGNMENT SEE SHEET C1108
FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
TIE INTO EXISTING
GUTTER EDGE
PROFILE CONTROLLED
BY TRACK ALIGNMENT
C1006
HIGHLAND DR
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 10+00 TO STA 11+63
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
SEE RAMP 8 SHEET C3005
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
BUS STOP
TIE TO EXISTING
AT 10+27.11
TIE TO EXISTING
AT 11+46.55, 20.10' LT
TIE TO EXISTING
AT 11+45.62, 17.96' LT
TIE TO EXISTING
AT 11+45.53,16.45' RT
1
2 3
45
BUS STOP
STA 10+23.00, OFF 24.99' RT
(HIGHLAND DR CL)
MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
1
BUS STOP
STA 10+29.79, OFF 24.97' RT
(HIGHLAND DR CL)
MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
2
BUS STOP
STA 10+38.00, OFF 26.46' RT
(HIGHLAND DR CL)
MATCH PROPOSED SIDEWALK
3
BUS STOP
STA 10+38.01, OFF 19.59' RT
(HIGHLAND DR CL)
MATCH EXISTING BACK OF CURB
4
BUS STOP
STA 10+22.99, OFF 19.51' RT
(HIGHLAND DR CL)
MATCH EXISTING BACK OF CURB
5
SD
SD
SD
L
L
STOP
STOP
102+00
103+0
0
104
+
0
0
5
0
+
0
0
51+
0
0
BP
=
0
+
0
0
.
0
0
PC
=
1
+
4
1
.
7
8
PT
=
1
+
6
0
.
8
0
EP
=
1
+
6
8
.
9
8
TCB
S2S6S10S14
204+00
205+00
206+
0
0
207
+
0
0
204+00
205+00
206+
0
0
207
+
0
0
1+00
2+00
3+00
4+0
0
0+00
1+69
20'
1+00
43404340
4350
4360
4370
4380
4350
4360
4370
4380
0+00
43
5
7
.
1
1
43
5
7
.
1
43
5
7
.
9
9
43
5
8
.
0
2+00
4.81%
1.28%6.17%0.46%
PV
I
1
+
2
4
.
5
2
EL
=
4
3
5
9
.
1
7
PVI 1+30.56
EL= 4359.24
PV
I
0
+
3
0
.
4
5
EL
=
4
3
5
6
.
1
3
PV
I
0
+
4
6
.
1
0
EL
=
4
3
5
7
.
0
9
PV
I
0
+
6
0
.
3
0
EL
=
4
3
5
7
.
1
6
PV
I
0
+
7
2
.
0
6
EL
=
4
3
5
7
.
2
2
PV
I
0
+
8
5
.
2
1
EL
=
4
3
5
7
.
2
8
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-007.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
0
0
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-1-007.dwg
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
PROPOSED SIMPSON GUTTER
ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1101 FOR
CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
EXISTING GROUND
PROPOSED GRADE
6' SIDEWALK
TYPE D CURB
PROFILE CONTROLLED
BY TRACK ALIGNMENT
PROFILE CONTROLLED
BY TRACK ALIGNMENT
MATCH SIDEWALK ELEVATIONS
EMERGENCY DRIVEWAY ℄
PROPOSED SIDEWALK ALIGNMENT
SEE SHEETS C1201 & C1202 FOR
MORE INFORMATION
PROPOSED SIMPSON
SURFACE
PROPOSED EMERGENCY DRIVEWAY
SEE SHEETS C1007 & C3007
FOR MORE INFORMATION
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLET
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLET
C1007
EMERGENCY DRIVEWAY
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 0+00 TO STA 1+50
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
DOUBLE SWING GATE
SEE SHEET C3010
SWING GATE POLE
STA. 204+92.36, 6.84' RT
(EB TRACK)
SWING GATE POLE
STA. 205+38.13, 6.84' RT
(EB TRACK)
BEGIN TYPE A - 3" CURB
STA. 206+00.06, OFF 34.26' LT
(WB TRACK)
R = 5.0'
TIE TO EXISTING AT
STA. 50+09.54
(SIMPSON SIDEWALK CL)
END TYPE A - 3" CURB
STA. 206+09.91, OFF 16.48' LT
(WB TRACK)
R = 5.0'
SD
SD
SD
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
SIMPSON
A
V
E
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
L
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
1
0
+
0
0
1
0
+
8
8
CCTV
0+00
2+00
100+00
101+00
102+00
103+00
104+
0
0
BP = 10+00.00
EP = 10+87.69
5
0
+
0
0
51+0
0
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
BP = 0+00.00
PC
=
0
+
7
5
.
0
5
PC
C
=
2
+
7
8
.
3
3
4340
4350
4360
4370
4380
4360
4380
43
5
3
.
4
1
43
5
3
.
4
0+00
43
5
4
.
2
9
43
5
4
.
3
43
5
4
.
8
0
43
5
4
.
8
1+00
43
5
5
.
8
0
43
5
5
.
8
43
5
6
.
7
7
43
5
6
.
8
2+00
43
5
7
.
1
7
43
5
7
.
2
43
5
6
.
6
5
43
5
6
.
6
3+00
43
5
6
.
8
9
43
5
6
.
9
3+50
0.57%0.57%
1.57%
MATCH EXISTING
PVI 0+00.00
EL= 4353.41
PV
I
2
+
7
8
.
3
3
EL
=
4
3
5
6
.
4
5
PV
I
1
+
4
5
.
8
5
EL
=
4
3
5
5
.
6
9
4350
4370
4340
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
SL-C-C-1-101.dwg
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
3
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
C
1
1
0
2
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND
AT LIP OF GUTTER
PROPOSED GRADE AT LIP OF GUTTER
EXISTING CURB AND
GUTTER
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-101.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
4
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
1
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT
BEGIN TYPE B CURB & GUTTER
MATCH PROPOSED McCLELLAND NE
CURB & GUTTER ALIGNMENT
STA 0+89.16
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
TIE INTO EXISTING
CURB AND GUTTER
TIE INTO EXISTING
GUTTER PROFILE
PROPOSED
HARDSCAPING
RAMP 2 SEE SHEET C3001
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
RAMP 1 SEE SHEET C3001
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
END TYPE B CURB & GUTTER
BEGIN CURB TRANSITION
STA 2+61.50
(SEE SHEET C3011)
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLET
6' SIDEWALK
TIE TO EXISTING
GUTTER EDGE
SAWCUT
McCLELLAND ST ℄
R= 520.02'
R= 486.38'
FENCE
PROPOSED
HARDSCAPING
END CURB TRANSITION
BEGIN MODIFIED TYPE B CURB & GUTTER
STA 2+78.33
(SEE SHEET C3011)
RAMP 3 & 4 SEE SHEET C3002
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
PROPOSED SIDEWALK ALIGNMENT SEE SHEETS
C1201 & C1202 FOR MORE INFORMATION
END CURB TRANSITION
BEGIN TYPE D CURB & GUTTER
STA 1+89.72
END CURB TRANSITION
BEGIN TYPE B CURB & GUTTER
STA 2+45.27
END TYPE D CURB & GUTTER
BEGIN CURB TRANSITION
STA 2+40.27END TYPE B CURB & GUTTER
BEGIN CURB TRANSITION
STA 1+84.72
FENCE
FENCE
FENCE
BOLLARD & CABLE (TYP)
SEE SHEET C1004
C1101
SIMPSON CURB AND GUTTER
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 0+00 TO STA 3+50
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
END 4'-0" WATERWAY
MATCH PROPOSED McCLELLAND NE
CURB & GUTTER ALIGNMENT STA 0+74.97
(SEE SHEET C3011)
BEGIN 4'-0" WATERWAY
MATCH PROPOSED McCLELLAND NE
CURB & GUTTER ALIGNMENT STA 0+14.12
(SEE SHEET C3011)
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SDPT
=
4
+
0
8
.
3
2
PC
=
5
+
7
3
.
5
9
PT
=
6
+
4
6
.
2
4
CCTV
1+01
0
+
0
0
1+00
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+
0
0
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+
0
0
51+00
52+00
53+00
54+00
0+00
0+
9
0
104+00
105+00
106+00
107+
0
0
4+00
5+00
6+00
7+00
10+75
10
+
0
0
5+00
43404340
0.57%
2.58%
4350
4360
4370
4380
4350
4360
4370
4380
43
5
6
.
8
9
43
5
6
.
9
3+50
43
5
7
.
3
9
43
5
7
.
4
4+00
43
5
7
.
6
7
43
5
7
.
7
43
5
8
.
3
3
43
5
8
.
3
43
5
9
.
3
2
43
5
9
.
3
43
6
1
.
0
0
43
6
1
.
0
6+00
43
6
2
.
4
2
43
6
2
.
4
43
6
3
.
8
5
43
6
3
.
8
7+00
0.61%0.51%1.38%2.10%
2.34%
4.22%
PV
I
3
+
9
9
.
3
6
EL
=
4
3
5
7
.
1
4
PV
I
4
+
3
8
.
9
5
EL
=
4
3
5
7
.
3
5
PV
I
4
+
6
4
.
1
9
EL
=
4
3
5
7
.
5
0
PV
I
4
+
8
5
.
3
7
EL
=
4
3
5
7
.
7
9
PV
I
5
+
5
8
.
1
2
EL
=
4
3
5
9
.
3
2
PV
I
6
+
0
1
.
0
7
EL
=
4
3
6
1
.
1
3
PV
I
6
+
8
2
.
8
3
EL
=
4
3
6
3
.
0
5
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-102.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
1
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-1-102.dwg
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
3
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
C
1
1
0
1
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
SEE RAMP 5 SHEET C3003 FOR PEDESTRIAN CROSSING &
ROADWAY TABLE TOP INFORMATION
END MODIFIED TYPE B CURB & GUTTER
BEGIN CURB & GUTTER END TRANSITION
STA 5+90.37 (SEE SHEET C3011)
PROPOSED SIDEWALK ALIGNMENT
SEE SHEETS C1201 & C1202 FOR
MORE INFORMATION
SEE RAMP 5 SHEET C3003
FOR ELEVATED PEDESTIRAN
CROSSING INFORMATION
SEE RAMP 7 SHEET C3004
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND
AT LIP OF GUTTER
PROPOSED GRADE AT LIP OF GUTTER
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
7
+
0
0
SEE
D
W
G
C
1
1
0
3
BEGIN CURB & GUTTER
END TRANSITION
STA 6+82.67
6' SIDEWALK
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLET
TIE TO EXISTING
GUTTER EDGE
TIE TO EXISTING
GUTTER EDGE
SAWCUT
R = 486.38'
R = 95.00'
SEE RAMP 6 SHEET C3004
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
END CURB & GUTTER
END TRANSTION
STA 6+00.87
END CURB & GUTTER END TRANSITION
BEGIN TYPE B CURB & GUTTER
STA 6+87.67
S 11TH E ℄
PROPOSED S 11TH E SE
GUTTER ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1107
FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
PROPOSED S 11TH E SW
GUTTER ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1106
FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
BOLLARD & CABLE (TYP)
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLET
C1102
SIMPSON CURB AND GUTTER
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 3+50 TO STA 7+00
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
SCORE TRACK SLAB CONCRETE
AT THE BACK OF CURB, FACE OF
CURB, AND EDGE OF GUTTER
SD
SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
STOP
55+00
55+90
EP = 11+62.76
0
+
0
0
EP = 9+30.39
PC = 8+70.87
PCC = 9
+
1
3
.
6
8
1
1
+
6
3
1
1
+
0
0
211+00 212+00 213+00
211+00 212+00
213+00
108+00 109+00
110+00
8+00
9+
0
0
9
+
3
0
9+00 43404340
4350
4360
4370
4380
4350
4360
4370
4380
43
6
3
.
4
9
43
6
3
.
5
7+00
43
6
4
.
7
8
43
6
4
.
8
43
6
6
.
1
9
43
6
6
.
2
8+00
43
6
7
.
8
2
43
6
7
.
8
10+00
2.58%
2.65%
3.26%
PV
I
7
+
5
9
.
4
7
EL
=
4
3
6
5
.
0
2
PV
I
7
+
8
4
.
0
9
EL
=
4
3
6
5
.
6
7
PV
I
8
+
7
6
.
1
5
EL
=
4
3
6
8
.
6
7
MATCH EXISTING
PVI 8+80.00
EL= 4368.71
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
7
+
0
0
SE
E
D
W
G
C
1
1
0
2
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
PROPOSED SIDEWALK
ALIGNMENT SEE SHEETS C1201 &
C1202 FOR MORE INFORMATION
APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND
AT LIP OF GUTTER
PROPOSED GRADE AT LIP OF GUTTER
END TYPE B1 CURB & GUTTER
MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER
STA 8+80.00
SAWCUT
SAWCUT
TIE TO EXISTING
GUTTER EDGE
PROPOSED HIGHLAND SE
GUTTER ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1108
FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
R = 35.00'
HIGHLAND DR ℄
EXISTING CURB & GUTTER
BOLLARD & CABLE (TYP)
C1103
SIMPSON CURB AND GUTTER
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 7+00 TO STA 9+00
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
SEE RAMP 8 SHEET C3005
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-103.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
a
e
d
.
k
i
n
n
i
n
g
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
1
0
3
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SD
SDL
ST
O
P
ST
O
P
ST
O
P
ST
O
P
CC
T
V
2
0
3
+
0
0
2
0
4
+
0
0
2
0
3
+
0
0
2
0
4
+
0
0
10+00 10+88
1+07
0+00
1
0
0
+
0
0
1
0
1
+
0
0
0+00
1
+
0
0
BP = 0+00.00
EP = 1+06.62
PC = 0+06.81
PT = 0+50.59
4370
4340
4350
4340
4350
4360
4370
4380
4360
4380
43
5
3
.
3
3
43
5
3
.
3
0+00
43
5
4
.
0
4
43
5
4
.
0
43
5
1
.
8
3
43
5
1
.
8
1+00 1+50
4.62%-10.55%
-3.27%
-18.78%
0.09%1.73%
PV
I
0
+
0
6
.
8
1
EL
=
4
3
5
3
.
4
1
PV
I
0
+
3
9
.
7
6
EL
=
4
3
5
4
.
3
5
PROFILE TO MATCH EXISTING
ELEVATED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
PVI 0+63.50
EL= 4354.01
PV
I
0
+
7
5
.
6
8
EL
=
4
3
5
3
.
6
1
PVI 0+79.57
EL= 4352.88
PV
I
0
+
6
0
.
0
5
EL
=
4
3
5
4
.
3
7
PV
I
0
+
2
6
.
7
5
EL
=
4
3
5
3
.
7
5
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
SL-C-C-1-104.dwg
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND
AT LIP OF GUTTER
PROPOSED GRADE
AT LIP OF GUTTER
EXISTING CURB &
GUTTER
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-104.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
a
e
d
.
k
i
n
n
i
n
g
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
1
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
BEGIN TYPE A CURB AND GUTTER
MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER
STA 0+06.81
McCLELLAND ST ℄
SEE RAMP 1 SHEET C3001 FOR
ADA RAMP INFORMATION
END TYPE A CURB AND GUTTER
TIE TO EDGE OF TRACK SLAB
STA 0+39.77
PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1101 TO C1103
FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
FENCE
REMOVE EXISTING DRAIN PLATE AND
FILL CURB AND GUTTER GAP WITH CONCRETE
MATCHING EXISTING PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ELEVATIONS
FENCEFENCE
FENCE
SEE RAMP 1 SHEET C3001 FOR
ADA RAMP INFORMATION
MATCH EXISTING CURB &
GUTTER
STA 0+79.57
EXISTING CURB &
GUTTER
PROPOSED McCLELLAND ST NW
GUTTER ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED TACTILE STRIP
BOLLARD & CABLE (TYP)
C1104
McCLELLAND ST NW CURB AND GUTTER
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 0+00 TO STA 1+00
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
SD
SD
ST
O
P
ST
O
P
ST
O
P
ST
O
P
CC
T
V
L
2
0
3
+
0
0
2
0
4
+
0
0
10+00 10+88
2
0
3
+
0
0
2
0
4
+
0
0
1+01
0+00 1
0
1
+
0
0
0
+
0
0
1
+
0
0
BP = 0+00.00
EP = 1+01.02
PC = 0+54.86
PT = 1+00.44
4370
4340
4350
4340
4350
4360
4370
4380
4360
4380
43
5
3
.
4
2
43
5
3
.
4
0+00
43
5
4
.
1
6
43
5
4
.
2
43
5
4
.
6
7
43
5
4
.
7
1+00 1+50
0.41%
9.57%
1.20%
4.56%
0.10%
PVI 0+27.04
EL= 4353.89
PV
I
0
+
9
9
.
6
3
EL
=
4
3
5
4
.
7
3
PV
I
0
+
3
0
.
8
7
EL
=
4
3
5
4
.
2
6
PROFILE TO MATCH EXISTING
ELEVATED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
PVI 0+42.95
EL= 4354.40
PV
I
0
+
4
6
.
8
7
EL
=
4
3
5
4
.
5
8
PV
I
0
+
6
7
.
3
3
EL
=
4
3
5
4
.
6
0
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
SL-C-C-1-105.dwg
C1105
McCLELLAND ST NE CURB AND GUTTER
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 0+00 TO STA 1+00
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND
AT LIP OF GUTTER
PROPOSED GRADE
AT LIP OF GUTTER
EXISTING CURB AND
GUTTER
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-105.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
a
e
d
.
k
i
n
n
i
n
g
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
1
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
BEGIN TYPE B CURB AND GUTTER
TIE TO EDGE OF TRACK SLAB
STA 0+67.33
McCLELLAND ST ℄
SAWCUT
TIE INTO PROPOSED
SIMPSON GUTTER PROFILE
END TYPE B CURB AND GUTTER
MATCH PROPOSED SIMPSON GUTTER ALIGNMENT
STA. 0+99.63
PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1101 TO
C1103 FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
PROPOSED McCLELLAND ST NE
GUTTER ALIGNMENT
FENCE
REMOVE EXISTING DRAIN PLATE AND
FILL CURB AND GUTTER GAP WITH CONCRETE
MATCHING EXISTING CROSS WALK ELEVATIONS FENCE
SEE RAMP 2 SHEET C3001 FOR
ADA RAMP INFORMATION
MATCH EXISTING CURB &GUTTER
STA 0+27.04
FENCE
SEE RAMP 1 SHEET C3001 FOR
ADA RAMP INFORMATION
SEE RAMP 3 SHEET C3002 FOR
ADA RAMP INFORMATION
SEE RAMP 4 SHEET C3002 FOR
ADA RAMP INFORMATION
PROTECT EXISTING TACTILE STRIP
BOLLARD & CABLE (TYP)
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
S 1100 EAST STREET
L
CC
T
V
20
8
+
0
0
20
9
+
0
0
20
8
+
0
0
20
9
+
0
0
106+00
1
0
7
+
0
0
5+
0
0
6+00
1+01
0+0
0
BP = 0+00.00
EP = 1+00.72
PC = 0+25.81
PC = 0+45.52
PT = 0+33.59
PT = 0+81.96
10+75
10+00
4370
4340
4350
4340
4350
4360
4370
4380
4360
4380
0+00
43
6
0
.
6
5
43
6
0
.
7
1+00 1+50
3.59%0.15%-4.52%
MATCH EXISTING
PVI 0+10.00
EL= 4359.98
PV
I
0
+
2
7
.
8
2
EL
=
4
3
6
0
.
6
2
PV
I
0
+
6
5
.
2
5
EL
=
4
3
6
0
.
6
7
PV
I
0
+
8
0
.
3
6
EL
=
4
3
5
9
.
9
9
PVI 0+90.72
EL= 4359.89
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
SL-C-C-1-106.dwg
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND
AT LIP OF GUTTER
PROPOSED GRADE
AT LIP OF GUTTER
EXISTING CURB AND
GUTTER
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-106.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
a
e
d
.
k
i
n
n
i
n
g
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
1
0
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
BEGIN TYPE A CURB & GUTTER
MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER
STA 0+10.00
S 11TH E ℄
SEE RAMP 7 SHEET C3004
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
PROPOSED S 11TH E SW
GUTTER ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1101 TO C1103
FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
GUTTER PROFILE TO MATCH PROPOSED
ELEVATED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
STA 0+80.36
END TYPE A CURB & GUTTER
MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER
STA 0+90.72
SAWCUT
SEE RAMP 5 SHEET C3003 FOR PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING & ROADWAY TABLE TOP INFORMATION
MATCH PROPOSED
ELEVATED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
STA 0+80.36
(SEE SHEET C3003)
BOLLARD & CABLE (TYP)
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLET
C1106
S 11TH E SW CURB AND GUTTER
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 0+00 TO STA 1+00
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
SEE RAMP 6 SHEET C3004
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
S 1100 EAST STREET
L
CC
T
V
20
9
+
0
0
20
9
+
0
0
10
6
+
0
0
1
0
7
+
0
0
6+00
10+75
10+00
0
+
0
0
0+90
BP = 0+00.00
EP = 0+90.45
PC = 0+31.90
PC = 0+54.35
PC = 0+75.74
PT = 0+47.63
PT = 0+60.65
PT = 0+80.45
4370
4340
4350
4340
4350
4360
4370
4380
4360
4380
43
6
2
.
2
0
43
6
2
.
2
0+00
43
6
1
.
4
1
43
6
1
.
4
1+00
-1.63%
HSD = 695.48
LVC 45.00'
P
V
I
0
+
5
3
.
0
9
EL
4
3
6
1
.
2
7
P
V
C
0
+
3
0
.
5
9
EL
4
3
6
1
.
6
4
1
P
V
T
0
+
7
5
.
5
9
EL
4
3
6
1
.
3
8
PV
I
0
+
0
9
.
5
7
EL
=
4
3
6
1
.
9
8
MATCH EXISTING
PVI 0+80.45
EL= 4361.40
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
SL-C-C-1-107.dwg
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND
AT LIP OF GUTTER
PROPOSED GRADE
AT LIP OF GUTTER
EXISTING CURB & GUTTER
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-107.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
a
e
d
.
k
i
n
n
i
n
g
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
1
0
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
WB TRACK ℄EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
END TYPE A CURB & GUTTER
MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER
STA 0+80.45
S 11TH E ℄
SAWCUT
BEGIN TYPE A CURB & GUTTER
MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER
STA. 0+09.57
PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1101 TO
C1103 FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
PROPOSED S 11TH E SE
GUTTER ALIGNMENT
RAMP 6 SEE SHEET C3004
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
EXISTING CURB & GUTTER
RAMP 5 SEE SHEET C3003 FOR PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING & ROADWAY TABLE TOP INFORMATION
BOLLARD & CABLE (TYP)
C1107
S 11TH E SE CURB AND GUTTER
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 0+00 TO STA 1+00
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
RAMP 7 SEE SHEET C3004
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
STOP
1
1
+
0
0
1
1
+
6
3
55+90
STA.1+30.79
OFF 32.23' LT
STA. 1+32.84
OFF 7.35' LT
215+84
212+00 213+00 214+00 215+00
215+85
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
4
+
4
6
0
+
0
0
0+
5
0
1+00 1+
5
0
2+00 2+50 3+00
3+50
4
+
0
0
BP = 0+00.00
EP = 4+45.99
PI = 1+57.51
PI = 3+15.60
PI = 0+92.05
PI = 0+99.39
PC = 0+2
4
.
6
8
PC = 1+29.10
PC = 3+29.95
PC = 3+81.52
PT
=
0
+
6
3
.
8
5
PT = 1+44.44
PT = 3+34.66
PT = 3+94.91
110+00
110+97
9+
0
0
9
+
3
0
1+00
43604360
3+00
4370
4380
4390
4400
4370
4380
4390
4400
0+00
43
7
1
.
5
9
43
7
1
.
6
43
7
3
.
5
7
43
7
3
.
6
43
7
5
.
9
2
43
7
5
.
9
2+00
43
7
7
.
2
3
43
7
7
.
2
43
7
9
.
3
4
43
7
9
.
3
43
8
3
.
5
0
43
8
3
.
5
4+00 4+50
1.04%
2.00%
-0.17%
1.62%
6.01%
5.00%
4.74%
2.61%
7.51%
0.60%
2.29%
2.74%-1.21%
4.01%
4.97%5.03%1.50%
PV
I
0
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
=
4
3
7
0
.
3
2
PV
I
0
+
9
2
.
2
0
EL
=
4
3
7
2
.
0
2
PV
I
3
+
3
0
.
5
0
EL
=
4
3
7
9
.
6
7
PVI 0+34.72
EL= 4371.42
PV
I
0
+
6
3
.
7
5
EL
=
4
3
7
1
.
7
2
PV
I
3
+
8
2
.
1
6
EL
=
4
3
8
2
.
6
0
PV
I
3
+
4
8
.
0
2
EL
=
4
3
8
0
.
5
5
PV
I
4
+
3
3
.
7
7
EL
=
4
3
8
5
.
0
4
PV
I
4
+
4
5
.
9
9
EL
=
4
3
8
5
.
3
6
PV
I
1
+
2
1
.
1
3
EL
=
4
3
7
4
.
1
9
PV
I
0
+
5
1
.
3
7
EL
=
4
3
7
1
.
5
2
PV
I
2
+
4
2
.
0
0
EL
=
4
3
7
6
.
4
2
PV
I
1
+
3
8
.
2
6
EL
=
4
3
7
4
.
6
6
PV
I
1
+
5
5
.
7
8
EL
=
4
3
7
4
.
4
5
PV
I
3
+
1
5
.
6
3
EL
=
4
3
7
9
.
3
7
PV
I
0
+
2
7
.
5
8
EL
=
4
3
7
1
.
4
4
PV
I
0
+
1
0
.
0
0
EL
=
4
3
7
0
.
8
2
PV
I
0
+
1
7
.
5
0
EL
=
4
3
7
0
.
9
3
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-108.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
a
e
d
.
k
i
n
n
i
n
g
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
1
0
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-1-108.dwg
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND
AT LIP OF GUTTER
PROPOSED GRADE AT LIP OF GUTTER
END TYPE A CURB & GUTTER
BEGIN CURB TRANSITION
EXTEND GUTTER TO INCLUDE DRAINAGE INLET
STA 0+92.05
SAWCUT
EXISTING CURB
AND GUTTER
PROPOSED HIGHLAND SE
GUTTER ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED DRAINAGE INLET
SAWCUT
SIMPSON AVE ℄
BEGIN TYPE A CURB & GUTTER
MATCH EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER
STA 0+14.77
END TYPE A - 24" CURB & GUTTER
MATCH PROPOSED PARKING LOT
CURB & GUTTER
STA 4+45.99
SEE SHEET C1109
HIGHLAND DR ℄
SAWCUT
END CURB TRANSITION
BEGIN TYPE A - 24" CURB & GUTTER
STA 0+99.39
RAMP 9 SEE SHEET C3005 FOR
ADA RAMP INFORMATION
RAMP 8 SEE SHEET C3005 FOR
ADA RAMP INFORMATION
PROPSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT. SEE
SHEET C1101 TO C1103 FOR
CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
SAWCUT
STA 3+90.60
OFF 19.97' LT
STA 3+33.98
OFF 10.34' LT
STA 3+33.10
OFF 3.03' LT
PROPOSED SWING GATE
SEE SHEET 3013
BOLLARD & CABLE (TYP)
C1108
HIGHLAND SE CURB AND GUTTER
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 0+00 TO STA 4+50
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
STOP
55+90 TCB
110+00
110+97
1
0
+
0
0
1
1
+
0
0
1
1
+
6
3
9+
0
0
9
+
3
0
BP = 10+00.00
EP = 13+44.80
PC = 10+13.20
PC = 13+07.79
PT = 10+57.64
PT = 13+34.80
215+84 212+00 213+00 214+00 215+00
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00 215+85
4
+
4
6
0
+
0
0
0+
5
0
1+00 1+
5
0
2+00 2+50 3+00
3+50
4
+
0
0
1
3
+
4
5
10+00
10+50 11+00 11+50 12+00 12+50 13+00
11+00
43604360
13+00
4370
4380
4390
4400
4370
4380
4390
4400
10+00
43
7
3
.
5
6
43
7
3
.
6
43
7
4
.
9
1
43
7
4
.
9
43
7
6
.
2
6
43
7
6
.
3
43
7
8
.
0
7
43
7
8
.
1
12+00
43
8
1
.
0
6
43
8
1
.
1
43
8
4
.
9
0
43
8
4
.
9
13+50
2.71%
7.96%
HSD = 123.73
LVC 35.00'
P
V
I
1
0
+
3
1
.
9
3
EL
4
3
7
3
.
0
7
P
V
C
1
0
+
1
4
.
4
3
EL
4
3
7
3
.
2
7
9
P
V
T
1
0
+
4
9
.
4
3
EL
4
3
7
3
.
5
4
HSD = 139.26
LVC 110.00'
P
V
I
1
2
+
1
1
.
4
1
EL
4
3
7
7
.
9
2
P
V
C
1
1
+
5
6
.
4
1
EL
4
3
7
6
.
4
3
6
P
V
T
1
2
+
6
6
.
4
1
EL
4
3
8
2
.
3
0
SSD = 82.82
LVC 40.00'
P
V
I
1
3
+
1
2
.
2
0
EL
4
3
8
5
.
9
5
P
V
C
1
2
+
9
2
.
2
0
EL
4
3
8
4
.
3
5
9
P
V
T
1
3
+
3
2
.
2
0
EL
4
3
8
5
.
4
3
MATCH EXISTING
PVI 10+13.20
EL= 4373.29
PVI 13+34.78
EL= 4385.36 CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND
AT LIP OF GUTTER
PROPOSED GRADE AT LIP OF GUTTER
SAWCUT
EXISTING CURB
AND GUTTER
PROPOSED HIGHLAND SE
GUTTER ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1108
FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLET
SAWCUT
SIMPSON AVE ℄
END TYPE A - 24" CURB & GUTTER
MATCH PROPOSED HIGHLAND SE
CURB & GUTTER
STA 13+34.80
SEE SHEET C1108
HIGHLAND DR ℄
SAWCUT
RAMP 9 SEE SHEET C3005 FOR
ADA RAMP INFORMATION
RAMP 8 SEE SHEET C3005 FOR
ADA RAMP INFORMATION
STA 13+18.55
OFF 25.19' RT
PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT.
SEE SHEET C1101 TO
C1103 FOR CURB AND
GUTTER PROFILE
STA 13+22.76
OFF 33.57' RT
STA 10+64.23
OFF 3.00' RT
STA 10+64.23
OFF 24.00' RT
STA 10+13.20
OFF 20.00' RT STA 11+76.03
OFF 3.00' RT
STA 11+76.03
OFF 15.00' RT
STA 12+58.44
OFF 15.00' RT
STA 12+58.44
OFF 24.00' RT
BEGIN TYPE A - 24" CURB & GUTTER
MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTER
STA 10+13.20
PROPOSED PARKING LOT
GUTTER ALIGNMENT
SEE SHEET C3006 FOR
RAMP INFORMATION
BOLLARD & CABLE (TYP)
PROPOSED SWING GATE
SEE SHEET 3013
C1109
PARKING LOT CURB AND GUTTER
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 0+00 TO STA 3+50
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-109.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
1
0
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SDSD
SD
SD
L L
L
CCTV
206+00
207+00 208+00 209+00
210
+
0
0
205+0
0
206+00
207+00 208+00 209+00
210
+
0
0
50
+
0
0
51+00 52+00 53+00
54+
0
0
BP = 50+00.00
PC
=
5
3
+
1
1
.
4
7
PC = 50+23.52
PT
=
5
1
+
3
9
.
2
9
PRC = 50+38.82
103+00
104+00 105+00 106+00
107
+
0
0
2+00
3+00
4+00 5+00 6+00
7+
0
0
10
+
0
0
10
+
7
5
51+00 43404340
53+00
4350
4360
4370
4380
4350
4360
4370
4380
50+00
43
5
8
.
2
7
43
5
8
.
3
43
5
8
.
0
3
43
5
8
.
0
43
5
8
.
2
9
43
5
8
.
3
43
5
8
.
5
8
43
5
8
.
6
52+00
43
5
9
.
4
6
43
5
9
.
5
43
6
0
.
5
3
43
6
0
.
5
43
6
1
.
7
1
43
6
1
.
7
43
6
3
.
2
6
43
6
3
.
3
54+00
3.22%
2.14%
-2.45%0.53%
LVC 25.00'
P
V
I
5
0
+
6
6
.
7
9
EL
4
3
5
7
.
8
6
P
V
C
5
0
+
5
4
.
2
9
EL
4
3
5
8
.
1
6
2
P
V
T
5
0
+
7
9
.
2
9
EL
4
3
5
7
.
9
2
LVC 45.00'
P
V
I
5
2
+
1
0
.
4
6
EL
4
3
5
8
.
6
1
P
V
C
5
1
+
8
7
.
9
6
EL
4
3
5
8
.
4
9
2
P
V
T
5
2
+
3
2
.
9
6
EL
4
3
5
9
.
0
9
LVC 40.00'
P
V
I
5
3
+
4
1
.
0
3
EL
4
3
6
1
.
4
0
P
V
C
5
3
+
2
1
.
0
3
EL
4
3
6
0
.
9
7
5
P
V
T
5
3
+
6
1
.
0
3
EL
4
3
6
2
.
0
5
LVC 25.00'
P
V
I
5
3
+
9
3
.
2
1
EL
4
3
6
3
.
0
8
P
V
C
5
3
+
8
0
.
7
1
EL
4
3
6
2
.
6
8
1
MATCH EXISTING
PVI 50+09.54
EL 4359.26
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
a
e
d
.
k
i
n
n
i
n
g
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-1-201.dwg
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1101 TO
C1103 FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
PROPOSED SIMPSON
SIDEWALK ALIGNMENT
APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND
AT LIP OF GUTTER
PROPOSED GRADE
R = 510'
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
5
4
+
0
0
SEE
D
W
G
C
1
2
0
2
BEGIN 6' SIDEWALK
TIE INTO EXISTING BACK TOP OF CURB
STA 50+09.54
TIE INTO EXISTING BACK TOP OF CURB
STA 50+09.54
OFFSET 6.00' LT
ELEV 4659.39
R = 15'
R = 155'
END 6' SIDEWALK
BEGIN 7' SIDEWALK WITH
BOLLARD AND CABLE
STA 53+14.00
RAMP 5 SEE SHEET C3003 FOR PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
& ROADWAY TABLE TOP INFORMATION
RAMP 6 SEE SHEET C3004
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
RAMP 7 SEE SHEET C3004
FOR ADA RAMP INFORMATION
S 11TH E ℄
SAWCUT
SAWCUT
BOLLARD & CABLE
BOLLARD & CABLE
BOLLARD & CABLE
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLET PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLET
C1201
SIMPSON SIDEWALK
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 50+12 TO STA 54+00
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
SD
SD
SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
L
1
1
+
0
0
1
1
+
6
3
TCB
210+00 211+00 212+00
210+00 211+00 212+00
107+00 108+00 109+00
54+00 55+00
55+90
EP = 55+89.95
PI = 55+64.93
PT
=
5
4
+
2
9
.
6
2
7+00 8+00
9+
0
0
9
+
3
0
55+00 43504350
4360
4370
4380
4390
4360
4370
4380
4390
43
6
3
.
2
6
43
6
3
.
3
54+00
43
6
4
.
5
8
43
6
4
.
6
43
6
5
.
9
1
43
6
5
.
9
43
6
7
.
6
4
43
6
7
.
6
56+00 56+50
2.64%
3.58%
LVC 25.00'
P
V
I
5
5
+
0
5
.
8
0
EL
4
3
6
6
.
0
5
P
V
C
5
4
+
9
3
.
3
0
EL
4
3
6
5
.
7
2
5
P
V
T
5
5
+
1
8
.
3
0
EL
4
3
6
6
.
5
0
LVC 25.00'
P
V
T
5
4
+
0
5
.
7
1
EL
4
3
6
3
.
4
1
LVC 15.00'
P
V
I
5
5
+
7
4
.
8
7
EL
4
3
6
8
.
5
3
P
V
C
5
5
+
6
7
.
3
7
EL
4
3
6
8
.
2
6
1
P
V
T
5
5
+
8
2
.
3
7
EL
4
3
6
8
.
6
8
MATCH EXISTING
PVI 55+86.77
EL 4368.77
CONCRETE
LEGEND:
LANDSCAPING
PAVEMENT
BP = BEGIN POINT
EP = END POINT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-1-202.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
a
e
d
.
k
i
n
n
i
n
g
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
1
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-1-202.dwg
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT. SEE SHEET C1101 TO
C1103 FOR CURB AND GUTTER PROFILE
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
HIGHLAND DR ℄
PROPOSED SIMPSON
SIDEWALK ALIGNMENT
APPROXIMATE EXISTING GROUND
AT LIP OF GUTTER
PROPOSED GRADE
SAWCUT
SIMPSON AVE ℄
R = 155'
TIE INTO EXISTING SIDEWALK
STA 57+70.22
OFF 6.00' LT
ELEV 4368.27
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
5
4
+
0
0
SE
E
D
W
G
C
1
2
0
1
BOLLARD & CABLE (TYP)
PROPOSED
DRAINAGE INLET
C1202
SIMPSON SIDEWALK
PLAN AND PROFILE
STA 54+00 TO STA 57+25
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
L
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
203+00
204+00
203+00
204+00
101+00
1
0
+
0
0
1
0
+
2
0
1
0
+
4
0
1
0
+
6
0
0+00 0+10
0+20
0+
3
0
0
+
4
0
0
+
5
0
0
+
6
0
1+01
0
+
4
0
0
+
5
0
0
+
6
0
0+
7
0
0+8
0
0+90
1+00 0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80
1+00
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-3-001.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
3
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
3
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-3-001.dwg
C3001
ROADWAY
CURB RETURN DETAILS
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
1
2
10
5
11
4
3
5
10
11
6 7
15 16 13
14
McCLELLAND ST ℄
PROPOSED McCLELLAND ST NW
"NW" GUTTER ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED McCLELLAND ST NE
"NE" GUTTER ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED SIMPSON GUTTER ALIGNMENT
SAWCUT
8
9
6
7 12
1
2
0.
6
7
%
0.
7
2
%
0.47%
4
12
SIMPSON AVE ℄
2.02%
2.00%
16
15
14
13
1.55%
3.79%
1.
3
5
%
4.
9
%
3
9
8
RAMP 1
POINT TABLE
POINT# "NW" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
1 0+09.94 2.00' LT 4353.25'BEGIN TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+09.94 2.50' LT 4353.75'TOP BACK OF CURB
2 0+19.45 2.50' LT 4354.05'TOP BACK OF CURB
0+19.79 2.00' LT 4353.55'END TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
3 0+20.61 4.53' LT 4354.20'TOP BACK OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
0+21.42 4.72' LT 4353.70'FRONT FACE OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
4 0+12.44 6.87' LT 4353.98'FRONT OF SIDEWALK - END OF CURB
0+12.57 7.37' LT 4353.98'FRONT OF SIDEWALK - END OF CURB
5 0+02.92 7.77' LT 4353.98'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
6 0+02.95 13.81' LT 4353.94'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
7 0+14.74 13.21' LT 4353.94'FRONT OF SIDEWALK - END OF CURB
0+15.02 13.69' LT 4353.94' FRONT OF SIDEWALK - END OF CURB
8 0+25.98 9.71' LT 4354.29'FRONT FACE OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
0+26.41 10.11' LT 4353.79'TOP BACK OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
9 0+30.10 6.96' LT 4353.73'FRONT FACE OF CURB - REFERENCE POINT
0+31.04 6.92' LT 4354.23'TOP BACK OF CURB - REFERENCE POINT
10 0+24.83 2.00' LT 4353.64'BEGIN TRANSITION FROM GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+25.94 2.50' LT 4354.14'TOP BACK OF CURB
11 0+33.41 2.00' LT 4353.98'GRADE BREAK - BEGIN END OF CURB TRANSITION
0+33.41 2.50' LT 4354.48'GRADE BREAK - BEGIN END OF CURB TRANSITION
12 0+38.62 2.50' LT 4354.33'END OF CURB - MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
0+38.87 2.00' LT 4354.33 END OF CURB - MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
13 0+18.33 1.13' RT 4354.60'CLEAR SPACE
14 0+21.67 2.92' RT 4354.62'CLEAR SPACE
15 0+63.45 31.94' LT 4353.93'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
FILL IN EXISTING LANDSCAPE AREA
WITH CONCRETE UP TO RAMP PLATFORM
FILL IN EXISTING LANDSCAPE AREA
WITH CONCRETE UP TO RAMP PLATFORM
R = 1.5'
BOLLARD & CABLE (TYP)
FENCE (TYP)
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
RAMP 2
POINT TABLE
POINT# "NE" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
1 0+68.39 2.00' LT 4354.60'END OF CURB - MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
0+68.69 2.50' LT 4354.60'END OF CURB - MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
2 0+74.28 2.00' LT 4354.59'BEGIN TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+74.28 2.50' LT 4355.05'GRADE BREAK - END END OF CURB TRANSITION
3 0+80.66 2.50' LT 4355.07'TOP BACK OF CURB
0+80.72 2.00' LT 4354.57'END TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
4 0+81.42 4.18' LT 4354.91'TOP BACK OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
0+81.88 4.49' LT 4354.60'FRONT FACE OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
5 0+77.65 7.48' LT 4354.63'TOP BACK OF CURB - END CURB
0+78.11 7.83' LT 4354.63'FRONT FACE OF CURB - END CURB
6 0+75.16 9.69' LT 4354.65'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
7 0+83.55 2.50' LT 4354.58'TOP BACK OF CURB - REFERENCE POINT
0+83.92 2.00' LT 4354.58'FRONT FACE OF CURB - REFERENCE POINT
8 0+95.65 2.00' LT 4354.63'BEGIN TRANSITION FROM GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
9 0+91.66 12.64' LT 4354.70'FRONT FACE OF CURB - END CURB
0+92.48 12.81' LT 4354.70'TOP BACK OF CURB - END CURB
10 0+89.67 15.33' LT 4354.72'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
11 0+95.54 2.50' LT 4354.63'FRONT FACE OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
0+96.09 2.50' LT 4355.14'TOP BACK OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
12 "SN" 0+94.94 2.00' LT 4354.65'END TRANSITION FROM GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
"SN" 0+94.94 2.50' LT 4355.32'TOP BACK OF CURB
13 0+42.36 14.17' LT 4355.32'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK PLAZA
14 0+43.06 24.17' LT 4354.65'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK PLAZA
15 0+87.94 5.21' RT 4354.54' CLEAR SPACE
16 0+96.45 2.00' RT 4354.70'CLEAR SPACE
TYPE A - 30" CURB & GUTER
TYPE A - 30" CURB & GUTER
TYPE B - 30" CURB & GUTER
TYPE B - 30" CURB & GUTER
SUGARMONT DRIVE
101+00
1
0
+
0
0
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-3-002.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
4
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
3
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-3-002.dwg
C3002
ROADWAY
CURB RETURN DETAILS
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
1
2
3
5
6
43
5
10
McCLELLAND ST ℄
SAWCUT
8
9
6
7
1
2
2.
7
6
%
0.
1
7
%
1.50%
4
SIMPSON AVE ℄
7
8
9
10
3.5
1
%
3.
8
4
%
2.
9
1
%
1.00%
0.40
%
4.28
%
11 12
1211
6.57
%
RAMP 3
POINT TABLE
POINT# "S" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
1 100+51.02 23.05' RT 4352.77'GUTTER - MATCH EXISTING
2 100+51.02 24.92' RT 4352.74'FRONT FACE OF CURB - MATCH EXISTING
100+51.03 25.42' RT 4353.08'TOP BACK OF CURB - MATCH EXISTING
3 100+51.03 30.44' RT 4352.99'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
4 100+55.03 30.44' RT 4353.05'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
5 100+55.02 24.93' RT 4352.91'FRONT FACE OF CURB
100+55.03 25.44' RT 4352.91'TOP BACK OF CURB
6 100+61.03 30.43' RT 4353.16'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
7 100+61.03 24.86' RT 4352.97'FRONT FACE OF CURB
100+61.03 25.44' RT 4352.97'TOP BACK OF CURB
8 100+65.03 30.43' RT 4353.25'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
9 100+65.02 25.05' RT 4352.99'FRONT FACE OF CURB - MATCH EXISTING
100+65.03 25.55' RT 4353.43'TOP BACK OF CURB - MATCH EXISTING
10 100+65.02 22.98' RT 4353.13'GUTTER - MATCH EXISTING
11 100+55.02 20.94' RT 4353.06'CLEAR SPACE
12 100+61.02 20.94' RT 4353.16'CLEAR SPACE
RAMP 4
POINT TABLE
POINT# "S" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
1 101+09.61 23.67' RT 4353.69'GUTTER - MATCH EXISTING
2 101+09.46 25.71' RT 4353.56'FRONT FACE OF CURB - MATCH EXISTING
101+09.42 26.21' RT 4353.96'TOP BACK OF CURB - MATCH EXISTING
3 101+08.96 32.07' RT 4353.85'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
4 101+13.26 32.36' RT 4353.71'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
5 101+13.70 25.87' RT 4353.72'FRONT FACE OF CURB
101+13.67 26.37' RT 4353.72'TOP BACK OF CURB
6 101+19.74 32.70' RT 4353.64'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
7 101+20.06 26.23' RT 4353.81'FRONT FACE OF CURB
101+20.03 26.73' RT 4353.81'TOP BACK OF CURB
8 101+23.96 34.61' RT 4353.54'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
9 101+24.30 26.43' RT 4353.96'FRONT FACE OF CURB - MATCH EXISTING
101+24.28 26.93' RT 4354.12'TOP BACK OF CURB - MATCH EXISTING
10 101+24.38 24.51' RT 4353.90'GUTTER - MATCH EXISTING
11 101+13.96 21.87' RT 4353.95'CLEAR SPACE
12 101+20.26 22.24' RT 4353.89'CLEAR SPACE
EXISTING TYPE A - 30"
CURB & GUTER
EXISTING TYPE A - 30"
CURB & GUTER
L
209+00
209+00
5+60 5+80
6+00
6+20
6+4
0
105+80 106+00
106+20
106+40
106+
6
0
53+00 53+20
53+40
53+60
209+00
209+00
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-3-003.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
4
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
a
e
d
.
k
i
n
n
i
n
g
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
3
-
0
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-3-003.dwg
C3003
ROADWAY
CURB RETURN DETAILS
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
SIMPSON "S" AVE ℄PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER ALIGNMENT
1
65
3
21 22
PROPOSED SIMPSON
SIDEWALK ALIGNMENT
20 23
11
2
24
16
4
8
109
7
13 14
12
15
17
18
19
3.
3
3
%
12.67%1.87%
10.00%2.03%3.20%
2.30%
2.
8
5
%
3.
0
5
%
3.
0
4
%
2.16%
BOLLARD & CABLE (TYP)
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
RAMP 5 - PEDESTRIAN WALK
POINT TABLE
POINT# "S" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
1 105+91.90 40.60' LT 4360.59'MATCH SIDEWALK ELEVATION
2 106+05.46 40.33' LT 4360.81'MATCH SIDEWALK ELEVATION
3 105+91.94 34.04' LT 4360.39'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
4 106+04.72 33.90' LT 4360.61' MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
5 105+91.98 27.04' LT 4360.39'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
6 106+04.03 26.92' LT 4360.60'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
7 105+92.01 21.05' LT 4360.39'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
8 106+03.53 20.98' LT 4360.60'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
9 105+92.05 14.05' LT 4360.39'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
10 106+03.00 14.00' LT 4360.60'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
RAMP 5 - PEDESTRIAN WALK Cont.
POINT TABLE
POINT# "S" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
11 105+84.57 11.20' LT 4359.44'FRONT FACE OF CURB
105+84.56 11.86' LT 4360.19'BACK TOP OF CURB
12 105+84.57 10.03' LT 4359.32'LIP OF GUTTER
13 105+92.07 11.86' LT 4360.39'FRONT FACE OF CURB
105+92.07 11.20' LT 4360.39'BACK TOP OF CURB
14 106+02.85 11.71' LT 4360.60'FRONT FACE OF CURB
106+02.80 11.04' LT 4360.60'BACK TOP OF CURB
15 106+11.08 10.97' LT 4360.46'FRONT FACE OF CURB
106+11.18 11.63' LT 4361.21' BACK TOP OF CURB
16 106+18.73 9.34' LT 4360.33'LIP OF GUTTER
17 106+18.98 10.79' LT 4360.75'GRADE BREAK - BEGIN END OF CURB TRANSITION
106+19.00 11.46' LT 4361.50'GRADE BREAK - BEGIN END OF CURB TRANSITION
18 106+30.09 11.00' LT 4361.08'END OF CURB - MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
106+30.08 11.65' LT 4361.08'END OF CURB - MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
19 105+84.70 10.38' RT 4359.07'LIP OF GUTTER
20 105+84.71 12.38' RT 4358.86'FRONT FACE OF CURB
105+84.71 12.88' RT 4359.36'BACK TOP OF CURB
21 105+92.21 12.36' RT 4359.61'FRONT FACE OF CURB
105+92.21 12.86' RT 4359.61'BACK TOP OF CURB
22 106+01.52 12.54' RT 4359.93'FRONT FACE OF CURB
106+01.50 13.04' RT 4359.93'BACK TOP OF CURB
23 106+08.27 13.14 'RT 4359.78'FRONT FACE OF CURB
106+08.22 13.70' RT 4360.28'BACK TOP OF CURB
24 106+08.46 11.19' RT 4359.99'LIP OF GUTTER
EXISTING TYPE A - 30"
CURB & GUTER
TYPE A - 30" CURB & GUTER
MODIFIED TYPE B
CURB & GUTTER
S
1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
106+60
106+80
1
0
+
0
0
1
0
+
7
5
0+
0
0
0+
1
0
0+
2
0
0
+
3
0
0
+
4
0
0
+
5
0
0
+
6
0
0+00 0+10 0+20 0+30
0+
4
0
0
+
5
0
0+
6
0
0+
7
0
0
+
8
0
0
+
9
0
0
+
9
0
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-3-004.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
4
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
3
-
0
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-3-004.dwg
C3004
ROADWAY
CURB RETURN DETAILS
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
SIMPSON AVE ℄
11
21
S 11TH E ℄
EB TRACK ℄
10
15
9
12
16
8
4
7
3
2
1
13
6
14
PROPOSED S 11TH E SE
"SE" GUTTER ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED S 11TH E SW
"SW" GUTTER ALIGNMENT
4
5
6
7 8
10
11
12 13
14
15
16
17
9
0.23%
0.79%
7.85%
6.20%
1.
4
9
%
1.86%
5.74%
7.00%1.5
7
%
RAMP 6
POINT TABLE
POINT# "SW" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
1 0+49.70 15.64' LT 4360.47'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
2 0+49.09 10.32' LT 4360.39'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
4 0+44.27 10.45' LT 4360.56'FRONT OF SIDEWALK - TOP OF FLARE
6 0+38.14 10.47' LT 4360.55'FRONT OF SIDEWALK - TOP OF FLARE
7 0+20.03 12.35' LT 4360.44'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
8 0+22.90 7.98' LT 4360.29'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
9 0+51.83 2.00' LT 4360.40'BEGIN TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+51.83 2.50' LT 4361.07'TOP BACK OF CURB
10 0+46.64 2.00' LT 4360.54'FRONT FACE OF CURB
0+46.66 2.50' LT 4361.21'GRADE BREAK - BEGIN FLARE TRANSITION
11 0+42.48 2.00' LT 4360.62'END TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+42.59 2.50' LT 4360.62'GRADE BREAK - END FLARE TRANSITION
12 0+36.35 2.00' LT 4360.53'BEGIN TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+36.46 2.50' LT 4360.53'GRADE BREAK - BEGIN FLARE TRANSITION
13 0+32.42 2.00' LT 4360.48'FRONT FACE OF CURB
0+32.42 2.50' LT 4361.15'GRADE BREAK - END FLARE TRANSITION
14 0+25.81 2.00' LT 4360.41'END TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+25.81 2.50' LT 4361.08'TOP BACK OF CURB
15 0+41.64 2.00' RT 4360.73'CLEAR SPACE
16 0+35.51 2.00' RT 4360.73'CLEAR SPACE
RAMP 7
POINT TABLE
POINT# "SE" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
1 0+40.93 2.18' RT 4361.47'CLEAR SPACE
2 0+45.90 2.21' RT 4361.40'CLEAR SPACE
3 0+59.28 2.00' LT 4361.16'BEGIN TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+59.28 2.50' LT 4361.65'TOP BACK OF CURB
4 0+48.87 2.00' LT 4361.28'FRONT FACE OF CURB - REFERENCE POINT
0+48.87 2.50' LT 4361.95' TOP BACK OF CURB - REFERENCE POINT
5 0+46.10 2.00' LT 4361.31'END TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+46.14 2.50' LT 4361.31'TOP BACK OF CURB
6 0+38.13 2.00' LT 4361.41'BEGIN TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+37.51 2.50' LT 4361.41'GRADE BREAK - BEGIN FLARE TRANSITION
7 0+31.90 2.00' LT 4361.43'FRONT FACE OF CURB
0+31.90 2.50' LT 4361.93'GRADE BREAK - END FLARE TRANSITION
8 0+28.77 2.00' LT 4361.46 END TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+28.77 2.50' LT 4361.96'TOP BACK OF CURB
9 0+46.36 4.38' LT 4361.42'FRONT FACE OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
0+47.23 4.31' LT 4361.92'TOP BACK OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
10 0+27.21 5.50' LT 4362.03'FRONT OF SIDEWALK - TOP OF FLARE
11 0+27.18 11.49' LT 4362.02'FRONT OF SIDEWALK - END OF FRONT FACE OF CURB
0+27.18 12.01' LT 4362.02'FRONT OF SIDEWALK - END OF TOP BACK OF CURB
12 0+67.67 10.72' LT 4361.80'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
13 0+70.10 14.07' LT 4361.86'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
14 0+67.54 17.71' LT 4361.82'BACK OF SIDEWALK - REFERENCE POINT
15 0+10.47 9.46' LT 4362.28'BACK OF SIDEWALK - REFERENCE POINT
16 0+09.56 9.52' LT 4362.31'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
17 0+09.57 5.50' LT 4362.30'MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
R = 2'
R = 12.5'
TYPE A - 30" CURB & GUTER
TYPE A - 30" CURB & GUTER
TYPE A - 30" CURB & GUTER
TYPE A - 30" CURB & GUTER
EN
D
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
WB
2
1
5
+
6
5
.
1
8
3+00 3+10
3
+
2
0
3
+
3
0
3+40 3+50 3+60 3+70
STOP
1
0
+
4
0
1
0
+
6
0
1
0
+
8
0
0
+
0
0
0
+
1
0
0
+
2
0
0
+
3
0
0
+
4
0
0+
5
0
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-3-005.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
4
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
3
-
0
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-3-005.dwg
C3005
ROADWAY
CURB RETURN DETAILS
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
PROPOSED HIGHLAND SE
"SE" GUTTER ALIGNMENT
SAWCUT
HIGHLAND DR ℄
7.
5
7
%
0.
5
0
%
5.00%
0.
5
0
%
PROPOSED HIGHLAND SE
"SE" GUTTER ALIGNMENT
EB TRACK ℄
RAMP 9
POINT TABLE
POINT# "SE" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
1 3+35.82 1.50' RT 4379.76'BEGIN TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
3+35.82 2.00' RT 4380.26'TOP BACK OF CURB
2 3+39.32 1.50' RT 4380.00'FRONT FACE OF CURB
3+39.32 2.00' RT 4380.43'GRADE BREAK - BEGIN FLARE TRANSITION
3 3+41.32 1.50' RT 4380.13'END TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
3+41.32 2.00'RT 4380.13'GRADE BREAK - END FLARE TRANSITION
4 3+41.32 5.50' RT 4380.39'FRONT OF SIDEWALK - TOP OF FLARE
5 3+41.32 10.50' RT 4380.44'BACK OF SIDEWALK
6 3+51.82 1.50' RT 4380.59'END TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
3+51.82 2.00' RT 4381.09'TOP BACK OF CURB
7 3+48.32 1.50' RT 4380.46'FRONT FACE OF CURB
3+48.32 2.00' RT 4380.88'GRADE BREAK - END FLARE TRANSITION
8 3+46.32 1.50' RT 4380.38'BEGIN TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
3+46.32 2.00'RT 4380.38'GRADE BREAK - BEGIN FLARE TRANSITION
9 3+46.32 5.50' RT 4380.40'FRONT OF SIDEWALK - TOP OF FLARE
10 3+46.32 10.50' RT 4380.44'BACK OF SIDEWALK
11 3+41.02 2.50'LT 4380.28'CLEAR SPACE
12 3+46.02 2.50' LT 4380.56'CLEAR SPACE
7.00%
7.00%
1.5
0
%
2.2
5
%
1.5
5
%
1.50%
5.00%
1.
0
0
%
0.7
0
%
0.7
0
%
6.
8
0
%
RAMP 8 Cont.
POINT TABLE
POINT# NORTHING EASTING ELEV DESCRIPTION
10 7431855.84 1541106.68 4372.66'FRONT OF SIDEWALK - MATCH EXISTING
11 7431857.58 1541111.48 4372.74'BACK OF SIDEWALK - MATCH EXISTING
12 7431873.25 1541109.04 4371.51'BACK OF SIDEWALK - REFERENCE POINT
13 7431878.17 1541107.26 4371.58'BACK OF SIDEWALK - REFERENCE POINT
14 7431873.45 1541113.22 4372.29'GRADE BREAK - SIDEWALK REFERENCE POINT
15 7431878.44 1541112.99 4371.66' GRADE BREAK - SIDEWALK REFERENCE POINT
16 7431878.05 1541125.68 4372.29'BACK OF SIDEWALK - MATCH TRACK SIDEWALK
17 7431883.05 1541125.70 4372.24'FRONT OF SIDEWALK - MATCH TRACK SIDEWALK
18 7431883.05 1541124.83 4372.25'GRADE BREAK - FRONT OF SIDEWALK
RAMP 8 Cont.
POINT TABLE
POINT# "E" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
20 212+79.55 3.50' RT 4371.72'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
21 212+84.81 3.50' RT 4371.83'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
22 212+76.74 3.50' LT 4371.60'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
23 212+82.23 3.50' LT 4371.71'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
24 212+69.34 18.98' LT 4371.48'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
25 212+75.43 19.34' LT 4371.59'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
RAMP 8
POINT TABLE
POINT# "SE" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
1 0+00.00 2.00' RT 4370.11'BEGIN TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+00.00 2.50' RT 4370.61'TOP BACK OF CURB
2 0+10.14 2.00' RT 4370.74'END TRANSITION FOR GUTTER PAN SLOPE REDUCTION
0+10.14 2.50' RT 4371.24'TOP BACK OF CURB
3 0+17.47 2.00' RT 4370.85'BEGIN GUTTER PAN TRANSITION
0+17.50 2.50' RT 4371.35' TOP BACK OF CURB
4 0+21.40 2.00' RT 4371.13'GRADE BREAK - BEGIN END OF CURB TRANSITION
0+21.40 2.50' RT 4371.42'GRADE BREAK - BEGIN END OF CURB TRANSITION
5 0+26.61 2.00' RT 4371.48'END CURB - MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
0+26.61 2.50' RT 4371.50'END CURB - MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
6 0+11.10 3.80' RT 4370.91'TOP BACK OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
0+11.57 3.94' RT 4371.41'FRONT FACE OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
7 0+16.03 3.06' RT 4370.91'FRONT FACE OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
0+16.50 3.23' RT 4371.41'TOP BACK OF CURB - BEGIN END CURB TRANSITION
8 0+08.87 11.00' RT 4371.43'END CURB
0+09.39 11.00' RT 4371.43'END CURB
9 0+13.48 11.00' RT 4371.50'END CURB
0+14.10 11.00' RT 4371.50'END CURB
26 0+13.41 2.00' LT 4370.58'CLEAR SPACE
27 0+17.59 2.00' LT 4370.64'CLEAR SPACE
TYPE A - 30" CURB & GUTER
TYPE A - 30" CURB & GUTER
TYPE A - 30" CURB & GUTER
TYPE A - 30" CURB & GUTER
5
10
4 9
72
3
2
8
9
4
1110
2120
3 8
1
6
12
18 17
16
5
13
11 12
1
7
2322
2524
6 14
15
27
26
N: 7431932.611
E: 1541355.304
ELEV: 4380.44
N: 7431932.611
E: 1541360.304
ELEV: 4380.44
N: 7431932.611
E: 1541397.304
ELEV: 4379.06
N: 7431931.189
E: 1541399.346
ELEV: 4379.06
N: 7431915.830
E: 1541405.017
ELEV: 4378.45
N: 7431876.175
E: 1541404.839
ELEV: 4378.45
N: 7431881.800
E: 1541404.850
ELEV: 4378.45
N: 7431878.836
E: 1541368.854
ELEV: 4377.07
TOP OF TRACK SLAB
ELEV: 4375.67 TOP OF TRACK SLAB
ELEV: 4375.87
N: 7431882.273
E: 1541299.115
ELEV: 4375.67
N: 7431882.273
E: 1541309.115
ELEV: 4375.87
N: 7431894.894
E: 1541309.172
ELEV: 4375.87
N: 7431894.819
E: 1541325.922
ELEV: 4376.88
N: 7431905.319
E: 1541325.969
ELEV: 4376.88
N: 7431905.394
E: 1541309.219
ELEV: 4375.87
N: 7431905.439
E: 1541299.219
ELEV: 4375.67
N: 7431876.730
E: 1541280.665
ELEV: 4375.30
N: 7431877.400
E: 1541270.668
ELEV: 4375.10
N: 7431916.856
E: 1541299.270
ELEV: 4375.67
N: 7431915.689
E: 1541299.265
ELEV: 4375.67
N: 7431914.716
E: 1541405.012
ELEV: 4378.45
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-3-006.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
2
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
3
-
0
0
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-3-006.dwg
C3006
SUGAR HOUSE PLATFORM AREA
PEDESTRIAN RAMP AND SIDEWALK PLAN
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
H: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SCALE: 1" = 5'
HIGHLAND PLATFORM AREA - SIDEWALK PLAN AND ELEVATION PLAN
SLOPE DOWN = 3.72%
SL
O
P
E
D
O
W
N
=
3
.
7
2
%
CR
O
S
S
SL
O
P
E
=
0.
5
0
%
CROSS SLOPE = 0.50%
SLOPE DOWN = 3.85%SLOPE DOWN = 2.00%
CR
O
S
S
SL
O
P
E
=
0.
5
0
%
5.00'
LANDING
LANDING
LANDING
37.00'
16
.
3
7
'
SEE NOTE 1
NOTES:
1. SEE DRAWING C3005 FOR ELEVATIONS AT THE WEST END OF THE SIDEWALK.
2. SEE DRAWING P3203 FOR STATION PLATFORM RAMP ELEVATIONS.
10
.
0
0
'
SLOPE DOWN = 5.98%
HANDRAIL (TYP)
SEE NOTE 2
5.
0
0
'
5.
6
3
'
5.00'
5.00'
5.
0
0
'
SLOPE UP = 2.00%
6.
6
7
'
5.
0
0
'
10.00'
5
0
+
0
0
5
0
+
2
0
50+4
0
205+00
205+00
206+
0
0
1+80
2+00
2+20
2+40
2+60
2+80
102+20
102+40
102+60
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-3-007.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
4
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
3
-
0
0
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-3-007.dwg
C3007
ROADWAY
EMERGENCY DRIVEWAY GRADING
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
SIMPSON AVE ℄
PROPOSED SIMPSON
GUTTER "S" ALIGNMENT
1
8
5
WEST "W" TRACK ℄
EAST "E" TRACK ℄
PROPOSED SIMPSON
SIDEWALK ALIGNMENT
2
6
3
7
11
12
13
BOLLARD & CABLE
BOLLARD & CABLE
4
9
10
14
15
16
19
17
18
POINT TABLE
POINT#"S" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
1 1+84.72 2.00' LT 4355.67'BEGIN CURB TYPE TRANSITION
1+84.72 2.50' LT 4356.34'BEGIN CURB TYPE TRANSITION
2 1+89.72 1.50' LT 4355.83' END CURB TYPE TRANSITION
1+89.72 2.50' LT 4356.33'END CURB TYPE TRANSITION
3 2+40.27 1.50' LT 4356.11'BEGIN CURB TYPE TRANSITION
2+40.27 2.50' LT 4356.61' BEGIN CURB TYPE TRANSITION
4 2+45.27 2.00' LT 4356.01'END CURB TYPE TRANSITION
2+45.27 2.50' LT 4356.68'END CURB TYPE TRANSITION
POINT TABLE
POINT#"E" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
5 204+94.61 6.40' RT 4356.90'
6 204+94.61 3.50' RT 4356.94'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
7 205+14.42 3.50' LT 4357.05' MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
8 205+40.09 6.40' RT 4357.15'
9 205+40.09 3.50' RT 4357.19'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
10 205+63.13 3.50' LT 4357.32' MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
POINT TABLE
POINT#"W" STATION OFFSET ELEV DESCRIPTION
11 205+18.65 3.50' RT 4357.05'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
12 205+42.52 3.50' LT 4357.17'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
13 205+42.12 6.67' LT 4357.12'
14 205+68.66 3.50' RT 4357.32'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
15 205+83.48 3.50' LT 4357.40'MATCH TRACK SLAB ELEVATION
16 205+83.48 6.67' LT 4357.35'
17 205+88.11 6.67' LT 4357.55'
18 206+00.14 13.41' LT 4358.92' MATCH PROPOSED SIDEWALK EDGE
19 206+90.76 29.02' LT 4359.26' MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK
6' SIDEWALK
BOLLARD & CABLE
DOUBLE SWING GATE
SEE SHEET C3010
TYPE D CURB & GUTER
TYPE B - 30" CURB & GUTER
TYPE B - 30" CURB & GUTER
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-3-010.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
3
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
3
-
0
1
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-3-010.dwg
C3010
CIVIL
BOLLARD AND SWING GATE DETAILS
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
MIN END TRANSITION LENGTH
CURB TYPE * (FT)
A 5
B 7
A - 24"5
9" MODIFIED 9
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-3-011.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
4
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
3
-
0
1
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-3-011.dwg
C3011
CIVIL
CURB TRANSITIONS AND DETAILS
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-3-013.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
3
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
3
-
0
1
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-3-013.dwg
C3013
CIVIL
GATE DETAILS
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-C-3-014.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
0
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
e
r
i
c
.
s
h
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
3
0
c
i
v
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
c
-
3
-
0
1
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-C-3-014.dwg
C3014
CIVIL
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY RAILING
M. HARTMANN
M. HARTMANN
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
SIMPSON
A
V
E
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
L
201+80
202+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
W
W W W W W W W W W W W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W W W
W
WWW
W
W
W
W
W W W W W W W W
W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
SD
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
SD
SD
W W W W W
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-D-1-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
0
4
d
r
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
d
-
1
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-D-1-201.dwg
D1201
DRAINAGE PLAN
WB STA 201+80.27 TO WB STA 206+50
E. JONES
E. JONES
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
01-16-26
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
D
1
2
0
2
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
PROPOSED OCS
FOUNDATION (TYP)
SIMPSON AVE ℄
CONSTRUCT 11.66 LF OF 12" PVC
@ 2.00% SLOPE
CONSTRUCT GRID GRATE AND CLEANOUT
BOX PER APWA STD PLAN 309.2.
WB STA 205+94.00 OFFSET (MATCH NEW
CURB AND GUTTER ALIGNMENT)
RIM = 4356.63
INV N = 4355.06
INV E = 4354.04
INV W = 4354.04
EXISTING STORM DRAIN
TO REMAIN IN PLACE
REMOVE EXISTING 12" CMP PIPE
CONNECT EXISTING STORM DRAIN
PIPE TO NEW INLET
W/ SIMPLE CONCRETE FIELD COLLAR
CONNECT TO EXISTING
CURB INLET PER
SLCPU STANDARDS
INV N = 4351.94
CONSTRUCT 39.91 LF OF 15" CLASS 3 RCP
@ 1.00% SLOPE TO EXISTING CATCH BASIN
CONSTRUCT DRAIN ARRAY PER
DETAIL 1 DWG K3012. WB STA 203+83.
EXISTING FA
I
R
M
O
N
T
STATION
CONSTRUCT TRACK DRAIN
ARRAY PER DETAIL 1 ON
DWG K3012. WB STA 205+94.CONSTRUCT CLEANOUT BOX PER
APWA STD PLAN 331.1
WB STA 206+32.76 OFFSET 18.89' LT
RIM = 4359.29
INV N = 4355.11
INV SW = 4355.11
CONSTRUCT 53.27 LF OF 12" PVC
@ 2.00% SLOPE
CONSTRUCT GRID GRATE AND CLEANOUT
BOX PER APWA STD PLAN 309.2.
WB STA 203+83.00 OFFSET (MATCH NEW
CURB AND GUTTER ALIGNMENT)
RIM = 4354.68
INV N = 4352.34
INV S = 4352.34
CONSTRUCT 13.33 LF OF 6" PVC
@ 1.00% SLOPE
CONNECT TRACK DRAIN
ARRAY TO INLET STA 205+94
CONSTRUCT GRID GRATE AND CLEANOUT
BOX PER APWA STD PLAN 309.2.
WB STA 206+26.23 OFFSET 28.32' LT
CONNECT TO EXISTING CLEANOUT BOX
RIM = 4358.93
INV S = 4355.34
CONSTRUCT 8.25 LF OF 12" CLASS 3 RCP @
1.10% SLOPE TO EXISTING CATCH BASIN
ABBREVIATIONS:
CMP - CORRUGATED METAL PIPE
RCP - REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
PVC - POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
HP - HIGH-PERFORMANCE POLYPROPYLENE
RIM - TOP OF GRATE
INV - INVERT ELEVATION
L
L
L
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+0
0
211+
0
0
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+0
0
211+
0
0
BP = 0+00.00
EP = 0+25.96
SIMPSON AV
E
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
S 1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGAR
M
O
N
T
D
R
I
V
E
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W
W
W W W W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss ss
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-D-1-202.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
0
4
d
r
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
d
-
1
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-D-1-202.dwg
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
D
1
2
0
1
D1202
DRAINAGE PLAN
WB STA 206+50 TO WB STA 211+50
E. JONES
E. JONES
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
01-16-26
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
D
1
2
0
3
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIMPSON AVE ℄
CONSTRUCT 18.26 LF OF 15"
CLASS 3 RCP @ 2.40% SLOPE
EXISTING CLEANOUT BOX
CONNECT PER SLCDPU STANDARDS
RIM = 4358.38
INV SE = 4352.23
CONSTRUCT 42.27 LF OF 2" PVC PIPE @ 1.50%
SLOPE FROM WHEEL SENSOR TO CATCH BASIN. WB
STA 210+30.00 SEE DWG Z7006 FOR WHEEL SENSOR
DETAIL
CONSTRUCT GRID GRATE AND
CLEANOUT BOX PER APWA STD
PLAN 309.2.
WB STA 209+92.67 OFFSET 6.67' LT
RIM = 4363.21
INV E = 4361.25
INV W = 4359.86
INV SE = 4361.33
CONSTRUCT GRID GRATE AND CLEANOUT
BOX PER APWA STD PLAN 309.2.
WB STA 208+90.51 OFFSET 43.10' RT
RIM = 4360.14
INV NE = 4357.45
CONSTRUCT GRID GRATE AND CLEANOUT
BOX PER APWA STD PLAN 309.2.
WB STA 208+91.73 OFFSET 19.23' RT
RIM = 4360.46
INV SW = 4356.81
INV E = 4357.31
INV NE = 4357.98
CONSTRUCT 106.06 LF OF
12" PVC PIPE @ 2.40% SLOPE
CONSTRUCT 54.02 LF OF 15"
CLASS 3 RCP @ 2.40% SLOPE
CONSTRUCT TRACK DRAIN
ARRAY PER DETAIL 1 ON DWG
K3012. WB STA 208+91.66
PROPOSED OCS
FOUNDATION, TYP.
CONSTRUCT CLEANOUT BOX PER APWA
STD PLAN 331.1.
WB STA 208+90.88 OFFSET 37.46' RT
CONNECT TO EXISTING CLEANOUT BOX
RIM = 4360.20
INV NE = 4356.38
INV NW = 4356.13
INV SW = 4357.40
CONSTRUCT 5.66 LF OF 15"
CLASS 3 RCP @ 1.00% SLOPE
ABBREVIATIONS:
CMP - CORRUGATED METAL PIPE
RCP - REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
PVC - POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
HP - HIGH-PERFORMANCE POLYPROPYLENE
RIM - TOP OF GRATE
INV - INVERT ELEVATION
CONSTRUCT 196.74 LF OF 2" PVC PIPE @ 2.50%
SLOPE FROM WHEEL SENSOR TO CATCH BASIN. WB
STA 211+90.00 SEE DWG Z7006 FOR WHEEL SENSOR
DETAIL
CONSTRUCT 12.50 LF OF 15"
CLASS 3 RCP @ 2.40% SLOPE
CONSTRUCT CONTECH SFMH48 STORMFILTER
WB STA 208+39.19 OFFSET 36.66' RT
RIM = 4358.52
INV NW = 4352.53
INV SE = 4354.83
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
W
W W WWWW
W
W W
W
W W W W W W W W
W
W W W W W W W W W W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
W W W W
SD
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
SD
SD
STOP
S260
S270
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-D-1-203.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
0
4
d
r
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
d
-
1
-
2
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-D-1-203.dwg
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
D
1
2
0
2
D1203
DRAINAGE PLAN
WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+84.18
E. JONES
E. JONES
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
AS SHOWN
01-16-26
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
EB TRACK ℄
PROPOSED OCS
FOUNDATION (TYP)
WB TRACK ℄
INSTALL 8" X 12" OBLIQUE
SCUPPER DRAIN W/ 8" PIPE
OPENING PER ZURN Z187 OR
APPROVED SIMILAR
@ BLOCK OUT INVERT
SEE SECTION A1 ON DWG K3019
INV = 4369.91
CONSTRUCT 38.99 LF 12" PVC
PIPE @ 2.40% SLOPE
CONSTRUCT CATCH BASIN PER DETAIL ON DWG K3011
(WB STA 213+11.16 OFFSET 30.75' RT)
RIM = 4371.65
INV W = 4369.37
INV S = 4369.37
INV E = 4369.95
NOTES:
1. SEE SHEET K3009 FOR TRACK DRAIN DETAILS.
2. TOP OF AREA DRAIN SHALL BE SET A MINIMUM OF 1/2"
BELOW GRADE OF TOP OF TRACK SLAB OR CONCRETE
INFILL. THE SURROUNDING CONCRETE SURFACE WITHIN
18" SHALL BE GRADED TO DRAIN.
CONNECT TO EXISTING CURB INLET
INV = 4370.36
REPLACE 34.82 LF 12" PVC PIPE @ 5.53%
CONSTRUCT AREA DRAIN PER DETAIL 1.
(WB STA 214+69.51 OFFSET 13.60' RT)
RIM = 4373.40
INV NW = 4372.08
CONSTRUCT 25.38 LF 8" PVC PIPE @ 1.50%
PROVIDE SLEEVE THROUGH PLATFORM
FOUNDATION
CONNECT TO PROPOSED CANOPY DRAIN
SEE PLATFORM PLANS FOR LOCATION
NTS
AREA DRAIN DETAIL 1
-
1'-0"
10
"
6"
8"
5
3
/
4
"
SCALE: 1" = 20'
DRAINAGE PLAN
D & L SUPPLY
I-4162 BRIDGE
DECK DRAIN OR
APPROVAL
EQUAL
OUTLET SHALL SLIP FIT
INSIDE BELL OF 6" PVC PIPE
REMOVE EXISTING CATCH BASIN
RELOCATE TO LOW POINT IN NEW CURB AND
GUTTER, SEE DWG NO. C1109.
CONSTRUCT 130.22 LF
8" PVC PIPE @ 0.90%
CONSTRUCT AREA DRAIN PER DETAIL 1
WB STA 214+89.43 OFFSET 29.92' RT
RIM = 4375.83
INV = 4372.63
CONSTRUCT 178.29LF
8" PVC PIPE @ 1.50%
REPLACE EXISTING CURB INLET WITH GRID GRATE AND
CLEANOUT BOX PER APWA STD PLAN 309.2
WB STA 212+74.55 OFFSET 44.02' RT
RIM = 4370.59
INV N = (CONTINUE AT EXISTING PIPE SLOPE INTO NEW BOX)
INV NE = 4368.96
INV E = 4368.43
CONSTRUCT 41.88 LF 12" HP
STORM PIPE @ 0.50% SLOPE
CONSTRUCT GRID GRATE AND BOX
INLET PER APWA STD PLAN 309.2
WB STA 213+12.87 OFFSET 13.51' LT
RIM = 4372.21
INV NW = 4370.57
INV SE = 4370.57
CONSTRUCT 32.34 LF
8" PVC PIPE @ 0.90%
CONSTRUCT 33.49 LF OF 8" PVC
PIPE @ 2.50% SLOPE TO NEW
CLEANOUT BOX
CONSTRUCT 33.52 LF
8" PVC PIPE @ 1.50%
CONSTRUCT 96.85 LF
12" HP STORM PIPE
@ 4.50% SLOPE
CONSTRUCT 39.35 LF
12" HP STORM PIPE
@ 4.50% SLOPE
CONSTRUCT CATCH BASIN PER
DETAIL ON DWG K3011
WB STA 215+89.03 OFFSET
(MATCH EXISTING STORM PIPE)
CONSTRUCT CATCH BASIN PER
DETAIL ON DWG K3011
WB STA 216+22.54 OFFSET 49.77' RT
RIM = 4387.26
INV N = 4383.72
INV S = 4383.72
CONNECT TO EXISTING
CATCH BASIN
INV N = 4385.49
ABBREVIATIONS:
CMP - CORRUGATED METAL PIPE
RCP - REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
PVC - POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
HP - HIGH-PERFORMANCE POLYPROPYLENE
RIM - TOP OF GRATE
INV - INVERT ELEVATION
CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE CLEANOUT
PER SIOUX CHIEF 851-46N
OR APPROVED SIMILAR
WB STA 215+07.81 OFFSET 30.17 RT
CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE CLEANOUT
PER SIOUX CHIEF 851-46N
OR APPROVED SIMILAR
WB STA 214+80.16 OFFSET 9.27 LT
CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE CLEANOUT
PER SIOUX CHIEF 851-46N
OR APPROVED SIMILAR
WB STA 214+46.64 OFFSET 9.27 LT
CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE CLEANOUT
PER SIOUX CHIEF 851-46N
OR APPROVED SIMILAR
WB STA 213+16.43 OFFSET 9.27 LT CONSTRUCT 13.11 LF
8" PVC PIPE @ 1.50%
CONSTRUCT 18.39 LF
8" PVC PIPE @ 1.50%
CONSTRUCT TRACK DRAIN
PER DETAIL 2 ON DWG K3012.
WB STA 214+89.42
CONSTRUCT 196.74 LF OF 2" PVC PIPE @ 2.50%
SLOPE FROM WHEEL SENSOR TO CATCH BASIN. WB
STA 211+90.00 SEE DWG Z7006 FOR WHEEL SENSOR
DETAIL
CONSTRUCT CATCH BASIN PER DETAIL ON DWG K3011
(WB STA 213+17.73 OFFSET 54.50' RT)
RIM = 4373.07
INV N = 4369.74
CONSTRUCT 24.64 LF OF
12" PVC PIPE @ 1.50%
CONSTRUCT 4.70 LF OF 12" CLASS 3
RCP @ EXISTING SLOPE TO
PROPOSED CATCH BASIN
CONNECT EXISTING STORM DRAIN
PIPE TO NEW INLET W/ SIMPLE
CONCRETE FIELD COLLAR
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT DRIVE
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
SUGARMONT DRIVE
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
L
TCB
201+80 202+00
203+00
204+00
205+00
206+0
0
CCTV
1. PROVIDE AND INSTALL SIGNAL HEADS WITH LENSES AS SHOWN.
2. ALL SIGNAL HEADS SHOWN SHALL BE TYPE I UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
3. PROVIDE ADEQUATE CONDUCTOR SLACK IN MAST ARM TO ALLOW FOR VERTICAL
ADJUSTMENTS OF SIGNAL WITHIN FULL RANGE OF MOUNTING BRACKET.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND ENSURE MAST ARM MINIMUM HEIGHT
REQUIREMENTS ARE MET PRIOR TO CASTING POLE FOUNDATIONS.
5. TAG EACH SET OF CABLES AT EACH CONDUIT END LABELING EACH CIRCUIT.
6. USE SIGNAL HEAD BRACKET MOUNTS FOR MOUNTING ALL SIGNAL HEADS. BOTTOM
OF SIGNAL HEAD ASSEMBLY SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 17.5' AND A MAXIMUM OF 19.5
ABOVE ROADWAY SURFACE.
7. PRIMARY CONDUITS BETWEEN SIGNAL JUNCTION BOXES SHALL CONTAIN 6-2" PVC
CONDUIT EXCEPT WHERE NOTED.
8. POLES TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATION
STANDARDS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
9. ALL CITY ITEMS TO BE REMOVED ARE TO BE RETURNED TO THE CITY "AS IS".
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
LIDAR DETECTION MOUNTED ON TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE.
INSTALL UNDERGROUND SERVICE PEDESTAL PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
STANDARD PLAN SHEET EK509
INSTALL TYPE 6 CABINET AND FOUNDATION WITH TYPE III JUNCTION BOX PER SALT LAKE
CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS STANDARD PLANS SHEET EK506.
LEGEND:
NOTES:
INSTALL TYPE II JUNCTION BOX PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
STANDARD PLANS SHEET EK505.
INSTALL PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL HEAD ON POLE PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC
OPERATIONS STANDARDS SHEET EK507.
SIGNAL POLE
TYPE II JUNCTION BOX
TCB TYPE 6 CABINET
LIDAR DETECTION
PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL HEAD
TYPE III JUNCTION BOX
OCS POLE
SIGNAL HEADS TYPE VI
MASTARM MOUNTED SIGNS
TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONDUIT
UNDERGROUND SERVICE PEDESTAL
SIGNAL HEADS TYPE I
UTA PLATFORM LUMINARE
TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE AND MAST ARM
WITH LUMINARE
CCTV CAMERACCTV
INSTALL TACTILE WARNING DEVICE (TRUNCATED DOMES)
POWER CABLE TO BE INSTALLED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
MOUNT STREET NAME SIGN ON MAST ARM.
TYPE I JUNCTION BOXCCTV CAMERA MOUNTED ON TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE OR MAST ARM AS SHOWN.
1
2
4
5
6
7
3
8
10
REMOVE EXISTING UTA LUMINARE, POLE, AND FOUNDATION.11
INSTALL AUDIBLE PUSH BUTTON ON POLE PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
STANDARDS SHEET EK507.
12
UDOT/SLC FIBER PULL BOX TYPE 213
INSTALL TYPE I JUNCTION BOX FOR LIGHTING CIRCUIT14
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-1-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
1
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-1-201.dwg
T1201
TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLANS
WB STA 201+60 TO WB STA 206+42
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
L. B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
1-16-26
MAT
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
4
2
SEE
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
T
1
2
0
2
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
P1
9'
8'
9'
9'
TYPE VI (FL.A) LEFT-TURN
ARROW LENS DETAIL
A
A
A B
R3-1
BLANK-OUT
30" X 30"
W10-7
ACTIVATED
BLANK-OUT
30" X 30"
C
R3-2
BLANK-OUT
30" X 30"
DO NOT
ENTER
D
R5-1
BLANK-OUT
30" X 30"
C
FAIRMONT STATION PLATFORM
POLE AND POST SCHEDULE
POLE
IDENT.STATION
OFFSET MAST ARM
LENGTH
LUMINARE
MOUNTING
HEIGHT
LUMINARE ARM
LENGTH NOTESLEFTRIGHT
D
B
P2
P9
D
P1 202+82.91 28.43' 25'30'10'30' MAST ARM TO BE FIELD CUT.
INSTALL UTA LUMINARE
P2 203+05.6 20.4'11' PEDESTRIAN POLE
P3 203+04.87 19.02'10'TYPE A MAST ARM POLE W/ TYPE 1
PRE SIGNAL
P4 203+53.28 20.01'11' BREAKAWAY POLE
P5 203+77.22 20.73' 40'30'15' 45' MAST ARM TO BE FIELD CUT
P6 203+85.4 77.79' 35'30'10'
P7 203+60.47 83.28'4.5' PEDESTRIAN POLE
P8 203+13.16 83.81' 25'30'10' 30' MAST ARM TO BE FIELD CUT
P9 202+99.89 75.05'4.5' PEDESTRIAN POLE
6
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
102
1
3
4
5
5
4
4
4
11
12
4
3
11
P3
P7
P5
P4
4
12
5
5
4
5
P6
5
12 12
12
5
12
13
9'
9'
MAST ARM MOUNTED SIGN SCHEDULE
MAST ARMIDENT.
CENTER OF SIGN TO
END OF MAST ARM A-2 SIGN W/G 8" "C" TEXT
P1 13.5'MCCLELLAND
P5 5.5'SUGARMOUNT
P6 5.5'MCCLELLAND
P8 5.5'SUGARMOUNT
1414
P8
14
14
14
14
14
SIMPSO
N
A
V
E
SIMPSO
N
A
V
E
S 1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
L
L
L
TC
B
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+00
211+00
CCTV
TCB
NOTES:
1. PROVIDE AND INSTALL SIGNAL HEADS WITH LENSES AS SHOWN.
2. ALL SIGNAL HEADS SHOWN SHALL BE TYPE I UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
3. PROVIDE ADEQUATE CONDUCTOR SLACK IN MAST ARM TO ALLOW FOR VERTICAL
ADJUSTMENTS OF SIGNAL WITHIN FULL RANGE OF MOUNTING BRACKET.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND ENSURE MAST ARM MINIMUM HEIGHT
REQUIREMENTS ARE MET PRIOR TO CASTING POLE FOUNDATIONS.
5. TAG EACH SET OF CABLES AT EACH CONDUIT END LABELING EACH CIRCUIT.
6. USE SIGNAL HEAD BRACKET MOUNTS FOR MOUNTING ALL SIGNAL HEADS. BOTTOM
OF SIGNAL HEAD ASSEMBLY SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 17.5' AND A MAXIMUM OF 19.5
ABOVE ROADWAY SURFACE.
7. PRIMARY CONDUITS BETWEEN SIGNAL JUNCTION BOXES SHALL CONTAIN 6-2" PVC
CONDUIT EXCEPT WHERE NOTED.
8. POLES TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATION
STANDARDS.
9. PTZ CAMERA REQUIRES NEMA BOX WITH A SWITCH AND SHALL WIRED FROM THE
NEAREST PCC FIBER BOX.
10. INSTALL PEDESTRIAN BLANK OUT SIGN. SEE SHEET 3213
11. ALL CITY ITEMS TO BE REMOVED ARE TO BE RETURNED TO THE CITY "AS IS".
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL POLE
LEGEND:
TYPE II JUNCTION BOX
TCB TYPE 6 CABINET
LIDAR DETECTION
PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL HEAD
TYPE III JUNCTION BOX
OCS POLE
SIGNAL HEADS TYPE VI
MAST ARM MOUNTED SIGNS
TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONDUIT
UNDERGROUND SERVICE PEDESTAL
SIGNAL HEADS TYPE I
TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE AND MAST ARM
WITH LUMINARE
CCTV CAMERADETV
TYPE I JUNCTION BOX
LIDAR DETECTION MOUNTED ON TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE.
INSTALL UNDERGROUND SERVICE PEDESTAL PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
STANDARD PLAN SHEET EK509
INSTALL TYPE 6 CABINET AND FOUNDATION WITH TYPE III JUNCTION BOX PER SALT LAKE
CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS STANDARD PLANS SHEET EK506.
INSTALL TYPE II JUNCTION BOX PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
STANDARD PLANS SHEET EK505.
INSTALL PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL HEAD ON POLE PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC
OPERATIONS STANDARDS SHEET EK507.
INSTALL TACTILE WARNING DEVICE (TRUNCATED DOMES)
POWER CABLE TO BE INSTALLED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
MOUNT STREET NAME SIGN ON MAST ARM.
CCTV CAMERA MOUNTED ON TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE OR MAST ARM AS SHOWN.
1
2
4
5
6
7
3
8
10
INSTALL AUDIBLE PUSH BUTTON ON POLE PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
STANDARDS SHEET EK507.12
UDOT/SLC FIBER PULL BOX TYPE 213
INSTALL TYPE I JUNCTION BOX FOR LIGHTING CIRCUIT14
RAISED PAVEMENT MARKER
INSTALL UTA PTZ CAMERA ON POLE.18
UTA PTZ CAMERA
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-1-202.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
1
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-1-202.dwg
T1202
TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLANS
WB STA 206+42 TO WB STA 211+50
J. GONZALES
J.GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
1-16-26
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
4
2
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
T
1
2
0
1
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
T
1
2
0
3
POLE AND POST SCHEDULE
POLE
IDENT.STATION
OFFSET MAST ARM
LENGTH
LUMINARE
MOUNTING
HEIGHT
LUMINARE ARM
LENGTH NOTESLEFTRIGHT
DO NOT
ENTER
R5-1
BLANK-OUT
30" X 30"
D
E
D
E
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
5
5
55
1
8
6
8
8
10
13
2
P10
P11
P12
P13
P14
P15
P16
7
7
12
1212
12
W10-7
ACTIVATED
BLANK-OUT
30" X 30"
14
8'
8'
8'
MAST ARM MOUNTED SIGN SCHEDULE
MAST ARMIDENT.
CENTER OF SIGN TO
END OF MAST ARM A-2 SIGN W/G 8" "C" TEXT
P11 12'SUGARMOUNT
5'/12'SIMPSON
14
W10-7
PEDESTRIAN
BLANK OUT SIGN
28.5" X 28.5"
18 18
P10 209+07.33 83.93'15' PEDESTRIAN POLE
P11 208+93.58 64.35'15'DUAL MAST ARM30'30'10'
P12 208+79.1 51.25'11' PEDESTRIAN POLE
P13 208+86.11 6.3'11' PEDESTRIAN POLE
P14 208+84.42 18.04'11' PEDESTRIAN POLE
P15 209+91.61 9.49'15' PEDESTRIAN POLE
P16 209+35.15 46.36'15' PEDESTRIAN POLE
I
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
STOP
212+00 213+00 214+00 215+00
CCTV
TCB
NOTES:1. PROVIDE AND INSTALL SIGNAL HEADS WITH LENSES AS SHOWN.
2. ALL SIGNAL HEADS SHOWN SHALL BE TYPE I UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
3. PROVIDE ADEQUATE CONDUCTOR SLACK IN MAST ARM TO ALLOW FOR VERTICAL
ADJUSTMENTS OF SIGNAL WITHIN FULL RANGE OF MOUNTING BRACKET.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND ENSURE MAST ARM MINIMUM HEIGHT
REQUIREMENTS ARE MET PRIOR TO CASTING POLE FOUNDATIONS.
5. TAG EACH SET OF CABLES AT EACH CONDUIT END LABELING EACH CIRCUIT.
6. USE SIGNAL HEAD BRACKET MOUNTS FOR MOUNTING ALL SIGNAL HEADS. BOTTOM
OF SIGNAL HEAD ASSEMBLY SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 17.5' AND A MAXIMUM OF 19.5
ABOVE ROADWAY SURFACE.
7. PRIMARY CONDUITS BETWEEN SIGNAL JUNCTION BOXES SHALL CONTAIN 6-2" PVC
CONDUIT EXCEPT WHERE NOTED.
8. POLES TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATION
STANDARDS.
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL POLE
LEGEND:
TYPE II JUNCTION BOX
TCB TYPE 6 CABINET
LIDAR DETECTION
PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL HEAD
ROADSIDE SIGN AND POST
TYPE III JUNCTION BOX
OCS POLE
SIGNAL HEADS TYPE VI
BLANK OUT SIGNS (R3-1, R3-2,R5-1, W10-7)
TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONDUIT
UNDERGROUND SERVICE PEDESTAL
SIGNAL HEADS TYPE I
UTA PLATFORM LUMINARE
TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE AND MAST ARM
WITH LUMINARE
EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARM
CCTV CAMERADETV
LIDAR DETECTION MOUNTED ON TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE.
INSTALL TYPE II JUNCTION BOX PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
STANDARD PLANS SHEET EK505.
INSTALL PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL HEAD ON POLE PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC
OPERATIONS STANDARDS SHEET EK507.
INSTALL TACTILE WARNING DEVICE (TRUNCATED DOMES)
MOUNT STREET NAME SIGN ON MAST ARM.
CCTV CAMERA MOUNTED ON TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE OR MAST ARM AS SHOWN.
4
5
6
7
3
8
INSTALL AUDIBLE PUSH BUTTON ON POLE PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
STANDARDS SHEET EK507.
12
UDOT/SLC FIBER PULL BOX TYPE 213
REMOVE, SALVAGE, AND RETURN ALL CITY OWNED POLES, SIGNS, PED PUSH
BUTTONS AND SIGNAL RELATED PARTS TO SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC SIGNAL CREW.
OBLITERATE EXISTING FOUNDATION.
9
EXISTING SIGNAL CABINET AND CONTROLLER (PROTECT IN PLACE)15
EXISTING SIGNAL POLE, MAST ARM, EQUIPMENT, AND STREET NAME SIGN (PROTECT IN PLACE)16
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN POLE AND PUSH BUTTON (PROTECT IN PLACE).17
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-1-203.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
1
-
2
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-1-203.dwg
T1203
TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLANS
WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+85
J. GONZALES
J.GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
1-16-26
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
T
1
2
0
2
W10-7
ACTIVATED
BLANK-OUT
30" X 30"
DO NOT
ENTER
R5-1
BLANK-OUT
30" X 30"
D
D
E
POLE AND POST SCHEDULE
POLE
IDENT.STATION
OFFSET MAST ARM
LENGTH
LUMINARE
MOUNTING
HEIGHT
LUMINARE ARM
LENGTH NOTESLEFTRIGHT
D
12
D
E
E
E
4
3
4
4
P17
P18
P19
P20
P22 P23
P25
5
5
4
3
4
6
4
7
5
12
12
7
8
8
9
9
9
12
4
8
8
13
17
16
16
17
15
P21
P26
P27
8'
8'
MAST ARM MOUNTED SIGN SCHEDULE
MAST ARM
IDENT.
CENTER OF SIGN TO
END OF MAST ARM A-2 SIGN W/G 8" "C" TEXT
P18 5'HIGHLAND
P22 5'HIGHLAND
P24
P17 211+79.01 14.14'11' PEDESTRIAN POLE
P18 211+87.36 28.02'20'
P19 211+92.70 41.15'11' PEDESTRIAN POLE
P20 212+43.69 57.26'EXISTING 4.5' PED POLE
P21 212+51.38 59.7'EXISTING MAST ARM
P22 212+43.69 57.26'EXISTING 4.5' PED POLE
P23 212+57.9 41.16'30'30'10'
P24 212+73.54 29.5'11' PEDESTRIAN POLE
P25 212+11.24 45.83'EXISTING MASTARM
P26 212+17.83 42.19'EXISTING 4.5' PED POLE
P27 212+12.68 39.09'EXISTING 4.5' PED POLE
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT DRIVE
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
SUGARMONT DRIVE
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
L
TCB
201+80 202+00
203+00
204+00
205+00
206+0
0
CCTV
1. MINIMUM SIGN HEIGHT SHALL BE SEVEN FEET MEASURED FROM BOTTOM OF SIGN
TO STREET PAVEMENT, EXCEPT WHERE NOTED.
2. ALL NEW TRAFFIC PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE REFLECTIVE TAPE OR
REFLECTIVE ACRYLIC PAINT AS SPECIFIED BY UDOT STANDARDS.
3. REMOVE ANY CONFLICTING PAVEMENT MARKINGS.
4. STRIPING TO CONTINUE TO CONSTRUCTION EXTENTS (MATCH EXISTING).
5. ALL CITY ITEMS TO BE REMOVED ARE TO BE RETURNED TO THE CITY "AS IS".
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
LEGEND:
NOTES:
4" DOUBLE YELLOW SOLID STRIPE
8" SOLID WHITE STRIPE
12" SOLID WHITE CROSSWALK STRIPE TO BE INSTALLED PER 2009 MUTCD 3B-16.
INSTALL TURN ARROW MARKING PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
STANDARD PLANS SHEET EK514
MOUNT SIGNS TO 2 INCH SQUARE 12-GUAGE METAL POLE WITH T1 BREAKAWAY ANCHOR.
SEE UDOT 2025 STANDARD DRAWINGS SN 8B FOR FOUNDATION.
A
ROADSIDE SIGN AND POST
BRACKET MOUNTED SIGN
24" SOLID WHITE STRIPE TO BE INSTALLED PER 2009 MUTCD 3B-16. STRIPE TO BE
INSTALLED A MINIMUM OF 4' IN ADVANCE OF NEAREST CROSSWALK.
"STOP" PAVEMENT MESSAGE TO BE AFFIXED DIRECTLY BEHIND TACTILE WARNING DEVICE
(WHITE LETTERING ON RED BACKGROUND).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 EXISTING SIGN (PROTECT IN PLACE).
8 RELOCATE EXISTING SIGN AS SHOWN
REMOVE, SALVAGE, AND RETURN ALL CITY OWNED SIGNS AND POSTS TO SALT
LAKE CITY TRAFFIC SIGNAL CREW. OBLITERATE EXISTING FOUNDATION.
9
TURN ARROW
THRU ARROW
THRU-TURN ARROW
CHEVRON ,ARKING FOR RAISED CROSSWALK
MASTARM MOUNTED SIGNS
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-1-204.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
1
-
2
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-1-204.dwg
T1204
STRIPING & SIGNING PLANS
WB STA 201+60 TO WB STA 206+42
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
R. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
1-16-26
MAT
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
4
2
SEE
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
T
1
2
0
5
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
13
'
11'
15'
13
'
10
'
11
'11
'
11
'
12
'
4'
FAIRMONT STATION PLATFORM
STOPHERE
ONRED
F
R10-11
BRACKET MOUNT
24" X 30"
A
LOOK
R15-8
36" X 18"
SIGN POST SCHEDULE
POSTIDENT.STATION
OFFSET
POST HEIGHT PANEL WIDTH PANEL HEIGHT NOTESLEFTRIGHT
A
LOOK
R15-8
36" X 18"
S1 202+93.29 6.55'9'35''18'' TWO "LOOK" SIGNS BACK TO BACK
S2 203+61.37 5.23'9'35''18'' TWO "LOOK" SIGNS BACK TO BACK
S3 206+02.92 38.68'8'12"18""NO TRESSPASSING
FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS ONLY"
1
2
4
3
4
5
3 2
4
1
4
1
5
3
5
6
6
6
8
9
7
7
S1 S2
S3
A
9
7
NO TRESPASSING.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
ONLY SIGN
12" X 18"
SIMPSO
N
A
V
E
SIMPSO
N
A
V
E
S 1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
L
L
L
TC
B
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+00
211+00
TCB
NOTES:
1. MINIMUM SIGN HEIGHT SHALL BE SEVEN FEET MEASURED FROM BOTTOM OF SIGN
TO STREET PAVEMENT, EXCEPT WHERE NOTED.
2. ALL NEW TRAFFIC PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE REFLECTIVE TAPE OR
REFLECTIVE ACRYLIC PAINT AS SPECIFIED BY UDOT STANDARDS.
3. REMOVE ANY CONFLICTING PAVEMENT MARKINGS.
4. STRIPING TO CONTINUE TO CONSTRUCTION EXTENTS (MATCH EXISTING).
5. ALL CITY ITEMS TO BE REMOVED ARE TO BE RETURNED TO THE CITY "AS IS".
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
LEGEND:
4" DOUBLE YELLOW SOLID STRIPE
8" SOLID WHITE STRIPE
12" SOLID WHITE CROSSWALK STRIPE TO BE INSTALLED PER 2009 MUTCD 3B-16.
INSTALL TURN ARROW MARKING PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
STANDARD PLANS SHEET EK514
MOUNT SIGNS TO 2 INCH SQUARE 12-GUAGE METAL POLE WITH T1 BREAKAWAY ANCHOR.
SEE UDOT 2025 STANDARD DRAWINGS SN 8B FOR FOUNDATION.
A
24" SOLID WHITE STRIPE TO BE INSTALLED PER 2009 MUTCD 3B-16. STRIPE TO BE
INSTALLED A MINIMUM OF 4' IN ADVANCE OF NEAREST CROSSWALK.
1
2
3
4
5
7 EXISTING SIGN (PROTECT IN PLACE).
8 RELOCATE EXISTING SIGN AS SHOWN
REMOVE, SALVAGE, AND RETURN ALL CITY OWNED SIGNS AND POSTS TO SALT
LAKE CITY TRAFFIC SIGNAL CREW. OBLITERATE EXISTING FOUNDATION.
9
10 4" YELLOW DOTTED STRIPE.
INSTALL RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS WITH 3' SPACING.13
RAISED PAVEMENT MARKER
ROADSIDE SIGN AND POST
BRACKET MOUNTED SIGN
TURN ARROW
THRU ARROW
THRU-TURN ARROW
CHEVRON ,ARKING FOR RAISED CROSSWALK
INSTALL CHEVRONS ON APPROACH SIDE OF RAISED CROSSWALKS.14
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-1-205.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
1
-
2
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-1-205.dwg
T1205
STRIPING & SIGNING PLANS
WB STA 206+42 TO WB STA 211+50
J. GONZALES
J.GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
1-16-26
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
4
2
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
T
1
2
0
4
11
'
11
'
23
'
10'10
'
10
'
16
'
4'
11
'
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
T
1
2
0
6
STOPHERE
ONRED
R10-11
BRACKET MOUNT
24" X 30"
R5-6
24" X 24"
F
A
A
DO NOT
ENTER
R5-1
30" X 30"
R15-6
24" X 24"
"NO TRESPASSING
RAILROAD PROPERTY"
12" X 18"
A
OM3-R
12" X 36"
A
R5-6
24" X 24"
M6-4
21" X 15"
A
R5-6
24" X 24"
A
1
2
5
3
5
1 2
4
1
5
10
9
7
7
S4
S5
S6
S7
S8
S9
STOPHERE
ONRED
R10-11
24" X 30"
SIGN POST SCHEDULE
POST
IDENT.STATION
OFFSET POST
HEIGHT
PANEL
WIDTH
PANEL
HEIGHT NOTESLEFTRIGHT
3
13
14
S4 208+94.07 16.87' 7'12''36'' 4' MIN. SIGN HEIGHT
S5 209+35.48 53.56' 10"
30'' 30''R5-1
18" 18" R15-6
12"18""NO TRESPASSING RAILROAD
PROPERTY"
S6 209+41.02 66.14' 10' 24'' 30'' R10-11
S7 209+48.49 73.91'11'24'' 24''R5-6
21''15'' M6-4
S8 209+53.42 43.' 9'24'' 24''R5-6
S9 211+45.9 11.82'9' 24'' 24'' R5-6
LOOK
R15-8
36" X 18"
BRACKET MOUNT
I
STOP
212+00 213+00 214+00 215+00
TCB
NOTES:
1. MINIMUM SIGN HEIGHT SHALL BE SEVEN FEET MEASURED FROM BOTTOM OF SIGN
TO STREET PAVEMENT, EXCEPT WHERE NOTED.
2. ALL NEW TRAFFIC PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE REFLECTIVE TAPE OR
REFLECTIVE ACRYLIC PAINT AS SPECIFIED BY UDOT STANDARDS.
3. REMOVE ANY CONFLICTING PAVEMENT MARKINGS.
4. STRIPING TO CONTINUE TO CONSTRUCTION EXTENTS (MATCH EXISTING).
5. ALL CITY ITEMS TO BE REMOVED ARE TO BE RETURNED TO THE CITY "AS IS".
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
LEGEND:
INSTALL THRU-RIGHT ARROW MARKING PER UTAH MUTCD.
A MOUNT SIGN TO 2 INCH SQUARE 12-GUAGE METAL POST PER SALT LAKE CITY
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS STANDARD PLANS SHEET EK511.
4" DOUBLE YELLOW SOLID STRIPE
8" SOLID WHITE STRIPE
12" SOLID WHITE CROSSWALK STRIPE TO BE INSTALLED PER 2009 MUTCD 3B-16.
INSTALL TURN ARROW MARKING PER SALT LAKE CITY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
STANDARD PLANS SHEET EK514
24" SOLID WHITE STRIPE TO BE INSTALLED PER 2009 MUTCD 3B-16. STRIPE TO BE
INSTALLED A MINIMUM OF 4' IN ADVANCE OF NEAREST CROSSWALK.
"STOP" PAVEMENT MESSAGE TO BE AFFIXED DIRECTLY BEHIND TACTILE WARNING DEVICE
(WHITE LETTERING ON RED BACKGROUND).
1
2
3
4
5
6
8 RELOCATE EXISTING SIGN AS SHOWN
11
4" SOLID WHITE LINE12
RAISED PAVEMENT MARKER
ROADSIDE SIGN AND POST
BRACKET MOUNTED SIGN
TURN ARROW
THRU ARROW
THRU-TURN ARROW
CHEVRON ,ARKING FOR RAISED CROSSWALK
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-1-206.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
1
-
2
0
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-1-206.dwg
T1206
STRIPING & SIGNING PLANS
WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+85
J. GONZALES
J.GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
1-16-26
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
T
1
2
0
5
11
'
11
'
11
'
NOTURNON RED
R10-6A
BRACKET MOUNT
24" X 30"
G
G
R5-6
24" X 24"
A
NOMOTORVEHICLES
R5-3
BRACKET MOUNT
24" X 24"
F
M6-1
21" X 15"
A
R5-6
24" X 24"
M6-2
21" X 15"
6
G
SIGN POST SCHEDULE
POST
IDENT.STATION
OFFSET POST
HEIGHT PANEL
WIDTH
PANEL
HEIGHT NOTESLEFTRIGHT
S10 211+91.53 6.21'9' 24'' 24'' R5-6
9'21''15'' M6-1
S11 212+76.39 41.05'9'24'' 24''R5-6
9'21''15''M6-2
2
1
4
2
2
2
3
5
4
1
5
3
3
5
1
15
4
11
8
3
4
12 12
12
S10
S11
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-201.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-201.dwg
T3201
MAST ARM DETAIL
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-202.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-202.dwg
T3202
MAST ARM POLE DETAIL
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-203.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-203.dwg
T3203
MAST ARM POLE FOUNDATION DETAILS
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-204.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-204.dwg
T3204
MAST ARM POLE POLE EXTENSION
FOR LUMINAIRE DETAIL
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-205.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-205.dwg
T3205
SIGNAL HEAD FOR VEHICLES DETAIL
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-206.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
0
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-206.dwg
T3206
SIGNAL HEAD MOUNTING DETAIL
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-207.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
0
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-207.dwg
T3207
SIGNAL POLE BREAK AWAY TYPE DETAIL
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
R. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-208.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
0
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-208.dwg
T3208
SIGNAL HEAD FOR PEDESTRIANS DETAIL
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-209.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
0
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-209.dwg
T3209
SIGNAL PUSH BUTTON DETAIL
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-210.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
1
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-210.dwg
T3210
SIGNAL CONTROLLER FOUNDATION DETAIL
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-211.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
1
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-211.dwg
T3211
JUNCTION BOX AND BURIED RACEWAY DETAIL
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-212.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
1
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-212.dwg
T3212
UNDERGROUND SERVICE PEDESTAL DETAIL
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-3-213.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
3
-
2
1
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-3-213.dwg
T3213
PEDESTRIAN BLANK OUT SIGN AND RAISED
PAVEMENT MARKER DETAILS
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
K. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 40'
1-16-26
TCB
CCTV
TCB
CCTV
TCB
CCTV
TCB
CCTV
TCB
CCTV
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-7-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
7
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-7-001.dwg
T7001
SIGNAL CIRCUIT DIAGRAM
S MCCLELLAND STREET
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
1-16-26
2 A CABLES
1 B CABLE
4 A CABLES
2 B CABLES
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
4 A CABLES
4 B CABLES
2 A CABLES
2 B CABLES
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
2 A CABLES
SIGNAL CIRCUIT
7-CONDUCTOR NO.14 AWG CABLE WITH
NO.6 BARE COPPER WIRE IN CONDUIT
AS SHOWN.
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL CIRCUIT
A 7-CONDUCTOR NO.14 AWG CABLE IN
THE SAME CONDUIT AS SIGNAL CIRCUIT.
PUSH BUTTON CIRCUIT
B 4-CONDUCTOR NO.14 AWG. WITH NO.6
BARE COPPER GROUND WIRE.
NOTES:
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL CONDUCTOR
SHALL NOT SHARE CONDUIT WITH PUSH
BUTTON CONDUCTOR.
1 CABLE
1 CABLE
1 CABLE
1 CABLE
LIGHTING CIRCUIT
2 SINGLE CONDUCTOR NO.6 COPPER
CABLE TYPE RHH-USE2-RHW WITH BARE
COPPER NO.6 GROUND WIRE IN 2"
CONDUIT.
FUTURE USE CONDUIT
2-2" PVC EACH WITH ONE CONTINUOUS
NO.14 AWG COPPER THHH PULL WIRE.
P1
P8
P6
P5
P3 P4
P1
P8 P7
P6
P3 P4
P1
P8
P7
P6 P1
P8
P7
P6
1 A CABLE
P4P3
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
1 A CABLE
LIDAR DETECTION CIRCUIT
A CAT6 GAME CHANGER ETHERNET
CABLE.
CCTV CAMERA CIRCUIT CIRCUIT
B CAT5 ETHERNET PATCH CABLE.
1 A CABLE
1 C CABLE
FIBER CONNECTION
C 6-STRAND PRE-TERMINATED DROP
CABLE.
P2
P7
P9
2-CONDUCTOR NO. 12 AWG CABLE FOR
BLANKOUT SIGN
A
BLANK OUT SIGN CIRCUT
B
1 CABLE
1 CABLE
1 A CABLE
2 A CABLES
1 B CABLES
NOTES:
PROVIDE AND INSTALL 3" PVC CONDUIT
FROM POWER SOURCE TO
UNDERGROUND SERVICE PEDESTAL
(USP) WITH UNINTERRUPTABLE POWER
SOURCE AS SHOWN. CABLE TO BE
INSTALLED BY OTHERS.
PROVIDE AND INSTALL 120 V POWER
SUPPLY FROM USP TO CONTROLLER
USING 2 SINGLE-CONDUCTOR NO.10
COPPER CABLES AND NO.6 BARE
COPPER GROUND WIRE.
COORDINATE POWER SERVICES FROM
POWER POLES WITH RMP. SEE UTILITY
SERVICES NOTES.
INSTALL TRAFFIC SIGNAL CIRCUIT,
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL CIRCUIT AND
DETECTION CIRCUIT CABLE IN SHARED
3" PVC BETWEEN TCB AND TYPE 3
JUNCTION BOX.
INSTALL PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON
CIRCUIT AIN SEPARATE 2" PVC
BETWEEN TCB AND TYPE 3 JUNCTION
BOX.
PROVIDE A SINGLE 3" CONDUIT FROM
THE FIBER SPLICE JUNCTION BOX TO
THE SIGNAL CABINET FOR DROP CABLE .
INSTALL LIGHTING CIRCUIT IN
SEPARATE 2" PVC BETWEEN USP AND
TYPE 1 JUNCTION BOX.
TC
B
TC
B
TC
B
CCTV
TC
B
CCTV
TC
B
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-7-002.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
7
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-7-002.dwg
T7002
SIGNAL CIRCUIT DIAGRAM
1100 EAST STREET
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
1-16-26
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
SIGNAL CIRCUIT
7-CONDUCTOR NO.14 AWG CABLE WITH
NO.6 BARE COPPER WIRE IN CONDUIT
AS SHOWN.
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL CIRCUIT
A 7-CONDUCTOR NO.14 AWG CABLE IN
THE SAME CONDUIT AS SIGNAL CIRCUIT.
PUSH BUTTON CIRCUIT
B 4-CONDUCTOR NO.14 AWG. WITH NO.6
BARE COPPER GROUND WIRE.
NOTES:
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL CONDUCTOR
SHALL NOT SHARE CONDUIT WITH PUSH
BUTTON CONDUCTOR.
LIGHTING CIRCUIT
2 SINGLE CONDUCTOR NO.6 COPPER
CABLE TYPE RHH-USE-RHW WITH BARE
COPPER NO.6 GROUND WIRE IN 2"
CONDUIT.
FUTURE USE CONDUIT
2-2" PVC EACH WITH ONE CONTINUOUS
NO.14 AWG COPPER THHH PULL WIRE.
NOTES:
PROVIDE AND INSTALL 3" PVC CONDUIT
FROM POWER SOURCE TO
UNDERGROUND SERVICE PEDESTAL
(USP) WITH UNINTERRUPTABLE POWER
SOURCE AS SHOWN. CABLE TO BE
INSTALLED BY OTHERS.
PROVIDE AND INSTALL 120 V POWER
SUPPLY FROM USP TO CONTROLLER
USING 2 SINGLE-CONDUCTOR NO.10
COPPER CABLES AND NO.6 BARE
COPPER GROUND WIRE.
2 A CABLES
2 B CABLES
2 A CABLES
2 B CABLES
1 C CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 A CABLE
P16
P11
P15
P14
COORDINATE POWER SERVICES FROM
POWER POLES WITH RMP. SEE UTILITY
SERVICES NOTES.
INSTALL TRAFFIC SIGNAL CIRCUIT,
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL CIRCUIT AND
DETECTION CIRCUIT CABLE IN SHARED
3" PVC BETWEEN TCB AND TYPE 3
JUNCTION BOX.
INSTALL PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON
CIRCUIT AIN SEPARATE 2" PVC
BETWEEN TCB AND TYPE 3 JUNCTION
BOX.5 A CABLES
4 B CABLES
1 CABLE
1 A CABLE
2 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
LIDAR DETECTION CIRCUIT
A CAT6 GAME CHANGER ETHERNET
CABLE.
CCTV CAMERA CIRCUIT
B CAT5 ETHERNET PATCH CABLE.
P10
P10
FIBER CONNECTION
C 6-STRAND PRE-TERMINATED DROP
CABLE.
1 C CABLE
PROVIDE A SINGLE 3" CONDUIT FROM
THE FIBER SPLICE JUNCTION BOX TO
THE SIGNAL CABINET FOR DROP CABLE .
P12
P13
P16
P15
P14
P10
P12
P13
4 A CABLES
4 B CABLES
1 C CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
P16
P15
P14
P10
P12
P13
2-CONDUCTOR NO. 12 AWG CABLE
BLANK OUT SIGN CIRCUT
B
A
PEDESTRIAN BLANK OUT SIGN
C 2-CONDUCTOR NO. 12 AWG CABLE
IN THE SAME CONDUIT AS SIGNAL
CIRCUIT
1 C CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 A CABLE
INSTALL LIGHTING CIRCUIT IN
SEPARATE 2" PVC BETWEEN USP AND
TYPE 1 JUNCTION BOX.
CCTV
TCB
CCTV
TCB
CCTV
TCB
CCTV
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-T-7-003.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
j
o
h
n
n
y
.
g
o
n
z
a
l
e
s
c
a
m
a
r
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
2
tr
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
t
-
7
-
0
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-T-7-003.dwg
T7003
SIGNAL CIRCUIT DIAGRAM
HIGHLAND DRIVE
J. GONZALES
J. GONZALES
B. KHAN
F. NANNENGA
1" = 20'
1-16-26
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
SIGNAL CIRCUIT
7-CONDUCTOR NO.14 AWG CABLE WITH
NO.6 BARE COPPER WIRE IN CONDUIT
AS SHOWN.
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL CIRCUIT
A 7-CONDUCTOR NO.14 AWG CABLE IN
THE SAME CONDUIT AS SIGNAL CIRCUIT.
PUSH BUTTON CIRCUIT
B 4-CONDUCTOR NO.14 AWG. WITH NO.6
BARE COPPER GROUND WIRE.
NOTES:
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL CONDUCTOR
SHALL NOT SHARE CONDUIT WITH PUSH
BUTTON CONDUCTOR.
FUTURE USE CONDUIT
2-2" PVC EACH WITH ONE CONTINUOUS
NO.14 AWG COPPER THHH PULL WIRE.
4 A CABLES
2 B CABLES
3 A CABLES
1 B CABLE
2 A CABLE
1 B CABLE 2 A CABLES
1 B CABLE
1 A CABLES
1 B CABLES
2 A CABLE
2 B CABLE
P17
P19
2 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
1 C CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
1 C CABLE
LIDAR DETECTION CIRCUIT
A CAT6 GAME CHANGER ETHERNET
CABLE.
CCTV CAMERA CIRCUIT
B CAT5 ETHERNET PATCH CABLE.
P18
FIBER CONNECTION
C 6-STRAND PRE-TERMINATED DROP
CABLE.
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
1 C CABLE
1 A CABLE
1 B CABLE
1 C CABLE
P22
P17
P19
P18
P17
P19
P18
P17
P19
P20
P18
P22 P23
P24
P25
P26
P27
A
2-CONDUCTOR NO. 12 AWG CABLE FOR
BLANKOUT SIGN
BLANK OUT SIGN CIRCUT
B
1 A CABLE
P21
P20
P22 P23
P24
P25
P26P27
P21
P20
P22 P23
P24
P25 P26
P27
P21
P20
P22
P23
P24
P25 P26
P27
P21
NOTES:
PROVIDE AND INSTALL 3" PVC CONDUIT
FROM POWER SOURCE TO
UNDERGROUND SERVICE PEDESTAL
(USP) WITH UNINTERRUPTABLE POWER
SOURCE AS SHOWN. CABLE TO BE
INSTALLED BY OTHERS.
PROVIDE AND INSTALL 120 V POWER
SUPPLY FROM USP TO CONTROLLER
USING 2 SINGLE-CONDUCTOR NO.10
COPPER CABLES AND NO.6 BARE
COPPER GROUND WIRE.
COORDINATE POWER SERVICES FROM
POWER POLES WITH RMP. SEE UTILITY
SERVICES NOTES.
INSTALL TRAFFIC SIGNAL CIRCUIT,
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL CIRCUIT AND
DETECTION CIRCUIT CABLE IN SHARED
3" PVC BETWEEN TCB AND TYPE 3
JUNCTION BOX.
INSTALL PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON
CIRCUIT AIN SEPARATE 2" PVC
BETWEEN TCB AND TYPE 3 JUNCTION
BOX.
PROVIDE A SINGLE 3" CONDUIT FROM
THE FIBER SPLICE JUNCTION BOX TO
THE SIGNAL CABINET FOR DROP CABLE .
AT
INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODEIBC
BRDG BRIDGE
PSI POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH
NS NEAR SIDE
EACH WAYEW
EXIST EXISTING
EMB EMBANKMENT
CURB & GUTTERC&G
CWR CONTINUOUSLY
STRUCTURE
STEEL
STIFFENER
STANDARD
STATION
SLAB ON GRADE
SAWED JOINT
SHEET
SOUTH BOUND
RETAINING WALL
RIGHT
RAILROAD
RETAINING
REQUIRED
REINFORCEMENT
PAVEMENT
POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT
PLATFORM
PLATE
OPPOSITE
OPENING
OUTSIDE DIAMETER
ON CENTER
NOT TO SCALE
NUMBER
NOT IN CONTRACT
NORTH BOUND
NOT APPLICABLE
MISCELLANEOUS
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
LEFT
DRAINDR
LONG LEG VERTICAL
LONG LEG HORIZONTAL
JOINT
INVERT
INTERIOR
INCH
INSIDE DIAMETER
HORIZONTAL
GRATING
GROUND
GALVANIZED
FOOTING
FEET
FAR SIDE
FLOOR
FINISH GRADE
EXTERIOR
EXPANSION
EQUAL
ELEVATION
EXPANSION JOINT
EACH FACE
EAST BOUND
DRAWING
DETAIL
DIAMETER
WELDED RAIL
CONTINUOUS
CONSTRUCTION JOINT
CONSTRUCTED
CONNECTION
CONCRETE
COLUMN
CLEAR
CONTROL JOINT
BEARING
BOTTOM
BUILDING
APPROXIMATE
AGGREGATE
ABUTMENT
ANCHOR BOLT
CENTER LINE
REINF
FTG
EF
EJ
STRUCT
STL
STIFF
STD
STA
SOG
SJ
SHT
SB
RW
RT
RR
RET
REQ'D
PVMT
PSF
PLAT
PL
OPP
OPNG
OD
OC
NTS
N0 #
NIC
NB
N/A
MISC
MIN
MAX
LT
LLV
LLH
JT
INV
INT
IN
ID
HORIZ
GRTG
GND
GALV
FT
FS
FL
FG
EXT
EXP
EQ
EL
EB
DWG
DET
DIA Ø
CONT
CONST JT
CONST
CONN
CONC
COL
CLR
CJ
BRG
BOT
BLDG
APPROX
AGG
ABUT
AB
℄
@
SIDEWALKSW
SYMMETRICALSYMM
WELDED WIRE FABRIC
WITHOUT
WESTBOUND
WITH
VERTICAL
VARIES
UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE
TYPICAL
TOP OF STEEL
TOP OF CONCRETE
TOP OF RAIL
TEMPORARY
TOP BACK OF CURB
TOP & BOTTOM
WWF
W/O
WB
W/
VERT
VAR
UNO
TYP
TOS
TOC
T/R
TEMP
TBC
T&B 1. ALL STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS SHALL BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
SPECIFICATIONS AND ALL OTHER DRAWINGS RELATING TO THE WORK.
2. EMBEDDED ITEMS SUCH AS PIPES, INSERTS, SLEEVES AND CONDUITS, AND
ANY RECESSES OR OPENINGS REQUIRED FOR UTILITY, ARCHITECTURAL,
MECHANICAL, AND ELECTRICAL INSTALLATIONS ARE NOT SHOWN ON THE
STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR TO REFER TO THE UTILITY,
ARCHITECTURAL, MECHANICAL, AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR THE
LOCATIONS AND DETAILS OF THESE ITEMS.
3. THE VERTICAL CONTROL OF ALL TRACK STRUCTURES IS BASED ON
ELEVATION OF TOP OF RAIL.
4. BEFORE FABRICATION AND/OR CONSTRUCTION, ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE
VERIFIED WITH ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS.
5. NO PIPES OR SLEEVES FOR MECHANICAL OR PLUMBING TRADES SHALL PASS
THROUGH STRUCTURAL MEMBERS, UNLESS SHOWN ON THE STRUCTURAL
DRAWINGS, WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER.
6. SEWER AND UTILITY LINES ARE NOT INDICATED ON STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS.
REFER TO CIVIL, PLUMBING, AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR THEIR
LOCATION, PROFILE, AND DETAILS. THE CONTRACTOR MUST COORDINATE
SEWER AND UTILITY LINES WITH FOUNDATIONS SHOWN ON STRUCTURAL
DRAWINGS. ANY INTERFERENCE BETWEEN SEWER AND UTILITY LINES AND
THE STRUCTURE FOUNDATIONS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF
THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE
CONSTRUCTION.
1. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS OR SPECIFIED, ALL
STRUCTURAL CONCRETE SHALL BE 4000 psi.
2. CONCRETE FOR FOOTINGS AND FOUNDATIONS SHALL BE 4000 psi UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED.
3. MIXING AND PLACING OF ALL CONCRETE AND SELECTION OF MATERIALS
SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE CODE.
4. COLD AND HOT WEATHER MIX DESIGNS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE
RESIDENT CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR FOR REVIEW 30 DAYS PRIOR TO USE.
5. UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE, CONCRETE SURFACES LEADING TO DRAINS
SHALL BE SLOPED A MINIMUM OF 1 INCH PER FOOT TOWARD DRAIN, WITH ALL
DECK AND THE ADJACENT SURFACES WARPED AS REQUIRED TO SATISFY AN
ADEQUATE DRAINAGE FLOW.
6. ALL EXPOSED CONCRETE EDGES AND CORNERS SHALL BE CHAMFERED WITH
A 3/4 INCH BY 45 DEGREE CHAMFER. EXCLUDING THE PLATFORM EDGE AND
TACTILE AREAS.
7. PROVIDE 2-INCH CONCRETE COVER ON REINFORCEMENT BARS EXCEPT AS
NOTED.
8. ALL EXPOSED CONCRETE SURFACES SHALL HAVE A RUBBED FINISH AS
DEFINED IN THE SPECIFICATION 03345 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
1. REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE DEFORMED STEEL CONFORMING TO THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM A615, GRADE 40 FOR #4 AND SMALLER BARS.
GRADE 60 FOR #5 AND LARGER BARS.
2. WIRE MESH SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A185.
3. WIRE MESH SHALL BE LAPPED 1-1/2 SPACES (9" MINIMUM).
4. REINFORCING BARS SHALL BE SPLICED AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. OR AS
REQUIRED BY ACI 318-05 CHAPTER 12.
5. REINFORCING STEEL EXCEPT FOR STIRRUPS AND TIES SHALL HAVE A
MINIMUM PROTECTIVE COVERING OF CONCRETE AS FOLLOWS;
A) CONCRETE PLACED DIRECTLY AGAINST EARTH: 3"
B) CONCRETE PLACED AGAINST FORMS BUT EXPOSED TO EARTH OR
WEATHER:
PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT: 2"
STIRRUPS, TIES, & SPIRALS: 2"
C) CONCRETE PLACED AGAINST FORMS BUT NOT EXPOSED DIRECTLY TO
EARTH OR WEATHER:
PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT: 1"
STIRRUPS, TIES, & SPIRALS: 1"
6. ALL BARS SHALL BE CLEAN OF RUST, GREASE AND OTHER MATERIALS LIKELY
TO IMPAIR BOND. ALL BENDS SHALL BE MADE COLD.
7. ALL REINFORCING STEEL, EXCEPT WELDED WIRE FABRIC (WWF), TO BE EPOXY
COATED BY CRSI CERTIFIED APPLICATOR.
1. ALL EXCAVATIONS SHALL BE INSPECTED AND ALL COMPACTIONS OF FILL
SHALL BE INSPECTED BY THE CONTRACTORS THIRD PARTY INDEPENDENT
INSPECTOR.
1. STEEL ROOF DECKING SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
STEEL DECK INSTITUTE SPECIFICATIONS AND APPLICABLE MANUFACTURER'S
REQUIREMENTS.
2. STEEL CELLULAR DECKING FOR CANOPY SHALL BE 20/20 GAUGE, 1-1/2" DEEP
GALVANIZED METAL FORM DECK WITH MINIMUM MOMENT OF INERTIA 0.30
IN/FT. DECKING SHALL BE CONTINUOUS OVER A MINIMUM OF TWO SPANS.
1. AS A MINIMUM, THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (IBC), CURRENT EDITION
AT THE DATE OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, WILL GOVERN THE DESIGN,
MATERIALS, AND CONSTRUCTION ON THIS PROJECT. MODIFICATIONS,
SUPPLEMENTS, AND OTHER ORDINANCES APPLICABLE WITHIN EACH
JURISDICTION SHALL ALSO GOVERN WITHIN THE SPECIFIC JURISDICTION.
2. IN THE CASE OF SPECIAL TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION, ADDITIONAL
SPECIFICATIONS OR CODES MAY ALSO APPLY. THESE ADDITIONAL CODES ARE
NOTED ON THE APPLICABLE DRAWINGS OR IN THE APPLICABLE
SPECIFICATION SECTION.
3. LOADS:
ROOF LIVE: 17 PSF
ROOF SNOW: 36 PSF ROOF SNOW LOAD, Pf
1.00 SNOW EXPOSURE FACTOR
1.00 SNOW LOAD IMPORTANCE FACTOR
1.20 THERMAL FACTOR, Ct
WIND: 90 MPH BASIC WIND SPEED
1.00 WIND IMPORTANCE FACTOR, Iw
EXPOSURE CATEGORY B
EARTHQUAKE: 1.00 SEISMIC IMPORTANCE FACTOR, Ie
SEISMIC USE GROUP I
SITE CLASS D
1.40g MAPPED SPECTRAL RESPONSE ACCELERATION, Ss
0.57g MAPPED SPECTRAL RESPONSE ACCELERATION, S1
0.931 SPECTRAL RESPONSE COEFFICIENT, SDS
0.380 SPECTRAL RESPONSE COEFFICIENT, SDI
SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY D
1. ALL STRUCTURAL STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A36, UNLESS NOTED
OTHERWISE.
2. ALL STEEL PIPES SHALL BE STANDARD PIPE, SCHEDULE 40 (UNLESS NOTED
OTHERWISE), CONFORMING TO ASTM A53, GRADE B.
3. STRUCTURAL TUBING SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A500, GRADE B, Fy=46 KSI.
4. ALL BOLTS SHALL BE GALVANIZED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
5. MACHINE BOLTS SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A307.
6. HIGH-STRENGTH BOLTS SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A325 (FRICTION TYPE).
7. ALL CONNECTIONS SHALL BE MADE WITH HIGH-STRENGTH BOLTS UNLESS
NOTED OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS.
8. ALL ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A307 (UNLESS NOTED
OTHERWISE).
9. ALL STEEL SHALL BE FABRICATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ASTM (2003)
APPLICABLE STANDARDS BY A CERTIFIED FABRICATOR.
10. WELDING SHALL BE PERFORMED BY CERTIFIED WELDERS.
11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO
FABRICATION.
12. ALL STRUCTURAL STEEL EXCEPT THAT EMBEDDED IN CONCRETE OR GROUT
SHALL HAVE ONE SHOP COAT OF APPROVED PRIMER PAINT.
13. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SHIMS WHERE REQUIRED.
14. FOR ALL ROOF OPENINGS OVER 1'-0" PROVIDE SUPPORT. METAL ROOF DECK
FABRICATOR TO REINFORCE ALL OPENINGS IN METAL DECK.
15. ALL WELDING ELECTRODES SHALL BE E70XX OR EQUIVALENT.
16. NO STRUCTURAL STEEL CONNECTION SHALL CONSIST OF LESS THAN 2 A325
BOLTS OR WELDS DEVELOPING A FACTORED LOAD OF 10 KIPS.
17. ALL WELD SIZES NOT INDICATED SHALL COMPLY WITH SECTION J2 OF THE
AISC SPECIFICATION LRFD THIRD EDITION.
18. BEARING PLATE SHOULD CONTAIN HOLES FOR GROUTING, WHICH ARE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH AISC SPECIFICATION LRFD THIRD EDITION.
1. WELD LENGTHS SHOWN ARE EFFECTIVE LENGTH PER CODE. WHERE LENGTHS
ARE NOT SHOWN, THE WELD SHALL BE THE FULL LENGTH OF THE JOINT.
2. ALL WELDING REQUIREMENTS SHOWN OR INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS MAY
BE FIELD OR SHOP WELDED AS REQUIRED FOR EFFICIENT ERECTION,
SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER.
3. ALL WELDING SHALL BE AS PER THE LATEST EDITION OF AWS D1.1.
1. FLOOR LEVEL SHALL NOT DEVIATE OVER 1/8" FROM THE THEORETICAL FLOOR
LEVELS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.
2. EDGE OF EXTERIOR WALL SHALL BE ON A STRAIGHT OR A CURVED LINE AS
SHOWN ON THE PLAN VIEW AND SHALL NOT DEVIATE MORE THAN 1/2" TOTAL
FROM THEORETICAL STRAIGHT OF CURVED LINES AS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS.
3. TOLERANCE LIMITS FOR CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE SPECIFIED IN
THE LATEST EDITION OF ACI 117.
4. TOLERANCE LIMITS FOR STEEL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED IN
THE LATEST EDITION OF THE CODE OF STANDARD PRACTICE BY THE
AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION.
STRUCTURAL ABBREVIATIONS GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES
MOMENT CONNECTION
STRUCTURAL SYMBOLS
STEEL DECK
STEEL DECKING:
FOUNDATION:
REINFORCING STEEL:
CONCRETE:STRUCTURAL STEEL AND MISC. METAL:
WELDING:
TOLERANCES:
APPLICABLE CODES:
GENERAL:
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-0-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
0
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-0-201.dwg
P0201
STATION
STRUCTURAL SYMBOLS, ABBREVIATIONS,
AND NOTES
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-1-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
1
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-1-201.dwg
P1201
SUGAR HOUSE
PLATFORM PLAN
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
1/4"=1'-0"
01-16-26
KEY NOTES:
1. CARD READER, SEE NOTE O.
2. SIGN TYPE 2B
3. CALL BOX, SEE NOTE O.
4. TICKET (FARE) VENDING MACHINE (TVM), SEE NOTE O.
5. SNOW MELT AREA
6. REAL TIME PASSENGER INFORMATION SIGN, TYP. SEE
NOTE O.
7. UTA BEACON SIGN TYPE 14A, LOCATED NEAR
HIGHLAND DR. (SEE DWG P3214 DETAIL D).
8. STANDARD UTA TRASH RECEPTACLE
9. ARTWORK INSTALLMENT AREA, TBD
10. TACTILE WARNING STRIP, STANDARD NO-DOME CENTER
11. LIGHT POLE
12. CANOPY
13. BENCH LOCATION. PLACE BENCH TO ONE SIDE OF SPACE
AS SHOWN ON PLAN TO ALLOW FOR ADA WAITING AREA.
14. FREEZELESS POST HYDRANT, SEE DWG P3216
15. RAIL PLATFORM SIGN TYPE 5
16. PLATFORM ADA SYMBOL TYPE SS 1, TYP.
17. PLATFORM BICYCLE SYMBOL TYPE SS 2, TYP.
NOTES
GENERAL
A. ALL HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL DISTANCES
ARE IN FEET AND INCHES EXCEPT STATIONING.
PLATFORM STATIONING IS MEASURED IN
DECIMAL UNITS FROM THE PLATFORM/TRACK
STATION POINT (0+00).
B. ELEVATIONS REFER TO DISTANCE ABOVE TOP
OF RAIL. PLATFORM SLOPE TO MATCH TOR
PROFILE SLOPE.
C. REFER TO P3207 FOR CONSTRUCTION AND
EXPANSION JOINT LAYOUT.
D. PLATFORM ACCESS RAMPS DOWN TO BE
CONSTRUCTED AT 1:12 OR LESS.
E. NOMINAL PLATFORM WIDTHS GIVEN, VERIFY
PLATFORM/TRACK CLEARANCES.
F. CONCRETE WALKING SURFACES FINISH IS TO
BE ROUGH BROOM.
G. CANOPY TO BE SET LEVEL ON PLATFORM WITH
MINIMUM CEILING HEIGHT AS SHOWN ON P3206.
H. CAMERAS TO BE INSTALLED ON PLATFORM
CANOPY, SEE NOTE P.
I. CONTRACTOR/OWNER TO VERIFY ALL SIGN
QUANTITIES.
J. BICYCLE RULES SIGN TO BE MOUNTED TO SIDE
OF TVM.
K. RIDER INFORMATION SIGN TO BE ATTACHED TO
COLUMN FACING RAMP.
L. USE RESTRICTION SIGN TO BE ATTACHED TO
COLUMN ABOVE RIDER INFORMATION SIGN
FACING RAMP.
M. SEE P3217 TO P3220 FOR GRAPHIC SIGN
STANDARDS.
N. SEE UTA WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE SIGN
SCHEDULE AND DRAWING PACKAGE v 7 FOR
MORE DETAILS.
O. CARD READER, REAL TIME PASSENGER
INFORMATION SIGN, TVM, AND CALL BOX SHALL
BE PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY UTA OR
OTHERS.
P. CAMERAS TO BE PROVIDED, INSTALLED, AND
TESTED BY OWNER.
SYMBOL LEGEND
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
04 2 4 8
TACTILE
SNOW MELT AREA
1
11
5
11124 11381514
℄ WB TRACK
+8"
+8"
00
+
2
1
R
E
A
L
T
I
M
E
P
A
S
S
E
N
G
E
R
IN
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
S
I
G
N
00
+
3
0
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
C
E
N
T
E
R
00
+
3
3
.
2
0
B
E
N
C
H
00
+
4
0
.
7
5
T
I
C
K
E
T
V
E
N
D
I
N
G
M
A
C
H
I
N
E
00
+
5
0
L
I
G
H
T
P
O
L
E
00
+
6
0
E
N
D
O
F
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
00
+
7
9
T
O
P
O
F
R
A
M
P
00
+
3
9
R
E
A
L
T
I
M
E
P
A
S
S
E
N
G
E
R
IN
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
S
I
G
N
00
+
0
7
U
T
A
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
T
R
A
S
H
R
E
C
E
P
T
I
C
L
E
00
+
4
5
.
5
0
F
R
E
E
Z
E
L
E
S
S
P
O
S
T
H
Y
D
R
A
N
T
00
+
1
0
L
I
G
H
T
P
O
L
E
00
+
0
4
C
A
R
D
R
E
A
D
E
R
00
+
1
5
R
A
I
L
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
S
I
G
N
T
Y
P
E
S
5
13
'
-
1
0
1
/
2
"
2
1
/
2
"
(T
Y
P
)
℄ EB TRACK
DOOR, TYP.
00
+
0
0
B
E
G
I
N
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
/
T
O
P
O
F
R
A
M
P
5'
-
6
"
(T
Y
P
)
6
9'
-
8
"
+8"
+8"
3'-1"
MIN. CLR.
A
P3205
C
P3206
00
+
2
6
.
8
0
B
E
N
C
H
10
16 17
26
13
B
P3205
3'-0"
+8"
+8"4'-0"
(TYP)
2'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
19'-0"
RAMP DOWN
D
16'-9"
10
'
-
6
"
1'
-
8
1
/
4
"
10
-0
0
+
1
6
.
7
5
B
O
T
T
O
M
O
F
R
A
M
P
+0"
+0"
00
+
6
9
A
R
T
W
O
R
K
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
M
E
N
T
A
R
E
A
00
+
5
6
C
A
R
D
R
E
A
D
E
R
93
00
+
5
3
C
A
L
L
B
O
X
HANDRAIL, SEE DWG.
C3014 FOR DETAILS,
TYP.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-201.dwg
P3201
STATION
TYPICAL STRUCTURAL DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
AS NOTED
01-16-26
34" CHAMFER 34" CHAMFER
HOOK
HOOK
34" CHAMFER
HOOK ALTERNATE DIRECTION
OF HOOKS
CONCRETE TOP SLAB
ALTERNATE HOOKS
CONCRETE WALL
14" MIN AMPLITUDE
ROUGHNESS
CONCRETE TOP SLAB
HOOK
CONCRETE WALL
LAP SPLICE
LA
P
S
P
L
I
C
E
LA
P
2" CLR (TYP.)
1'-0"3"
COMPRESSIBLE FILLER
℄ EXPANSION JOINT
SEE DETAIL "A", "B", & NOTE 6
SEE DETAIL "A", "B", & NOTE 5
SEALANT BACKER ROD, TYP.
1 14" DIA PVC
PIPE W/ CAP. (FILL
WITH GREASE)
1" DIA x 1'-10" LONG
24" O.C. SMOOTH
DOWEL AT MIDDLE OF
SLAB OR WALL. SEE NOTE 6
W POLYURETHANE FILLER
14" R. SEE NOTE 3
BOND BREAKER AT BACKER ROD
BACKER ROD DIA=W+1/8"COMPRESSIBLE
FILLER
LE
S
S
T
H
A
N
W
/
2
B
U
T
NO
T
L
E
S
S
T
H
A
N
14"
EXTEND COMPRESSIBLE FILLER
TO SUBGRADE WHEN SLAB ON GRADE
SUBGRADE
NOTES:
1. SLABS ON GRADE SHALL BE THICKENED TO
12" MIN AT EXPANSION JOINT TO ALLOW
SPACE FOR DOWELS.
2. FOR WALLS, FORM ALL JOINT EDGES AT 12"
CHAMFER.
3. FOR SLABS, PROVIDE 14" RADIUS TOOLED
EDGES AT TOP SURFACE.
4. "W"=1" WIDE UNLESS OTHERWISE
INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS.
5. USE DETAIL "B" AT UNDERSIDE OF SLABS ON
GRADE ONLY. USE DETAIL "A" AT ALL OTHER
LOCATIONS.
6. AT EXPANSION JOINTS, GREENSTREAK
"SPEED DOWEL" NO. PSD12/#7TX (BASE
CODE PSD/#7BX) OR APPROVED EQUAL MAY
BE USED IN LIEU OF SMOOTH DOWEL AND
PVC ASSEMBLY SYSTEM SHOWN.
7. SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR
LOCATIONS OF EJ'S.
SEE NOTES BELOW, TYP
SEE DRAWINGS FOR
LOCATION OF REINFORCEMENT 1 4" MIN AMPLITUDE
ROUGHNESS
REINFORCEMENT CONTINUOUS
THROUGH JOINT
NOTES:
1. ALL HOOKS SHALL BE ACI STD 90 DEGREE HOOKS.
NOTES:
1. ALL HOOKS SHALL BE ACI STD 90 DEGREE HOOKS.
3"3"
3/16" MAX
1
1
/
2
"
2"
C
L
R
CONCRETE SLAB
REINFORCING PER
FOUNDATION PLAN
AND SECTIONS, P4201
SAW CUT - MAKE SOON ENOUGH
TO PREVENT CRACKING, NOT TOO
SOON TO CAUSE SPALLING, AND NOT
MORE THAN 12 HOURS AFTER INITIAL
PLACEMENT FROM TRUCK
LOCATE SAWCUTS & ADJUST WWF
PRIOR TO CASTING CONCRETE.
DISCONTINUE WWF AT JOINT. STOP
3" EACH SIDE OF JT.
NTS
CONTROL JOINT (SJ)5
-
NTS
CONSTRUCTION JOINT (CJ)3
-
NTS
EXPANSION JOINT (EJ)4
-
NOTES:
1. SANDBLAST JOINT PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE FOR NEXT SLAB OR WALL.
2. FOR SLABS, EDGE TOP OF EXPOSED SLAB JOINT EDGES AT 1 4" RADIUS.
3. FOR WALLS, FORM JOINT EDGES AT 12" CHAMFER.
4. CJ'S SHALL BE PLACED IN THICKENED, REINFORCED FOUNDATION SECTIONS AT SPACING NOT
TO EXCEED 36'-6". SEE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR JOINT LAYOUTS.
REINFORCEMENT CONT
THROUGH JOINTS
14" AMPLITUDE
ROUGHNESS
℄ CONSTRUCTION JOINT
NTS
HINGED TOP SLABS 2
-
NTS
TYPICAL WALL REINFORCEMENT AT
CORNERS AND INTERSECTIONS 1
-
14" MIN AMPLITUDE
ROUGHNESS
WALL < 10" THICK
WALL > 10" THICK
DETAIL "A" - EXPOSED FACE
DETAIL "B" - SLAB ON GRADE
NON-WATER BEARING SLAB OR WALL
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-202.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-202.dwg
P3202
STATION
STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
20'-0" DOUBLE CANOPY
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
1/2"=1'-0"
01-16-26
20'-0"
16'-0"2'-0"2'-0"
9'
-
8
"
4'
-
4
"
4'
-
4
"
6"
16'-0"1'-4"
(TYP)
6"
1'-0"
5"
12
'
-
0
1
/
4
"
1'
-
2
1
/
4
"
2'
-
9
1
/
4
"
6'
-
6
"
8'
-
4
"
(T
Y
P
)
C6x13
W10x45
WT6X20,
TYP.
ROOF OUTLINE
9 SPACES AT 2'-0" = 18'-0"
WT6x20
C8x13.75
C6x13
C8x13.75C10x30
WT10x45, TYP.
WT6x20, TYP.
TOP OF PLATFORM
L4x4x3 8, TYP.
℄
POST
℄
POST
PLAN
ELEVATION TYPICAL SECTION
NOTES:
1. ALL STEEL ELEMENTS TO BE GALVANIZED.
2.12" DIAMETER CABLE NOT SHOWN
C
P3210
D
P3210
B
P3210
A
P3210
⅊3 16"
L4x4x3/8
C10x30
C8x13.75,
TYP.
C8x13.75TOP OF PLATFORM
1 4"/FT
⅊ 3 16"
(TYP)
E
P3210
14"/FT
1'-0"
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-203.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-203.dwg
P3203
STATION
SUGAR HOUSE STATION
PLATFORM ELEVATION
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
1/4"=1'-0"
01-16-26
12
8
1
2
GENERAL
A. ALL HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL DISTANCES
ARE IN FEET AND INCHES EXCEPT STATIONING.
PLATFORM STATIONING IS MEASURED IN
DECIMAL UNITS FROM THE PLATFORM/TRACK
STATION POINT (0+00).
B. ELEVATIONS REFER TO DISTANCE ABOVE TOP
OF RAIL. PLATFORM SLOPE TO MATCH TOR
PROFILE SLOPE.
C. REFER TO P3207 FOR CONSTRUCTION AND
EXPANSION JOINT LAYOUT.
D. PLATFORM ACCESS RAMPS DOWN TO BE
CONSTRUCTED AT 1:12 OR LESS.
E. NOMINAL PLATFORM WIDTHS GIVEN, VERIFY
PLATFORM/TRACK CLEARANCES.
F. CONCRETE WALKING SURFACES FINISH IS TO
BE ROUGH BROOM.
G. CANOPY TO BE SET LEVEL ON PLATFORM WITH
MINIMUM CEILING HEIGHT AS SHOWN ON P3206.
H. CAMERAS TO BE INSTALLED ON PLATFORM
CANOPY, SEE NOTE P.
I. CONTRACTOR/OWNER TO VERIFY ALL SIGN
QUANTITIES.
J. BICYCLE RULES SIGN TO BE MOUNTED TO SIDE
OF TVM.
K. RIDER INFORMATION SIGN TO BE ATTACHED TO
COLUMN FACING RAMP.
L. USE RESTRICTION SIGN TO BE ATTACHED TO
COLUMN ABOVE RIDER INFORMATION SIGN
FACING RAMP.
M. SEE P3217 TO P3220 FOR GRAPHIC SIGN
STANDARDS.
N. SEE UTA WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE SIGN
SCHEDULE AND DRAWING PACKAGE v 7 FOR
MORE DETAILS.
O. CARD READER, REAL TIME PASSENGER
INFORMATION SIGN, TVM, AND CALL BOX SHALL
BE PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY UTA OR
OTHERS.
P. CAMERAS TO BE PROVIDED, INSTALLED, AND
TESTED BY OWNER.
NOTES
1
11
22'-0"16'-0"22'-0"
9
EL = +8"
EDGE OF PLAT.
15
KEY NOTES:
1. CARD READER, SEE NOTE O.
2. SIGN TYPE 2B
3. CALL BOX, SEE NOTE O.
4. TICKET (FARE) VENDING MACHINE (TVM), SEE NOTE O.
5. SNOW MELT AREA
6. REAL TIME PASSENGER INFORMATION SIGN, TYP. SEE NOTE O.
7. UTA BEACON SIGN TYPE 14A, LOCATED NEAR HIGHLAND DR.
(SEE DWG P3214 DETAIL D).
8. STANDARD UTA TRASH RECEPTACLE
9. ARTWORK INSTALLMENT AREA, TBD
10. TACTILE WARNING STRIP, STANDARD NO-DOME CENTER
11. LIGHT POLE
12. CANOPY
13. BENCH LOCATION. PLACE BENCH TO ONE SIDE OF SPACE AS
SHOWN ON PLAN TO ALLOW FOR ADA WAITING AREA.
14. FREEZELESS POST HYDRANT, SEE DWG P3216
15. RAIL PLATFORM SIGN TYPE 5
16. PLATFORM ADA SYMBOL TYPE SS 1, TYP.
17. PLATFORM BICYCLE SYMBOL TYPE SS 2, TYP.
11
14
3
EL = +8"
6
13 13
6
4
19'-0"
EL = +8"
EDGE OF PLAT.
16'-9"
EL = +0"
RAMP DOWN
D
HANDRAIL, SEE DWG.
C3014 FOR DETAILS
2%
5.98%
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-204.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-204.dwg
P3204
STATION
SUGAR HOUSE STATION
PLATFORM ELEVATION & SECTION
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
AS NOTED
01-16-26
6'-11 1/4"6'-11 1/4"
4 3/4"4'-6 3/4"4 3/4"
13'-10 1/2"
4'-6 3/4"
CL
E
A
R
A
N
C
E
8
'
-
8
"
WB
T
R
A
C
K
℄
EB
T
R
A
C
K
℄
NOTES:
A. ALL HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL DISTANCES
ARE IN FEET AND INCHES EXCEPT
STATIONING. PLATFORM STATIONING IS
MEASURED IN DECIMAL UNITS FROM THE
PLATFORM/TRACK STATION POINT (0+00).
B. NOMINAL PLATFORM WIDTHS GIVEN,
VERIFY PLATFORM/TRACK CLEARANCES.
C. CONCRETE FINISH IS TO BE ROUGH BROOM.
D. CANOPY TO BE SET LEVEL ON PLATFORM
WITH MINIMUM CEILING HEIGHT AS SHOWN.
PL
A
T
F
O
R
M
℄
SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"
HIGHLAND DRIVE PLATFORM ELEVATION AND SECTION A
-
9'-8"
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-205.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-205.dwg
P3205
STATION
20 FOOT DOUBLE CANOPY
ELEVATIONS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
16'-0"
GALVANIZED STEEL COLUMN
COR-TEN (RUSTED)
METAL ROOF PANELS
CONCRETE BASE/PIER
SEE NOTE 6
BENCH SEAT
NTS
20' DBL CANOPY FRONT ELEVATION A
-
TICKET VENDING MACHINE
(TVM), REFER TO PLATFORM
PLANS FOR LOCATION
TEMPERED GLASS PANELS WITH
TAMPER-PROOF STAINLESS STEEL
ANCHORING AT TOP AND BOTTOM
GALVANIZED STEEL BEAM
C8x13.75
TEMPERED GLASS PANELS WITH
TAMPER-PROOF STAINLESS STEEL
ANCHORING AT TOP AND BOTTOM, TYP.
CONCRETE BASE/PIER
SEE NOTE 6
GALVANIZED STEEL COLUMN
GALVANIZED STEEL BEAM
COR-TEN (RUSTED)
METAL ROOF PANELS
LIGHT (2) 4 AXIS LIGHTING WET BEAM
4 LED SURFACE MOUNT
W/MOUNTING BRACKET, FROSTED
LENS, BLACK FINISH
4'-0"8'-0"4'-0"SIGN TYPE 2B
13'-2 3/4" TOP OF COLUMN
9'-0 1/2" BEAM BEARING
7'-2 1/2" CTR. OF RAIL
3'-5 3/4" CTR. OF RAIL
1'-10 3/4" CTR. OF RAIL
0'-8 1/2" TOP OF COLUMN BASE
C8x13.75
TICKET VENDING MACHINE
(TVM), REFER TO PLATFORM
PLANS FOR LOCATION
BENCH SEAT
LIGHT (2) 4 AXIS LIGHTING WET BEAM
4 LED SURFACE MOUNT
W/MOUNTING BRACKET, FROSTED
LENS, BLACK FINISH
COR-TEN STEEL "L" BENCH
SUPPORT AT BOTH ENDS OF BENCH
C8x13.75
1 2
2 1
GENERAL CANOPY NOTES:
1. EACH CANOPY SHALL HAVE ONE DATA CONDUIT AND ONE POWER
CONDUIT. CONDUITS SHALL BE ONE AND ONE HALF INCH GALVANIZED.
2. DATA CONDUIT SHALL BE PLACED ON PRIMARY VERTICAL POST, ON
THE OUTSIDE FLANGE. PLACE CONDUIT ON SIDE OF CANOPY TO
ENSURE SHORTEST DISTANCE BETWEEN CONDUIT AND THE PCC.
3. POWER CONDUIT SHALL BE PLACED ON PRIMARY VERTICAL BEAM, ON
THE OUTSIDE FLANGE. PLACE CONDUIT ON THE POST THAT DOES
NOT HOUSE THE DATA CONDUIT.
4. EACH CANOPY SHALL HAVE ONE DOWNSPOUT PLACED ON THE
PRIMARY VERTICAL POST OPPOSITE OF THE CONDUIT, ON THE
OUTSIDE FLANGE. DOWNSPOUT SHALL BE TWO AND ONE HALF INCH
GALVANIZED.
5. ELEVATIONS REFER TO DISTANCE ABOVE TOP OF RAIL.
6. SEE DRAWING P3208 FOR CANOPY FOUNDATION DETAILS.
C
P3214
1 12" SCH. 40 GALVANIZED
STEEL CONDUIT
2 12" SCH. 40 GALVANIZED
STEEL DOWNSPOUT
C6x13 GALVANIZED
LEANING RAIL
1 12" SCH. 40 GALVANIZED
STEEL CONDUIT
2 12" SCH. 40 GALVANIZED
STEEL DOWNSPOUT
COR-TEN STEEL "L" BENCH
SUPPORT AT BOTH ENDS OF BENCHC6x13 GALVANIZED LEANING RAIL
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-206.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
0
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-206.dwg
P3206
STATION
20 FOOT DOUBLE CANOPY
SECTION
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
ROOF BEAM
SIGN TYPE 2B - STREETCAR
STATION IDENTIFICATION SIGN
SEE NOTE 6
2 12" SCH. 40 GALVANIZED PIPE DOWNSPOUT
WITHIN COLUMN WIDE-FLANGE
GALVANIZED STEEL COLUMN
TEMPERED GLASS PANELS
INSIDE COLUMN FLANGE
LIGHT(2) 4 AXIS LIGHTING WET BEAM
4 LED SURFACE MOUNT
W/MOUNTING BRACKET, FROSTED
LENS, BLACK FINISH, TYP.
BENCH
REAL TIME PASSENGER
INFORMATION SIGN
COR-TEN (RUSTED) 3 16" METAL ROOF
PANELS, SLOPE TO GUTTER
WESTBOUND
TRAIN APPROACHING
6'-11 1/4"6'-11 1/4"
℄
PLATFORM
CANOPY PIER, SEE P3208
80
"
M
I
N
.
C
L
E
A
R
84
"
R
E
C
O
M
M
E
N
D
E
D
W6X20, GALVANIZED
GENERAL CANOPY NOTES:
1. EACH CANOPY SHALL HAVE ONE DATA CONDUIT AND ONE POWER
CONDUIT. CONDUITS SHALL BE ONE AND ONE HALF INCH GALVANIZED.
2. DATA CONDUIT SHALL BE PLACED ON PRIMARY VERTICAL POST, ON
THE OUTSIDE FLANGE. PLACE CONDUIT ON SIDE OF CANOPY TO
ENSURE SHORTEST DISTANCE BETWEEN CONDUIT AND THE PCC.
3. POWER CONDUIT SHALL BE PLACED ON PRIMARY VERTICAL BEAM, ON
THE OUTSIDE FLANGE. PLACE CONDUIT ON THE POST THAT DOES
NOT HOUSE THE DATA CONDUIT.
4. EACH CANOPY SHALL HAVE ONE DOWNSPOUT PLACED ON THE
PRIMARY VERTICAL POST OPPOSITE OF THE CONDUIT, ON THE
OUTSIDE FLANGE. DOWNSPOUT SHALL BE TWO AND ONE HALF INCH
GALVANIZED.
5. ELEVATIONS REFER TO DISTANCE ABOVE TOP OF RAIL.
6. SEE DRAWING P3219 FOR SIGN DETAILS.ROOF GUTTER
A B C D E
A
P3209
0'-8" FRONT EDGE
OF PLATFORM, TYP.
0'-8 1/2" CTR.
OF PLATFORM
9'-0 1/2" BEAM BEARING
NTS
20' DBL SIDE CANOPY SECTION AT BENCH A
-
TICKET VENDING MACHINE
C
P3209
PLATFORM SLAB AND
REINFORCING PER P4201
WESTBOUND
TRAIN APPROACHING
SL-C-P-3-207.dwg
P3207
STATION
20 FOOT STANDARD CANOPY
FLOOR PLAN
T. COVEYOU
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
1" = 2'-0"
01-16-26
WHEEL CHAIR /ADA
ACCESS CLEAR
SPACE
TVM NOTES:
1. TICKET VENDING MACHINE (TVM) SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH REAR OF
MACHINE SIX INCHES FROM FACE OF ADJACENT OBSTRUCTION TO
ALLOW FOR MAINTENANCE ACCESS.
A
P3205
A
P3206
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-207.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
0
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
6'-6"
3'
-
0
1
/
8
"
2'
-
0
"
1'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
20'-0"
1'
-
2
3
/
8
"
(T
Y
P
)
16'-0"
3'
-
0
"
1'-5"
1'
-
1
0
1
/
4
"
2'
-
8
1
/
4
"
2'
-
8
1
/
4
"
1'
-
1
0
1
/
4
"
CJ
(TYP)
4'-0"
(TYP)
5'
-
6
"
5'
-
6
"
6'-6"
WHEEL CHAIR /ADA
ACCESS CLEAR
SPACE
1 12" SCH. 40
GALVANIZED STEEL
CONDUIT, TYP.
CONCRETE PLATFORM
TICKET VENDING MACHINE
(TVM) LOCATION
TEMPERED GLASS
WALL PANELSC8x13.75 GALVANIZED
STEEL LEANING RAILS
TACTILE SURFACE, TYP.
EDGE OF PLATFORM
BENCH SEAT,
TYP.P.I.S. SIGN, TYP.
CONCRETE PLATFORM CONCRETE CURB
WALL BELOW, TYP.3'
-
0
1
/
8
"
2'
-
0
"
4
3
/
4
"
4
3
/
4
"
1"
(TYP)
CANOPY PIER,
TYP.
20' CANOPY PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 2'-0"
CANOPY ABOVE
A
B
C
D
E
21
EJ
CJ
(TYP)
EJ
CJ
(TYP)
CJ
(TYP)
EJ
EJ
EJ
NOTES:
1. LOCATE EXPANSION JOINT AT APPROXIMATE CENTER OF CANOPY
COLUMNS.
2. CONTROL JOINTS EQUALLY SPACED BETWEEN PLATFORM ELEMENTS
AT APPROXIMATELY 4'-0" O.C.
3. CUT TACTILE STRIP TO FIT SPACING AS DICTATED BY LOCATIONS OF
CANOPY COLUMNS, TYP.
2 12" SCH. 40
GALVANIZED STEEL
DOWNSPOUT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-208.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
0
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-208.dwg
P3208
STATION
DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATION
CANOPY DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
#3 SPIRAL
ORIENT VERTICAL REBAR,
AS SHOWN TO CLEAR
ANCHOR BOLTSANCHOR BOLTS, TYP.
SEE DETAIL THIS DWG.
2'-6"
℄
3" MIN CLEAR
CONCRETE COVER
(8) #8 VERTICAL BARS EQUALLY SPACED
SECTION A
-
SEE NOTE 7, TYP.
1'-0 3/4"2"
1'
-
0
3
/
4
"
2"
STEEL PLATE
3 4"x4"x1'-3 4",
TYP.
TRACK WELD
2"
ANCHOR BOLT
BEARING PLATE DETAIL
1'-6
1
/
2
"
1'-0
3
/
4
"
1'-6
1
/
2
"
1'-0
3
/
4
"
2 7/
8
"
2 7/
8
"
2 7/
8
"
2 7/
8
"
SEE PLATFORM DWGS.
FOR NUMBER OF HOLES
AND HOLE DIAMETER
2 116" DIA.
HOLE, TYP.
18" BOLT CIRCLE DIA.
4" RADIUS
EQ.EQ.
1'-4 3/4"
1'
-
4
3
/
4
"
NO
M
I
N
A
L
EQ
.
EQ
.
1'
-
6
"
CI
R
C
L
E
D
I
A
.
1'-3
"
NOTES:
1. CONCRETE SHALL DEVELOP A MINIMUM 28-DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
OF 4000 PSI.
2. ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL BE ASTM F1554 GRADE 55. HEAVY HEX NUTS
SHALL BE ASTM A563. FLAT WASHERS SHALL BE ASTM F436. BOLTS, NUTS,
AND WASHERS SHALL BE HOT DIP GALVANIZED PER ASTM A153.
3. REINFORCING BARS SHALL BE ASTM A615 GRADE 60, UNLESS OTHERWISE
NOTED.
4. ALL REINFORCEMENT SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM CLEAR CONCRETE COVER
OF 3 INCHES.
5. USE STEEL ANCHOR BOLT SETTING TEMPLATE TO ASSURE CORRECT
INSTALLATION OF ANCHOR BOLTS AT TOP OF FOUNDATION.
6. ALL EXPOSED CONCRETE SURFACES SHALL HAVE A 1" CHAMFER.
7. BEARING PLATES FOR ALL FOUNDATIONS SHALL HAVE A 1.5" CHAMFER AT
FOUR (4) CORNERS.
8. FOUNDATION INSTALLER TO DETERMINE LENGTH OF FORM REQUIRED
BASED ON ACTUAL ELEVATION OF GRADE AT TIME OF CONCRETE
PLACEMENT. FORMED SURFACE MUST EXTEND 6" MINIMUM BELOW FINAL
GRADE.
9. CONNECT 2/0 INSULATED GROUND WIRE FROM GROUNDING PLATE TO
FOUNDATION VERTICAL REBAR TO EXTERNAL 5/8" x 10'-0" LONG COPPER
CLAD STEEL GROUND ROD. EXOTHERMIC WELD MUST BE USED TO
CONNECT GROUND WIRE TO BOTTOM SURFACE OF GROUNDING PLATE,
FOUNDATION REBAR AND EXTERNAL GROUND ROD. ADD ADDITIONAL
GROUND RODS AS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE SPECIFIED RESISTANCE TO
EARTH (25 OHMS OR LESS). TESTING SHALL BE WITNESSED BY ENGINEER
OR HIS DESIGNEE.
℄ FOUNDATION
℄ FOUNDATION
NOTE:
ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL
BE SET PER ANCHOR
BOLT ORIENTATION DETAIL
POST BASEPLATE
ANCHOR BOLT
SETTING TEMPLATE
5 16 45
°
⅊ 2"
ELEVATION
DRILLED PIER FOUNDATION
TOP OF PLATFORM
SEE ANCHOR BOLT
DETAIL THIS DRAWING
SEE ANCHOR BOLT
BEARING PLATE DETAIL
THIS DRAWING
PROTECT THREADS PRIOR
TO SETTING POST WITH
PLASTIC TUBE END CAPS
WT10X45
2 0 INSULATE
COPPER GROUND
WIRE
POST
BASEPLATE
8'
-
0
"
E
M
B
E
D
M
E
N
T
I
N
T
O
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
O
U
N
D
4"
3"
EXISTING
GROUND
#3
@
4
"
P
I
T
C
H
S
P
I
R
A
L
3"
PL
A
C
E
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
I
N
FO
R
M
S
(
S
E
E
N
O
T
E
8
)
(8) #8 VERTICAL BARS
PROVIDE GROUT
WATERSHED WITH
1" HEIGHT AT CENTER
℄ FOUNDATION
(S
E
E
N
O
T
E
9
)
A
-
1 3/4"
4'
-
4
"
3'
-
5
"
11
"
10
"
℄ BOLT
DOUBLE NUTS
WASHER
LE
N
G
T
H
(M
I
N
.
)
1'
-
6
"
GA
L
V
A
N
I
Z
E
D
LEVELING NUT
BEARING PLATE
ANCHOR BOLT DETAIL
(TYPICAL)
FOUNDATION/PLATFORM
FINISH LEVEL
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-209.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
0
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-209.dwg
P3209
STATION
20 FOOT DOUBLE CANOPY
DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
AS NOTED
01-16-26
6"
5"
1'-0"2"6"6"
4"
3/4"
5/
8
"
PREFINISHED METAL GUTTER ADHERED TO
UNDERSIDE OF METAL ROOF PANEL,
SLOPE TO DOWNSPOUT
OVERLAPPING METAL FLASHING AND
COUNTERFLASHING - SEAL WITH MASTIC
CONT.
PREFINISHED METAL COUNTER FLASHING
ADHERED TO STRUCTURAL COLUMN
COR-TEN (RUSTED) 3 16"
METAL PLATE ROOF
PREFINISHED METAL FLASHING ADHERED
TO UPPER FACE OF METAL PANEL ROOF
GALVANIZED W6x20 BEAM GALVANIZED STRUCTURAL
COLUMN
GRID
GASKET, TYP.
METAL ROOF PANEL
WELDED STEEL "TEE" BEAM
LIGHT FIXTURE
B
P3214
ROOF FLASHING DETAIL
SCALE: 4"=1'-0"
B
-
CANOPY ROOF SECTION
SCALE: 2"=1'-0"
A
P3206
PANEL ATTACHMENT DETAIL
SCALE: 8"=1'-0"
D
-
B
-
1'-0"
3"3"6"
3 1/2"
(TYP)
1/8"
(TYP)
1'-2 3/8"
1
1
/
2
"
1'
-
5
"
SEAT DIVIDER = VERTICAL LEG OF
INVERTED TEE LOCATED 2'-4" FROM THE
ENDS OF THE CONCRETE CURB (X2)
FAN HEAD WITH STAINLESS BOLT
W/ STAINLESS WASHER TORX HEAD
4 @ 2X4 NOMINAL HDPE
CEDAR BENCH SLATS
INVERTED "TEE" BEAM CAST
INTO CONCRETE CURB TO
SUPPORT BENCH SLATS
SEE SHEET P3214
BENCH SECTION
SCALE: 2"=1'-0"
C
P3206
D
-
1/4"
C6x13 GALVANIZED
LEANING RAIL, TYP.
TEMPERED GLASS
PANELS
1 3 4"x1 3 4"x1 4" GALVANIZED
STEEL ANGLE
3"x2"x1 4" GALVANIZED
STEEL ANGLE
GALVANIZED STEEL THROUGH
BOLT
0'-8 1/2" TOP OF CONC.
ABOVE TOP OF RAIL
DOWELL ANCHORS WELDED
TO UNDERSIDE OF INVERTED
TEE" - EPOXY INTO CONCRETE
CONCRETE PLATFORM
WELD, TYP.
B C
C8x13.75, TYP.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-210.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
1
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-210.dwg
P3210
STATION
STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
CANOPY DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
6"
L4x4x3 8
⅊3 16"
7 8" DIA. BOLT, NUT, AND
WASHER WITH 15 16" DIA.
HOLE, TYP.
WT6x20
DETAIL A
5"1 1/2"1 1/2"
2
3
/
8
"
2
3
/
8
"
2
3
/
8
"
1
7
/
1
6
"
⅊3 16"
C6x13
7 8" DIA. BOLT, NUT, AND
WASHER WITH 15 16" DIA.
HOLE, TYP.
W10x45
DETAIL B
1
1
/
2
"
2
1
/
2
"
2
1
/
2
"
1
1
/
2
"
1 1/2"1 1/2"
3"
W10x45
7 8" DIA. BOLT, NUT, AND
WASHER WITH 15 16" DIA.
HOLE, TYP.
C8x13.75
2
5
/
8
"
1
1
1
/
1
6
"
1
1
1
/
1
6
"
3"
1 1/2"
1 1/2"
W10x45
C6x13
7 8" DIA. BOLT, NUT, AND
WASHER WITH 15 16" DIA.
HOLE, TYP.
DETAIL C
DETAIL D
W10x45
1/2x6 EYE BOLT,
TYP.
12" DIA. CABLE,
TYP.
⅊3 16"
(TYP)
1/2x6 EYE BOLT,
TYP.
C10x30
L4x4x3 8(TYP)
3"3"
2"
W6x20
(TYP)
DETAIL E
1'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
C10x30
1
7
/
1
6
"
C.J.P.
14"
(TYP)
2-12 18
(TYP)
7 8" DIA. BOLT, NUT, AND
WASHER WITH 15 16" DIA. HOLE
CENTERED IN LEG OF Lx4x4x3 8,
TYP.
4"
LIGHT FIXTURE, TYP.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-211.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
1
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-211.dwg
P3211
STATION
20 FOOT DOUBLE CANOPY
REFLECTED CEILING & ROOF PLANS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
1" = 2'-0"
01-16-26
UNDERSIDE OF METAL
ROOF PANELS
3'-0"2'-0"4'-0"4'-0"4'-0"3'-0"
16'-0"
SL
O
P
E
A
S
IN
D
I
C
A
T
E
D
SL
O
P
E
A
S
IN
D
I
C
A
T
E
D
SLOPE 1/8" PER FOOT
ROOF: COR-TEN (RUSTED)
ROOF PANELS ANCHORED
TO STEEL HSS BEAMS WITH
PLATES AND GASKETS
1 2
D
C
B
1 2
D
C
B
LIGHT FIXTURE, TYP.
20' CANOPY REFLECTED CEILING PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 2'-0"
B
-
20' CANOPY ROOF PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 2'-0"
A
-
2 12" SCH. 40
GALVANIZED STEEL
DOWNSPOUT
P.I.S. SIGN, TYP.
1 12" SCH. 40
GALVANIZED STEEL
CONDUIT, TYP.
1 12" SCH. 40
GALVANIZED STEEL
CONDUIT, TYP.
2 12" SCH. 40
GALVANIZED STEEL
DOWNSPOUT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-212.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
1
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-212.dwg
P3212
STATION
MISCELLANEOUS PLATFORM DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
AS NOTED
01-16-26
BENCH SEAT,
SEE P3209
CONC BENCH PER P3209,
REINF W/(4) #4 x CONT
AT EA CORNER W/ #4 x
TIES @ 8" OC
1'
-
0
"
PLATFORM
SLAB & REINF
PER P4201
BENCH CONCRETE CURB
SCALE: 1" = 1'
B
-
(8) #5 VERT BARS
4"
MI
N
4'
-
6
"
MI
N
2'-0"Ø
3"
2'-6"Ø
3"
6'
-
0
"
4"
MI
N
SIGN POLE &
ANCHORAGE BY MFR.
STAINLESS STEEL
ANCHORS TO BE USED.
ANCHORS TO EXTEND A
MINIMUM OF 12" INTO
CONCRETE FOOTING
BELOW. DO NOT COUNT
4" EXTENSION IN
MINIMUM LENGTH.
PROVIDE NON-SHRINK
GROUT ONLY IF
REQUIRED BY MFR
2"1'-0"X1'-0" EXTENSION TO
BE POURED MONOLITHIC
WITH FOOTING BELOW.
REINF W/ (4) #4 x
((1) EA CORNER)
AND #3 x TIE STD HOOK1'
-
6
"
SLIGHT DRAINAGE SLOPE
REQD. MAINTAIN REBAR
CLEAR COVER.
#3 TIES @ 8" OC,
PROVIDE (3) TIES
IN TOP 6"
ELECTRICAL CONDUIT,
COORDINATE W/
ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS
AA
A A
VIEW A-A
VIEW A-A
TYPE 4 SIGN FOUNDATION
SCALE: 1" = 1'
A1
-
S14A SIGN FOUNDATION
SCALE: 1" = 1'
A2
-
NOTE: FOOTING BASED ON A
NON-CONSTRAINED CONDITION.
150 PSF/FT LATERAL BEARING
UTILIZED.
NOTE: FOOTING BASED ON A
NON-CONSTRAINED CONDITION.
150 PSF/FT LATERAL BEARING
UTILIZED.
2"
(12) #5 VERT BARS
1'-6"X1'-6" EXTENSION TO
BE POURED MONOLITHIC
WITH FOOTING BELOW.
REINF W/ (4) #4 x
((1) EA CORNER)
AND #3 x TIE STD HOOK1'
-
6
"
PROVIDE NON-SHRINK
GROUT ONLY IF
REQUIRED BY MFR
SLIGHT DRAINAGE SLOPE
REQD. MAINTAIN REBAR
CLEAR COVER.
#3 TIES @ 8" OC,
PROVIDE (3) TIES
IN TOP 6"
ELECTRICAL CONDUIT,
COORDINATE W/
ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS
EXTERIOR SLAB
ON GRADE, TYP,
SEE PLAN
SIGN POLE &
ANCHORAGE BY MFR.
STAINLESS STEEL
ANCHORS TO BE USED.
ANCHORS TO EXTEND A
MINIMUM OF 12" INTO
CONCRETE FOOTING
BELOW. DO NOT COUNT
4" EXTENSION IN
MINIMUM LENGTH.
NTS
TYPICAL GAS METER LAYOUT FOR STATION PLATFORM SNOW MELT 1
-
FUEL LINE LOCATION (TYP)
REGULATOR
TYPICAL REGULATOR
RELIEF VENT
GAS METER: PROVIDED BY OTHERS
CAPACITY: 1,600 MBH (1,797 CFH)
DESIGN LENGTH: 10 FT
DESIGN PRESSURE: 4 TO 14 PSI
OUTLET DIAMETER: 1"
4 3/4"
1'-0"
2" CLR
(TYP)
8"
M
I
N
6"
M
I
N
16"
GAS METER CLEARANCE TO FINISH GRADE
(250 METER SHOWN)
32
"
T
O
3
6
"
FINISHED GRADE
125%
100%
75%
50%
25%
PUMP CURVE
SYST
E
M
C
U
R
V
E
25% 50% 75% 100% 125%
HWR
HW
S
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-213.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
1
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-213.dwg
P3213
STATION
MECHANICAL DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
PROVIDE A 10K TYPE 2 TEMPERATURE SENSOR
IN AN EMPTY CONDUIT IN THE CENTER OF
EACH HEAT RUN SO OWNER CAN MONITOR
SLAB TEMPERATURE ON REMOTE GRAPHICS
PROVIDE SNOWMELT MANIFOLD BOX. SEE
DETAILS FOR MORE INFORMATION
SNOWMELT MANIFOLD AND PIPING.
CONTRACTOR WILL PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS
FOR TUBING LAYOUT. PIPING LAYOUT
DESIGNED AS DEFERRED SUBMITTAL AND
REVIEWED BY ENGINEER.
GAS METER (PROVIDED BY
OTHERS, GC TO STAKE)
SEE DWG. P3212, DETAIL 1
GAS FUEL LINE TO
PROTRUDE 6"CONTROL VALVE
BALANCING VAVLE
TEST TEE (TYP)
UNION (TYP)
ISOLATION VALVE (TYP)
HWS FROM MAIN
HWR TO MAIN
TO CONTROLLER PLANT.
ALL CONTROL WIRING
SHALL BE RUN IN CONDUIT
PCC
CABINET
W/ GAS
BOILER
NTS
SNOWMELT PIPING DIAGRAM 1
-
VENT
DRIP LEG,
TYP.
VENT REGULATOR TO OUTSIDE WHERE
REQUIRED. INSTALL VENT PER MANUFACTURERS
RECOMMENDATIONS AND PER PLUMBING CODE.
GAS REGULATOR 4 TO 14 PSI TO EQUIPMENT
PRESSURE. VERIFY WITH MANUFACTURERS
RECOMMENDATIONS.
EMERGENCY
SEISMIC
SHUT-OFF VALVE
GAS SHUT-OFF
COCK
NATURAL GAS
METER
NOTE: DEVELOPED LENGTH = 10 FT.
TOTAL DEMAND = TOTAL CFH X 1.2
4 TO 14 LB.
3/4" G
R
BOILER
B1
530,000
BTU/H
NTS
GAS FLOW DIAGRAM 2
-
NTS
PUMP CURVE DETAIL 3
-
SEE P4201 AND P4202 FOR
CONCRETE SLAB THICKNESS
WIRE TIE RADIANT TUBING TO
WIRE MESH REBAR
RADIANT TUBING
(APPROXIMATELY
3.0" BELOW TOP OF
SLAB)
EPOXY COATED
WIRE MESH OR
REBAR BY GENERAL
CONTRACTOR
BASE MATERIAL AND INSULATION
BY OTHER. REFLECTIVE FACED
INSULATION TO BE PROVIDED BY
PLUMBING CONTRACTOR.
NTS
PLATFORM SLAB ON GRADE
RADIANT TUBING INSTALLATION DETAIL 4
-
DESIGN POINTHEAD FT.
10% MAX
FLOW 25%FLOW 25%
15% HEAD LOSS
MAX.
FLOW GPM
SEE DWG. E3207
FOR DETAILS
PROPOSED GAS LINE,
SEE UTILITY PLANS
213+00 214+00 215+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
STOP
UT
A
B
E
A
C
O
N
S
I
G
N
T
Y
P
E
1
4
A
OF
F
S
E
T
:
1
5
'
C
L
W
B
T
R
A
C
K
2
1
2
+
8
7
.
0
0
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-214.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
1
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-214.dwg
P3214
STATION
STANDARD PLATFORM AND SNOWMELT
DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
AS NOTED
01-16-26
SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"
TACTILE WARNING STRIP AT 8" PLATFORM A
-
2'-0"
6"
9"
(TYP)
4 3/4"4'-6 3/4"
8"
CONCRETE
PLATFORM
2'x4' TACTILE WARNING STRIP
WITH SIX INCH DOMELESS
CUTOUT AREA
TOUCHDOWN POINT
OF RAMP
PLATFORM FOUNDATION
VEHICLE RAMP
STREETCAR VEHICLE (APPROX.)
℄ O
F
T
R
A
C
K
VEHICLE FLOOR
APPROX 14" ABOVE
TOR
EDGE OF
PLATFORM
NTS
ROOF GUTTER DETAIL B
-
CONT. HEAT TRACE CABLE IN
GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUT
W6x20 BEAM, GALVANIZED
2-1/2" SCHD. 40 GALVANIZED
STEEL PIPE DOWNSPOUT, WELDED
TO BEAM FLANGES
3/16" COR-TEN (RUSTED)
PLATE, TYP.
PRE-FINISHED METAL GUTTER ADHERED
TO UNDERSIDE OF METAL ROOF PANEL,
SLOPE TO DOWNSPOUT
4"
HDPE CEDAR
BENCH SLAT
CONCRETE CURB
FAN HEAD STAINLESS
BOLT W/ STAINLESS
WASHER TORX HEAD
INVERTED COR-TEN (RUSTED)
STEEL "TEE" BEAM, ROUND
OFF EXPOSED EDGE, FREE OF
SHARP EDGES, UNPAINTED
BENCH SECTION DETAIL
SCALE: 2" = 1'-0"
C
-
A
-
A
P3216
60'-0"
ZONE 2
19'-0"
ZONE 2
279'-2"
ZONE 1
5'
-
0
"
40
'
-
6
3
/
4
"
ZO
N
E
3
22
'
-
3
3
/
8
"
ZO
N
E
3
5'-0"
43'-6 1/4"
ZONE 3
5'
-
0
"
5'-0"
SCALE: 1" = 10'
SNOWMELT ZONING DETAIL D
-
EB TRACK ℄
WB TRACK ℄
5'
-
6
"
(T
Y
P
)
13
'
-
1
0
1
/
2
"
4'-0"
(TYP)
SYMBOL LEGEND
SNOW MELT AREA SEE P1201 FOR
PLATFORM DETAILS
10'-0"
5'
-
7
1
/
2
"
144'-11 3/4"PROPOSED SIDEWALK, TYP.
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
PROPOSED
RETAINING WALL,
TYP.
SIGNAL
HOUSE
PCC CABINET
DOWELL ANCHORS WELDED
TO UNDERSIDE OF INVERTED
"TEE" - EPOXY INTO CONCRETE
10
'
-
6
"
10'-0"
ZONE 2
13
'
-
3
"
2'
-
1
1
"
MAINTENANCE
WALKWAY
SNOWMELT MANIFOLD
BOX, SEE P3215 DETAIL 4
FOR DETAILS, TYP.
15'-4 1/2"
1
GF
MU
AE1
3/4"
HWS
1 3/4"
SNOW
M
E
L
T
49 5/8"
32 1/8"
21"
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-215.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
1
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-215.dwg
P3215
STATION
SNOWMELT DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
INSULATION LINE
SEE SPECIFICATION FOR
THICKNESS
HIGH CAPACITY
AUTOMATIC AIR
VENT
ATTACH TO EXISTING OVERHEAD
STRUCTURE. SEE DEFERRED
SUBMITTALS FOR SEISMIC.
STANDARD CLEVIS ASSEMBLY
1-1/4" Ø HWS
SCREWED CONNECTIONS, BOTH
ENDS, TYP.
INSULATION WITHSHIELD, TYP.
UNION
1/2" BLOWDOWN LINE
BALL VALVE WITH HOSE END,
CHAIN, AND CAP
NTS
EXPANSION TANK DETAIL 1
-
NTS
HOT WATER SYSTEM GLYCOL CHEMICAL FEED SYSTEM 2
-
NTS
AIR ELIMINATOR DETAIL 3
-
2" Ø HWS
NOTES:
1. DIMENSIONS SHOW MAXIMUM
SIZE. BOX MAY BE REDUCED
IF ALL COMPONENTS CAN FIT
AND BE EASILY MAINTAINED.
SEE SHEET E0208 FOR
OTHER JUNCTION BOX SIZES.
2. MANIFOLD LOCATIONS
SHOWN ON DWG. P3214.
NTS
SNOWMELT MANIFOLD BOX 4
-
COVER - POLYMER
CONCRETE JUNCTION
BOX LID
POLYMER CONCRETE
JUNTION BOX
TOP OF BOX SHALL
BE FLUSH WITH
PLATFORM
SKID RESISTANT
SURFACE
3/8-16 UNC
STAINLESS
STEEL HEX BOLT
W/ WASHER (2)
PRESSURE SWICH
2" Ø SNOWMELT CLOSED
CIRCULATING SYSTEM-HEATING
WATER
CHECK VALVE
SOLENOID
VALVE
3/4" GLYCOL
DISCHARGE PIPING
LOW LEVEL
SWITCH
CONTROL PANEL
MOUNTED ON TANK
OR SUPPORT STAND
GLYCOL PUMP
1/2" X 2 1/2" PULL SLOT
CONNECT TO SIDE OF HOT WATER SUPPLY MAIN.
AVOID TOP OR BOTTOM CONNECTION TO PREVENT
AIR OR DEBRIS FROM ENTERING PIPE TO TANK
DETAIL NOTES:
SHUT OFF BALL VALVE. REQUIRED TO PROPERLY
PRECHARGE TANK.
DRAIN VALVE
AUTOMATIC AIR VENT. BELL & GOSSETT
MODEL #7 OR #87
ANTI THERMO-SYPHON LOOP. 12" MIN. DROP.
TIE INTO EXISTING MAKE-UP WATER LINE.
PRESSURE GAUGE -O- 60 PSIG WITH GAUGE COCK.
6
4
3
3
7
5
1
3/4"
PROVIDE SEISMIC
BRACING STRAPS. HANG
FROM STRUCTURE.
INSULATED TANK AND
PROVIDE METAL JACKET
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
3/4"
3/4"
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-216.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
1
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-216.dwg
P3216
FREEZELESS POST HYDRANT
DETAIL
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
POLYMER CONCRETE
18" x 18" x 18" BOX WITH
BOLTED COVER
6" PLATFORM SLAB
1" GALVANIZED PIPE
4" LONG RUBBER DONUT CENTRALIZER TO PREVENT
POST MOVEMENT AND DEBRIS FALLING INTO CASING.
SPLIT FOR INSTALLATION AND REMOVAL. CAN USE 7 8"
THICK RUBBER SHEETHING.
STAINLESS STEEL HOSE CLAMP
AROUND DONUT
3" SCH. 40 PVC CASING
4"
6"
2"
1" IPS SIZE PE4308 HDPE
BLUE STRIPE POLYETHYLENE
SDR 9, 200 PSI
COMPRESSION 90° EL x 3 4" FPT
STAINLESS PIPE STIFFENER INSERT
1 CUBIC FOOT DRAIN ROCK
WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC
DOGHOUSE CASING
AROUND PIPE,
12" CLEAR
3 4" x 3" BRASS NIPPLE
TEFLON TAPE AND PIPE DOPE
(REMOVEABLE)
DRAIN PORT
3" - 3 4" CRUSHED ROCK
WOODFORD Y30 FREEZELESS POST HYDRANT
5'
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
3
'
B
U
R
Y
M
O
D
E
L
)
JB WELD #8265-S
ON THREADS.
CLEAN TREADS BEFORE CONNECTING
(NON-REMOVEABLE)
NTS
FREEZELESS POST HYDRANT A
-
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-217.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
1
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-217.dwg
P3217
GRAPHIC SIGN STANDARDS
STANDARD FONTS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
FONT A: GOUDY BOLD
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
1234567890
FONT C: GEOMETRIC 415 BLACK
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
1234567890
STREETCAR LOGO:
- ONE WORD USING "FONT C." GEOMETRIC 415
- ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
- FONT COLOR IS UTA BLUE (REFLEX BLUE)
- LETTERS SPACED AS SHOWN
- CONFIRM ARTWORK WITH UTA BEFORE PROCEEDING
COLOR SCHEDULE
SIGN COLORS FOR ALL STREETCAR STOPS ARE INDICATED
ON SIGN DETAILS. UTA LOGO COLORS TO MATCH AS SHOWN
IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES. CONFIRM COLOR SELECTION WITH
UTA BEFORE PROCEEDING.
- UTA BLUE: PMS REFLEX BLUE
- UTA RED: PMS 186 RED
ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTES
BLUE: RED:
C:100 C:0
M:73 M:100
Y:0 Y:81
K:2 K:4NOTES
1. FONTS DISPLAYED ON THIS PAGE ARE ONLY ALLOWABLE FONTS FOR USE ON UTA STREET CAR SYSTEM SIGNAGE.
STANDARD FONT AND LOGO
SCALE: NTS
A
-
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-218.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
1
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-218.dwg
P3218
GRAPHIC SIGN STANDARDS
TYPE 4 - RAIL PLATFORM
SIGN DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
AS NOTED
01-16-26
8"
5"
3"
1 1/2"1 1/2"
3'-1 1/2"
2'-7 3/8"
6"
6"
3"x3" PAINTED WHITE,
ALUM. SQUARE TUBE
12" DIAMETER HOLES
1" SQUARE TUBE SUPPORT
3"x3" PAINTED WHITE,
ALUM. SQUARE TUBE
GUSSET (TYP.)
12" THICK
BASE PLATE
(8) 3 8"X 7" LONG STAINLESS STEEL ANCHOR RODS
WITH 4 12" EMBEDMENT INTO CONCRETE. PROVIDE
AND INSTALL STAINLESS STEEL WASHER AND
DOUBLE STAINLESS STEEL NUTS AT EACH
ANCHOR. PROVIDE 2 12" MINIMUM ANCHOR ROD
EXTENSION ABOVE TOP OF CONCRETE.
3"x3" ALUMINUM
SQUARE TUBE (TYP.)
BARREL LOCK
(TYP.)
TEMPERED GLASS
(TYP.)
CONTINUOUS
HINGE (TYP.)
116" THICK
ALUM. PANEL
116" THICK EXTRUDED
ALUM.DISPLAY CASE
FRAME WITH 1 4" THICK
TEMPERED GLASS
(2) BARREL LOCKS
LOCATED ON DISPLAY
CASE FRAME; LOCKS
TO BE KEYED ALIKE.
116" THICK STYRENE GRAPHICS
PANEL WITH GRAPHICS SCREEN
PRINTED IN 4 COLORS, BY UTA
1 1 4" TYP. FRAME WITH
3 16" TYP. BORDER
UTA TO PROVIDE
AND INSTALL SYSTEM MAP,
BICYCLE RULES, &
LAST TRAIN INFORMATION
E
-
SIGN MOUNTING PLATE DETAIL
SCALE: 4" = 1'-0"
E
-
SIGN SECTION
SCALE: 4" = 1'-0"
F
-
SCALE: 1" = 1'-0"
BASE PLATE ANCHOR DETAIL A
-
DISPLAY CASE DETAIL
SCALE: 2" = 1'-0"
B
-
DISPLAY CASE ELEVATION
SCALE: 2" = 1'-0"
C
-
8"5"3"
1
1
/
2
"
1
1
/
2
"
CONTINUOUS
HINGE
6"
3"
3"
3"x3" PAINTED WHITE,
ALUM. SQUARE TUBE
SET SCREW
SIGN FACE PANEL
TWO (2) PER KIOSK
3"x6" ALUMINUM
TUBE
2'
-
6
"
3'-7"
3"x3" PAINTED WHITE
ALUM. SQUARE TUBE
SIGN FACE
SIZE: 31-1/2" x 18"
STATION NAME
AND ADDRESS
FRONT VIEW
F
-
B
-
A
-
DISPLAY CASE W/
SYSTEM MAP.
C
-
SIDE VIEW
SCALE: 1" = 1'-0"
SINGLE CASE INFO KIOSK (TYP.)D
-
2'-10 1/2"1'-0"
3'
-
0
"
8'
-
4
"
2'
-
6
"
3'
-
4
"
1'
-
6
"
6"
3"
3"
3"
3'-1 1/2"
2'-7 1/2"
3"
1"x1" ALUM. SQUARE
TUBE SUPPORT
3"
SIGN DETAIL - PERSPECTIVE
(2) 3/16" DIA. HOLES
DRILLED IN TOP
RETURN OF PAN
1" DEEP PAN WITH INSIDE
WELDED CORNERS
(2) 3/16" DIA. HOLES DRILLED
IN BOTTOM RETURN OF PAN
NOTES:
1. UTA TO CREATE AND PROVIDE POSTER ARTWORK.
SEE UTA WAYFINDING AND SIGNAGE DOCUMENT.
℄℄
CLIENT
TO PROVIDE
& INSTALL
SYSTEM MAP &
LAST TRAIN
INFORMATION
CLIENT
TO PROVIDE
& INSTALL
BICYCLE RULES
(8) #4 REBAR @ 20" OC
(14) #4 REBAR @ 6" OC
3" MIN.
(TYP)
℄
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-219.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
3
1
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
1
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-219.dwg
P3219
GRAPHIC SIGN STANDARDS
TYPE 2B STATION IDENTIFICATION SIGN DETAILS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
AS NOTED
01-16-26
STATION IDENTIFICATION SIGN
SCALE: 2" = 1'-0"
A
-
NOTES:
1. CONFIRM STATION NAMES WITH OWNER.
2. SEE PLATFORM DRAWINGS FOR SIGN LOCATIONS.
3. REFER TO UTA WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE SIGN SCHEDULE AND DRAWING
PACKAGE, SIGN TYPE 2B FOR EXACT STREETCAR STATION IDENTIFICATION
SIGN DETAILS.
Sugar House Station
10'-10" TO BE CONFIRMED ON SIGHT
B
-
2"
2
1
/
2
"
2
1
/
2
"
2'
-
1
"
T
O
B
E
C
O
N
F
I
R
M
E
D
O
N
S
I
G
H
T
6"
EQ
.
EQ
.
To Central Pointe TRAX
TYPE 2B STATION SIGN, TYP.
STATION IDENTIFICATION SIGN DETAIL
SCALE: NTS
B
-
14"
(TYP)
6"x6"x3/8" STEEL PLATE, TYP.
C10x30 ROOF BEAM, TYP.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-3-220.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
3
-
2
2
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-3-220.dwg
P3220
GRAPHIC SIGN STANDARDS
PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND PRISM
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. APPROXIMATE DESIGN SHOWN.
2. REFER TO UTA STANDARD TEMPLATE.
3. CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL USE RESTRICTION SIGNS.
7"
2'
-
1
1
"
NTS
SIGN TYPE 6: USE RESTRICTION SIGN C
-
GENERAL NOTES:
1. APPROXIMATE DESIGN SHOWN. UTA OPERATIONS MAY PROVIDE STENCILS.
2. VERIFY ALL PAVEMENT MARKING LOCATIONS WITH UTA OPERATIONS PRIOR
TO INSTALLATION ON CONCRETE PLATFORM.
3. REFER TO SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM PLAN DRAWING P1201 FOR
INFORMATION ON SIGN LOCATIONS.
4. SEE P3217 FOR FONTS. CHECK WITH UTA TO CONFIRM.
5. REFER TO UTA WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE SIGN SCHEDULE AND DRAWING
PACKAGE FOR MORE INFORMATION.
1'-6"
1'-1"
1'
-
6
"
3/8" WIDE WHITE (#3) PAINT
SYMBOL ON BRIGHT GREEN
(#8) THERMOPLASTIC
CIRCLE BASE
NOTES:
1. PLACE BIKE SYMBOL TO THE LEFT OF THE ADA SYMBOL
(WHEN FACING TRAIN FROM PLATFORM) AS SHOWN ON
PLATFORM SIGN PLANS.
2. PLACE TWO INCHES FROM TACTILE STRIP AND ONE INCH
FROM ANY CONTROL OR EXPANSION JOINTS.
1'-6"
10 3/4"
1
1
/
8
"
1'
-
6
"
WHITE PAINT SYMBOL ON BLUE
THERMOPLASTIC SQUARE
NOTES:
1. PLACE ADA SYMBOL AT CENTER OF LRT VEHICLE DOOR #2 & #3 AS
SHOWN ON SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM PLAN P1201.
2. PLACE TWO INCHES FROM TACTILE STRIP AND ONE INCH FROM
ANY CONTROL OR EXPANSION JOINTS.
SS 1: PLATFORM ADA SYMBOL
SCALE: NTS
A1
-
SS 2: PLATFORM BICYCLE SYMBOL
SCALE: NTS
B1
-
3"
6'
-
4
"
11
'
-
6
"
SIDE ELEVATION TOP SECTION
FRAME
CENTER POST
10
"
FIBERGLASS
FACE WITH LED
BACKLIGHT
42"
SIGN TYPE 14A: UTA BEACON (TRIANGULAR PRISM)
SCALE: NTS
A2
-
NOTES:
1. APPROXIMATE DESIGN SHOWN.
2. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY DESIGN WITH
DESIGNER.
3. P3217/A: UTA LOGO INFORMATION.
4. SEE DWG P3212 FOR SIGN FOUNDATION
DETAILS
2'-8"5"5"
SEE NOTE 4
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-4-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
4
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-4-201.dwg
P4201
STATION
FOUNDATION PLAN AND SECTIONS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
AS NOTED
01-16-26
13
'
-
1
0
1
/
2
"
(T
Y
P
)
RAMP LENGTH 19'-0"PLATFORM LENGTH 60'-0"
2'
-
2
"
(T
Y
P
)
4'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
2'-1"74'-10"2'-1"
10"
(TYP)
10"
(TYP)
4"
(TYP)
8"
2'-7" LAP
(TYP)
13'-10 1/2"
9'-1"2'-0"
(TYP)
4 3/4"
(TYP)
EDGE OF PLATFORM, TYP.
EDGE OF PLATFORM, TYP.SEE P3201 FOR CONTROL
JOINT DETAIL, TYP.
CONSTRUCTION
JOINT, TYP.10" (TYP)
1 12" DEEP DEPRESSED
SLAB SURFACE FOR TACTILE
WARNING STRIP, SEE P3214, TYP.
NTS
SUGAR HOUSE STATION FOUNDATION PLAN
1 12" DEEP DEPRESSED
SLAB SURFACE FOR TACTILE
WARNING STRIP, SEE P3214, TYP.
#5 @ 12"
EACH WAY
#5 @ 12",
TYP.
#5 @ 12" VERTS.
WITH STD. HOOK
EACH FACE, TYP.
#5 AS SHOWN,
TYP.
2'-7" HOOK ON
OUTSIDE FACE
OF VERTICALS,
TYP.
#5 @ 12"
EACH FACE,
TYP.
#5 @ 12",
TYP.
5-#5 AS SHOWN,
TYP.
#5 @ 12"
(TYP)
CROSS SLOPE SEE P3206
B
-
A
-
SEE P1201 FOR
PLATFORM DETAILS
4'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
8"
(T
Y
P
)
2'-1"9'-8 1/2"2'-1"
TOP OF RAIL,
TYP.
10
"
(T
Y
P
)
8"
SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 2'-0"
B
-
SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 2'-0"
A
-
C
-
ENLARGED SLAB DETAIL
SCALE: 2" = 1'-0"
C
-
3"
5/
8
"
1/
2
"
TO TOP OF HYDRONIC
SNOW MELT
SLAB REINFORCEMENT
TO BE LOCATED
DIRECTLY BELOW
HYDRONIC SNOW MELT
HEAT SHIELD
3
3
/
8
"
1/
2
"
NOTES:
1. IF SAW CUT, CARE SHOULD
BE TAKEN TO AVOID
CUTTING HYDRONIC
SNOWMELT.
HYDRONIC
SNOW MELT
HYDRONIC
SNOW MELT,
TYP.
#5 @ 12"
EACH FACE,
TYP.
EXPANSION
JOINT
SEE DETAIL 4
ON P3201, TYP.
SLEEVED AT EXPANSION JOINT
SCALE: 1" = 0'-6"
D
-
EXPANSION JOINT
SEE SHEET P3201
SNOWMELT PIPING
PREVENT CONCRETE
FROM ENTERING
SLEEVE DURING
PLACEMENT
RADIANT SLAB
PROVIDE PVC SLEEVE
THROUGH EXPANSION
JOINT THAT IS A
MINIMUM OF 2 PIPE
SIZES LARGER THAN
HYDRONIC PIPE
A
P4202
B
P4202
SEE P4202 FOR
RAMP DETAILS
RAMP LENGTH 16'-9"
C
P4202
D
P4202
10
'
-
6
"
SEE P4202 FOR
RAMP DETAILS
SEE P3201 FOR CONTROL
JOINT DETAIL, TYP.SEE P3201 FOR EXPANSION
JOINT DETAIL, TYP.
SEE P3201 FOR EXPANSION
JOINT DETAIL, TYP.
1'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-P-4-202.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
t
a
i
.
c
o
v
e
y
o
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
6
s
t
a
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
p
-
4
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-P-4-202.dwg
P4202
STATION
RAMP FOUNDATION SECTIONS
F. NANNENGA
T. COVEYOU
A. DIGIROLAMO
F. NANNENGA
1" = 2'-0"
01-16-26
13'-10 1/2"
9'-1"2'-0"
(TYP)
4 3/4"
(TYP)
1 12" DEEP DEPRESSED
SLAB SURFACE FOR TACTILE
WARNING STRIP, SEE P3214,
TYP.
#5 @ 12"
EACH WAY
#5 @ 12",
TYP.
#5 @ 12" VERTS.
WITH STD. HOOK
EACH FACE, TYP.
#5 AS SHOWN,
TYP.
2'-7" HOOK ON
OUTSIDE FACE
OF VERTICALS,
TYP.
CROSS SLOPE SEE P3206
4'
-
0
"
VA
R
I
E
S
8"
(T
Y
P
)
2'-1"9'-8 1/2"2'-1"
TOP OF RAIL,
TYP.
10
"
(T
Y
P
)
PLATFORM RAMP - SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 2'-0"
A
-
HYDRONIC
SNOW MELT
#5 @ 12"
EACH FACE,
TYP.
EXPANSION
JOINT
SEE DETAIL 4
ON P3201, TYP.
8"
HYDRONIC
SNOW MELTRAMP UP
SLOPE: 2%
#5 @ 12", TYP.
2'-7" LAP
(TYP)1'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
2'-7" HOOK ON
OUTSIDE FACE
OF VERTICALS,
TYP.
PLATFORM RAMP - SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 2'-0"
B
-
19'-0"
8"
2'
-
2
"
(T
Y
P
)
CONSTRUCTION
JOINT, TYP.
5 - #5 AS
SHOWN, TYP.
STATION PLATFORM
SEE P4201 FOR DETAILS
4"
(TYP)
2'-1"
(TYP)
10"
(TYP)
10"
(TYP)
10
"
(T
Y
P
)
#5 @ 12",
TYP.
#5 @ 12" VERTS. WITH STD.
HOOK EACH FACE, TYP.
CONSTRUCTION
JOINT, TYP.10" (TYP)
8"
HYDRONIC
SNOW MELT
RAMP DOWN
SLOPE: 5.98%
#5 @ 12", TYP.
2'-7" LAP
(TYP)
1'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
2'-7" HOOK ON
OUTSIDE FACE
OF VERTICALS,
TYP.
PLATFORM RAMP - SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 2'-0"
D
-
16'-9"
8"
3'
-
4
"
VA
R
I
E
S
(
T
Y
P
)
VA
R
I
E
S
(T
Y
P
)
CONSTRUCTION
JOINT, TYP.
5 - #5 AS SHOWN,
TYP.
STATION PLATFORM
SEE P4201 FOR DETAILS
4"
(TYP)
2'-1"
(TYP)
12'-7"
10"
(TYP)
10"
(TYP)10
"
(T
Y
P
)
#5 @ 12",
TYP.
#5 @ 12" VERTS. WITH STD.
HOOK EACH FACE, TYP.#5 @ 12"
EACH FACE,
TYP.
10'-6"
#5 @ 12"
EACH WAY
#5 @ 12",
TYP.
#5 @ 12" VERTS.
WITH STD. HOOK
EACH FACE, TYP.
#5 AS SHOWN,
TYP.
2'-7" HOOK ON
OUTSIDE FACE
OF VERTICALS,
TYP.
4'
-
0
"
VA
R
I
E
S
8"
(T
Y
P
)
2'-1"6'-4"2'-1"
10
"
(T
Y
P
)
PLATFORM RAMP - SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 2'-0"
C
-
HYDRONIC
SNOW MELT
#5 @ 12"
EACH FACE,
TYP.
CONSTRUCTION
JOINT, TYP.10" (TYP)
SEE P3201 FOR CONTROL
JOINT DETAIL, TYP.
MATCH PLATFORM
CROSS SLOPE
LEGEND:
JUNCTION BOX - SIZE AND TYPE AS INDICATED
DIRECTIONAL BORE
POLE NO. - CIRCUIT NO. - LIGHTING CONTROL CABINET1-3-A
TRANSFORMER
EXISTING LIGHT POLE
CONDUIT CONTAINING TELEPHONE/COMMUNICATIONS CABLING
CONDUIT CONTAINING ELECTRICAL POWER WIRING
SERVICE PEDESTAL
LUBRICATOR CABINET ON OCS POLE
LUBRICATOR
OUTLET
SIGNAL SYSTEM HOUSE
LUBRICATOR PVC CONDUIT
SIGNAL CONTROLLER
LUMINAIRES MOUNTED ON STANDARD POLE
RELOCATED LIGHT POLE
JUNCTION BOX TYPE I ELECTRICAL
JUNCTION BOX TYPE I TELEPHONE/COMMUNICATIONS
POWER CONTROL CABINET FOR STATIONS
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-E-0-202.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
e
-
0
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-E-0-202.dwg
E0202
PLATFORM ELECTRICAL
LEGENDS, NOTES AND ABBREVIATIONS
A.JAIN
A. JAIN
D.DUZAN
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-E-0-208.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
e
-
0
-
2
0
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-E-0-208.dwg
E0208
SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM
JUNCTION BOX AND TRENCH DETAILS
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.DUZAN
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
1. PROVIDE SEALING COMPOUND ON ENDS OF EACH
CONDUIT RUN
2. OTHER JUNCTION BOXES ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO
APPROVAL BY OWNER.
3. USE GRANULAR BACKFILL WELL TAMPED AROUND
JUNCTION BOXES.
4. CAST CONDUIT HOLES IN JUNCTION BOX AT THE
TIME OF PRE-CASTING OR DRILL/PUNCH AT THE TIME OF
PLACEMENT WITH NO STRUCTURAL DAMAGE TO THE BOX. ALL
DRILLED HOLES SHALL BE THE SAME DIAMETER AS OUTSIDE
DIAMETER OF CONDUIT.
5. THE TOP OF THE JUNCTION BOX SHALL BE FLUSH WITH
SURROUNDING GRADE OR CONCRETE FLATWORK EXCEPT AS
DIRECTED WHEN AREA IS SUBJECT TO WHEEL LOAD. IF WHEEL
LOAD IS ANTICIPATED, THE JUNCTION BOX SHALL THEN BE
COVERED BY A 1/4'' STEEL PLATE OVERLAPPING
THE JUNCTION BOX BY A MINIMUM OF 1-1/2'' ON ALL SIDES AND A
MINIMUM OF 4'' OF ASPHALT COVER.
6. ALL CONDUIT TO CONTAIN 700 POUND FLAT BRAIDED NYLON PULL
LINE IN ADDITION TO CIRCUIT WIRES.
7. SEAL ALL CONDUIT HOLES USING A RUBBER SLEEVE GASKET AND
EXPANDING FOAM.
8. SEWER ROCK AND GEO-TEXTILE FABRIC FOR ALL JUNCTION
BOXES SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE SIGNAL INSTALLATION PRICE.
9. REFER TO APWA PLAN NO 255 FOR FURTHER TRENCHING DETAILS.
10. MAINTAIN MINIMUM ON 24'' COVER TO CONDUITS BEHIND TBC AND
MINIMUM OF 36'' COVER TO CONDUITS IN ROADWAY.
11. JUNCTION BOX INSTALLED IN CONCRETE SLABS TO HAVE 1/2''
PREFORMED EXPANSION JOINT FILLER TRIMMED FLUSH WITH
SLAB AND BOX. JOINT SEAL ALL SIDES.
12. ALL CONDUITS TO ENTER BOTTOM HALF OF JUNCTION BOX.
NOTES:
SPECIFICATIONS FOR TYPE I, II, III & D
JUNCTION BOX AND COVER.
A. MADE FROM POLYMER CONCRETE CONSISTING OF SAND AND
AGGREGATE BOUND TOGETHER WITH A POLYMER RESIN.
B. NON-SKID SURFACE 0.50 COEFFICIENT.
C. MINIMUM WALL THICKNESS 1/2''.
D. SUPPORT WHEEL LOAD OF 12,000 LBS. AND A MAXIMUM DEFLECTION
OF 1/2'' WITH 8,000 LBS. LOAD USING 10'' X 10'' LOAD.
E. LOGO AREA:
1. SIGNAL USE LOGO 'SIGNAL'.
2. LIGHTING USE LOGO 'STREET LIGHTING'.
3. INTERCONNECT USE LOGO 'SIGNAL'.
4. POWER BOXES USE LOGO 'POWER'.
F. SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING AVERAGE PHYSICAL AND
CHEMICAL PROPERTIES:
PROPERTIES ASTMPOLYMER
TENSILE STRENGTH C-4961,700 PSI
FLEXURAL STRENGTH D790 7,500 PSI
IMPACT RESISTANCE D-2444 72 FT./LBS.
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH C-1091 11,000 PSI
EFFECT OF ACIDS D543 VERY RESISTANT
EFFECT OF ALKALIES D543 VERY RESISTANT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-E-0-209.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
e
-
0
-
2
0
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-E-0-209.dwg
E0209
PLATFORM ELECTRICAL
SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM
TVM BASE, CALL BOX, AND CARD READER DETAILS
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.DUZAN
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
0.1
0
4
2
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-E-0-210.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
e
-
0
-
2
1
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-E-0-210.dwg
E0210
PLATFORM ELECTRICAL
PLATFORM LIGHT INSTALLATION AND
POLE FOUNDATION DETAILS
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.DUZAN
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
214+00 215+00
214+00 215+00
PI
T
O
WB
2
1
4
+
5
3
.
9
3
PS
N
O
6
T
/
O
WB
2
1
4
+
7
5
.
1
8
PO
E
=
W
B
2
1
5
+
8
4
.
1
8
EN
D
D
F
BE
G
I
N
E
M
B
E
D
D
E
D
WB
2
1
4
+
7
7
.
7
6
PI
T
O
EB
2
1
4
+
5
5
.
0
4
PS
N
O
.
6
T
/
O
EB
2
1
4
+
7
6
.
2
9
PO
E
=
E
B
2
1
5
+
8
5
.
2
9
EN
D
D
F
BE
G
I
N
E
M
B
E
D
D
E
D
EB
2
1
4
+
7
8
.
8
7
EN
D
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
WB
2
1
4
+
8
8
.
4
2
BE
G
I
N
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
WB
2
1
4
+
7
8
.
4
2
EN
D
G
U
I
D
E
W
A
Y
C
U
R
B
WB
2
1
3
+
6
0
.
0
0
EN
D
G
U
I
D
E
W
A
Y
C
U
R
B
EB
2
1
4
+
6
1
.
1
1
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-E-1-205.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
e
-
1
-
2
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-E-1-205.dwg
E1205
SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM
ELECTRICAL PLAN
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.DUZAN
Y.LIU
1"=10'
01-16-26
A 1-2"C (4-#10 XHHW & 1-#10 GND)
FOR PASSENGER INFORMATION SIGN
1-2"C (2-#10 XHHW & 1-#10 GND)
FOR TICKET VENDING MACHINE
1-2"C (8-#10 XHHW & 1-#10 GND)
FOR LIGHTING
1-2"C (2-#10 XHHW & 1-#10 GND)
FOR CALL BOX/TELEPHONE
1-2"C (4-#10 XHHW & 1-#10 GND)
FOR CARD READER
1-2"C (SPARE)
A1 2-1/2"C (2-#8 XHHW EACH)
FOR SNOWMELT (HEAT TRACE FOR
CANOPY AND RAIN GUTTERS)
B 2-2"C (1-SPARE)
FOR CALLBOX/TELEPHONE
2-2"C (1-SPARE)
FOR COMMUNICATIONS
REFERENCE NOTES
1 CARD READER
2 LIGHT POLE
3 SIGN KIOSK
4 TICKET (FARE) VENDING MACHINE (TVM)
5 CALL BOX
6 PASSENGER INFORMATION SIGN
NOTES:
1. LOCATE UTA SYSTEM CONDUITS/JUNCTION BOXES ON
TRACK SIDE OF PLATFORM AND POWER CONDUIT/JUNCTION
BOXES ON OUTSIDE OF PLATFORM.
2. PULL BOXES AND CONDUITS ARE ILLUSTRATED
SCHEMATICALLY. PLACE PULL BOXES OUT OF PLATFORM
WALKING PATH.
3. INSTALL EMPTY 2" COMMUNICATION CONDUIT WITH PULL
CORD FROM NEAREST PULL BOX TO CANOPY SUPPORT
COLUMN FOR FUTURE INSTALLATION OF SECURITY
CAMERAS.
4. PASSENGER INFORMATION SIGN TO BE WIRED THROUGH
CANOPY
5. REFER TO SHEETS E0208, E0209 AND E0210 FOR PLATFORM
PULL BOX AND EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION DETAILS.
6. THE HYDRONIC PIPING ROUTING AND LOCATION OF
SNOWMELT MANIFOLD BOX IS SHOWN FOR REFERENCE
ONLY, REFER TO P3214, P3215, AND VENDOR DRAWING FOR
ACTUAL DESIGN AND INSTALLATION.
7. THE ACTUALLY INSTALLATION OF TEMPERATURE
SENSOR SHOULD BE COORDINATED WITH HYDRONIC PIPES
DESIGN BY OTHERS FOR LOCATIONS AND QUANTITIES.
8. THE CONDUIT TO PASSENGER INFORMATION SIGN VIA
CANOPY COLUMN.
POWER
CONTROL
CABINET
PLATFORM
TELEPHONE/CALLBOX
COMMUNICATIONS
TO FUTURE QWEST SERVICE LOCATION
FROM ROCKY MOUNTAIN
POWER SERVICE LOCATION
NORTH
PLATFORM
POWER TVM
LIGHTING
SNOWMELTING
TYPE III BOX
ATS240 VOLTS
DISTRIBUTION
NETWORK
DATA &
PHONES PANEL "L1"
SNOW
MELT
PANEL "P1"
PLATFORM
SNOW
BOILER
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
B
SUGAR HOUSE
STATION PLATFORM
3 2
1
4
5
1
6
2
1-2" PVC
1-1 1/2" PVC
1-2" PVC
1-2" PVC
1-1 1/2" PVC 1-2" PVC
2-1 1/2 " PVC6-2" PVC
POWER
2-2" PVC
SENSOR
8-2" PVC
SENSOR
1-1 1/2 " PVC3-2" PVC
POWER
TYPE III JUNCTION BOX(TYP) FOR SENSOR
NOTE-1
TYPE II JUNCTION BOX(TYP) FOR CALL
BOX/TELEPHONE COMMUNICATION
TYPE III JUNCTION BOX (TYP) FOR POWER
A
A1
1-1 1/2 " PVC5-2" PVC
POWER
REFER TO SHEET
E3207 FOR PCC
DETAIL
4-2" PVC
COMM
3-2" PVC
COMM2-2" PVC
COMM
SEE NOTE 5
(TYP)6
1-2" PVC
TYPE II BOX
PLATFORM CANOPY DOWNSPOUT SENSORS
PLATFORM CONCRETE TEMPERATURE SENSOR
(DEDICATED CONDUIT END ENCASED IN CONCRETE WITHIN 25' OF
ALERTON PANEL)
2-3" CONDUIT FOR 2" PEX TUBING
HYDRONIC PIPING SEE NOTE 6
FUTURE 2-2" PEX TUBING
NO CONDUIT, NOTE 6
FUTURE 2" PEX TUBING
NO CONDUIT, NOTE 6
SNOWMELT MANIFOLD BOX
SEE P3215 FOR DETAIL
TYPE II JUNCTION BOX(TYP) FOR SENSOR
TYPE II JUNCTION BOX (TYP) FOR SENSOR
NOTE 7
1-2" PVC CONDUIT FOR TEMPERATURE SENSOR
2-2" PVC CONDUIT FOR TEMPERATURE SENSOR
3-2" PVC CONDUIT FOR TEMPERATURE SENSOR
TYPE II JUNCTION BOX(TYP) FOR SENSOR
NOTE 7
TYPE II JUNCTION BOX(TYP) FOR SENSOR
NOTE 7
3-2" PVC CONDUIT FOR TEMPERATURE SENSOR
2-2" PVC CONDUIT FOR TEMPERATURE SENSOR
SNOWMELT MANIFOLD BOX
SEE P3215 FOR DETAIL
NOTE 6
NOTE 6
NOTE 8
INCOMING UTILITY METER
NOTE 7
TYPE II JUNCTION BOX (TYP) FOR SENSOR
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-E-8-204.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
e
-
8
-
2
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
E8204
PLATFORM ELECTRICAL
SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM
PANEL SCHEDULE
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.DUZAN
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
1. LOADS SHOWN ON SNOW MELT PANEL ARE INDICATIVE.
COORDINATE WITH SNOW MELT SYSTEM SUPPLIER FOR
FINAL LOADS.
2. STATION PLATFORM IS PROVIDED WITH HYDRONIC SNOW
MELTER SYSTEM. CANOPY ROOF HAS HEAT TRACE SYSTEM
3. CIRCUIT BREAKER SUPPLYING POWER TO HEAT TRACING
SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH 30A MINIMUM GROUND-FAULT
EQUIPMENT PROTECTION.
NOTES:
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-W-0-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
a
n
s
k
r
u
t
i
.
j
o
s
h
i
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
0
7
s
t
r
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
w
-
0
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-W-0-001.dwg
W0001
GENERAL NOTES, STANDARD SYMBOLS
AND ABBREVIATIONS
A. ALY
S. JOSHI
W. ABBASSI
W. ABBASSI
NTS
01-16-26
GENERAL NOTES, STANDARD SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
CM CONCRETE MATERIALS
CM-1.CONCRETE MIX DESIGN, PLACEMENT, AND CURING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI 301.
CM-2.USE A MINIMUM 28-DAY CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 4,000 PSI UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
CM-3 FOR CONCRETE MIXTURES BEING USED FOR MASS CONCRETE, CONTRACTOR SHALL ADJUST
CEMENTITIOUS MATERIAL CONTENT AND TAKE OTHER MEASURES TO MAINTAIN MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE
IN CONCRETE, AS PER ACI 207.1.
CM-4 CONCRETE SHALL BE CURED ACCORDING TO ACI 308.1. CONCRETE SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM LOSS OF
MOISTURE FOR NOT LESS THAN SEVEN DAYS AFTER PLACEMENT AND WITH NECESSARY PROTECTION
FOR COLD OR HOT WEATHER PLACEMENT.
CM-5 THE USE OF CALCIUM CHLORIDE AND OTHER CHLORIDE-CONTAINING AGENTS IS PROHIBITED. THE USE
OF RECYCLED CONCRETE IS PROHIBITED. PLACEMENT WITHIN/CONTACT BETWEEN ALUMINUM ITEMS
(INCLUDING ALUMINUM CONDUIT) AND CONCRETE IS PROHIBITED.
CM-6 ALL PERMANENTLY EXPOSED CONCRETE EDGES SHALL HAVE A 3/4" CHAMFER UNLESS NOTED
OTHERWISE.
CM-7 CONSULT MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS (FILED UNDER A SEPARATE APPLICATION) FOR
OPENINGS AND EMBEDDED ITEMS SUCH AS FLOOR DRAIN SYSTEMS, CONDUIT, ETC.
CM-8 OBSERVABLE CRACKS SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE ENGINEER OF RECORD TO DETERMINE CAUSE AND
APPROPRIATE REPAIR PROCEDURE.
CM-9 PERFORM CONCRETE TESTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIFICATIONS.
RE CONCRETE REINFORCEMENT
RE-1.REINFORCING BAR STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM A615, GRADE 60DEFORMED
BARS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. WELDED WIRE REINFORCEMENT SHALL CONFORM TO THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM A1064. MILL TEST CERTIFICATES SHALL BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH
SPECIFICATIONS.
RE-2.FABRICATION AND PLACEMENT OF REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CRSI MSP-1
AND ACI 301.
RE-3 CHAIRS, SPACERS, STANDEES, AND CARRIER BARS SHALL BE SIZED, SPACED, AND PLACED TO PROVIDE
THE REQUIRED SPACING, ALIGNMENT, AND CLEARANCES OF REINFORCING. CARRIER BARS SHALL NOT
BE USED AS PRIMARY REINFORCING BARS.
RE-4 REINFORCING BAR LAP SPLICES NOT OTHERWISE INDICATED SHALL BE ACI CLASS B. WELDED WIRE
REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE LAPPED ONE PANEL PLUS TWO INCHES MINIMUM.
RE-5 WHERE A 90-DEGREE, 135–DEGREE, OR 180-DEGREE HOOK IS GRAPHICALLY INDICATED, PROVIDE
CORRESPONDING ACI 318-14 STANDARD HOOKS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
RE-6 DOWELS SHALL MATCH SIZE AND SPACING OF MAIN REINFORCEMENT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
RE-7 REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE SECURELY TIED IN PLACE.
RE-8 ALL BENDING OF REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE DONE COLD.
RE-9 PROVIDE MECHANICAL SPLICES FOR BARS LARGER THAN #11 OR WHERE INDICATED. ALL MECHANICAL
SPLICES SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD.
RE-10 PROVIDE MIN CONCRETE COVER OVER REINFORCING STEEL AS FOLLOWS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE:
CONCRETE EXPOSURE MEMBER REINFORCEMENT SPECIFIED COVER, IN.
CAST AGAINST AND
PERMANENTLY IN CONTACT
WITH GROUND
ALL ALL 3
EXPOSED TO WEATHER OR
IN CONTACT WITH GROUND ALL
#6 THROUGH
#18 BARS 2
#5 BAR, W31 OR D31 WIRE
AND SMALLER 1-1/2
NOT EXPOSED TO WEATHER
OR IN CONTACT WITH
GROUND
SLABS, JOISTS, AND
WALLS
#14 AND #18 BARS 1-1/2
#11 BAR AND SMALLER 1 1/2 UNO
BEAMS, COLUMNS,
PEDESTALS, AND
TENSION TIES
PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT,
STIRRUPS, TIES, AND
HOOPS
1-1/2
GN GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:
GN-1. THE DESIGN DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE CONSIDERED ALL INCLUSIVE, AND IT IS THE FIELD PERSONNEL'S
RESPONSIBILITY TO VERIFY ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS BEFORE PROCEEDING
WITH FOUNDATION INSTALLATION OR ANY OTHER CONSTRUCTION. ANY DISCREPANCIES FOUND BETWEEN
THE DESIGN DRAWINGS AND THE ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF
THE ENGINEER OF RECORD FOR REEVALUATION BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH WORK.
GN-2.IN CASE OF CONFLICT BETWEEN DESIGN DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS, THE ENGINEER OF RECORD
SHALL BE NOTIFIED TO OBTAIN CLARIFICATION PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH WORK.
GN-3 ONLY USE DIMENSIONS INDICATED ON THE DESIGN DRAWINGS. DO NOT SCALE DESIGN DRAWINGS.
GN-4 STRUCTURES HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO BE STABLE IN THEIR FINAL STATE.
CONTRACTOR TO ENGAGE A QUALIFIED ENGINEER FOR ALL TEMPORARY CONDITIONS. ERECTION AIDS,
LIFTING DEVICES, ETC. ARE NOT SHOWN AND ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ERECTOR’S ENGINEER OR
AS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD.
NOTES:
RETAINING WALL GENERAL NOTES:
1.DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS:
UT BUILDING CODE, 2021
ACI 318-19
ASCE 7-16
AASHTO LRFD DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIGHWAY BRIDGES, 2021
2.COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF CONCRETE FOR RETAINING WALL AT 28 DAYS F'C=4000 PSI.
3.ALL SHOP DRAWINGS SUBMITTED FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE IN U.S. CUSTOMARY UNITS.
4.INSTALLATION OF RETAINING WALLS TO BE COORDINATED WITH EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITIES,
DRAINAGE, ITS UTILITIES, AND WZTC.
FOUNDATION NOTES:
5.THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION WAS USED IN THE DESIGN OF THE RETAINING WALLS:
A. FREE DRAINING BACKFILL:
UNIT WEIGHT = 120 LB/FT3
FRICTION ANGLE = 30-34
SEISMIC PEAK GROUND
ACCELERATION (PGA) = 0.64G
B.
UNIT WEIGHT = 120 LB/FT3
FRICTION ANGLE = 32
BEARING RESISTANCE = 2500 LB/FT2
FRICTION FACTOR = 0.45
6.DESIGN VALUES SHALL BE FIELD VERIFIED BY QUALIFIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER.
SUBSTRUCTURE NOTES:
7. ALL STRUCTURAL STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A615 GRADE 60.
8.BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION TO BE COMPACTED. ANY LOCALIZED UNSTABLE AREAS TO BE STABILIZED AS
DIRECTED BY SITE ENGINEER.
9.ALL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH SHEAR KEYS AND WATERSTOPS.
RE-11 PROVIDE SPLICES, DEVELOPMENT, AND STANDARD HOOKS AS FOLLOWS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE:
REINFORCING STEEL SPLICE CHART FOR F'C = [4000 PSI] - EPOXY COATED
SPLICE LENGTH (CLASS B)DEVELOPMENT LENGTH DEVELOPMENT
LENGTH FOR
STANDARD HOOKS
LENGTH OF
STANDARD HOOKSBAR SIZE TOP BARS OTHER BARS TOP BARS OTHER BARS
#3 29"22"22"17"7"7"
#4 39"30"30"23"9"9"
#5 48"36"37"28"11"11
#6 57"44"44"34"13"14"
#7 85"65"65"50"15"16"
#8 96"74"74"57"17"18"
#9 108"83"83"64"19"23"
#10 122"94"94"72"22"25"
#11 135"104"104"80"24"28"
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4395
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4395
43
7
3
.
9
7
1+00
43
7
6
.
2
5
43
7
6
.
8
3
43
7
7
.
4
0
43
7
8
.
2
6
2+00
43
7
9
.
1
3
43
8
0
.
1
3
43
8
0
.
8
5
43
8
1
.
0
4
3+00
43
8
0
.
1
1
BE
G
I
N
W
A
L
L
1
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
7
3
.
9
7
PV
I
2
+
2
5
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
7
9
.
1
3
EN
D
W
A
L
L
3
+
4
5
.
7
8
EL
E
V
4
3
7
9
.
4
5
EL
E
V
4
3
7
5
.
9
2
PV
I
1
+
0
7
.
6
3
EL
E
V
4
3
7
7
.
4
0
PV
I
1
+
7
5
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
8
0
.
7
3
PV
I
2
+
6
4
.
9
6
EL
E
V
4
3
8
0
.
9
1
AN
G
L
E
P
O
I
N
T
2
+
7
9
.
9
9
EL
E
V
4
3
8
1
.
4
4
PV
I
2
+
8
4
.
3
7
EL
E
V
4
3
8
1
.
4
4
PV
I
2
+
8
9
.
3
7
EL
E
V
4
3
8
0
.
0
6
PV
I
3
+
2
9
.
4
1
EL
E
V
4
3
8
0
.
7
9
AN
G
L
E
P
O
I
N
T
2
+
7
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
8
0
.
0
6
AN
G
L
E
P
O
I
N
T
3
+
2
7
.
8
9
EL
E
V
4
3
8
0
.
0
6
PV
I
3
+
2
6
.
3
7
STA 2+04.52, EL 4371.30
STA 2+51.98, EL 4373.21 STA 3+45.78, EL 4374.08
214+00 215+00
214+00 215+00
1+50 2+00 2+50
3+00
WB
2
1
3
+
6
0
.
0
0
PO
B
R
W
1
1
+
0
0
.
0
0
=
WB
2
1
5
+
3
0
.
0
0
11
.
1
7
L
T
WB
2
1
5
+
3
0
.
0
0
21
.
1
5
L
T
WB
2
1
5
+
7
7
.
9
0
21
.
3
7
L
T
WB 215+
8
4
.
1
8
4.61 LTPOE RW
1
3
+
4
5
.
7
8
=
RW
1
2
+
8
1
.
3
6
RW
1
2
+
9
9
.
1
3
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-W-1-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
a
n
s
k
r
u
t
i
.
j
o
s
h
i
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
0
7
s
t
r
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
w
-
1
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-W-1-201.dwg
W1201
RETAINING WALL 1
SITUATION AND LAYOUT
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
W. ABBASSI
W. ABBASSI
AS SHOWN
01-16-26
TOP OF WALL
WB TRACK
TOP OF RAIL
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
WB TRACK ℄
23
'
RETAINING WALL 1 AT
BACK OF WALL
EB TRACK ℄
ELEVATION AT TOP OF
RETAINING WALL 1 (TYP)
FINISHED GROUND
AT BACK OF WALL
SCALE: 1" = 20'
RETAINING WALL 1 - PLAN
DEVELOPED ELEVATION
(HANDRAIL NOT SHOWN)
NOTES:
1. HANDRAILS ARE NOT SHOWN.
2. HANDRAILS ARE REQUIRED ON BOTH SIDES OF RAMPS
WITH RISE OF 6" OR MORE.
3. HANDRAIL HEIGHT SHALL ADHERE TO ADA STANDARDS
405.8 AND 505.
4. SEE SHEET C3005 FOR DETAILS.
TOP OF FOUNDATION
2'
-
0
"
MI
N
1'
-
0
"
FOUNDATION LIMITS
FOR RETAINING WALL 1
5.
5
0
'
FOUNDATION LIMITS
FOR RETAINING WALL 2
NOTCHED FOUNDATION
SEE DWG W3001 FOR DETAILS
12.00'
13.50'
7.
0
0
'
5.
5
0
'
214+00 215+00
214+00 215+00
ANGLE POINT
RW2 2+60.91
AN
G
L
E
P
O
I
N
T
RW
2
2
+
3
6
.
7
6
WB
2
1
5
+
8
2
.
4
3
26
.
3
9
L
T
PO
E
R
W
2
3
+
0
1
.
7
8
=
WB
2
1
4
+
6
0
.
0
0
36
.
0
4
R
T
PO
B
R
W
2
1
+
0
0
.
0
0
=
1+50 2+00
2+
5
0
3+
0
0
RW2 2+
8
0
.
5
4
RW
2
1
+
2
9
.
7
0
RW
2
1
+
6
9
.
1
6
RW
2
2
+
1
0
.
6
5
RW2 2+
9
1
.
0
2
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4395
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4395
43
7
5
.
9
7
1+00
43
8
0
.
0
3
43
8
1
.
6
8
43
8
3
.
3
4
43
8
4
.
9
9
2+00
43
8
6
.
3
4
43
8
6
.
6
8
43
8
5
.
7
2
43
8
4
.
4
9
3+00
BE
G
I
N
W
A
L
L
1
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
7
5
.
9
7
PV
I
2
+
1
5
.
0
0
EL
E
V
4
3
8
5
.
9
8
EN
D
W
A
L
L
3
+
0
1
.
7
8
EL
E
V
4
3
8
4
.
4
1
EL
E
V
4
3
7
8
.
9
8
PV
I
1
+
0
9
.
0
7
EL
E
V
4
3
8
6
.
9
0
PV
I
2
+
4
0
.
8
3
EL
E
V
4
3
8
6
.
4
4
PV
I
2
+
6
0
.
2
4
EL
E
V
4
3
8
6
.
8
0
AN
G
L
E
P
O
I
N
T
2
+
3
6
.
7
6
EL
E
V
4
3
8
6
.
4
0
AN
G
L
E
P
O
I
N
T
2
+
6
0
.
9
1
STA 1+29.70, EL 4373.30
STA 1+69.16, EL 4373.90
STA 2+10.65, EL 4374.69 STA 3+01.78, EL 4375.93
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-W-1-202.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
a
n
s
k
r
u
t
i
.
j
o
s
h
i
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
0
7
s
t
r
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
w
-
1
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-W-1-202.dwg
W1202
RETAINING WALL 2
SITUATION AND LAYOUT
S. JOSHI
S. JOSHI
W. ABBASSI
W. ABBASSI
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
TOP OF WALL
TOP OF PEDESTRIAN
SIDEWALK
RETAINING WALL 2
AT BACK OF WALL
WB TRACK ℄
23
'
EB TRACK ℄
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
ELEVATION AT TOP OF
RETAINING WALL 2 (TYP)
FINISHED GROUND
AT BACK OF WALL 2
SCALE: 1" = 20'
RETAINING WALL 2 - PLAN
DEVELOPED ELEVATION
(HANDRAIL NOT SHOWN)
NOTES:
1. HANDRAILS ARE NOT SHOWN.
2. HANDRAILS ARE REQUIRED ON BOTH SIDES OF RAMPS
WITH RISE OF 6" OR MORE.
3. HANDRAIL HEIGHT SHALL ADHERE TO ADA STANDARDS
405.8 AND 505.
4. SEE SHEET C3005 FOR DETAILS.
TOP OF FOUNDATION
2'
-
0
"
MI
N
1'
-
0
"
FOUNDATION LIMITS
FOR RETAINING WALL 2
5.
5
0
'
7.
0
0
'
9.
0
0
'
FOUNDATION LIMITS
FOR RETAINING WALL 1
NOTCHED FOUNDATION
SEE DWG W3001 FOR DETAILS
13.50'
12.00'
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-W-3-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
a
n
s
k
r
u
t
i
.
j
o
s
h
i
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
0
7
s
t
r
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
w
-
3
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-W-3-001.dwg
W3001
WALL DETAILS
A. ALY
S. JOSHI
W. ABBASSI
W. ABBASSI
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
NTS
RETAINING WALL - DIMENSIONS
NTS
RETAINING WALL - REINFORCEMENT
PGL
H
F
C B
W
OFFSET FROM WB TRACK CL = VARIES (10'-2" TO 20'-4 3/8")
OFFSET FROM EB TRACK CL = 12'-1/2"
1'-0"
BACK FACE
ROUGHENED
CONSTRUCTION JOINT
FRONT
FACE
#4 @18" OC VERT.
BAR B HORIZ.
#4 @ 18" OC
HORIZ.
BAR G T&B TRANSVERSE
REINFORCEMENT
BAR A VERT. WITH STANDARD HOOK
BAR D
BAR E
RETAINING WALL - DIMENSIONS
DESIGN
H W B C F H-VARIES BARS A BARS B BARS D BARS E BAR G
BAR S
BASE
SHEAR
REINFFROM TO
6'-0" 5'-6" 4'-0" 1'-6"1'-4" 2'-1"6'-0"#5@12" #4@9" #5@10" #5@10" #4@12"-
8'-0" 7'-0" 4'-6" 2'-6" 1'-6" 6'-0" 8'-0"#6@12" #4@12" #6@12" #6@12" #4@12"-
10'-0" 9'-0" 6'-0" 3'-0" 1'-6" 8'-0" 10'-0"#6@9" #4@12" #6@12" #6@12" #4@12"-
12'-0" 12'-0" 8'-6" 3'-6" 1'-6" 10'-0" 12'-0"#7@6" #5@12" #7@12" #7@12" #5@12" #4@7"
2" Ø DRAINS @ 10' MAX CENTER TO
CENTER (SLOPE 4% TO DRAIN)
1'
-
0
"
T
Y
P
.
HANDRAIL
APPLY DAMPPROOFING TO BACK OF
WALL AND TOP OF FOOTING HEEL
EXTEND DRAINAGE CORE TO 1'-6" (MAX)
BELOW FINISHED GRADE
℄
TRACK
6"
C
L
R
NOTES:
1. ALL REINFORCEMENT BARS SHALL BE EPOXY-COATED.
PLASTIC DRAINAGE CORE WITH GEOTEXTILE
(DRAINAGE) (CLASS 2) (CONT ALONG WALL)
WEEP HOLE &
DRAINAGE CORE
2"
2"
ROUGHENED CONC.
SURFACE
2'
-
0
"
BAR S SHEAR REINFORCEMENT
2'
-
0
"
M
I
N
3"
C
L
R
3" CLR
1'
-
0
"
T
Y
P
.
FINISHED GRADE
WALL CONTROL LINE
NTS
DETAIL AT FOUNDATION NOTCH
RETAINING WALL FOOTING
OCS FOUNDATION
3" MIN. GAP ON
ALL SIDES, TYP.
BAR TO MATCH BAR G
TOP & BOTTOM
2'
-
6
"
TY
P
.
3'-0" MIN.
BEND "G" BAR 90 DEGREES
TOP & BOTTOM STEM WALL ABOVE
NTS
SECTION AT TYPICAL WALL FOOTING TRANSITIONS
NTS
TYPICAL PENETRATION REINFORCING DETAIL THROUGH WALL
WALL STEM REINF. NOT
SHOWN FOR CLARITY
TOP OF FOOTING.
SEE WALL ELEVATIONSSE
E
W
A
L
L
EL
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
ADD'L EDGE BAR @12"
SIZE TO MATCH BAR "D"
ADD'L BARS @12"
SIZE TO MATCH BAR "E"
ADD'L BARS SIZE AND
SPACING TO MATCH BAR "G"
1
1
2'-0"
RETAINING
WALL STEM
ADD'L BARS EF.
SIZE TO MATCH
WALL REINFORCING
PIPE SLEEVE
WITH FLANGE
COLLAR
6" MIN
ld TYP
ld T
Y
P
WALL
REINFORCING
SEALANT
ELEVATION SECTION
ldh
N
E
A
R
ED
G
E
S
,
T
Y
P
ADDITIONAL
REINFORCEMENT,
EACH FACE
FOOTING REINFORCEMENT
SEE SCHEDULE
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-0-100.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
0
-
1
0
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-0-100.dwg
U0100
UTILITIES
GENERAL NOTES
D. TREADWELL
D. TREADWELL
R. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
NTS
01-16-26
GENERAL UTILITY NOTES:
1. UTILITIES TO BE INSTALLED PER APWA STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS
2. EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN IN PLANS AND PROFILES ARE BASED ON AS-BUILT INFORMATION, INFORMATION FROM 3RD PARTY
FRANCHISEES, FIELD SURVEY DATA, AND TEST HOLE DATA. CONTRACTOR TO BE VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS PRIOR TO WORK.
3. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF TRACK FOUL ZONE. ANY FUTURE WORK WITHIN THESE LIMITS REQUIRES
APPROVAL FROM UTA.
4. REFER TO MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN UTA AND CITY IN CASE FUTURE MAINTENANCE OF UTILITIES TO REMAIN IS REQUIRED.
5. EXISTING BUILDINGS, DRIVEWAYS, UTILITY SERVICES, AND LANDSCAPING ON THE CRA PROPERTY ARE TO BE DEMOLISHED AND EXISTING
WATER, SEWER, STORMWATER, AND GAS SERVICES ARE TO BE REMOVED BACK TO MAIN. UTILITIES ARE TO REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL
BUILDING DEMOLITION BEGINS.
6. PROTECT THE EXISTING JORDAN AND SALT LAKE CANAL IN PLACE. NO WORK IS ALLOWED WITHIN 33 LF OF CANAL CENTERLINE FROM
MARCH 1ST TO OCTOBER 1ST.
7. 1" WATER METER AND VAULT(S) TO BE INSTALLED PER APWA STANDARD PLAN 521
8. 2" WATER METER AND VAULT(S) TO BE INSTALLED PER APWA STANDARD PLAN 522
9. BACKFLOW PREVENTER(S) TO BE INSTALLED PER APWA STANDARD PLAN 631.1
10. FIRE HYDRANT(S) TO BE INSTALLED PER APWA STANDARD PLAN 511
11. DUCTILE IRON PIPE WITH MECHANICAL JOINTS PER ANSI C110, C150, AND C51. PROVIDE PIPE IN 18' LENGTHS. MAXIMUM DEFLECTION OF 4
DEG 16' 48" (16" PER 18' LENGTH) PER AWWA M41, FIGURE 4-21
12. TRENCH FOR DIP AND HDPE PIPE TO BE PER AWWA M51, FIGURE 4-2. UNTREATED BASE COURSE FOR HAUNCHING AND BEDDING TO BE
PER APWA PLAN 382
13. A MINIMUM OF 5' COVER TO TOP OF PIPE IS REQUIRED
14. ALL HDPE PIPE TO BE SDR11
15. ALL CASINGS TO INCLUDE POLYTHYLENE MODEL CI CASING SPACERS AT 5' ON CENTER SPACING FROM ADVANCE PRODUCTS AND
SYSTEMS OR APPROVED EQUAL. SPACER SHOE HEIGHT SHOWN ON PLANS.
16. CARRIER PIPE IS TO BE CENTERED WITHIN CASING
17. NO ANNULAR FILL WITHIN CASINGS
18. CASINGS SHALL INCLUDE AMCE MOLDED CONE END SEALS FROM ADVANCE PRODUCTS AND SYSTEMS OR APPROVED EQUAL
201+80
202+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
203+00
204+00 205+00
206+00
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
SIMPSON
A
V
E
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
x
x
x
x
x
x
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-201.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
4
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-201.dwg
U1201
EXISTING UTILITY PLAN
WB STA 201+80.27 TO WB STA 206+50
D. TREADWELL
T. COVEYOU
F. NANNENGA
A. DIGIROLAMO
1" = 20'
01-16-26
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
U
1
2
0
2
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
FAIRMONT S
T
A
T
I
O
N
1 018UFO01
1 026UFO11
115 UFO 006 105 DIP 010
310 UFO 017
104 UGE 002
105 DIP 002
104 OHP 002
1 001PVC05
1 002PVC05
1 007UFO15
1 003PVC05
4 002CMP05
3 001UGT08
1 001OHP04
1 005UFO16 308 UFO 023
301 UFO 003
311 UFO 001
316 UFO 002
104 UGE 001
3 017PTR02
1 005DIP05
1 003DIP05
1 004DIP05
405 CMP 003
105 DIP 006 CABLE T.V. BOX
ELECTRIC BOX
GAS METER
STREET LIGHT BOX
WATER METER
TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX
TELEPHONE BOX
WATER BOX
FIBER OPTIC BOX
UTILITY BOX
IRRIGATION BOX
CLEANOUT
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
UTILITY MANHOLE
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
INTERCEPTOR MANHOLE
TELEPHONE MANHOLE
WATER MANHOLE
FIBER OPTIC MANHOLE
MONITORING WELL
WATER VALVE
GAS TEST VALVE
FIRE HYDRANT
BORING LOCATION
STAND PIPE
DROP INLET
LARGE SIGN
SIGN
BOLLARD POST
FLAG POLE
POWER POLE
GUY
AREA LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARM
AND POLE
VAULT: E-ELECTRIC, T-TELEPHONE,
W-WATER
TREE
SYMBOL LEGEND
110 UFO 016
1 007DIP05
1 008DIP05
UTILITY OWNER CODES:
01 - MCI/VERIZON
02 - ENBRIDGE
03 - QWEST
04 - ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
05 - SLC UTILITIES
06 - SOUTH SALT LAKE PW
07 - UDOT
08 - UNKNOWN
09 - UTA
10 - UTOPIA
11 - COMCAST
12 - SALT LAKE IRRIGATION CO.
13 - AT&T
14 - XO COMMUNICATIONS
15 - GOOGLE
16 - LUMEN
PR - PRIVATE
MATERIAL CODES:
BOX - EXISTING RAIL SIGNAL BOX
CIP - CAST IRON PIPE
CMP - CORRUGATED METAL PIPE
CPPR - COPPER
DIP - DUCTILE IRON PIPE
DIT - OPEN DITCH
GUY - BRAIDED STEEL GUY WIRE
MDPE - MEDIUM DENSITY POLYETHELYNE
OFO - OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
OHC - OVERHEAD COAXIAL
OHP - OVERHEAD POWER
OHT - OVERHEAD TELEPHONE
PCCP - PRESTRESSED CONCRETE CYLINDER PIPE
PVC - POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
RCP - REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
STL - STEEL
UFO - UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC
UGC - UNDERGROUND COAXIAL
UGE - UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
UGP - UNDERGROUND POWER
UGT - UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
VCP - VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE
PTR - PLASTIC
ABANDONED WATER
EXISTING SEWER
EXISTING STORM DRAIN
EXISTING WATER
EXISTING UNDERGROUND POWER
EXISTING GAS
EXISTING FIBER OPTIC
EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER
EXISTING TELEPHONE
EXISTING OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
LEGEND
x
1 036???05
1 012UFO11
3 039DIP05
3 038DIP05
3 037DIP05
SEE
NOTE 5
NOTES:
1. PROTECT UTILITIES IN PLACE FOR DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION.
2. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT SHOWN.
3. REFER TO UTILITY RELOCATION PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
4. REFER TO DRAINAGE PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
5. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF
TRACK FOUL ZONE. WORK WITHIN THESE LIMITS REQUIRES
APPROVAL FROM UTA.
#XX XXXXXXX
UTILITY RUN #
MATERIAL
UTILITY OWNER
NOTE
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
116 UFO 001
1 010UFO15
1 001HDPE05
1 019UFO16
1 001PTR02
TH1
TH2
TH3 TH4
TH5
TH6 TH7
TH11
TH9
TH8
TH10
1 015UFO11
1 027UFO11
111 UFO 029
1 032UFO16
MATCHLI
N
ESEE DWG
U
1
2
0
4
SIMPSO
N
A
V
E
SIMPSO
N
A
V
E
S 1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARM
O
N
T
D
R
I
V
E
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+00
211+00
207+00
208+00
209+00
210+00
211+00
x
x
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-202.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-202.dwg
U1202
EXISTING UTILITY PLAN
WB STA 206+50 TO WB STA 211+50
D. TREADWELL
T. COVEYOU
F. NANNENGA
A. DIGIROLAMO
1" = 20'
01-16-26
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
NOTES:
1. PROTECT UTILITIES IN PLACE FOR DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION.
2. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT SHOWN.
3. REFER TO UTILITY RELOCATION PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
4. REFER TO DRAINAGE PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
5. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF
TRACK FOUL ZONE. WORK WITHIN THESE LIMITS REQUIRES
APPROVAL FROM UTA.
6. NOT USED
7. LIGHT POLE INCLUDES CELL SIGNAL BOOSTER LOCATED AT ITS
TOP. PROTECT IN PLACE.
8. NOT USED
9. PROPOSED POWER POLE BY OTHERS
CRA
PROPERTY
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
6
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
U
1
2
0
1
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
U
1
2
0
3
1 003PVC05
405 CMP 003
1 004DIP05
1 011DIP05
1 002???02
1 003PTR02
1 010UFO15
1 005UFO16
1 004PTR02
3 021DIP05
304 OHP 003
305 ??? 005
105 PCCP004 302 ??? 005
305 ??? 006
304 OHP 012
302 ??? 007
305 ??? 022
304 OHP 004
305 DIP 016
102 PTR 008
304 OHP 007
302 ??? 012
304 OHP 010
101 UFO 004
101 UFO 005
1 011PTR02
305 DIP 017
1 012DIP05
3 006???02
4 005CMP05
4 004CMP05
3 002OHP04
304 OHP 005
304 OHP 006
3 011OHP04
105 PVC 007
305 DIP 023
101 UFO 003
1 013DIP05
305 DIP 035
311 OFO 001
308 OFO 002
SEE NOTE 7
SEE
NOTE 5
CABLE T.V. BOX
ELECTRIC BOX
GAS METER
STREET LIGHT BOX
WATER METER
TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX
TELEPHONE BOX
WATER BOX
FIBER OPTIC BOX
UTILITY BOX
IRRIGATION BOX
CLEANOUT
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
UTILITY MANHOLE
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
INTERCEPTOR MANHOLE
TELEPHONE MANHOLE
WATER MANHOLE
FIBER OPTIC MANHOLE
MONITORING WELL
WATER VALVE
GAS TEST VALVE
FIRE HYDRANT
BORING LOCATION
STAND PIPE
DROP INLET
LARGE SIGN
SIGN
BOLLARD POST
FLAG POLE
POWER POLE
GUY
AREA LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARM AND POLE
VAULT: E-ELECTRIC, T-TELEPHONE, W-WATER
TREE
SYMBOL LEGEND
UTILITY OWNER CODES:
01 - MCI/VERIZON
02 - ENBRIDGE
03 - QWEST
04 - ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
05 - SLC UTILITIES
06 - SOUTH SALT LAKE PW
07 - UDOT
08 - UNKNOWN
09 - UTA
10 - UTOPIA
11 - COMCAST
12 - SALT LAKE IRRIGATION CO.
13 - AT&T
14 - XO COMMUNICATIONS
15 - GOOGLE
16 - LUMEN
PR - PRIVATE
MATERIAL CODES:
BOX - EXISTING RAIL SIGNAL BOX
CIP - CAST IRON PIPE
CMP - CORRUGATED METAL PIPE
CPPR - COPPER
DIP - DUCTILE IRON PIPE
DIT - OPEN DITCH
GUY - BRAIDED STEEL GUY WIRE
MDPE - MEDIUM DENSITY POLYETHELYNE
OFO - OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
OHC - OVERHEAD COAXIAL
OHP - OVERHEAD POWER
OHT - OVERHEAD TELEPHONE
PCCP - PRESTRESSED CONCRETE CYLINDER PIPE
PVC - POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
RCP - REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
STL - STEEL
UFO - UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC
UGC - UNDERGROUND COAXIAL
UGE - UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
UGP - UNDERGROUND POWER
UGT - UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
VCP - VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE
PTR - PLASTIC
ABANDONED WATER
EXISTING SEWER
EXISTING STORM DRAIN
EXISTING WATER
EXISTING UNDERGROUND POWER
EXISTING GAS
EXISTING FIBER OPTIC
EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER
EXISTING TELEPHONE
EXISTING OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
LEGEND
x
#XX XXXXXXX
UTILITY RUN #
MATERIAL
UTILITY OWNER
NOTE
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
1PR PVC 013
101 UFO 020
SEE
NOTE
8
SEE NOTE 8
SEE NOTE 9
TH14
TH15
TH16
TH17
316 OFO 003
115 UFO 008
111 UFO 030
111 UFO 031
116 UFO 033
1 034UFO16
116 UFO 035
116 UFO 036
116 UFO 037
116 UFO 039
116 UFO 038101 UFO 041
MATCHL
I
N
E
SEE DW
G
U
1
2
0
4
MATCH
L
I
N
E
SEE D
W
G
U
1
2
0
4
316 OFO 004
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
U1203
EXISTING UTILITY PLAN
WB STA 211+50 TO WB STA 215+84.18
D. TREADWELL
T. COVEYOU
F. NANNENGA
A. DIGIROLAMO
1" = 20'
01-16-26
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
1
+
5
0
SE
E
D
W
G
U
1
2
0
2
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
1PR CIP 028
3PR DIP 030
1PR ??? 011
3 006OHP04
3 009STL02
3 025DIP05
1 013???05
305 DIP 026
105 RCP 008
405 RCP 009
1PR CIP 027
1PR VCP 010
1PR ??? 012
3 024DIP05
1 008PTR02
1 006RCP05
1 007???05
1 008PVC05
3 033DIP05
1 009???05
101 UFO 042
108 UFO 011
3 023DIP05
105 RCP 010
3,405 RCP 011
305 ??? 032
3PR UGE 003
3 004UGEPR
3 029DIPPR
1 031DIPPR
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-203.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1 010STL02
1
04 UGE 003
1 021UFO16
022UFO16
11 UFO 013
15 UFO 009
NOTE 5
4PR ??? 012
NOTES:
1. PROTECT UTILITIES IN PLACE FOR DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION.
2. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT SHOWN.
3. REFER TO UTILITY RELOCATION PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
4. REFER TO DRAINAGE PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
5. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF
TRACK FOUL ZONE. WORK WITHIN THESE LIMITS REQUIRES
APPROVAL FROM UTA.
6. OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS.
7. ABANDONED IN PLACE BY PREVIOUS PROJECT. REMOVE WITHIN
LIMITS OF GUIDEWAY IF DISCOVERED.
CABLE T.V. BOX
ELECTRIC BOX
GAS METER
STREET LIGHT BOX
WATER METER
TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX
TELEPHONE BOX
WATER BOX
FIBER OPTIC BOX
UTILITY BOX
IRRIGATION BOX
CLEANOUT
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
UTILITY MANHOLE
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
INTERCEPTOR MANHOLE
TELEPHONE MANHOLE
WATER MANHOLE
FIBER OPTIC MANHOLE
MONITORING WELL
WATER VALVE
GAS TEST VALVE
FIRE HYDRANT
BORING LOCATION
STAND PIPE
DROP INLET
LARGE SIGN
SIGN
BOLLARD POST
FLAG POLE
POWER POLE
GUY
AREA LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARMAND POLE
VAULT: E-ELECTRIC,T-TELEPHONE, W-WATER
TREE
SYMBOL LEGEND
UTILITY OWNER CODES:
01 - MCI/VERIZON
02 - ENBRIDGE
03 - QWEST
04 - ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
05 - SLC UTILITIES
06 - SOUTH SALT LAKE PW
07 - UDOT
08 - UNKNOWN
09 - UTA
10 - UTOPIA
11 - COMCAST
12 - SALT LAKE IRRIGATION CO.
13 - AT&T
14 - XO COMMUNICATIONS
15 - GOOGLE
16 - LUMEN
PR - PRIVATE
MATERIAL CODES:
BOX - EXISTING RAIL SIGNAL BOX
CIP - CAST IRON PIPE
CMP - CORRUGATED METAL PIPE
CPPR - COPPER
DIP - DUCTILE IRON PIPE
DIT - OPEN DITCH
GUY - BRAIDED STEEL GUY WIRE
MDPE - MEDIUM DENSITY POLYETHELYNE
OFO - OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
OHC - OVERHEAD COAXIAL
OHP - OVERHEAD POWER
OHT - OVERHEAD TELEPHONE
PCCP - PRESTRESSED CONCRETE CYLINDER PIPE
PVC - POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
RCP - REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
STL - STEEL
UFO - UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC
UGC - UNDERGROUND COAXIAL
UGE - UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
UGP - UNDERGROUND POWER
UGT - UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
VCP - VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE
PTR - PLASTIC
ABANDONED WATER
EXISTING SEWER
EXISTING STORM DRAIN
EXISTING WATER
EXISTING UNDERGROUND POWER
EXISTING GAS
EXISTING FIBER OPTIC
EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER
EXISTING TELEPHONE
EXISTING OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
LEGEND
x
#XX XXXXXXX
UTILITY RUN #
MATERIAL
UTILITY OWNER
NOTE
EB TRACK ℄
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
7 040DIP05
1 015STL02
1 014STL02
1 013STL02
102 STL 016
08 UFO 043
08 UFO 024
08 UFO 025705 DIP 041
1PR RCP 013
1PR ??? 014
1PR ??? 015
4PR RCP 014
1PR RCP 015
TH24
TH18
TH20
TH19
TH23
TH22
TH21
4PR ??? 016
1 031UFO11
1 039UFO11
040UFO16
1 042PVC05
105 PVC 043
TH26
TH25
TH27
TH24A
206+00
207+0
0
208+0
0
206+00
207+0
0
208+0
0
SIMPSON
A
V
E
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
SUGARMONT
D
R
I
V
E
x
x
x
x
x
x
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-204.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-204.dwg
U1204
EXISTING UTILITY PLAN
SUGARMONT AVENUE AND
CRA PROPERTIES
D. TREADWELL
T. COVEYOU
F. NANNENGA
A. DIGIROLAMO
1" = 20'
01-16-26
MATCHLINE
SEE DWG U
1
2
0
2
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
SUGARMON
T
D
R
I
V
E
110 UFO 017
104 UGE 002
105 DIP 002
3 01 UFO 003
3 11 UFO 001
102 PTR 017
4 05 CMP 003
CABLE T.V. BOX
ELECTRIC BOX
GAS METER
STREET LIGHT BOX
WATER METER
TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX
TELEPHONE BOX
WATER BOX
FIBER OPTIC BOX
UTILITY BOX
IRRIGATION BOX
CLEANOUT
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
UTILITY MANHOLE
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
INTERCEPTOR MANHOLE
TELEPHONE MANHOLE
WATER MANHOLE
FIBER OPTIC MANHOLE
MONITORING WELL
WATER VALVE
GAS TEST VALVE
FIRE HYDRANT
BORING LOCATION
STAND PIPE
DROP INLET
LARGE SIGN
SIGN
BOLLARD POST
FLAG POLE
POWER POLE
GUY
AREA LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARM AND POLE
VAULT: E-ELECTRIC, T-TELEPHONE, W-WATER
TREE
SYMBOL LEGEND
UTILITY OWNER CODES:
01 - MCI/VERIZON
02 - ENBRIDGE
03 - QWEST
04 - ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
05 - SLC UTILITIES
06 - SOUTH SALT LAKE PW
07 - UDOT
08 - UNKNOWN
09 - UTA
10 - UTOPIA
11 - COMCAST
12 - SALT LAKE IRRIGATION CO.
13 - AT&T
14 - XO COMMUNICATIONS
15 - GOOGLE
16 - LUMEN
PR - PRIVATE
MATERIAL CODES:
BOX - EXISTING RAIL SIGNAL BOX
CIP - CAST IRON PIPE
CMP - CORRUGATED METAL PIPE
CPPR - COPPER
DIP - DUCTILE IRON PIPE
DIT - OPEN DITCH
GUY - BRAIDED STEEL GUY WIRE
MDPE - MEDIUM DENSITY POLYETHELYNE
OFO - OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
OHC - OVERHEAD COAXIAL
OHP - OVERHEAD POWER
OHT - OVERHEAD TELEPHONE
PCCP - PRESTRESSED CONCRETE CYLINDER PIPE
PVC - POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
RCP - REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
STL - STEEL
UFO - UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC
UGC - UNDERGROUND COAXIAL
UGE - UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
UGP - UNDERGROUND POWER
UGT - UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
VCP - VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE
PTR - PLASTIC
ABANDONED WATER
EXISTING SEWER
EXISTING STORM DRAIN
EXISTING WATER
EXISTING UNDERGROUND POWER
EXISTING GAS
EXISTING FIBER OPTIC
EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER
EXISTING TELEPHONE
EXISTING OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
LEGEND
x
NOTES:
1. PROTECT UTILITIES IN PLACE FOR DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION.
2. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT SHOWN.
3. SEE Y1241 FOR SHARED RMP AND FIBER OPTIC TRENCH (NOT SHOWN)
4. REFER TO DRAINAGE PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
5. EXISTING BUILDINGS, DRIVEWAYS, UTILITY SERVICES, LANDSCAPING ON THE CRA
PROPERTY ARE TO BE DEMOLISHED AND EXISTING WATER, SEWER, STORMWATER,
AND GAS SERVICES WILL BE REMOVED BACK TO MAIN. UTILITIES TO REMAIN IN PLACE
UNTIL BUILDING DEMOLITION BEGINS.
6. REFER TO UTILITY RELOCATION PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
7. FIBER OPTIC TO BE REMOVED BY COMCAST.
8. REMOVE EXISTING POLE.
9. OVERHEAD POWER TO BE REMOVED BY RMP
#XX XXXXXXX
UTILITY RUN #
MATERIAL
UTILITY OWNER
NOTE
MATCHL
I
N
ESEE DWG
U
1
2
0
1
MATC
H
L
I
N
E
SEE D
W
G
U
1
2
0
2
101 UFO 018
111 UFO 029
6 16 UFO 002
102 ??? 017
505 ??? 044
311 UFO 044
301 UFO 046
116 UFO 047
311 UFO 045
311 OFO 001
304 OHP 012
316 OFO 004
711 OFO 005
904 OHP 008
TH12
TH13
8
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-205.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-205.dwg
U1205
EXISTING UTILITY MATRIX
SHEET 1 OF 4
D. TREADWELL
T. COVEYOU
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
NTS
01-16-26
UTILITY ID#UTILITY TYPE OWNER
ID#UTILITY OWNER UTILITY RUN MATERIAL UTILITY RUN#IMPACT
PROBABILITY SIZE SHEET EX.
CASING?
EX.
CASING
SIZE
EX. CASING
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
ASCE
Quality
Level
16-UFO-001 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN COPPER 001 HIGH U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
16-UFO-002 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN PLASTIC 002 HIGH 1.75" U1201 TEST HOLE #8. RELOCATE.QLD
15-UFO-006 FIBER OPTIC 15 GOOGLE UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 006 LOW U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
15-UFO-007 FIBER OPTIC 15 GOOGLE UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 007 LOW U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
11-UFO-012 FIBER OPTIC 11 COMCAST UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 012 U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
11-UFO-015 FIBER OPTIC 11 COMCAST UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 015 LOW U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
10-UFO-016 FIBER OPTIC 10 UTOPIA STEEL 016 LOW 6" U1201 TEST HOLE #3; TEST HOLE #7. PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
10-UFO-017 FIBER OPTIC 10 UTOPIA PLASTIC 017 LOW 2"U1201 TEST HOLE #10. PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
01-UFO-018 FIBER OPTIC 01 MCI/VERIZON UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 018 LOW U1201 TEST HOLE #6. PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
16-UFO-019 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 019 LOW U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
08-UFO-023 FIBER OPTIC 08 UNKNOWN PLASTIC 023 HIGH U1201 TEST HOLE #11. RELOCATE.QLC
11-UFO-026 FIBER OPTIC 11 COMCAST UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 026 LOW U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
11-UFO-027 FIBER OPTIC 11 COMCAST UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 027 LOW U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
11-UFO-028 FIBER OPTIC 11 COMCAST UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 028 LOW U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
11-UFO-029 FIBER OPTIC 11 COMCAST UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 029 LOW U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
16-UFO-032 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 032 LOW U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
02-PTR-001 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE PLASTIC 001 HIGH 4"U1201 TEST HOLE #1. PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
02-PTR-017 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE PLASTIC 017 HIGH 5" U1201 TEST HOLE #9. CASING PROPOSED QLB
04-OHP-001 OVERHEAD POWER 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER OVERHEAD POWER 001 LOW U1201 EAST POLE TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS QLB
05-PVC-001 SEWER 05 SLC UTILITIES POLYVINYL CHLORIDE 001 LOW 8" U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-PVC-002 SEWER 05 SLC UTILITIES POLYVINYL CHLORIDE 002 LOW 8" U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-HDPE-001 STORM DRAIN 05 SLC UTILITIES HIGH DENSITY POLYETHELYNE 001 LOW 10" U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
05-CMP-002 STORM DRAIN 05 SLC UTILITIES CORRUGATED METAL 002 HIGH 12"U1201 CONNECT TO NEW MANHOLE QLC
08-UGT-001 TELEPHONE 08 UNKNOWN UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE 001 LOW U1201 BOX TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS QLC
04-UGE-001 UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC 001 LOW 20"X7" U1201 TEST HOLE #4. PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
04-UGE-002 UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC 002 LOW 10"x6" U1201 TEST HOLE #6. 4" + 6" CONDUIT. PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-DIP-002 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 002 LOW 12"U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
05-DIP-003 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 003 HIGH 12"U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
05-DIP-005 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 005 LOW U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLB
05-DIP-006 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 006 HIGH 12"U1201 YES 20"METAL TEST HOLE #2. PROTECT IN PLACE.QLB
05-DIP-007 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 007 LOW U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-DIP-008 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 008 LOW U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-DIP-010 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 010 HIGH 12"U1201 TEST HOLE #5. RELOCATE. ASSUMED MATERIAL QLB
05-???-036 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES UNKNOWN 036 LOW UNKNOWN U1201 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
05-DIP-037 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 037 HIGH 3" U1201 CONNECT TO EXISITING MAIN QLD
05-DIP-038 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 038 HIGH 4"U1201 PORTION SOUTH OF MAIN TO BE PROTECTED QLD
05-DIP-039 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 039 HIGH 6" U1201 PORTION SOUTH OF MAIN TO BE PROTECTED QLD
01-UFO-003 FIBER OPTIC 01 MCI/VERIZON UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 003 HIGH U1201,
U1202 RELOCATE QLC
16-UFO-005 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 005 HIGH U1201,
U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
15-UFO-010 FIBER OPTIC 15 GOOGLE UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 010 LOW U1201,
U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
04-OHP-002 OVERHEAD POWER 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER OVERHEAD POWER 002 HIGH U1201,
U1202 NORTH POLE AND WIRE TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS QLB
05-PVC-003 SEWER 05 SLC UTILITIES POLYVINYL CHLORIDE 003 LOW 8"U1201,
U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-CMP-003 STORM DRAIN 05 SLC UTILITIES CORRUGATED METAL 003 HIGH 12"U1201,
U1202 CONNECT TO NEW MANHOLE QLC
05-DIP-004 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 004 LOW 12"U1201,
U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
01-UFO-004 FIBER OPTIC 01 MCI/VERIZON UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 004 HIGH U1202 RELOCATE QLC
15-UFO-008 FIBER OPTIC 15 GOOGLE UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 008 LOW U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-206.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
12
/
2
9
/
2
0
2
5
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
0
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-206.dwg
U1206
EXISTING UTILITY MATRIX
SHEET 2 OF 4
D. TREADWELL
T. COVEYOU
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
NTS
01-16-26
UTILITY ID#UTILITY TYPE OWNER
ID#UTILITY OWNER UTILITY RUN MATERIAL UTILITY
RUN#
IMPACT
PROBABILITY SIZE SHEET EX.
CASING?
EX.
CASING
SIZE
EX. CASING
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
ASCE
Quality
Level
01-UFO-020 FIBER OPTIC 01 MCI/VERIZON UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 020 LOW U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
11-UFO-030 FIBER OPTIC 11 COMCAST UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 030 LOW U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
16-UFO-033 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 033 LOW U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
16-UFO-034 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 034 LOW U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
16-UFO-035 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 035 LOW U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
16-UFO-036 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 036 LOW U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
16-UFO-037 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 037 LOW U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
16-UFO-038 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 038 LOW U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
02-???-002 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE UNKNOWN 002 LOW UNKNOWN U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLB
02-PTR-003 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE PLASTIC 003 LOW 2"U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
02-PTR-004 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE PLASTIC 004 LOW 2"U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
02-???-005 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE UNKNOWN 005 HIGH UNKNOWN U1202 TO BE REMOVED BY OTHERS (CRA DEMO WORK)QLB
02-???-006 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE UNKNOWN 006 HIGH UNKNOWN U1202 TO BE REMOVED BY OTHERS (CRA DEMO WORK)QLC
02-???-007 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE UNKNOWN 007 HIGH UNKNOWN U1202 TO BE REMOVED BY OTHERS (CRA DEMO WORK)QLB
02-PTR-011 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE PLASTIC 011 LOW 2"U1202 TEST HOLE #17. PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
02-???-012 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE UNKNOWN 012 HIGH UNKNOWN U1202 TO BE REMOVED BY OTHERS (CRA DEMO WORK)QLC
11-OFO-001 OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 11 COMCAST OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 001 HIGH U1202 RELOCATE QLC
08-OFO-002 OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 08 UNKNOWN OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 002 HIGH U1202 RELOCATE QLC
16-OFO-002 OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 003 HIGH U1202 NORTH POLE AND WIRE TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS QLB
16-OFO-004 OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 004 HIGH U1202,
U1204 RELOCATE QLC
16-OFO-005 OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 005 HIGH U1204 RELOCATE QLC
04-OHP-003 OVERHEAD POWER 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER OVERHEAD POWER 003 HIGH U1202 POLES AND WIRE TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS QLB
04-OHP-004 OVERHEAD POWER 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER OVERHEAD POWER 004 HIGH U1202 POLES AND WIRE TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS QLB
04-OHP-005 OVERHEAD POWER 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER OVERHEAD POWER 005 HIGH U1202 POLES AND WIRE TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS QLB
04-OHP-007 OVERHEAD POWER 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER OVERHEAD POWER 007 HIGH U1202 NORTH POLE AND WIRE TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS QLB
04-OHP-008 OVERHEAD POWER 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER OVERHEAD POWER 008 HIGH U1204 RELOCATE QLC
04-OHP-010 OVERHEAD POWER 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER OVERHEAD POWER 010 HIGH U1202 NORTH POLE AND WIRE TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS QLB
04-OHP-011 OVERHEAD POWER 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER OVERHEAD POWER 011 HIGH U1202 POLES AND WIRE TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS QLB
04-OHP-012 OVERHEAD POWER 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER OVERHEAD POWER 012 HIGH U1202 POLES AND WIRE TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS QLB
05-PCCP-004 SEWER 05 SLC UTILITIES PRESTRESSED CONCRETE
CYLINER PIPE 004 LOW 8" U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-???-005 SEWER 05 SLC UTILITIES UNKNOWN 005 HIGH ??? 8" U1202 TO BE REMOVED BY OTHERS QLD
05-???-006 SEWER 05 SLC UTILITIES UNKNOWN 006 HIGH 8" U1202 TO BE REMOVED BY OTHERS QLD
05-PVC-007 SEWER 05 SLC UTILITIES POLYVINYL CHLORIDE 007 LOW 8" U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-CMP-004 STORM DRAIN 05 SLC UTILITIES CORRUGATED METAL PIPE 004 LOW 12"U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
05-CMP-005 STORM DRAIN 05 SLC UTILITIES REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE 005 LOW 10" U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
PR-PVC-013 STORM DRAIN PR PRIVATE POLYVINYL CHLORIDE 013 LOW ??? 6" U1202 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-DIP-011 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 011 LOW 12"U1202 TEST HOLE #14. PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-DIP-012 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 012 LOW 12"U1202 QLC
05-DIP-013 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 013 LOW 6" U1202 INCLUDES WATER MAIN AT END OF LATERAL QLD
05-DIP-016 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 016 HIGH 6" U1202 ABANDON QLB
05-DIP-017 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 017 LOW 12"U1202 TEST HOLE #16. PROTECT AND CONNECT NEW TO EXISTING QLC
05-DIP-021 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 021 HIGH 4"U1202 TEST HOLE #15. LABELED AS IRRIGATION, TO BE REMOVED BY
OTHERS QLB
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-207.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
0
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-207.dwg
U1207
EXISTING UTILITY MATRIX
SHEET 3 OF 4
D. TREADWELL
T. COVEYOU
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
NTS
01-16-26
UTILITY ID#UTILITY TYPE OWNER
ID#UTILITY OWNER UTILITY RUN MATERIAL UTILITY RUN#IMPACT
PROBABILITY SIZE SHEET EX.
CASING?
EX.
CASING
SIZE
EX. CASING
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
ASCE
Quality
Level
05-???-022 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES UNKNOWN 022 HIGH UNKNOWN U1202 TO BE REMOVED BY OTHERS QLB
05-DIP-035 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 035 HIGH 1"U1202 REMOVE AND RELOCATE QLD
11-UFO-031 FIBER OPTIC 11 COMCAST UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 031 LOW U1202,
U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
16-UFO-039 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 039 LOW U1202,
U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
02-PTR-008 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE PLASTIC 008 LOW 2"U1202,
U1203 ASSUMED PLASTIC PER TEST HOLE #17. RELOCATE QLB
04-OHP-006 OVERHEAD POWER 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER OVERHEAD POWER 006 HIGH U1202,
U1203 POLES AND WIRE TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS QLB
05-DIP-023 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 023 HIGH 12"U1202,
U1203 ABANDON QLC
16-OFO-004 OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 004 HIGH U1202,
U1204 RELOCATE QLC
15-UFO-009 FIBER OPTIC 15 GOOGLE UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 009 LOW U1203 TEST HOLE #23. PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
08-UFO-011 FIBER OPTIC 08 UNKNOWN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 011 LOW U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
11-UFO-013 FIBER OPTIC 11 COMCAST UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 013 LOW U1203 TEST HOLE #23. PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
16-UFO-021 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 021 LOW U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
16-UFO-022 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 022 LOW U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
08-UFO-024 FIBER OPTIC 08 UNKNOWN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 024 LOW U1203 TEST HOLE #23. PROTECT IN PLACE
08-UFO-025 FIBER OPTIC 08 UNKNOWN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 025 LOW U1203 TEST HOLE #23. PROTECT IN PLACE
16-UFO-040 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 040 LOW U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
01-UFO-041 FIBER OPTIC 01 MCI/VERIZON UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 041 LOW U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
01-UFO-042 FIBER OPTIC 01 MCI/VERIZON UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 042 LOW U1203 TEST HOLE #23. PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
08-UFO-043 FIBER OPTIC 08 UNKNOWN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 043 LOW U1203 TEST HOLE #23. PROTECT IN PLACE
02-STL-009 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE STEEL 009 HIGH 6" U1203 TEST HOLE #19. CASING PROPOSED QLB
02-STL-010 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE STEEL 010 LOW 6" U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
02-STL-013 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE STEEL 013 LOW 3" U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
02-STL-014 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE STEEL 014 LOW 3" U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
02-STL-015 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE STEEL 015 LOW 3" U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
02-STL-016 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE STEEL 016 LOW 4"U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
05-PVC-008 SEWER 05 SLC UTILITIES POLYVINYL CHLORIDE 008 LOW 15" U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-???-009 SEWER 05 SLC UTILITIES UNKNOWN 009 LOW UNKNOWN U1203 ???QLD
PR-VCP-010 SEWER PR PRIVATE VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE 010 LOW 8"U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
PR-???-011 SEWER PR PRIVATE UNKNOWN 011 LOW UNKNOWN U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
PR-???-012 SEWER PR PRIVATE UNKNOWN 012 LOW UNKNOWN U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
05-???-013 SEWER 05 SLC UTILITIES UNKNOWN 013 LOW UNKNOWN U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
PR-???-014 SEWER PR PRIVATE UNKNOWN 014 LOW UNKNOWN U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
PR-???-015 SEWER PR PRIVATE UNKNOWN 015 LOW UNKNOWN U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-208.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
0
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-208.dwg
U1208
EXISTING UTILITY MATRIX
SHEET 4 OF 4
D. TREADWELL
T. COVEYOU
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
NTS
01-16-26
UTILITY ID#UTILITY TYPE OWNER
ID#UTILITY OWNER UTILITY RUN MATERIAL UTILITY RUN#IMPACT
PROBABILITY SIZE SHEET EX.
CASING?
EX.
CASING
SIZE
EX. CASING
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
ASCE
Quality
Level
05-RCP-006 STORM DRAIN 05 SLC UTILITIES REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE 006 LOW 48" U1203 JORDAN AND SALT LAKE CITY CANAL: PROTECT IN
PLACE QLC
05-???-007 STORM DRAIN 05 SLC UTILITIES UNKNOWN 007 LOW UNKNOWN U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-RCP-008 STORM DRAIN 05 SLC UTILITIES REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE 008 LOW 15"U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
05-RCP-009 STORM DRAIN 05 SLC UTILITIES REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE 009 LOW 15" U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
05-RCP-010 STORM DRAIN 05 SLC UTILITIES REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE 010 LOW 15" U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
05-RCP-011 STORM DRAIN 05 SLC UTILITIES REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE 011 HIGH 15" U1203 ABANDON QLD
PR-???-012 STORM DRAIN 05 SLC UTILITIES UNKNOWN 012 HIGH UNKNOWN U1203 ABANDON QLD
PR-RCP-013 STORM DRAIN PR PRIVATE REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE 013 LOW UNKNOWN U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
PR-RCP-014 STORM DRAIN PR PRIVATE REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE 014 LOW UNKNOWN U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
PR-RCP-015 STORM DRAIN PR PRIVATE REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE 015 LOW UNKNOWN U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
PR-???-016 STORM DRAIN PR PRIVATE UNKNOWN 016 HIGH 12"U1203 REMOVE QLC
PR-UGE-003 UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC PR PRIVATE UNKNOWN 003 UNKNOWN U1203 SERVICE TO EXISTING PARKING LOT LIGHTING QLD
PR-UGE-004 UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC PR PRIVATE UNKNOWN 004 UNKNOWN U1203 SERVICE TO EXISTING PARKING LOT LIGHTING QLD
04-UGP-003 UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC 003 LOW U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
05-DIP-024 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 024 HIGH 12"U1203 ABANDON QLC
05-DIP-025 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 025 HIGH 12"U1203 ABANDON QLC
05-DIP-026 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 026 HIGH 12"U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLB
PR-CIP-027 WATER PR PRIVATE CAST IRON PIPE 027 LOW 6" U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLC
PR-CIP-028 WATER PR PRIVATE CAST IRON PIPE 028 HIGH 6" U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE - PRIVATE QLD
PR-DIP-029 WATER PR PRIVATE DUCTILE IRON PIPE 029 LOW 6" U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE - PRIVATE QLD
PR-DIP-030 WATER 05 PRIVATE DUCTILE IRON PIPE 030 HIGH ???U1203 RELOCATE HYDRANT AND VALVE QLD
PR-DIP-031 WATER PR PRIVATE DUCTILE IRON PIPE 031 LOW 6" U1203 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
05-???-032 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES UNKNOWN 032 LOW ???U1203 REPLACE QLB
05-DIP-033 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 033 HIGH 12" U1203 CASING
PROPOSED
TEST HOLE #21. CASING PROPOSED. REPLACE WITH
HDPE.
QLC
05-DIP-040 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 040 HIGH 8" U1203 ABANDONED IN PLACE BY PREVIOUS PROJECT QLD
05-DIP-041 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES DUCTILE IRON PIPE 041 HIGH 6" U1203 ABANDONED IN PLACE BY PREVIOUS PROJECT QLD
05-PVC-042 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES POLYVINYL CHLORIDE 042 HIGH 1" U1203 IRRIGATION LINE. ASSUMED MATERIAL AND SIZE QLD
05-PVC-043 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES POLYVINYL CHLORIDE 043 HIGH 1" U1203 IRRIGATION LINE. ASSUMED MATERIAL AND SIZE QLD
11-UFO-044 FIBER OPTIC 11 COMCAST UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 044 HIGH U1204 RELOCATE QLD
11-UFO-045 FIBER OPTIC 11 COMCAST UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 045 LOW U1204 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
01-UFO-046 FIBER OPTIC 01 MCI/VERIZON UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 046 LOW U1204 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
01-UFO-047 FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC 047 HIGH U1204 RELOCATE QLD
02-???-017 GAS 02 ENBRIDGE UNKNOWN 017 LOW UNKNOWN U1204 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
16-OFO-005 OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 16 LUMEN OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC 005 HIGH U1204 RELOCATE QLC
04-OHP-008 OVERHEAD POWER 04 ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER OVERHEAD POWER 008 HIGH U1204 RELOCATE QLC
05-???-044 WATER 05 SLC UTILITIES UNKNOWN 044 LOW UNKNOWN U1204 PROTECT IN PLACE QLD
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-209.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
0
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-209.dwg
U1209
EXISTING UTILITY
TEST HOLE DATA
D. TREADWELL
T. COVEYOU
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
NTS
01-16-26
203+00
203+00
ss
204+00
205+00
204+00
205+00
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-210.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
1
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-210.dwg
U1210
UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN
STA 203+00 TO STA 205+00
D. TREADWELL
A. LEWIS
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
1" = 10'
01-16-26
2
SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT DRIVE SUGARMONT DRIVE
PROPOSED ALTERATION NOTES:
1. REMOVE DWARF-STYLE DECORATIVE LIGHTS.
2. REMOVE AND SALVAGE EXISTING DECORATIVE LIGHTS.
3. RELOCATE EXISTING FIBER BOX TO STA. 204+58, 24.8' RT
4. RELOCATE EXISTING TELEPHONE BOX TO STA. 204+61, 24.6; RT
5. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF TRACK FOUL ZONE. WORK WITHIN
THESE LIMITS REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM UTA.
6. REMOVE EXISTING IRRIGATION BACK TO 10' FROM PROPOSED CENTERLINES AND CAP REMAINING LINES.
APPROX. 100' TOTAL LENGTH FROM 3 PLANTERS.
7. LOWER FIBER OPTIC IN PLACE.
8. PROTECT EXISTING LINE IN PLACE. REFER TO MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN UTA AND CITY FOR
FUTURE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS.
9. PROTECT IN PLACE
PROPOSED ALTERATION NOTES:
1. EXISTING GAS LINE. PROTECT IN PLACE.
2. EXISTING 20" METAL CASING. PROTECT EXISTING WATERLINE IN
PLACE.
3. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF TRACK
FOUL ZONE. WORK WITHIN THESE LIMITS REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM
UTA.
4. PROTECT EXISTING LINE IN PLACE. REFER TO MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN UTA AND CITY FOR FUTURE MAINTENANCE
REQUIREMENTS.
6
2
3
4
LEGEND
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
ABANDONED WATER
EXISTING SEWER
EXISTING STORM DRAIN
EXISTING WATER
EXISTING UNDERGROUND POWER
EXISTING GAS
EXISTING FIBER OPTIC
EXISTING OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER
EXISTING TELEPHONE
x
3
5
CABLE T.V. BOX
ELECTRIC BOX
GAS METER
STREET LIGHT BOX
WATER METER
TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX
TELEPHONE BOX
WATER BOX
FIBER OPTIC BOX
UTILITY BOX
IRRIGATION BOX
CLEANOUT
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
UTILITY MANHOLE
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
INTERCEPTOR MANHOLE
TELEPHONE MANHOLE
WATER MANHOLE
FIBER OPTIC MANHOLE
MONITORING WELL
WATER VALVE
GAS TEST VALVE
FIRE HYDRANT
STAND PIPE
DROP INLET
LARGE SIGN
SIGN
BOLLARD POST
FLAG POLE
POWER POLE
GUY
AREA LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARM AND POLE
VAULT: E-ELECTRIC, T-TELEPHONE, W-WATER
TREE
EXISTING OCS POLE
TO REMAIN.
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
4
1
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
1
1 1
7
7
8
1
6
9
SIMP
S
O
N
A
V
E
207+
0
0
208
+
0
0
207+
0
0
208+
0
0
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
206+
0
0
205+00
206+0
0
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G
G
GGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-211.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
4
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
1
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-211.dwg
U1211
UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN
STA 205+00 TO STA 208+00
D. TREADWELL
A. LEWIS
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
1" = 10'
01-16-26
SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
SUGARMONT DRIVE
PROPOSED ALTERATION NOTES:
1. OVERHEAD LINES TO BE REMOVED BY OTHERS. REMOVE POLE.
2. EXISTING BUILDINGS, DRIVEWAYS, UTILITY SERVICES, LANDSCAPING ON THE CRA PROPERTY ARE TO BE
DEMOLISHED AND EXISTING WATER, SEWER, STORMWATER, AND GAS SERVICES WILL BE REMOVED BACK TO MAIN.
UTILITIES TO REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL BUILDING DEMOLITION BEGINS.
3. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF TRACK FOUL ZONE. WORK WITHIN THESE LIMITS
REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM UTA.
4. HOT TAP EXISTING 12" MAIN AND INSTALL 9.4 LF OF 2" WATER LINE FROM EXISTING MAIN TO NEW 2" METER. NEW
METER TO BE AT WB STATION 206+79.13, 54.7 LF RT. INSTALL NEW WILKINS MODEL 375XLB 2" BACKFLOW
PREVENTER OR APPROVED EQUAL. NEW METER AND BACKFLOW PREVENTER TO BE COMPLETELY WITHIN 5' OF
BACK OF CURVE. CONNECTION FROM BACKFLOW PREVENTER TO EXISTING IRRIGATION SYSTEM BY SALT LAKE CITY
PARKS DEPARTMENT.
5. SEE SHEET Y1241 FOR SHARED FIBER OPTIC AND RMP TRENCH (NOT SHOWN) FIBER OPTIC CABLE TO BE RELOCATED
BY MCI/VERIZON.
1
8
6
3
1
2
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
CRA PROPERTY
(SEE NOTE 2)
4
5
EXISTING CONNECTIONS TO MAIN
3
LEGEND
ABANDONED WATER
EXISTING SEWER
EXISTING STORM DRAIN
EXISTING WATER
EXISTING UNDERGROUND POWER
EXISTING GAS
EXISTING FIBER OPTIC
EXISTING OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER
EXISTING TELEPHONE
x
CABLE T.V. BOX
ELECTRIC BOX
GAS METER
STREET LIGHT BOX
WATER METER
TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX
TELEPHONE BOX
WATER BOX
FIBER OPTIC BOX
UTILITY BOX
IRRIGATION BOX
CLEANOUT
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
UTILITY MANHOLE
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
INTERCEPTOR MANHOLE
TELEPHONE MANHOLE
WATER MANHOLE
FIBER OPTIC MANHOLE
MONITORING WELL
WATER VALVE
GAS TEST VALVE
FIRE HYDRANT
STAND PIPE
DROP INLET
LARGE SIGN
SIGN
BOLLARD POST
FLAG POLE
POWER POLE
GUY
AREA LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARM AND POLE
VAULT: E-ELECTRIC, T-TELEPHONE, W-WATER
TREE
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
6
7
6
9
33
5
4
5
PROPOSED ALTERATION NOTES:
1. ENBRIDGE TO CONSTRUCT 96 LF OF 8" GAS LINE CASING
2. REFER TO DRAINAGE PLANS FOR TREATMENT
3. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF TRACK FOUL ZONE. WORK WITHIN THESE
LIMITS REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM UTA.
4. EXISTING WATERLINES WERE CONNECTED VIA HOT TAP TO NEW MAIN ON SOUTH SIDE OF SIMPSON
AVENUE BY PREVIOUS PROJECT. REMOVE PREVIOUSLY ABANDONED LINES WITHIN LIMITS OF NEW
GUIDEWAY. CUT AND CAP REMAINING AND GROUT AROUND CAP.
5. SEE SHEET Y1241 FOR SHARED MCI/VERIZON AND COMCAST FIBER OPTIC AND RMP TRENCH (NOT SHOWN).
6. DISCONNECT AND REMOVE EXISTING 3" WATER METER AND VAULT. REMOVE EXISTING LINE WITHIN LIMITS
OF NEW GUIDEWAY.CUT AND CAP REMAINING AND GROUT AROUND CAP.
7. LOWER EXISTING LUMEN FIBER OPTIC IN PLACE. REMOVE EXISTING HAND HOLE.
8. LOWER EXISTING UTOPIA FIBER OPTIC IN PLACE AND ROUTE AROUND PROPOSED OCS POLE FOUNDATION..
8
4
6
208
+
0
0
209+00
208+
0
0
209+
0
0
x x
x
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss 209+00
210+00
209+
0
0
210+00
x
x
x x
ss
ss
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-212.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
1
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-212.dwg
U1212
UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN
STA 208+00 TO STA 210+00
D. TREADWELL
A. LEWIS
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
1" = 10'
01-16-26
SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
PROPOSED ALTERATION NOTES:
1. EXISTING BUILDINGS, DRIVEWAYS, UTILITY SERVICES, LANDSCAPING ON THE CRA PROPERTY
ARE TO BE DEMOLISHED. EXISTING WATER, SEWER, STORMWATER, AND GAS SERVICES WILL
BE REMOVED BACK TO MAIN. UTILITIES TO REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL BUILDING DEMOLITION
BEGINS.
2. REMOVE POLE. OVERHEAD POWER LINES TO BE REMOVED BY RMP.
3. REMOVE EXISTING HYDRANT.
4. REMOVE EXISTING WATER VALVES.
5. ABANDON 251 LF OF EXISTING WATERLINE IN PLACE, TO WB STA. 211+83. FILL ABANDONED
LINE WITH FLOWABLE FILL. SEE ALSO SHEET U1213.
6. POLE, STREETLIGHT, AND CELL BOOSTER TO REMAIN. PROTECT IN PLACE.
7. EXISTING WATERLINE WAS CONNECTED VIA HOT TAP TO NEW MAIN ON SOUTH SIDE OF
SIMPSON BY PREVIOUS PROJECT. REMOVE PREVIOUSLY ABANDONED LINE WITHIN LIMITS OF
NEW GUIDEWAY. CUT AND CAP REMAINING AND GROUT AROUND CAP.
8. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF TRACK FOUL ZONE. WORK
WITHIN THESE LIMITS REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM UTA.
9. SEE SHEET U1231 PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
10. SEE SHEET U1225 FOR TREATMENT.
11. SEE SHEET Y1241 FOR SHARED FIBER OPTIC AND RMP TRENCH.
12. FIBER OPTIC TO BE RELOCATED BY COMCAST.
13. FIBER OPTIC CABLE TO BE RELOCATED BY MCI/VERIZON
PROPOSED ALTERATION NOTES:
1. EXISTING BUILDINGS, DRIVEWAYS, UTILITY SERVICES, LANDSCAPING ON THE CRA PROPERTY ARE TO BE DEMOLISHED
AND EXISTING WATER, SEWER, STORMWATER, AND GAS SERVICES WILL BE REMOVED BACK TO MAIN. UTILITIES TO REMAIN
IN PLACE UNTIL BUILDING DEMOLITION BEGINS.
2. EXISTING WATERLINE WAS CONNECTED VIA HOT TAP TO NEW MAIN ON SOUTH SIDE OF SIMPSON BY PREVIOUS PROJECT.
REMOVE PREVIOUSLY ABANDONED LINE WITHIN LIMITS OF NEW GUIDEWAY. CUT AND CAP REMAINING AND GROUT
AROUND CAP.
3. REFER TO DRAINAGE PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
4. REMOVE POLE. OVERHEAD POWER LINES TO BE RELOCATED BY RMP.
5. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF TRACK FOUL ZONE. WORK WITHIN THESE LIMITS
REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM UTA.
6. SEE SHEET Y1241 FOR SHARED FIBER OPTIC AND RMP TRENCH. FIBER OPTIC CABLE TO BE RELOCATED BY MEI/VERIZON
7. REMOVE EXISTING STREETLIGHT. POLE TO REMAIN.
1 3
1
1
1
2
3
4
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SIM
P
S
O
N
A
V
E
SIMPSON AVE
CRA PROPERTY
(SEE NOTE 1)
CRA PROPERTY
(SEE NOTE 1)
5
2
7
1
4
5
8
1
2
LEGEND
ABANDONED WATER
EXISTING SEWER
EXISTING STORM DRAIN
EXISTING WATER
EXISTING UNDERGROUND POWER
EXISTING GAS
EXISTING FIBER OPTIC
EXISTING OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER
EXISTING TELEPHONE
x
CABLE T.V. BOX
ELECTRIC BOX
GAS METER
STREET LIGHT BOX
WATER METER
TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX
TELEPHONE BOX
WATER BOX
FIBER OPTIC BOX
UTILITY BOX
IRRIGATION BOX
CLEANOUT
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
UTILITY MANHOLE
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
INTERCEPTOR MANHOLE
TELEPHONE MANHOLE
WATER MANHOLE
FIBER OPTIC MANHOLE
MONITORING WELL
WATER VALVE
GAS TEST VALVE
FIRE HYDRANT
STAND PIPE
DROP INLET
LARGE SIGN
SIGN
BOLLARD POST
FLAG POLE
POWER POLE
GUY
AREA LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARM AND POLE
VAULT: E-ELECTRIC, T-TELEPHONE, W-WATER
TREE
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
S
1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
6
6
12
1
11
11
11
13
9
10
6
8
6
7
SIMPSON AVE
210+00 211+00 212+00
210+00 211+00
212+00
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-213.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
1
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-213.dwg
U1213
UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN
STA 210+00 TO STA 212+00
D. TREADWELL
A. LEWIS
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
1" = 10'
01-16-26
SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
PROPOSED ALTERATION NOTES:
1. REMOVE POLE. OVERHEAD POWER LINE TO BE REMOVED BY RMP.
2. PROTECT EXISTING JORDAN AND SALT LAKE CANAL IN PLACE. NO WORK IS ALLOWED WITHIN 33 LF OF CANAL CENTERLINE FROM MARCH 1ST TO
OCTOBER 1ST.
3. EXISTING BUILDINGS, DRIVEWAYS, UTILITY SERVICES, LANDSCAPING ON THE CRA PROPERTY ARE TO BE DEMOLISHED. EXISTING WATER, SEWER,
STORMWATER, AND GAS SERVICES WILL BE REMOVED BACK TO MAIN. UTILITIES TO REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL BUILDING DEMOLITION BEGINS.
4. REMOVE APPROXIMATELY 45 LF OF WATERLINE FROM EXISTING MAIN SOUTH TO EXISTING VALVE. REMOVE EXISTING VALVE.
5. ABANDON 251 LF OF EXISTING WATERLINE TO WB STA. 211+83. FILL WITH FLOWABLE FILL.
6. ENBRIDGE TO REPLACE 45 LF OF 6" STEEL GAS LINE WITH 6" HDPE GAS LINE INSTALLED WITHIN 45 LF OF 14" POLYETHYLENE GAS LINE CASING.
7. OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC LINE TO BE REMOVED BY LUMEN.
8. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF TRACK FOUL ZONE. WORK WITHIN THESE LIMITS REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM UTA.
9. SEE U1225 FOR TREATMENT.
10. SEE Y1241 FOR SHARED FIBER OPTIC AND RMP TRENCH.
11. ABANDON EXISTING WATERLINE FROM WB STA. 211+83 TO WB STA 212+33, 14' LT. FILL CARRIER PIPE WITH FLOWABLE FILL.
12. SEE Y1242
1
1
5
CRA PROPERTY
(SEE NOTE 3)
4 678
LEGEND
ABANDONED WATER
EXISTING SEWER
EXISTING STORM DRAIN
EXISTING WATER
EXISTING UNDERGROUND POWER
EXISTING GAS
EXISTING FIBER OPTIC
EXISTING OVERHEAD FIBER OPTIC
EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER
EXISTING TELEPHONE
x
CABLE T.V. BOX
ELECTRIC BOX
GAS METER
STREET LIGHT BOX
WATER METER
TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX
TELEPHONE BOX
WATER BOX
FIBER OPTIC BOX
UTILITY BOX
IRRIGATION BOX
CLEANOUT
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
UTILITY MANHOLE
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
INTERCEPTOR MANHOLE
TELEPHONE MANHOLE
WATER MANHOLE
FIBER OPTIC MANHOLE
MONITORING WELL
WATER VALVE
GAS TEST VALVE
FIRE HYDRANT
STAND PIPE
DROP INLET
LARGE SIGN
SIGN
BOLLARD POST
FLAG POLE
POWER POLE
GUY
AREA LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
STREET LIGHT
TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARM AND POLE
VAULT: E-ELECTRIC, T-TELEPHONE, W-WATER
TREE
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
JORDAN AND SALT
LAKE CITY CANAL
2
3
9
10
10
11
12
1
7
12
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-214.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
1
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-214.dwg
U1214
UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN
STA 212+00 TO STA 215+84.18
D. TREADWELL
A. LEWIS
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
1" = 10'
01-16-26
SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
WB TRACK ℄
SIMPSO
N
A
V
E
1
2
4
5
6
19
EB TRACK ℄
19
7
212+25
8
11
PROPOSED OCS
POLE, TYP.
12
PROPOSED SEWER BYPASS
SEE SHEET U1220
10
9
20
10
9
9
13
16
16
15
14
NOTES:
1. SEE PREVIOUS PAGE FOR LEGEND.
14
17
PROPOSED ALTERATION NOTES:
1. REMOVE 113 LF OF EXISTING WATERLINE, WB STA. 212+28, 27' LT. TO WB STA. 212+67, 79' RT. SEE U1226 FOR REPLACEMENT.
2. REMOVE AND RELOCATE EXISTING STREET LIGHT AND ELECTRIC CIRCUIT TO WB STA. 212+81.50, 51.7 LF RT.
3. ENBRIDGE TO INSTALL 45 LF OF 12" CASING.
4. RELOCATE EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE AND PULLBOX. SEE TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLANS FOR NEW LOCATION.
5. REMOVE STORM DRAIN INLET. SEE DRAINAGE PLANS FOR TREATMENT
6. REMOVE EXISTING CURB INLET AND MANHOLE. SEE DRAINAGE PLANS FOR NEW LOCATIONS.
7. REMOVE 35 LF OF STORM DRAIN.
8. EXISTING DROP INLET TO BE RELOCATED. SEE DRAINAGE PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
9. PROTECT EXISTING IN PLACE.
10. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF TRACK FOUL ZONE. WORK WITHIN THESE LIMITS REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM UTA.
11. REMOVE 36 LF OF STORM DRAIN. SEE DRAINAGE PLANS FOR NEW LOCATION.
12. REMOVE EXISTING HYDRANT AND VALVE. REMOVE 34 LF OF EXISTING PIPE. SEE SHEET U1222.
13. REMOVE 136 LF OF EXISTING STORM DRAIN. SEE DRAINAGE PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
14. SHUT VALVE TEMPORARILY TO ALLOW FOR REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING WATER LINE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF RETAINING WALL.
15. REMOVE 131 LF OF EXISTING WATER LINE TO ALLOW FOR RETAINING WALL CONSTRUCTION. REPLACED IN KIND AFTER WALLS ARE CONSTRUCTED.
16. EXISTING CATCH BASIN TO REMAIN. SEE DRAINAGE PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
17. REMOVE EXISTING VALVE
18. SEE U1226 FOR HYDRANT RELOCATION. HYDRANT TO REMAIN OPERATIONAL DURING CONSTRUCTION.
19. EXISTING LIGHTS AND CIRCUITS TO BE RELOCATED TO LOCATION SPECIFIED BY PROPERTY OWNER.
20. SEE DRAINAGE PLANS FOR TREATMENT.
5 20
17
18
3
SI
M
P
S
O
N
A
V
E
HIGHLAND DR
ST
O
P
ss
ss
G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G
G
GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
G
ss
ss
ss
ss ss
ss
ss
ss ss ss ss ss ss ss ss ss ss
ss ss ss
ss
ss
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-220.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
2
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
2
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-220.dwg
U1220
PROPOSED SEWER
HIGHLAND DRIVE SEWER BY-PASS
D. TREADWELL
A. LEWIS
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
AS SHOWN
01-16-26
WB
TRACK
℄
EB
TRACK
℄
APWA PLAN NO. 413
COVER COLLAR
APWA PLAN NO. 303 44"
FRAME AND COVER
12" TALL GRADE RING PER APWA
PLAN NO. 360.1, 360.2, OR 362 (TYP)
30" CONCRETE
SUPPORTS (8" x 8") (TYP)
SHOP FABRICATED 90°
OR TWO 45° BENDS (TYP)
UNTREATED BASE COURSE PER
APWA PLAN 382 TYP
HIGHLAND DR SEWER BY- PASS
SCALE: 1" = 5'
8" DR11 HDPE SEWER
BY-PASS LINE
8" BLIND FLANGE
(TO CLOSE SYSTEM UNTIL USE)
8" RESIN 3608 IPS FLANGE
ADAPTER DR11 WELDED TO
HDPE BY-PASS PIPE
8" CLASS 160 BACK-UP RING
A
-
DETAIL A
SCALE: NTS
7.
5
"
SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
NOTES:
1. BY-PASS SHALL BE CAPPED WITH HDPE BLIND FLANGE AND
PLACED IN APWA PLAN NO. 303 FRAME AND COVER. COVER
SHALL BE CLEARLY MARKED SANITARY SEWER.
2. USE FLOWABLE FILL AS BACKFILL FOR FABRICATED BENDS.
3. 1 1/2" SHOE HEIGHT REQUIRED
SANITARY SEWER BY-PASS LINE (95 LF)
42 LF OF BY-PASS CASING
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE
10' CLEARANCE ZONE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE
WB TRACK ℄
EB TRACK ℄
SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')HIGHLAND DR SEWER BY- PASS PLAN VIEW
SCALE: 1" = 10'
50'
13'
32.25'
13'
LOCATION OF FRAME AND COVER MAY BE
ADJUSTED. MAINTAIN DIMENSIONS BELOW FROM
CENTERLINE OF TRACK.
LOCATION OF FRAME AND COVER MAY BE
ADJUSTED. MAINTAIN DIMENSIONS BELOW FROM
CENTERLINE OF TRACK.
3'
-
6
"
SEE NOTE 2 TYP
14" HDPE CORRUGATED SMOOTH
WALLED CASING
(SEE NOTE 3)
ss ss ssssssss ss ss ss ss
L30
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
0.00%
45.00%
-0.28%
0.00%
-45.
0
0
%
PV
I
0
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
4
3
7
8
.
4
0
PV
I
0
+
2
2
.
7
5
EL
4
3
7
8
.
4
0
PV
I
0
+
3
1
.
5
9
EL
4
3
7
4
.
4
2
PV
I
0
+
3
9
.
1
2
EL
4
3
7
4
.
4
2
PV
I
0
+
4
5
.
4
9
EL
4
3
7
7
.
2
9
PV
I
0
+
6
4
.
1
6
EL
4
3
7
7
.
2
4
-0+10
43
7
8
.
4
0
43
8
1
.
3
0+00
43
7
7
.
3
9
43
8
1
.
2
43
7
7
.
2
8
0+50 0+75
EL. 4376.71
EL. 4374.71
Line Table
Line #
L30
Length
64.16
Direction
S00° 04' 52"W
Start Point (N,E)
(7431990.69,1541374.78)
End Point (N,E)
(7431926.52,1541374.69)
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-221.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
2
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
2
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-221.dwg
U1221
PROPOSED GAS LINE
SUGAR HOUSE STATION
D. TREADWELL
A. LEWIS
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
H: 1" = 20' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
ENBRIDGE TO INSTALL 63 LF OF 2" POLY GAS LINE
CONNECT TO EXISTING GAS LINE
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
STATION PLATFORM
ENBRIDGE TO INSTALL NEW METER.
SEE PLATFORM DWG P3213
FOR LOCATION
SEE U1222 FOR NEW WATER LINE
SEE U1214 FOR REVISION TO EXISTING
WATER LINE
PROPOSED WALL
FOOTING. SEE NOTE 2
EXISTING
SANITARY
EX. WATER
EXISTING
STORM
PROPOSED RETAINING
WALL
NOTES:
1. ACTUAL GAS SERVICE PROFILE TO BE DETERMINED BY ENBRIDGE IN THE FIELD
2. PROVIDE 4" COVER BETWEEN GAS LINE AND FOOTING MIN. SEE W3001 FOR WALL PENETRATION DETAIL.
3. EXISTING GAS LINE IS PRIVATE. PERMISSION FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER IS REQUIRED BEFORE
CONNECTION CAN BE MADE.
4. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE TO TOP OF PIPE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
5. MAINTAIN 1' HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL SEPARATION BETWEEN PROPOSED GAS LINE AND EXISTING
UTILITIES
EXISTING
PROPOSED
SWEEP UP TO PROPOSED
GAS METER (NOT SHOWN)
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4390
-38.
6
1
%
0.00%
PV
I
0
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
4
3
7
6
.
2
8
PV
I
0
+
0
5
.
0
0
EL
4
3
7
6
.
2
8
PV
I
0
+
1
6
.
6
1
EL
4
3
7
1
.
8
0
PV
I
0
+
5
7
.
0
0
EL
4
3
7
1
.
8
0
-0+10
43
7
6
.
2
8
43
8
1
.
1
0+00
43
7
1
.
8
0
43
7
1
.
8
0
43
8
1
.
9
0+50 0+75
EL. 4374.05
PV
I
0
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
4
3
7
6
.
2
8
PV
I
0
+
5
7
.
0
0
EL
4
3
7
1
.
8
0
EL. 4374.75
Line Table
Line #
L27
L28
L29
Length
5.00
11.61
40.42
Direction
S00° 56' 22"W
S00° 54' 54"W
S00° 54' 54"W
Start Point (N,E)
(7431956.89,1541372.36)
(7431951.89,1541372.28)
(7431940.28,1541372.10)
End Point (N,E)
(7431951.89,1541372.3)
(7431940.28,1541372.1)
(7431899.87,1541371.4)
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-222.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
2
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
2
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-222.dwg
U1222
PROPOSED WATER LINE
HIGHLAND DRIVE STATION
D. TREADWELL
D. TREADWELL
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
PLAN: 1" = 10'
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. PROVIDE 2' OF COVER FROM FOOTING TO TOP OF CASING MIN.
2. INSTALL 31 LF OF 4" HDPE CASING, STA. 0+22.28 TO STA. 0+52.69
3. SEE DRAWING P1201 FOR STATION PLATFORM PLAN AND POST HYDRANT LOCATION.
4. SEE DRAWING P3216 FOR POST HYDRANT DETAIL.
5. EXISTING WATERLINE IS PRIVATE. PERMISSION FROM OWNER IS REQUIRED BEFORE CONNECTION CAN BE MADE.
6.12" SHOE HEIGHT
7. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE TO TOP OF PIPE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
8. ELEVATION OF EXISTING WATER LINE IS ASSUMED. VERIFY IN FIELD.
9. MINIMUM OF 5' COVER TO TOP OF PIPE REQUIRED
10. CONNECT TO EXISTING 6" CIP WITH SADDLE CLAMP TAP PER APWA PLAN 551
11. INSTALL GATE VALVE ON EXISTING 6" DIP LINE
12. RELOCATE EXISTING HYDRANT ON EXISTING LINE. MINIMIZE HYDRANT DOWN TIME.
13. SEE ALSO U1214
PROPOSED 57 LF OF 1" POLY WATER LINE
INSTALL NEW WATER METER
STATION PLATFORM
INSTALL POST HYDRANT (SEE NOTE 3 & 4)
SEE U1221 FOR NEW GAS LINE
PROPOSED PLATFORM
FOOTING. SEE NOTE 1
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
02.5 55 10
(1" = 5')
NOTE 2, 6
PROPOSED RETAINING
WALL FOOTING. SEE
NOTE 1
SWEEP UP TO POST
HYDRANT NOT SHOWN
CONNECT TO EXISTING 6" CIP.
SEE NOTE 8
EX. STORM
510
62
1112
13
PROPOSED
TRACK
SLAB
SIMPSON AVE
x
x x
x
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-225.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
2
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-225.dwg
U1225
PROPOSED GAS LINE PLAN
SIMPSON AVENUE
D. TREADWELL
D. TREADWELL
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
H: 1" = 10' V: 1" = 2.5'
01-16-26
CONNECT TO EXISTING 2"
PLASTIC GAS LINE
SIMPSON AVE. GAS LINE PLAN
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
CONNECT TO EXISTING 2"
STEEL GAS LINE
WESTBOUND CL
EASTBOUND CL
1
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
1. SEE SHEET U1231
2. CONSTRUCT 286 LF OF 4" HDPE GAS LINE. CONSTRUCTION BY ENBRIDGE
3. WB STA. 209+41.88, 49.7' RT
4. WB STA. 209+44.97, 40.0' RT
5. WB STA. 211+95.57, 25.6' RT
6. ABANDON EXISTING GAS LINE IN PLACE
7. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF TRACK FOUL ZONE. FUTURE WORK WITHIN
THESE LIMITS REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM UTA.
8. SEE U1242
23
4
5
6
7
7
8
HIGHLAND DRIVE
21
3
+
0
0
21
3
+
0
0
ss
ss
ss
ss ss ss
ss
ss
ss ss ss ss ss ss ss ss ss ssss
ss
ss
0+00 0+90
L36
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
4
0
FITTING 238
FITTING 241
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
9
APPURTENANCE 20
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
4
2
APPURTENANCE 21
FITTING TABLE
FITTING NAME
FITTING 238
FITTING 239
FITTING 240
FITTING 241
HORIZONTAL ANGLE
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
VERTICAL ANGLE
45.00
22.50
22.50
45.00
FITTING ANGLE
45
22.50
22.50
45
SIZE
12 in x 12 in
12 in x 12 in
12 in x 12 in
12 in x 12 in
LINE TABLE
LINE #
L36
LENGTH
90.08
DIRECTION
S19° 58' 31"E
START POINT (N,E)
(7431940.49,1541049.72)
END POINT (N,E)
(7431855.83,1541080.49)
APPURTENANCE TABLE
APPURTENANCE NAME
APPURTENANCE 20
APPURTENANCE 21
SIZE
12 in x 12 in
12 in x 12 in
TYPE
GATE
GATE
TEE TABLE
FITTING NAME
FITTING 242
SIZE
12 in x 12 in x 12 in
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-226.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
2
3
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
2
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-226.dwg
U1226
PROPOSED WATER LINE PLAN
HIGHLAND DRIVE
D. TREADWELL
D. TREADWELL
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
1"=10'
01-16-26
SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
NOTES:
1. INSTALL CATHODIC PROTECTION PER SHEET U1233
2. FILL ABANDONED PIPE WITH FLOWABLE FILL.
3. TRANSITION TO DUCTILE IRON PIPE
4. INSTALL 43 LF OF 18" STEEL CASING FROM STA. 0+18.5 TO STA. 0+61.5. 2" SHOE HEIGHT REQUIRED
5. SEE SHEET U1227 FOR PROFILE
6. PROTECT IN PLACE
7. REMOVE EXISTING VALVES AND ABANDON LINE. SEE ALSO U1214
8. INSTALL 12" HDPE PIPE FROM CONNECTION AT NORTH END TO CONNECTION AT SOUTH END
9. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF TRACK FOUL ZONE. FUTURE WORK WITHIN THESE LIMITS REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM UTA
10. SEE U1231
11. SEE U1230
12. CONNECT TO EXISTING DUCTILE IRON PIPE
HIGHLAND DRIVE WATER LINE PLAN
34
8
7
9
9
6
WESTBOUND CL EASTBOUND
CL
10
112
12
123
1
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
0.00%0.00%
98.16%0.00%
0.00%0.00%
-66.00%
0.00%
PVI 0+00.00
EL 4363.20
PVI 0+04.20
EL 4363.20
PVI 0+09.20
EL 4363.20 PVI 0+11.09
EL 4365.05
PVI 0+67.29
EL 4365.05
PV
I
0
+
6
9
.
7
1
EL
4
3
6
5
.
0
5
PVI 0+71.54
EL 4365.05
PVI 0+74.35
EL 4363.20
PVI 0+75.43
EL 4363.20
-0+10
43
6
3
.
2
0
43
7
0
.
3
0+00
43
6
5
.
0
5
43
7
0
.
6
43
6
5
.
0
5
43
7
0
.
6
0+50
43
6
3
.
2
0
43
7
0
.
6
0+95
AP
P
U
R
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
2
1
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
8
FITTING 241
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
4
2
AP
P
U
R
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
2
0
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
4
0
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
9
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-227.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
2
3
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
2
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-227.dwg
U1227
PROPOSED WATER LINE PROFILE
HIGHLAND DRIVE
D. TREADWELL
D. TREADWELL
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
H: 1" = 10' V: 1" = 5'
01-16-26
HIGHLAND DRIVE WATER LINE PROFILE
NOTES:
1. SEE SHEET U1231 FOR PLAN VIEW
2. SEE SHEETS U1234 AND U1235 FOR CATHODIC PROTECTION DETAILS.
3. PROPOSED ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE AT TOP OF PIPE
4. MAINTAIN MINIMUM 1' HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL SEPARATION BETWEEN
PROPOSED WATER LINE AND EXISTING UTILITIES.
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
0
(CUSTOM)
5 2.5 5 10
EXISTING GROUND
PROPOSED
EXISTING
SIMPSON AVE
210+00 211+00 212+00
210+00 211+00
212+00
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
APPURTENANCE 14
L31
L32
L33FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
2
9
FITTING 230
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
1
FITTING 235
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
6
AP
P
U
R
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
1
8
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
7
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
0
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
L34
L35
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
2
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
4
AP
P
U
R
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
1
9
FITTING TABLE
FITTING NAME
FITTING 235
FITTING 236
FITTING 229
FITTING 230
FITTING 231
FITTING 232
FITTING 234
HORIZONTAL ANGLE
0.00
0.00
44.97
44.96
17.89
33.77
0.00
VERTICAL ANGLE
45.00
11.25
1.86
2.08
41.88
31.85
22.50
FITTING ANGLE
45
11.25
45
45
45
45
22.50
SIZE
12 in x 12 in
12 in x 12 in
12 in x 12 in
12 in x 12 in
12 in x 12 in
12 in x 12 in
12 in x 12 in
LINE TABLE
LINE #
L31
L32
L33
L34
L35
LENGTH
9.80
5.75
231.80
57.46
6.67
DIRECTION
S89° 35' 53"E
S44° 53' 01"E
S89° 44' 06"E
S74° 42' 24"E
N69° 57' 32"E
START POINT (N,E)
(7431895.33,1540765.37)
(7431895.26,1540775.17)
(7431891.19,1540779.22)
(7431890.12,1541011.02)
(7431874.96,1541066.44)
END POINT (N,E)
(7431895.26,1540775.17)
(7431891.19,1540779.22)
(7431890.12,1541011.02)
(7431874.96,1541066.44)
(7431877.25,1541072.71)
APPURTENANCE NAME
APPURTENANCE 14
APPURTENANCE 18
APPURTENANCE 19
SIZE
6 in x 6 in
12 in x 12 in
12 in x 12 in
TYPE
GATE
GATE
GATE
TEE TABLE
FITTING NAME
FITTING 237
SIZE
12 in x 12 in x 6 in
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-231.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
2
3
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
3
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-231.dwg
U1231
PROPOSED WATER LINE PLAN
SIMPSON AVENUE
D. TREADWELL
D. TREADWELL
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
1"=10'
01-16-26
CONNECT TO EXISTING
EXISTING WATERLINE
SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
NOTES:
1. INSTALL CATHODIC PROTECTION PER SHEET U1233
2. NOT USED
3. INSTALL 12" DUCTILE IRON PIPE FROM EXISTING TO FITTING 235.
4. INSTALL 17 LF OF 18" STEEL CASING FROM STA. 2+66 TO STA. 2+83. 2" SHOE HEIGHT REQUIRED.
5. SEE SHEET U1232 FOR PROFILE
6. INSTALL 12 LF OF 6" DUCTILE IRON PIPE AND FIRE HYDRANT PER APWA PLAN 511
7. CONSTRUCT 8.5 LF OF 1" TYPE K COPPER PIPE. VERIFY AND MATCH EXISTING PIPE DIAMETER. INSTALL NEW WATER METER.
8. SEE SHEET U1225
9. INSTALL 12" HDPE PIPE FROM FITTING 235 TO FITTING 234
10. 10' DISTANCE FROM TRACK CENTERLINE REPRESENTS LIMIT OF TRACK FOUL ZONE. FUTURE WORK WITHIN THESE LIMITS REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM UTA.
11. SEE ALSO SHEET U1226
12. SEE SHEET U1233
EASTBOUND ℄
WESTBOUND ℄
SIMPSON AVE. WATER LINE PLAN
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
E
E
B
E
L
O
W
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
E
E
A
B
O
V
E
6
7
8
10
10
49
3
JORDAN AND SALT
LAKE CANAL
JORDAN AND SALT
LAKE CANAL
11
12
12
1
1
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
2.61%-0.61%
3.01%
PV
I
0
+
0
0
.
0
0
EL
4
3
5
6
.
7
3
PV
I
0
+
0
9
.
8
0
EL
4
3
5
6
.
9
9
PV
I
0
+
1
5
.
5
5
EL
4
3
5
6
.
9
5
-0+10
43
5
6
.
7
3
43
6
2
.
2
0+00
43
5
7
.
2
4
43
6
2
.
7
43
5
7
.
9
9
43
6
3
.
4
0+50
43
5
8
.
7
4
43
6
4
.
0
43
5
9
.
5
0
43
6
4
.
7
1+00
43
6
0
.
2
5
43
6
5
.
3
43
6
1
.
0
0
43
6
6
.
0
1+50
43
6
1
.
7
5
43
6
6
.
9
43
6
2
.
5
1
43
6
7
.
7
2+00
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
0
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
2
9
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
7
4350
4355
4360
4365
4370
4375
4380
4385
0.00%
65.2
2
%
-73
.
5
3
%
0.00%
0.00%
PVI 2+38.79
EL 4363.68 PV
I
2
+
4
7
.
3
4
EL
4
3
6
3
.
6
8
PVI 2+56.64
EL 4356.84 PVI 2+92.18
EL 4356.84
PV
I
3
+
0
4
.
7
7
EL
4
3
6
5
.
0
5
PV
I
3
+
1
1
.
4
7
EL
4
3
6
5
.
0
5
43
6
3
.
2
6
43
6
8
.
5
43
6
1
.
7
2
43
6
9
.
3
2+50
43
5
6
.
8
4
43
6
1
.
9
4
43
7
0
.
2
3+00 3+25
EL. 4362.35
EL. 4357.06
AP
P
U
R
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
1
9
FITTING 232
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
4
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
5
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
1
AP
P
U
R
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
1
8
FI
T
T
I
N
G
2
3
6
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-232.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
2
3
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
3
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-232.dwg
U1232
PROPOSED WATER LINE PROFILE
SIMPSON AVENUE
D. TREADWELL
D. TREADWELL
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
H: 1" = 10' V: 1" = 2.5'
01-16-26
SIMPSON AVE. WATER LINE PROFILE
NOTES:
1. SEE SHEET U1231 FOR PLAN VIEW
2. SEE SHEETS U1234 AND U1235 FOR CATHODIC PROTECTION DETAILS.
3. PROPOSED ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE AT TOP OF PIPE
4. MINIMUM 5' VERTICAL SEPARATION REQUIRED FROM EXISTING JORDAN AND SALT LAKE
CANAL TO PROPOSED CASING
5. MAINTAIN MINIMUM 1' HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL SEPARATION BETWEEN PROPOSED
WATER LINE AND EXISTING UTILITIES
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
VERT SCALE IN FEET
0
(CUSTOM)
5 2.5 5 10
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
E
E
A
B
O
V
E
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
E
E
B
E
L
O
W
EXISTING GROUND
JORDAN AND SALT LAKE CANAL
PROPOSED SANITARY
BYPASS
EXISTING
SANITARY
PROPOSED
EXISTINGCONNECT TO
EXISTING
PROPOSED CASING
EXISTING FIBER
CONNECT TO
EXISTING
EXISTING GAS
SIMPSON AVE
S
1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
209+00
210+00 211+00 212+00
209+
0
0
210+00 211+00 212+00
ssss
ss
ss
ss
ss
ss
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-233.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
2
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
3
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-233.dwg
U1233
WATERLINE
CATHODIC PROTECTION
D. TREADWELL
A. LEWIS
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
1"=20'
01-16-26
GENERAL NOTES:
1. KEEP WORK SITE NEAT AND ORDERLY AT ALL TIMES. REMOVE EXCESS EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS
WHEN REQUIRED BY PREVAILING CONDITIONS. CONFINE OPERATIONS TO CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS
AND WORK AREAS. SITE SHALL BE RESTORED TO CONDITION EQUIVALENT TO THE ORIGINAL
CONDITION AND TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ENGINEER AND OWNER. PREVENT CONTAMINATION OF
THE PROJECT AREA.
2. CATHODIC PROTECTION MATERIALS TO BE STORED OFF THE GROUND AND PROTECTED AGAINST
WEATHER, CONDENSATION, AND MECHANICAL DAMAGE. WIRES SHOULD NOT BE BENT OR TIGHTLY
COILED.
3. MATERIALS DAMAGED IN SHIPMENT OR INSTALLATION ARE TO BE REPLACED BY CONTRACTOR.
4. PIPELINE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ELECTRICAL ISOLATION OF THE NEW
PIPELINE FROM EXISTING PIPELINES, CONCRETE REBAR, ELECTRICAL GROUNDING, CASINGS, PIPE
SUPPORTS, PIPE LATERALS, OR OTHER METALLIC STRUCTURES.
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE
PLANS FOR THIS PROJECT AND ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS WHICH MAY INTERFERE WITH THIS
PROJECT.
6. USE THERMITE WELD METHOD FOR ELECTRICAL CONNECTION OF COPPER WIRE TO METALLIC
SURFACES. FOLLOW MANUFACTURER'S PROCEDURES FOR INSTALLATION. ASSURE THAT THE PIPE OR
FITTING WALL THICKNESS IS OF SUFFICIENT THICKNESS THAT THERMITE WELD PROCESS WILL NOT
DAMAGE THE INTEGRITY OF THE PIPE OR FITTING OR PROTECTIVE LINING.
7. ALL TEST STATIONS TO BE INSTALLED ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE ROAD AS DETERMINED BY
OWNER/PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE.
TEST STATION NOTES:
1. SEE TEST STATION SCHEDULE FOR LOCATION, TYPE, AND STYLE OF TEST STATIONS.
2. SEE DETAIL 1, SHEET U1234 FOR TYPE "A" TEST STATION AND ANODE INSTALLATION ON THE 12" DIP
WATERLINE.
3. FLUSH MOUNT TEST STATION SHALL BE TRAFFIC RATED FLUSH MOUNTED CAST IRON BOX ASSEMBLY
BY JENSEN PRECAST, MODEL BROOKS 1-RT OR EQUAL. TEST BOX SHALL BE CONCRETE BODY CAST
WITH A CAST IRON RING, WITH A MINIMUM WEIGHT OF 54 POUNDS AND MINIMUM DIMENSIONS OF 8.75"
INSIDE DIAMETER AND 12" LONG. FURNISH WISH A 12-POUND CAST IRON LID WITH WORDS "CP TEST"
CAST INTO THE LID.
4. TEST LEADS TO BE #10 AWG, SOLID, RHW/USE-2 BLACK INSULATION OR AS SPECIFIED.
5. ALL WIRE CONNECTIONS TO BE WITH CRIMP ON SPADE LUG TERMINALS.
6. INSTALL PANDUIT LABEL TAGS ON ALL WIRES WITHIN TEST STATION BOX AND LABEL TAGS WITH FINE
POINT WATERPROOF INK NYLON MARKER PEN.
7. IF POSSIBLE, INSTALL TEST STATIONS OVER CENTERLINE OF PIPE. PLACE TEST STATIONS ON
PROTECTED LOCATIONS (NEXT TO FENCES, APPURTENANCES, OUT OF ROADWAYS, ETC.) OR OTHER
EASILY ACCESSIBLE AREAS. WHERE REQUIRED, OFFSET TEST STATION TO EDGE OF ROAD.
8. NO BELOW GRADE SPLICING OF WIRES IS ALLOWED WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FROM THE ENGINEER.
CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE ALL WIRES ARE OF SUFFICIENT LENGTH FOR EACH INTENDED
APPLICATION.
9. IN-LINE SPLICES WHERE DEEMED NECESSARY BY ENGINEER SHALL BE "C" TAPS MADE OF CONDUCTIVE
WROUGHT COPPER SIZED TO FIT THE WIRES BEING SPLICED. "BUTT" TYPE WIRE SPLICE CONNECTORS
ARE ACCEPTABLE FOR #10 AWG OR SMALLER SPLICES. COAT SPLICES WITH SCOTCH 130C TAPE,
SCOTCH SUPER 88 TAPE, AND SCOTCHKOTE ELECTRICAL COATING AS MANUFACTURED BY 3M
PRODUCTS. 30 MIL LINERLESS RUBBER HIGH VOLTAGE SPLICING TAPE AND 7 MIL VINYL ELECTRICAL
TAPE SUITABLE FOR MOIST OR WET ENVIRONMENTS AND DIRECT BURY.
10. PROVIDE A MINIMUM ANODE SPACING OF 5-FEET FROM ALL BURIED METALLIC STRUCTURES.
11. ANODES TO BE PREPACKAGED 32 LB. HIGH POTENTIAL MAGNESIUM, ASTM B843, GRADE M1C, AND
TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM G97.
12. HEAVIER GALVANIC ANODES MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR 32-LB ANODES AT THE CONTRACTOR'S OPTION,
BUT THE TOTAL QUANTITY OF ANODES REQUIRED WILL NOT CHANGE.
13. ANODES TO BE SUPPLIED WITH #12 AWG SOLID COPPER RHW/USE-2 BLACK INSULATION AND
SUFFICIENT LENGTH AS REQUIRED TO REACH FROM PIPELINE TO TEST STATION WITHOUT SPLICING
ADDITIONAL WIRE. UNSPLICED LEAD LENGTH REQUIRED TO BE VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR.
14. ANODES TO BE BURIED A MINIMUM OF 5 FEET BELOW GRADE AT OR BELOW SPRINGLINE OF PIPE.
15. REMOVE ANODE FROM PLASTIC PACKAGING BEFORE INSTALLATION.
16. BORIN STELTH 2 REFERENCE ELECTRODE, MODEL SRE-007-CUY, TO BE INSTALLED AT ALL TEST
STATIONS ACCORDING TO MANUFACTURER INSTRUCTIONS OR AS SPECIFIED BY ENGINEER.
17. BACKFILL WITH NATIVE SOIL. A MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES AROUND ANY COUPONS, ANODES, AND
REFERENCE CELLS, THEN FLOOD EACH WITH A MINIMUM OF 5 GALLONS FRESH WATER. AFTER WATER
ABSORPTION, CONTINUE BACKFILLING AS SPECIFIED.
18. ROUTE ALL TEST LEADS AND COUPON WIRES IN APPROPRIATELY SIZED SCHEDULE 80 ASTM 1785 PVC
CONDUIT BETWEEN THE PIPE AND THE TEST STATION BASE.
19. DURING BACKFILL, INSTALL CATHODIC PROTECTION WARNING TAPE: 3” PLASTIC, APWA BLUE,
NON-DETECTABLE, MARKED “CAUTION CATHODIC PROTECTION CABLE BURIED BELOW." INSTALL 12"-18"
ABOVE ANY CATHODIC PROTECTION WIRES OR DEVICES.
CONTINUITY BONDING AND COATING NOTES:
1. ALL BURIED METALLIC PRESSURE PIPING SYSTEMS, WHICH CONTAIN MECHANICAL OR
NON-METALLURGICAL JOINTS, SHALL BE MADE ELECTRICALLY CONTINUOUS BY BONDING WITH
STRANDED COPPER WIRE. DIRECT BONDING SHALL BE ACHIEVED USING THE EXOTHERMIC WELD
PROCESS WITH THE NUMBER OF BOND WIRES REQUIRED, PER PIPE JOINT, AS SPECIFIED.
2. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE RESISTANCE PER JOINT SHALL BE 162 MICRO-OHMS USING TWO BOND CABLES
PER JOINT.
3. PROVIDE DIELECTRIC COATING ON ALL BURIED METALLIC FITTINGS, PIPING, AND VALVE BOXES,
UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE.
4. BOND ALL ADJACENT FITTING JOINTS WHERE MULTIPLE METALLIC FITTINGS ARE INSTALLED TOGETHER
WITH JOINT BONDS.
5. ALL BARE LINE PIPE, UNCOATED FLANGE BOLTS, UNCOATED MECHANICAL FITTING BOLTS, AND OTHER
UNCOATED BOLTS, NUTS, FLANGES, OR FITTINGS WITH METALLIC COMPOSITION SHALL BE PROTECTED
WITH WAX-TAPE PRIMER AND #1 WAX-TAPE AS MANUFACTURED BY TRENTON CORPORATION OR
APPROVED EQUIVALENT AND APPLIED TO A THICKNESS OF 20 MILS.
SLCDPU SIMPSON AVENUE WATERLINE - CATHODIC PROTECTION OVERVIEW
SCALE: 1" - 20'
WB STA. 209+67, 29.5' RT
CTS #1 - TYPE "A" TEST STATION,
SEE DETAIL
WB STA 211+83.5, 23.9' RT
CTS #2 - TYPE "A" TEST STATION,
SEE DETAIL1,4
U1234 1,4
U1234
20 40
SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
EASTBOUND CL
WESTBOUND CL
10' OFFSET FROM TRACK ℄
PROPOSED CASING
5'-0"
5'-0"
O.C.,TYP
6"
4"
1"
10"
2"
2"
2"
2"
3.5' MIN
12"
3'-0"
MIN
5'-0"
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-234.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
3
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-234.dwg
U1234
CATHODIC PROTECTION
DETAILS 1 OF 2
D. TREADWELL
A. LEWIS
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. SEE FLUSH MOUNTED TEST STATION DETAIL.
2. POSITION STEEL COUPON 12" AND PARALLEL TO PIPE. COUPON SHOULD BE APPROX. 6"
FROM REFERENCE ELECTRODE.
3. SEE TEST STATION SCHEDULE FOR ANODE QUANTITY AND TYPE.
4. INSTALL AND LABEL EACH TEST LEAD IN TEST STATION.
5. NOT ALL TEST WIRES SHOWN FOR CLARITY. FOR TERMINAL BOARD LAYOUT, SEE DETAIL.
NOTES:
1. COLOR CODE WIRE INSULATION AS SHOWN IN APPLICABLE TEST STATION
DETAILS, CONNECT EACH TEST WIRE TO SEPARATE TERMINAL.
2. WIRE CONFIGURATION FOR FLUSH MOUNTED TEST STATIONS SIMILAR TO
POST MOUNTED TEST STATIONS.
3. PROVIDE 18 INCHES SLACK IN TEST WIRES, MINIMUM
NOTES:
1. TERMINAL BOARD LAYOUT FOR REFERENCE ONLY AND MAY BE DIFFERENT ON PHYSICAL
BOARD.
2. TERMINALS SHALL BE 1/4" STAINLESS STEEL WITH LOCKING WASHER, TWO FLAT WASHERS,
AND DOUBLE NUTS.
3. ALL WIRE CONNECTIONS TO BE WITH RING TONGUE COMPRESSION TERMINALS.
4.INSTALL AND LABEL EACH TEST LEAD IN TEST STATION.
5. TEST WIRES NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY.
6. ONE (1) COUPON TO BE INSTALLED OR AS SPECIFIED BY ENGINEER WITH MAGNETIC COUPON SWITCH
INSTALLED BETWEEN COUPON TEST LEAD TERMINAL AND PIPE TEST LEAD TERMINAL FOR ALL TEST
STATION TYPES.
NOTES:
1. FILL BOTH ENDS OF CONDUIT WITH DUCT PUTTY.
2. ALL WIRES WILL BE SPLICED USING THE SAME COLOR CODE
AS EXISTING WIRES, AND THE SAME TYPE WIRE.
NOTES:
1. FILL VOIDS AND IRREGULARITIES WITH INSULATING PUTTY,
WRAP CONNECTION WITH TWO LAYERS OF SCOTCH 130C SELF
VULCANIZING RUBBER TAPE AND TWO LAYERS OF SCOTCH 88
VINYL ELECTRICAL TAPE.
2. DETAIL SIMILAR FOR ANODE HEADER WIRE SPLICES. SIZE
COMPRESSION CONNECTORS AS REQUIRED.
NOTES:
1. COPPER SLEEVE REQUIRED FOR #2 AWG JOINT BONDS OR FOR
#12 AWG OR SMALLER TEST WIRES.
2. WELDER AND CARTRIDGE SIZE VARIES ACCORDING TO PIPE
SIZE AND PIPE MATERIAL, CONSULT WELDER MANUFACTURER
FOR RECOMMENDED WELDER AND CARTRIDGE
3. COAT ALL THERMITE WELDS, PIPE, AND EXPOSED COPPER
WIRE AS SPECIFIED.
4. PIPELINE COATING NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY.
NOTES:
1. ANODES TO BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE.
2. ANODES INCLUDE AN ATTACHED LEAD WIRE FOR INSTALLATION.
3. REMOVE ANODE FROM PLASTIC BEFORE INSTALLATION.
4. ENSURE ANODES ARE NOT IN CONTACT WITH ANY OTHER BELOW GRADE
STRUCTURES.
5. AFTER ANODE INSTALLATION, BACKFILL TO 1-FOOT OVER THE ANODES, WATER
ANODES WITH 5 GALLONS OF WATER PER ANODE, IF SOILS ARE DRY AS
DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER.
6. WHEN POSSIBLE, PLACE ANODES WITHIN MOIST LOAM AND CLAY SOIL. AVOID
PLACEMENT OF ANODES WITHIN DRY SAND AND DO NOT PLACE WITHIN GRAVEL.
PIPE TERMINAL
0.01 OHM
HOLLOWAY SHUNT
ANODE TERMINAL
COUPON TERMINAL
PIPE TERMINAL
REF.ELECTRODE
TERMINAL
FINISH GRADE
#12 AWG TWIN LEAD, GREEN INSULATION
#8 AWG HEADER WIRE,
BLACK INSULATION
2 - #10 AWG WIRES,
WHITE INSULATION
WIRE SPLICE, TYP,
SEE DETAIL
1 - #14 AWG WIRE,
YELLOW INSULATION
DUCTILE IRON COUPON
PIPELINE
WIRE CONN, TYP,
SEE DETAIL
GALVANIC ANODE,
QUANTITY AS
SPECIFIED, TYPREFERENCE ELECTRODE,
LOCATE 6" FROM PIPE
4' SQUARE x 6" THICK
FORMED CONC PAD 8" DIA. CAST
IRON COVER
12" METER BOX,
PROVIDE EXTENSION
WHERE SPECIFIED
EXTENSION NOT
SHOWN
PLASTIC OR GLASS REINFORCED
BOARD WITH SST TERMINALS,
SEE DETAIL
TEST WIRES
(NOT ALL SHOWN)
CONNECT #8 AWG ANODE
LEAD, IF THERE ARE NO
ANODES THIS CONNECTION
POINT SHALL BE A SPARE
0.01 OHM HOLLOWAY SHUNT,
REQUIRED AT ANODE TEST
STATIONS ONLY
MAGNETIC COUPON SWITCH, SEE NOTE 6
CONNECT #14 AWG
REFERENCE ELECTRODE, YELLOW
CONNECT #12 GREEN COUPON TEST LEAD
CONNECT #12 GREEN COUPON TEST LEAD
PLASTIC OR GLASS REINFORCED BOARD
CONNECT #10 AWG PIPE
TEST WIRE, WHITE
CONNECT #10 AWG
PIPE TEST WIRE,
WHITE
CONNECT FOREIGN PIPE, FOREIGN ANODE, CASING, OR
UNPROTECTED INSULATING FLANGE TEST WIRES. SHUNT
REQUIRED BETWEEN FOREIGN ANODE AND FOREIGN
PIPE TEST WIRE.
PIPELINE REFERENCE ELECTRODE,
LOCATE 6" FROM PIPE OR AS SPECIFIED
DUCTILE IRON COUPON,
LOCATE 12" FROM PIPE OR AS SPECIFIED
ASPHALT
CONDUIT BUSHING
EACH END
1/8"/FT.
SLOPE
FLUSH MOUNT
TEST STATION,
SEE DETAIL
FINISH GRADE
SIDEWALK
CURB
2" SCH 40 PVC
ANODE
HEADER WIRE ANODE LEAD WIRE
TAPE WRAP
CONNECTION,
SEE NOTE 1
TAPE WRAP
CONNECTION,
SEE NOTE 1 COMPRESSION
CONNECTOR, TYP FILE OR GRIND WELD AREA
TO BRIGHT METAL BEFORE
WELDING
PIPELINE
INSULATED WIRE THERMITE WELD, SEE NOTES
DIELECTRIC COATING,
SEE NOTES
#8 AWG STRANDED
COPPER ANODE HEADER WIRE
NATIVE SOIL
BACKFILL
WIRE SPLICE,
SEE DETAIL
FINISH GRADE
PREPACKAGE 32LB HIGH
POTENTIAL MAGNESIUM ANODE
FLUSH MOUNT TEST STATION
SCALE: NTS
2
-
3
-
TERMINAL BOARD
WIRING DIAGRAM
TYPE A TEST STATION
SCALE: NTS
1
-
TEST STATION TERMINAL BOARD
SCALE: NTS
3
-
TEST STATION OFFSET
SCALE: NTS
4
-
GALVANIC ANODE WIRE SPLICES
SCALE: NTS
5
-
STEEL AND DUCTILE IRON
PIPE WIRE CONNECTION
SCALE: NTS
6
-HORIZONTAL GALVANIC ANODE INSTALLATION
SCALE: NTS
7
-
2
-
6
-
3
-
5
-
3
-5
-
CATHODIC PROTECTION TEST STATION SCHEDULE
CTS # STATION TYPE STYLE
NUMBER AND BARE WEIGHT
OF HIGH POTENTIAL
MAGNESIUM ANODES
REMARKS
1 TBD A FLUSH 4 - 32 LB.OFFSET TEST STATION AS SHOWN IN PLAN VIEW
2 TBD A FLUSH 4 - 32 LB.OFFSET TEST STATION AS SHOWN IN PLAN VIEW.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-U-1-235.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
d
a
v
i
d
.
t
r
e
a
d
w
e
l
l
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
1
6
u
t
i
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
u
-
1
-
2
3
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-U-1-235.dwg
U1235
CATHODIC PROTECTION
DETAILS 2 OF 2
D. TREADWELL
A. LEWIS
F. NANNENGA
D. TREADWELL
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. INSTALL NUMBER OF BOND WIRES SPECIFIED PER
JOINT FOR PIPE DIAMETER AND MATERIAL.
2. COAT ALL THERMITE WELDS, PIPE, AND EXPOSED
COPPER WIRE WITH AQUATA-POXY, WAX TAPE,
DENSO PROTAL 7200, OR COATING SYSTEM AS
SPECIFIED.
3. PIPELINE COATING NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY.
NOTES:
1. INSTALL NUMBER OF BOND WIRES SPECIFIED PER
JOINT FOR PIPE DIAMETER AND MATERIAL.
2. COAT ALL THERMITE WELDS, PIPE, AND EXPOSED
COPPER WIRE. WITH AQUATA-POXY, WAX TAPE,
DENSO PROTAL 7200, OR COATING SYSTEM AS
SPECIFIED.
3. PIPELINE COATING NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY.
NOTES:
1. PUSH ON DUCTILE IRON BOND SHOWN, SIMILAR FOR
DUCTILE MECHANICAL AND RESTRAINED JOINTS, AND
STEEL CARNEGIE JOINTS.
2. INSTALL NUMBER OF BOND WIRES SPECIFIED PER
JOINT FOR PIPE DIAMETER AND MATERIAL.
3. COAT ALL THERMITE WELDS, PIPE, AND EXPOSED
COPPER WIRE WITH AQUATA-POXY, WAX TAPE, DENSO
PROTAL 7200, OR COATING SYSTEM AS SPECIFIED.
4. PIPELINE COATING NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY.
NOTES:
1. INSTALL NUMBER OF BOND WIRES SPECIFIED
PER JOINT FOR PIPE DIAMETER AND MATERIAL.
2. COAT ALL THERMITE WELDS, PIPE, AND
EXPOSED COPPER WIRE WITH AQUATA-POXY,
WAX TAPE, DENSO PROTAL 7200, OR COATING
SYSTEM AS SPECIFIED.
3. PIPELINE COATING NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY.
NOTES:
1. INSTALL NUMBER OF BOND WIRES SPECIFIED
PER JOINT FOR PIPE DIAMETER AND MATERIAL.
2. COAT ALL THERMITE WELDS, PIPE, AND
EXPOSED COPPER WIRE WITH AQUATA-POXY,
WAX TAPE, DENSO PROTAL 7200, OR COATING
SYSTEM AS SPECIFIED.
3. PIPELINE COATING NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY.
THERMITE WELD WIRE
CONNECTION, TYP SEE DETAIL
BOND FOLLOWER RING WITH
#12 MIN. AWG HMWPE OR THIN COPPER WIRE
PVC PIPE, TYP
FOLLOWER RING
DETAIL A
THERMITE WELD WIRE
CONNECTION, TYP, SEE DETAIL
#2 AWG STRANDED
COPPER WIRE WITH HMWPE
INSTALLATION
THERMITE WELD WIRE
CONNECTION, TYP, SEE DETAIL
THROUGH CONDUCTOR
THERMITE WELD
THERMITE WELD, TYPE,
SEE DETAIL
BOND PIPE AND COUPLER WITH
#2 AWG HMWPE COPPER WIRE
DETAIL B
DETAIL C
FIRE HYDRANT
CURB
DUCTILE IRON PIPE RISER
BOND WIRE
MJ GATE VALVE
BOND WIREBOND WIRE
DUCTILE IRON TEE
THERMITE WELD WIRE
CONNECTION, TYP, SEE DETAIL DIP PIPE
FINISH GRADE
THERMITE WELD WIRE
CONNECTION, TYP, SEE DETAIL
#2 AWG STRANDED COPPER
WIRE WITH HMWPE INSULATION
THERMITE WEL WIRE
CONNECTION, TYP, SEE DETAIL
#2 AWG STRANDED COPPER
WIRE WITH HMWPE INSULATION
THERMITE WELD WIRE
CONNECTION, TYP, SEE DETAIL
MECHANICAL JOINT BOND
SCALE: NTS
8
-
FLEXIBLE JOINT BOND
SCALE: NTS
9
-
DUCTILE IRON JOINT BOND
SCALE: NTS
10
-FLANGED JOINT BOND
SCALE: NTS
11
-
FIRE HYDRANT BONDING
SCALE: NTS
12
-
6
U1234
6
U1234
6
U1234
#12 AWG STRANDED
WIRE PIGTAIL, HMWPE OR THIN
INSULATION, TYP OF 2
#2 AWG STRANDED WIRE,
HMWPE INSULATION
THERMITE WELD,
TYP, SEE DETAIL
FLEXIBLE, EXPANSION,
OR DEPEND-O-LOCK
TYPE COUPLING
6
U1234
6
U1234
6
U1234
6
U1234
6
U1234
6
U1234
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-0-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
0
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y0001
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
001
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-0-002.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
0
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y0002
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
STANDARD SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
3"
C
L
R
3" CLR
SCALE: NTS
AT FEEDER POLE 4" DIA PVC CONDUIT
FOR FEEDER CABLES ONE PER
FEEDER CIRCUIT. IF TWO FEEDER
CIRCUITS ARE LOCATED ON ONE
FEEDER POLE THEN SIGNAL/COMM
CONDUIT WILL REQUIRE FIELD
ENGINEER DIRECTION
OPENING IN POLE BASE PLATE
FOR ACCESS, SMALLEST FEEDER
POLE SHOWN
FOR DOUBLE FEEDER POLES,
SPARE CONDUIT TERMINATES
AT SWEEP
2" DIA CONDUIT FOR
SIGNAL/COMMUNICATION
#4 TIES
2" DIA CONDUIT FOR
LIGHTNING ARRESTER TYPICAL
ALL FEEDER POLES AND AS SHOWN
ON OCS LAYOUT DRAWINGS
TOP OF TRACK SLAB,
EXISTING GRADE
OR TOR EXCEPT AT
SIDEWALK INSTALLATIONS
WHERE TOP OF SLAB IS
160MM BELOW TOP OF
SIDEWALK EXCEPT IN
SECTION 6A.1 WHERE
FLUSH WITH SIDEWALK
2" DIA. 90 DEG SWEEP IN
FOUNDATION FOR LIGHTNING
ARRESTER TYPICAL ALL
POLES WITH SURGE
ARRESTERS SEE LAYOUT
DRAWINGS
3"CL
R
4-# TIES
@ 6" OC
2" x 2" x 1/4"x 6"
A36 ANGLE BRACKET
(SEE NOTE IN SECTION VIEW BELOW)
FOR BOLT CIRCLE, BOLT SIZE, BEARING PLATE
DATA AND BASE PLATE DATA SEE TABLE BELOW
AND CE-OC-5173. WIDE FLANGE POLE
FOUNDATION WILL NOT REQUIRE CONDUIT
SWEEPS FOR FEEDERS. CONDUITS WILL BE
ROUTED OUTSIDE FOUNDATION AND INTO THE
WEB.
XXX
#4
T
I
E
S
@
1
2
"
O
C
SCALE: NTS SCALE: NTS
FOUNDATION
TRACKSET PARALLEL TO TRACK
BOL
T
C
I
R
C
L
E
DIAM
E
T
E
R
"
B
.
C
.
"
"E
"
EQ
U
A
L
EQ
U
A
L
"G" NOMINAL
EQUAL EQUAL
FOUNDATION
PLATE A36 STEEL
12" THICK
"G"+"A"+1"3"
"G
"
+
"
A
"
+
1
"
3"
"A"
+
1
/
4
"
"A"+1/4"
BOLT CIRCLE
"B.C."
1-1/2"
TYPICA
L
LE
N
G
T
H
LE
N
G
T
H
WASHER
LEVELING
NUT
FOUNDATION
FINISH LEVEL
BEARING
PLATE
DOUBLE NUTS
C BOLT
OV
E
R
A
L
L
L
E
N
G
T
H
"
B
"
"H
"
EM
B
E
D
M
E
N
T
D
E
P
T
H
"C
"
TH
R
E
A
D
"D
"
PR
O
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
BOLT DIA. "A"
18
"
GA
L
V
A
N
I
Z
E
D
LE
N
G
T
H
(M
I
N
.
)
ADDITIONAL #8
REINFORCEMENT BARS
TO EXTEND A MINIMUM
OF 3'-6" BELOW THE
BOTTOM OF ANCHORS
ADDITIONAL #8
REINFORCEMENT BARS
(4 EA PER ANCHOR BOLT)
3'-6" FOR TERMINATION POLES
&
3'-0" FOR NON TERMINATION POLES
Y3002
OCS POLE FOUNDATIONS
B.DEMERS
S.KHAYYAT
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-3-002.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
4
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
3
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
NOTES:
* THE LATTER PORTION OF THE FOUNDATION REFERENCE (4.6, 5.5, 6.1, 7.6) INDICATES THE FOUNDATION DEPTH IN
METRES.
** "-F" REPRESENTS FEEDER POLE, "BW" REPRESENTS BALANCE WEIGHT POLE, SEE OCS LAYOUT PLANS.
*** THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DESIGN MOMENTS ARE BASED ON FOUNDATION DRILLED PIER CALCULATIONS AND ARE
DESIGNED TO LIMIT THE DEPTH PIER WHILE MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR OCS POLE STRENGTH.
FOR GENERAL NOTES, SEE DRAWING CE-OC-5173.
*FOUNDATION
REFERENCE
BOLT
CIRCLE
"B.C."
BASE PLATE
SIZE
"E"
BASE PLATE
THICKNESS
BOLT DIAMETER
"A"
BOLT SPACING
"G"
EMBEDMENT
DEPTH
"H"
BOLT
PROJECTION
"C"
BOLT THREAD
LENGTH
"D"
OVERALL BOLT
LENGTH
"B"
***MAX ALLOWABLE DESIGN
MOMENT (kip*ft)POLE TYPE
FPE-14 22"23"2"2"15.56"54"12"10"50"66 PD-XX OR PE-XX
FPE-16 PD-XX OR PE-XX22"23"2"2"15.56"54"12"10"50"99
FPE-18 22"23"2"2"15.56"50"12"10"54"143 PD-XX OR PE-XX
FPE-20 (Term.)
FPE-20(Non-Term)
22"23"2"2"15.56"50"12"10"54"175 PD-XX OR PE-XX
250 PD-XX OR PE-XX54"10"12"50"15.56"22"23"2"2"
CL
TOTAL ROLL
TRACK TOLERANCE
EFFECTS
TOTAL ROLL
TRACK TOLERANCE
EFFECTS
3 2 1
4
1 2 3
4
1.24'.62'.50'1.24' .62' .50'
CLEARANCE
ENVELOPE
VEHICLE CRITERIA
6.24'
CLEARANCE ENVELOPE DETAILS:
FULL ROLL OF VEHICLE = 3.00 DEGREES EACH SIDE OF CENTERLINE
FULL ROLL
OPERATING HEIGHT
TOP OF RAIL TO CENTER OF ROLL
TOP OF PANTOGRAPH TO CENTER OF ROLL
ROLL OF PANTOGRAPH
22.50 FT
2.10 FT
20.40 FT
2.00 IN
12.83 IN
14.83 IN
14.83 IN
=
=
=
=
=
(+)
(-)
TRACK ALLOWANCES ALIGNMENT = 1 3/4 IN
CROSS LEVEL @ 1 1/4" DIFFERENCE
1.75 IN
5.70 IN
7.45 IN
=
=
(+)
TOTAL TRACK TOLERANCE EFFECTS,
7.45 IN =0.62 FT
=
6.00 IN =0.50 FT
=10.96 FT
CLEARANCE
PANTOGRAPH PARAMETERS
DESCRIPTION
OVERALL WIDTH OVER HORNS
DESCRIPTION
GAUGE
VEHICLE PARAMETERS
DESCRIPTION
2.0
2.0
56.50
IN.
6.23
0.17
0.17
23.00
13.33
4.71
FT.
2.10
0.17
160
276
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM PARAMETERS
DESCRIPTION
74.80
3 DEGREES
IN FT
IN FT
IN FT
1.5 0.13
1.25 0.10
2.0
Vm
a
=
FR
E
I
G
H
T
T
R
A
C
K
S
V
n
=
2
7
0
N
O
R
M
A
L
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
2
2
'
-
6
"
)
CARBON CURRENT
COLLECTING STRIPS
OF INTERSECTIONHORN POINT
Wh = 52.24" HORN WIDTH
Wp = 74.80" PANTOGRAPH WIDTH
Wc = 50.39" CARBON WIDTH
12"
PAN HEAD PLAN
CONTACT WIRE OPERATING HEIGHTS
3 2 2 31
SELECTED MAIN LINE TRACK PARAMETERS FOR CLEARANCE ENVELOPE
270
0.25
MAX
REQUIRED CLEARANCE ENVELOPE (ONE HALF)
REQUIRED CLEARANCE ENVELOPE (TOTAL)
UNIVERSAL PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE ENVELOPE
27
5
"
M
A
X
I
M
U
M
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
2
2
'
-
1
1
"
)
2" UPLIFT (NOTE 3)
FOR ALL CONTACT WIRE HEIGHTS ON ALL UTA LINES
HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT TOLERANCE (SEE NOTE 1)
CROSS LEVEL TOLERANCE (SEE NOTE 1)
RAIL CENTERS (NOTE 1)4.9459.22
TRUCK ROLL CENTER HEIGHT (NOTE 1)
LATERAL SHIFT AT TRUCK ROLL CENTER (NOTE 2)
MAXIMUM VEHICLE REPETITIVE ROLL ANGLE (NOTE 2)
25.15
PANTOGRAPH ROLL AT ALL HEIGHTS (NOTE 2)
MAXIMUM PANTOGRAPH OPERATING HEIGHT (NOTE 2)
MINIMUM PANTOGRAPH OPERATING HEIGHT (NOTE 2)
MAXIMUM CONTACT WIRE HEIGHT FOR DESIGN
CONTACT WIRE UPLIFT ALLOWANCE (NOTE 3)
22'6"
3
WORST CASE CONDITIONS ARE WITH FULL VEHICLE ROLL WITHOUT WIND AT 22'6":FT
1.24 FT
5.48 FT=
FULL ROLL = 20.40 TAN (3.00)
TRACK ALIGNMENT: (NOTE 4)
ELECTRICAL/MECHANICAL CLEARANCE ALLOWANCE, (NOTE 4)
PANTOGRAPH UPLIFT ALLOWANCE (NOTE 1) (NOTE 3)
WIDTH OF CLEARANCE = 10.96' USE (11'-0")ELECTRICAL/MECHANICAL
HALF WIDTH OF PANTOGRAPH: C TO 1 IN DIAGRAM = 6.23 FT /2 = 3.12 FTL
TOTAL ROLL, 1 TO 2
2 TO 3
3 TO 4
6.23ft. [1900mm]
79.17ft. [24132mm]
39.59ft. [12066mm]
29.58ft. [9016mm]
39.59ft. [12066mm]
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-005.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
0
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7005
OCS TECHNICAL SHEET
UNIVERSAL PANTOGRAPH
CLEARANCE ENVELOPE
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. FOR UNIVERSAL PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE PURPOSES, TRACK
TOLERANCES ARE TAKEN FROM AIRPORT LRT .
2. PER DESIGN CRITERIA CHAPTER 11.
3. CONTACT WIRE UPLIFT ALLOWANCE INTERPRETED AS 2"
PANTOGRAPH UPLIFT PLUS 1" CARBON WEAR.
NOTES:
SITE SPECIFIC DRAWINGS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
BASIC DESIGN DRAWINGS
OCS SITE SPECIFIC DRAWINGS INCLUDE MASTER OVERLAP CHARTS, OCS
WIRING LAYOUT PLANS, FOUNDATION AND POLE SCHEDULES.
A MASTER OVERLAP CHART IS A SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM OF THE ROUTE
SHOWING EACH TENSION LENGTH, IT'S TERMINATION TYPE, AND MID-POINT
ANCHOR RELATIVE TO TRACK ALIGNMENT AND CIVIL FEATURES.
FOUNDATION AND POLE SCHEDULES PROVIDE VALUES FOR STATIONING AND
OFFSET FOR THE CENTER OF EACH NEW STRUCTURE AND THE ASSEMBLY
REFERENCE CALLOUTS FOR POLE FOUNDATION AND POLE TYPES.
ALONG TRACK STATIONING OF THE POLE FOUNDATIONS AND DOWN GUY
ANCHOR FOUNDATIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED AGAINST THE AS-BUILT
TRACK ALIGNMENT BY THE POLE AND FOUNDATION CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO
COMMENCING WORK.
THE POLE AND FOUNDATION STATIONING IS BASED ON THE DESIGNED TRACK
ALIGNMENT AND PROFILE DRAWINGS OF THE LIGHT RAIL SYSTEM. AS-BUILT
VARIATIONS IN THE ALIGNMENT BEYOND THE STATED TOLERANCES SHALL
BE REFERRED TO THE PROJECT MANAGER IMMEDIATELY.
OFFSET DIMENSIONS ARE MEASURED FROM THE CENTERLINE OF TRACK
TO CENTERLINE OF POLE AT TRACK LEVEL AND SHALL BE VERIFIED PRIOR
TO THE FABRICATION OF ANY OCS ASSEMBLIES.
THE TOP OF FOUNDATION HEIGHT GIVEN IN THE FOUNDATION AND POLE
SCHEDULE DRAWINGS IS REFERENCED TO THE ADJACENT RAIL LEVEL OF
THE NOMINATED LIGHT RAIL TRACK.
OCS WIRING LAYOUT PLANS SHOW ALL WIRING SUPPORT AND RESISTRATION
LOCATIONS, AND ORIENTATION OF WIRES AND EQUIPMENT, PRINCIPAL WIRING
DIMENSIONS AND ASSEMBLY REFERENCES.
CONTACT WIRE HEIGHT DIMENSIONS ARE REFERENCED TO THE DESIGNED
RAIL LEVEL AT CENTERLINE OF THE TRACK SERVICED BY THAT WIRE.
LOADS GENERATED BY THE ATTACHMENT OF FUTURE OR TEMPORARY WIRING
OR ANCILLARY WIRES TO THE STRUCTURES HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED
EXCEPT WHERE NOTED ON THE DRAWING OR CONTRACT SPECIFICATION.
ALL DIMENSIONS, DETAILS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS INCLUDING
TRACK TOLERANCES SHALL BE VERIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR IN THE FIELD
PRIOR TO THE FABRICATION OF STRUCTURES AND OTHER ASSOCIATED
EQUIPMENTS.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
CONTRACTOR AS BUILT RECORD DRAWINGS
CONTRACTOR SUPPLIED SHOP DRAWINGS
OCS BASIC DESIGN DRAWINGS INCLUDE TECHNICAL SHEETS, GENERAL
ARRANGEMENT DRAWINGS, TYPICAL SPAN DRAWINGS, TYPICAL STRUCTURE
DRAWINGS, AND ASSEMBLY DRAWINGS.
TECHNICAL SHEET DRAWINGS PROVIDE BASIC DATA AND DEVELOPED CRITERIA
RELATING TO THE OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM AND ITS RELATIONSHIP
WITH OTHER EQUIPMENT AND SYSTEMS.
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWINGS SHOW THE REQUIRED RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN MULTIPLE SPANS OF WIRING AND MULTIPLE STRUCTURES.
TYPICAL SPAN DRAWINGS SHOW CONTACT AND MESSENGER WIRE SPANS
AND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN VARIOUS OCS ASSEMBLIES NEEDED TO
FIT OUT EACH SPAN OF A GIVEN TYPE.
TYPICAL STRUCTURE DRAWINGS SHOW A CROSS SECTION VIEW OF
INDIVIDUAL STRUCTURE TYPES AND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN VARIOUS
OCS ASSEMBLIES NEEDED TO FIT OUT THE STRUCTURE.
ASSEMBLY DRAWINGS SHOW ONE OR MORE ASSEMBLIES OF
GENERIC PARTS WITH REQUIRED DIMENSIONS, INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS,
AND BILL OF MATERIALS TABLE. ASSEMBLIES ARE IDENTIFIED BY
DISCRETE REFERENCE NUMBERS.
FINAL DETAILING OF ASSEMBLIES SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
CONTRACTOR WHO SHALL PRODUCE SHOP DRAWING FOR EACH AND EVERY
ASSEMBLY REFERENCE REQUIRED FOR THE COMPLETE INSTALLATION OF THE
OCS. CONTRACTORS AND SUPPLIERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO PROVIDE
THEIR OWN STANDARD ASSEMBLIES AND COMPONENTS PROVIDED THAT
THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PURPOSE, DIMENSIONAL PERFORMANCE,
AND SPECIFICATION. DETAILING SHALL INCLUDE PARTS IDENTIFICATION AND BILL
OF MATERIALS TABLE.
CONSISTENCY OF ASSEMBLIES AND PARTS SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR
ALL APPLICATIONS THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT.
THE LOADING VALUES SHOWN ON OCS ASSEMBLY DRAWINGS ARE
FOR INFORMATION ONLY, SUCH VALUES MAY HAVE FORMED THE BASIS FOR
ASSEMBLIES CALLED FROM OTHER CONTRACT DRAWINGS.THE CONTRACTOR
SHALL DETERMINE AND RECORD THE ACTUAL LOADING CAPACITIES FOR THE
ASSEMBLIES AND COMPONENTS TO BE PROVIDED ON SHOP DRAWINGS.
ALL OCS ASSEMBLIES SHALL BE TESTED TO DEMONSTRATE MECHANICAL
STRENGTH CAPABILITY INCLUDING THE REQUIRED FACTORS OF SAFETY. PAST
TEST RESULTS MAY BE USED.
TEST RECORDS OF ALL ASSEMBLIES INCLUDING PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE
TEST RIG IN EACH CASE, IF APPROPRIATE, SHALL BE SUPPLIED TO THE
PROJECT MANAGER BEFORE INSTALLATION.
GENERALA.
B.
C.D.
E.
1. THE SCOPE, CONTENT, AND PRESENTATION OF CONTRACTOR PREPAREDDRAWINGS SHALL BE MODELED ON CONTRACT SITE SPECIFIC AND BASIC
DESIGN DRAWINGS WHERE APPROPRIATE.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
THE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE OCS AS BUILT STRUCTURE
RECORD DRAWINGS.
EACH OCS STRUCTURE RECORD DRAWING SHALL CONTAIN THE INFORMATION
REQUIRED.
AN OCS STRUCTURE RECORD DRAWING DEPICTS ONE OR MORE POLES
OR BUILDING ATTACHMENTS, PLUS EQUIPMENT ARRANGED TO SUPPORT AND/OR
REGISTER MESSENGER AND CONTACT WIRES AT ONE SPECIFIC LOCATION.
AS-BUILT FOUNDATION SCHEDULES SHALL BE COMPLETED AS DETAILED IN
DRAWING Y7195 AND THE TITLE ENDORSED 'AS-BUILT'.
THE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE REDLINE DRAWINGS FOR ALL OCS
WIRING LAYOUTS SHOWING ALL DESIGN CHANGES MADE IN THE INSTALLATION.
CHANGES TO THE OCS WIRING LAYOUTS SHALL ONLY INCLUDE THOSE TO BRING THE
DESIGN INTO COMPLIANCE WITH DESIGN CRITERIA OR FOR POLE STATIONINGS MOVED
ONE FOOT OR MORE.
AFTER THESE UPDATES HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED THE OCS WIRING LAYOUT SHALL
BE ENDORSED 'DESIGN UPDATE' SINCE IT DOES NOT SHOW ACTUAL STAGGER VALUES
AND WIRE HEIGHTS AS INSTALLED.
ACTUAL 'AS-BUILT' STAGGER VALUES AND CONTACT WIRE HEIGHTS RECORDED DURING
ACCEPTANCE MEASUREMENT TESTS SHALL BE SHOWN APPROPRIATELY ON THE
STRUCTURE RECORD DRAWINGS.
THE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE REDLINE DRAWINGS OF MASTER
OVERLAP CHARTS AND SECTIONING DIAGRAMS SHOWING CHANGES FROM THE
SUPPLIED CONTRACT DRAWINGS.
CONTRACTOR SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL BE PREPARED BY SUPPLIERS FOR ALL ASSEMBLIES
USED IN THE WORK.
CONTRACTOR SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL CARRY THE SAME TITLES AND ASSEMBLY REFERENCES
AS THESE CONTRACT DRAWINGS.
EXAMPLE MATERIALS LISTS SHOWN ON CONTRACT ASSEMBLY DRAWINGS GIVE TYPICAL
COMPONENT NAMES. SUPPLIER NAMES FOR COMPONENTS WILL BE ACCEPTED IN SHOP
DRAWING MATERIALS LISTS. SUPPLIER PARTS NUMBERS SHALL BE GIVEN.
COMPONENT DRAWINGS SHALL ACCOMPANY SHOP DRAWINGS.
ALTERNATIVE ASSEMBLY CONFIGURATIONS MAY BE USED IF ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL
FUNCTIONS ARE EQUIVALENT AND APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER.
THE WEIGHT OF SECTION INSULATOR ASSEMBLIES SHALL BE GIVEN ON THEIR SHOP DRAWINGS.
THE BREAKING LOAD AND MAXIMUM OPERATING LOAD FOR ALL STRAIN CLAMPS SHALL BE
GIVEN ON CORRESPONDING COMPONENT DRAWINGS.
IN ORDER TO DEMONSTRATE ADEQUATE PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE, CANTILEVER DRAWINGS
SHALL BE DRAWN TO SCALE, FOR A CONTACT WIRE HEIGHT OF 19'-6" AND THE MINIMUM
POLE CLEARANCE PERMITTED FOR THE RELEVANT TRACK CURVATURE AND TRACK
SUPERELEVATION FEATURED. SCALED CANTILEVER DRAWINGS SHALL INCLUDE THE OUTLINE
OF THE PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE ENVELOPE.
EACH CANTILEVER SHOP DRAWING SHALL SHOW:
A. MAXIMUM RADIAL LOAD PERMITTED ON EACH CONDUCTOR
B. MAXIMUM CANTILEVER REACH PERMITTED
FOR EACH HEADSPAN STRUCTURE, CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE INDIVIDUAL SITE SPECIFIC SHOP
DRAWINGS DRAWN TO SCALE WITH INDIVIDUAL OCS ASSEMBLIES SHOWN AND DIMENSIONED,
INCLUDING COMPONENT LISTS.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-006.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
0
0
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7006
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
DRAWING HIERARCHY AND
CONTENT REQUIREMENTS
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
NOTE 2
TABLE 3
CATENARY DROOP
DUE TO ICE
TABLE 2
MAX PERMISSIBLE
MIDSPAN OFFSET
TABLE 1
BLOW-OFF
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-009.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
0
0
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7009
OCS TECHNICAL SHEET
MAX PERMISSIBLE MIDSPAN OFFSET,
BLOW-OFF AND CATENARY DROOP
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. MAX. SPAN FOR 22'-6" CWH SHALL BE 180 FEET.
2. DROOP IS DEFINED AS THE ADDITIONAL MIDSPAN SAG OF AN
OCS DUE TO ICE ON THE CONDUCTORS.
NOTES:
RADIAL LOAD = T * SIN (A/2) X 2
C
SUPPORT
C
SUPPORT C
SUPPORT
C
SUPPORT C
SUPPORT
C
SUPPORTLLL
L
L
L
"L" =
LOW POINT LOW POINT
"L" =2
L1+L2
PLAN
WIND LOAD
C
SUPPORTL C
SUPPORTL
C
SUPPORTL
L
L2L1
S
"L"
RADIAL
LOAD
STRUCTURE
ANGLE
A
"L"
L1 L2
"L"
ELEVATION
VERTICAL LOAD
MW, CW
MW
CW
SUM OF THE DISTANCE TO
THE LOW POINT OF THE
MESSENGER ON BOTH SIDES
OF CENTER SUPPORT.
MW, CW
TRACK CL
PLAN AT SUPPORT
RADIAL LOAD - TANGENT TRACK
PLAN AT SUPPORT
RADIAL LOAD BY ANGLE
MW, CW
MW, CW
RADIAL LOAD = 4 T S
S
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-010.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
0
1
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7010
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
TECHNICAL SHEET
SCAT VERTICAL, WIND & RADIAL LOADS
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. NON OPERATING CONDITION IS -30° F WITH 1/2" RADIAL ICE ON
MESSENGER WIRE AND 1/2" RADIAL ICE ON CONTACT WIRE AND
BALANCE WEIGHT ANCHORS LOCKED AT 0° F.
2. THE EXTREME WIND NON-OPERATING CONDITION IS 90 MPH AT 0°
F WITHOUT ICE AS DEFINED ON DRAWING Y7003.
3. TANGENT TRACK RADIAL LOADS ASSUME A 12" STAGGER AT
EACH END OF THE SPAN.
4. FOR MAXIMUM TENSIONS IN CONDUCTORS, SEE TECHNICAL
SHEET CONDUCTOR AND WIRE PARTICULARS SUMMARY
DRAWING Y7003.
5. EQUIPMENT SHALL BE DESIGNED OR SELECTED TO HAVE
MAXIMUM SAFE LOADS THAT EXCEED LOADS FOR THE
CONDITIONS SHOWN.
NOTES:
ERECTION TOLERANCE
Vm
a
=
LATERAL SHIFT AT ROLL CENTER
1.00 IN
1.14 IN
2.00 IN
2.00 IN
1.00 IN
26.91 IN
37.40 IN
2.00 IN
1.00 IN
0.99 IN
2.00 IN
1.00 IN
28.16 IN
37.40 IN
2.00 IN
2.00 IN
6.47 IN
AT 22'-6" CWH AT 19'6" CWH
TRACK ALLOWANCES ALIGNMENT = 1.00"
CROSS LEVEL EFFECT @ .25" DIFFERENCE (TABLE 2)
6.48 IN (180FT)8.82 IN (210FT)
3.88 IN 3.88 INSTAGGER CHANGE ON 2640 FT
10.49 IN 9.24 IN
AT 22'-6" CWH AT 19'6" CWH
ERECTION TOLERANCE
1.00 IN
2.32 IN
14.82 IN
1.00 IN 1.00 IN
2.32 IN
3.88 IN 3.88 IN
13.11 IN 14.12 IN
CRITERIA: (NO WIND, FULL ROLL CONDITION):
CONTACT WIRE HEIGHT
CROSS LEVEL EFFECT (TABLE 4)
LATERAL SHIFT
FULL ROLL
1.00"
1.14 IN 0.99 IN
12.94
HALF CARBON WIDTH
AVAILABLE FOR STAGGER
SELECTED MAXIMUM STAGGER
25.19 IN25.19 IN
12.08 IN 11.07 IN
22.13 IN24.16 IN
11 IN 12 IN
FR
E
I
G
H
T
T
R
A
C
K
S
V
n
=
2
7
0
N
O
R
M
A
L
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
2
2
'
-
6
"
)
CARBON CURRENT
COLLECTING STRIPS
OF INTERSECTIONHORN POINT
Wh = 52.24" HORN WIDTH
Wc = 50.39" CARBON WIDTH
12"
PAN HEAD PLAN
11" MAX STAGGER
TANGENT & CURVE
(TABLE 1)
12" MAX STAGGER
TANGENT & CURVE
(TABLE 1)
PANTOGRAPH PARAMETERS
DESCRIPTION
OVERALL WIDTH OVER HORNS
PANTOGRAPH ROLL AT ALL HEIGHTS FROM CENTERLINE
PANTOGRAPH UPLIFT ALLOWANCE
MAXIMUM PANTOGRAPH OPERATING HEIGHT
DESCRIPTION
GAUGE
GAUGE TOLERANCE (INCLUDED IN LATERAL MOTION)
VEHICLE PARAMETERS
DESCRIPTION
TRUCK ROLL CENTER HEIGHT
1.50
3.00
56.50
IN.
6.23
0.13
0.25
22.92
13.75
4.71
FT.
2.08
0.17
25
LATERAL SHIFT AT TRUCK ROLL CENTER
MAIN LINE TRACK PARAMETERS
INCL. WHEEL WEAR
165
275
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM PARAMETERS
DESCRIPTION
OPERATING WIND SPEED WITHOUT ICE
HEIGHT DUE TO WIND
55 MPH
2.00
0.08
0.17
74.80
CARBON COLLECTOR LENGTH
MAXIMUM CATENARY CONSTRUCTION TOLERANCE
MAXIMUM DESIGNED STAGGER AT 19'-6"
1.0
HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT TOLERANCE
CROSS LEVEL TOLERANCE
0.01
MAXIMUM VEHICLE REPETITIVE ROLL ANGLE 3 DEGREES
IN FT
IN FT
IN FT
SEE TABLE 5
1.00 0.08
0.25 0.02
2.72 0.23
4.94
RAIL HEAD WIDTH
CENTER TO CENTER OF RAILS 59.22
NOTE 3
NOTE 3
2.0
50.39 4.20
MINIMUM PANTOGRAPH OPERATING HEIGHT
MAXIMUM DESIGNED STAGGER AT 22'-6"
SEE TABLE 5
BLOW OFF OF CW ON 180 FT SPAN 6.48 0.54
8.82 0.74BLOW OFF OF CW ON 210 FT SPAN
TOTAL
50% OF TOTAL
FOR 22'-3" CWH
TABLE 1 - PARAMETERS FOR PANTOGRAPH SECURITY
TABLE 5 - CALCULATION FOR MAXIMUM STAGGER ON BALLASTLESS TRACK
WITH 50% ALL ALLOWANCES AND STAGGER, CONTACT WIRE TO REMAIN ON CARBON.
ALIGNMENT TOLERANCE
AT 22'-6"AT 19'6"
STAGGER CHANGE ON 2640 FT
MAXIMUM POLE DEFLECTION ALLOCATION AT CONTACT WIRE
CENTER TO CENTER OF RAILS
0.25 IN=
59.22 IN=
AT 22'-6" CWH AT 19'6" CWH
19.50 FT
CROSS LEVEL TOLERANCE
0.99 IN
CONTACT WIRE OPERATING HEIGHT (CWH)22.50 FT
CROSS LEVEL EFFECT AT CWH = CWH x 0.25/59.22 = 1.14 IN
VEHICLE ROLL AT 3 DEGREES ABOVE ROLL CENTER
TABLE 2 - CALCULATION FOR CROSS LEVEL EFFECT
TABLE 3 - CALCULATION FOR ROLL INTO WIND
12.82 IN
2.00 IN
14.82 IN
7.41 IN 6.47 IN
12.94 IN
2.00 IN
10.94 IN
PANTOGRAPH ROLL
TOTAL ROLL
50% ALLOWANCE (NOTE 2)
TABLE 4 - CALCULATION FOR PANTOGRAPH SECURITY AT MIDSPAN
PANTOGRAPH ROLL INTO WIND (TABLE 3)
BLOW OFF OF CONTACT WIRE ON MAXIMUM STAGGER (NOTE 5)
POLE DEFLECTION ALLOWANCE DUE TO WIND AT CWH
STAGGER EFFECT ALLOWANCE
TOTAL HALF PANTOGRAPH ROLL FROM CENTERLINE
HALF PANTOGRAPH WIDTH
SECURITY BY DIFFERENCE
AVAILABLE MIDSPAN OFFSET ON MAX SPAN WITH 4" SAFETY AT HORN 6.49 IN (NOTE 4)5.24 IN (NOTE 4)
27
5
"
M
A
X
I
M
U
M
O
P
E
R
A
T
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
2
2
'
-
1
1
"
)
Wp = 74.80" PANTOGRAPH WIDTH
7.41 IN
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-011.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
0
1
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7011
OCS TECHNICAL SHEET
PANTOGRAPH SECURITY AND MAXIMUM
STAGGERS FOR BALLASTLESS TRACK
B.DEMERS
S.KHAYYAT
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
10-24-25
1. FOR ACCEPTANCE OF INSTALLED OCS, PERMISSIBLE STAGGER AND
MSO IS ONE INCH MORE THAN THE DESIGN VALUE.
2. AREMA RECOMMENDED ALLOWANCE: 50% OF FULL ROLL INTO WIND.
3. TRACK TOLERANCE ALLOWED IS TWICE THE PERMISSIBLE VALUE
FOR EMBEDDED TRACK PER DESIGN CRITERIA.
4. FOR PERMISSIBLE MIDSPAN OFFSETS FOR SPANS OF SHORTER
LENGTH SEE DRAWING Y7009.
5. MAXIMUM SPAN OF 210FT AT 19'6" WIRE HEIGHT SPECIFIED BY UTA.
NOTES:
H = ADJUSTED HANGER LENGTH (IN.)
SH = STANDARD SYSTEM HEIGHT (IN.)
SH , SH = UNEQUAL SYSTEM HEIGHTS (IN.)
N
NH = H + ( ( A - A ) - ( A - A ) )
N
L
S
R
H = NORMAL HANGER LENGTH (IN.)
X = DISTANCE TO HANGER (FT.)
L = SPAN LENGTH (FT.)
S R S L
WHERE:
L
X
L
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-012.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
0
1
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7012
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
TECHNICAL SHEET
HANGER LENGTH TABLE
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. NORMAL SYSTEM HEIGHT: SCAT AUTO-TENSIONED = 4'-0"
2. HANGER LENGTHS ARE FOR SPANS WITH 4'0" SYSTEM HEIGHTS
EACH END.
3. HANGER LENGTHS FOR AUTO-TENSIONED, LOW PROFILE/NORMAL
SYSTEM HEIGHT ARE BASED ON A 500 kcmil HARD DRAWN
COPPER MESSENGER AT 4800 POUND TENSION AND A 350 kcmil
HARD DRAWN GROOVED CONTACT WIRE AT 3000 POUND
TENSION. 0.04 LBS/FT HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE WEIGHT OF
CONDUCTORS TO ACCOUNT FOR THE WEIGHT OF
MISCELLANEOUS HARDWARE.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD MEASURE THE HANGER LENGTHS
AND COMPARE RELATIVE TO CALCULATED THEORETICAL
HANGER LENGTHS, IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THE PROPER
CONTACT WIRE HEIGHT AND PROFILE WHEN IT IS MEASURED
FROM TOP OF RAIL.
NOTES:
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-013.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
0
1
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7013
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
TECHNICAL SHEET
INSTALLATION TENSIONS AND SAGS
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. TENSIONS ARE GIVEN FOR TYPICAL TEMPERATURE RANGE FOR
CONSTRUCTION.
2. LOADED TENSIONS EXIST IN MESSENGER WIRES BEFORE
BALANCE WEIGHTS ARE
RELEASED TO APPLY AUTO TENSIONING.
3. UNLOADED TENSIONS EXIST IN MESSENGER WIRE TO PROFILE
THE MESSENGER INTO
ITS FINAL SAG BEFORE THE CONTACT WIRE IS INSTALLED.
4. SAG VALUES APPLY ONLY TO THE SAME SPAN LENGTH AS THE
EQUIVALENT SPAN.
NOTES:
°F
30
DISTANCE FROM MIDPOINT ANCHOR (FT)
TEMP.
0.68
200
40 0.45
50 0.23
*60 0
70 0.23
80 0.45
90 0.68
100 0.90
110 1.13
120 1.35
130 1.58
y = ALONG TRACK MOVEMENT (IN)
* NORMAL CONDITION CANTILEVER IS INSTALLED PERPENDICULAR TO TRACK
NORMAL
TO
W
A
R
D
MI
D
P
O
I
N
T
AN
C
H
O
R
(
-
)
AW
A
Y
F
R
O
M
M
I
D
P
O
I
N
T
AN
C
H
O
R
(
+
)
1.35
1.80
3.16
2.71
2.26
1.35
0.90
0.45
0
0.45
0.90
400
2.03
2.71
4.74
4.06
3.38
2.03
1.35
0.68
0
0.68
1.35
600
2.71
3.61
6.32
5.41
4.51
2.71
1.80
0.90
0
0.90
1.80
800
3.38
4.51
7.90
6.77
5.64
3.38
2.26
1.13
0
1.13
2.26
1000
4.06
5.41
9.48
8.12
6.77
4.06
2.71
1.35
0
1.35
2.71
1200
4.74
6.32
11.05
9.48
7.90
4.74
3.16
1.58
0
1.58
3.16
1400
5.41
7.22
12.63
10.83
9.02
5.41
3.61
1.80
0
1.80
3.61
1600
6.09
8.12
14.21
12.18
10.15
6.09
4.06
2.03
0
2.03
4.06
1800
6.77
9.02
15.79
13.54
11.28
6.77
4.51
2.26
0
2.26
4.51
2000
7.44
9.93
17.37
14.89
12.41
7.44
4.96
2.48
0
2.48
4.96
2200
8.12
10.83
18.95
16.24
13.54
8.12
5.41
2.71
0
2.71
5.41
2400
CANTILEVER REACH (DIMENSION R) FT-IN
0.020.020.0220.03
1.341.431.54161.66
22
20
3.17
2.61
18 2.11 1.82
2.25
2.73
2.42
2.93
1.95
2.11
2.55
1.70
14 1.27
12
10
0.93
0.64
8
6
0.41
0.23
4 0.10
0.56
0.80
1.101.17
0.60
0.86
1.03
0.52
0.75
0.09
0.200.21
0.38
0.10
0.19
0.36 0.33
0.08
MOVEMENT
Y (IN)
6'-6"7'-6"7'-0"8'-0"
0.010.010.010.020.020.020.020.020.02
0.06
0.13
0.36
0.52
0.71
1.18
1.46
1.76
0.930.971.021.071.131.191.26
1.36
1.68
2.03
1.51
1.87
2.262.40
1.98
1.60
1.77
2.14
1.43
1.94
1.60
1.29
1.85
1.52
1.23
0.07
0.15
0.42
0.60
0.82
0.46
0.67
0.910.97
0.71
0.49
0.86
0.44
0.63
0.07
0.17
0.31
0.18
0.30
0.08
0.16
0.28
0.07
0.78
0.57
0.40
0.74
0.55
0.38
0.27 0.25
0.14
0.06
0.24
0.14
0.23
0.06
0.860.89
1.08
1.34
1.62
1.40
1.69
1.13
0.33
0.48
0.650.68
0.35
0.50
0.05
0.120.13
0.22
0.06
0.21
11'-6"10'-0"
D = STAGGER CHANGE (IN)
9'-0"8'-6"9'-6"10'-6"11'-0"12'-6"12'-0"
ALONG
TRACK
3.053.7824 3.50 3.26 2.702.86 2.55 2.312.42 2.20 2.10 2.01 1.93
STAGGER CHANGE
AUTO-TENSIONED SIMPLE CATENARYAUTO-TENSIONED SIMPLE CATENARY
ALONG TRACK MOVEMENT
0 1.35
10 1.13
20 0.90
2.71
1.80
2.26
4.06
2.71
3.38
5.41
3.61
4.51
6.77
4.51
5.64
8.12
5.41
6.77
9.48
6.32
7.90
10.83
7.22
9.02
12.18
8.12
10.15
13.54
9.02
11.28
14.89
9.93
12.41
16.24
10.83
13.54
TABLE 1 TABLE 2
5'-6"6'-0"
0.03
1.80
3.44
2.83
2.29
1.37
1.01
0.70
0.45
0.25
0.11
4.12
0.03
1.97
3.77
3.10
2.50
1.50
1.10
0.76
0.49
0.27
0.12
4.52
RECOMMENDED INSTALLATION PROCEDURE:
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT STAGGERS BE SET TO
THE DESIGN VALUE WITH THE BALANCE WEIGHT(S)
LOCKED IN THEIR NORMAL POSITION AT 60 F.
APPLICATION NOTE:
MAXIMUM TENSION LENGTH SHALL BE BASED ON
LAST IN-RUNNING CANTILEVER NOT EXCEEDING
2640 FT FROM FIXED TERMINATION OR MIDPOINT.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-014.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
0
1
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7014
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
TECHNICAL SHEET
TRACK MOVEMENT & STAGGER CHANGE
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. CANTILEVER REACH IS FROM BRACKET HINGE TO CONTACT
WIRE ON STAGGER.
NOTE:
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-015.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
0
1
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7015
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
CONDUCTOR PARTICULARS
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0002.
3. WEIGHT OF CATENARY INCLUDING AN ASSUMED HANGER LOAD
OF 0.04 LB/FT.
4. ICE CONDITION IS WITH ONE HALF INCH RADIAL ICE THICKNESS
ON MESSENGER AND CONTACT WIRE.
5. MESSENGER TENSION IS AT THE LOADED CONDITION WITH
CONTACT WIRE AND HANGERS.
6. DROOP IS DEFINED AS THE ADDITIONAL SAG OF AN OCS DUE
TO ICE ON THE CONDUCTORS.
7. WIND PRESSURES ARE BASED ON NESC, RULE 250B FOR HEAVY
LOADING DISTRICT & SPEC. SEC. 12.5.12.
8. OPERATING AND NON-OPERATING CASES MUST BE COMPARED
TO DETERMINE WORST POSSIBLE LOAD COMBINATION FOR
STRUCTURAL AND OCS COMPONENT DESIGN CONSIDERATION.
9. 90 MPH WIND SPEED TRANSLATES TO EQUIVALENT 21LB/FT
HORIZONTAL WIND PRESSURE WITH CORRESPONDING
OVERLOAD FACTOR OF 1.0 FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN
PURPOSES.
10. IT IS ASSUMED THAT 40 MPH IS THE MAXIMUM WIND SPEED
WHERE ICE ON THE CONTACT WIRE AND MESSENGER WIRE IS
STILL CAPABLE OF ADHERING. IN EXCESS OF 40 MPH WIND
SPEED ALL ICE ON THE WIRES IS CONSIDERED TO BE BLOWN
AWAY.
11. THE OCS IS IN AUTO-TENSION MODE FOR A TEMPERATURE
RANGE OF 0°F TO 120°F. THE SYSTEM BECOMES A FIXED
TERMINATED SYSTEM BY MEANS OF BALANCE WEIGHT STOPS
AT TEMPERATURES BELOW 0°F AND AT HIGH TEMPERATURES
ABOVE 120°F.
12. THE FOLLOWING EQUIVALENT SPAN LENGTHS ARE USED IN
DETERMINING TENSIONS IN THE FIXED TERMINATED
CONDITION: MESSENGER WIRE 100FT CONTACT WIRE 25FT
13. LOAD FACTORS ONLY APPLY TO CALCULATIONS FOR
DETERMINING: POLE ALLOWABLE BENDING MOMENT VALUES
NOTES:
TRACK RAILS OF RAILROADS
(EXCEPT ELECTRIFIED
RAILROADS USING OVER-
HEAD CONDUCTOR.)
TOP OF RAIL
22
'
-
6
"
ROADS, STREETS, ALLEYS
NONRESIDENTIAL DRIVE-
WAYS, PARKING LOTS, AND
OTHER AREAS SUBJECT TO
ANY VEHICLE EXCEEDING
8 FT HEIGHT
OVER GROUND
PARALLEL AND WITHIN
RIGHT OF WAY OF PUBLIC STREETS
IN URBAN DISTRICT
18
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
0
"
ABOVE GROUND
DRIVEWAYS OR
AREAS ACCESSIBLE
TO PEDESTRIANS OR
RESTRICTED TO
RIDERS ON HORSES
ANIMAL, AND VEHICLES
LESS THAN 8 FT HEIGHT
OCS CONTACT WIRE OR ASSOCIATED SPAN WIRE
GUYS & SPAN WIRES
COMMON WIRES,CABLES & MESSENGERS
LIGHTNING PROTECTION WIRES
SUPPLY LINES 0V-750V
SUPPLY LINES 750V-22KV
SUPPLY LINES GREATER THAN 22KV
4'
-
0
"
4'
-
0
"
4'
-
0
"
4'
-
0
"
6'
-
0
"
(N
O
T
E
3
)
SEE NOTE 2
SEE NOTE 4
16
'
-
0
"
OCS CONTACT WIRE, MESSENGER
WIRE, AERIAL FEEDER SPANWIRE
LIVE FITTINGS OR UNGROUNDED FITTINGS
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-016.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
0
1
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7016
OCS VERTICAL
ELECTRICAL CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. ALL CLEARANCES ARE MINIMUM.
2. VERTICAL CLEARANCES APPLY UNDER ALL WEATHER
CONDITIONS:
A. CONDUCTOR TEMPERATURE RANGE OF -30° TO 130° F,
NO WIND, WITH FINAL UNLOADED SAG INTHE WIRE.
B. SPAN LENGTHS NOT GREATER THAN THE FOLLOWING:
SINGLE CONTACT WIRE - 125 FT.
SIMPLE CATENARY - 210 FT.
3. FOR VOLTAGES EXCEEDING 22KV (UP TO 470KV) THE
CLEARANCE SHALL BE INCREASED BY 0.4 INCHES FOR EACH
1KV, OR FRACTION THEREOF.
4. VERTICAL CLEARANCES TO NON-OCS CONDUCTORS APPLY
UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS WHICHEVER PRODUCES
THE LARGEST SAG IN THE CONDUCTOR:
A. CONDUCTOR SAG AT 125° F NO WIND DISPLACEMENT, OR
B. MAXIMUM CONDUCTOR DESIGNED OPERATING
TEMPERATURE IF GREATER THAN 120° F, OR
C. 32° F WITH RADIAL ICE OF 0.5 INCHES
5. ALL ELECTRICAL CLEARANCES SHALL COMPLY WITH NATIONAL
ELECTRICAL SAFETY CODE.
6. NON-OCS EQUIPMENT SHALL NOT BE WITHIN 10 FEET OF OCS
EQUIPMENT.
NOTES:
LEGEND FOR MASTER OVERLAP CHART
GRADE CROSSING
STATION
FUTURE TRACK
MPA
MPA
SECTION INSULATOR
ST
5 BALANCE WEIGHTBW
FT FIXED TERMINATION
MIDPOINT ANCHOR
4 4
OVERLAP
DISCONNECT SWITCHDSW
MIDPOINT ANCHOR
SHOWING WIRE RUN
TPSS
LEGEND FOR SECTIONING DIAGRAM
GRADE CROSSING
STATION
200+00
INSULATED OVERLAP
SECTION INSULATOR
WITH DISCONNECT SWITCH
DSW
Mc
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S2
TPSS
200+00
Mc
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S2
FT
6
BW
5
BW
6
MPA
5 5
ST
X5
ST
X6
FT
X6
FT
X5
S
1
1
t
h
E
a
s
t
SO
U
T
H
H
I
G
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
.
ST SPRING TENSIONER
SECTIONING DIAGRAM
MASTER OVERLAP CHART
SI
113
9
151
6
113
9
191
9
243
'
238
'
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-100.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
1
0
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7100
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
MASTER OVERLAP CHART
AND SECTIONING DIAGRAM
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
SL-C-Y-7-100.dwg
POLE
A/2AAAAAAA/2
POLE
CONTACT WIRE
MESSENGER WIRE
A/2AAAAAA/2
A/2 A A A A A/2
A/2 A A A A/2
A/2AAA/2
AA/2 A/2
POLEPOLE
POLE POLE
POLEPOLE
POLEPOLE
POLEPOLE
4'
-
0
"
NO
R
M
A
L
4'
-
0
"
NO
R
M
A
L
4'
-
0
"
NO
R
M
A
L
4'
-
0
"
NO
R
M
A
L
4'
-
0
"
NO
R
M
A
L
4'
-
0
"
NO
R
M
A
L
STANDARD SPANS
SPANS 181' - 210'
ASSEMBLY HA-7
SPANS 151' - 180'
ASSEMBLY HA-6
SPANS 121' - 150'
ASSEMBLY HA-5
SPANS 91' - 120'
ASSEMBLY HA-4
SPANS 61' - 90'
ASSEMBLY HA-3
SPANS 30' - 60'
ASSEMBLY HA-2
IN-SPAN POTENTIAL EQUALIZING JUMPER
JS1 (TYP)
Y7180
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
TYPICAL STANDARD SPANS
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. THE HANGER SET ASSEMBLY REQUIRED FOR EACH SPAN IS
SHOWN IN THE OCS WIRING LAYOUT PLANS AND
ALLOCATION SCHEDULES.
2. FOR "A" AND "L " DIMENSIONS DIVIDE ACTUAL SPAN BY
NUMBER OF HANGERS ASSIGNED.
3. MAXIMUM HANGER SPACING IS 30 FEET.
2
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-180.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
1
8
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
NO. OF HANGERSANCHOR SPAN HANGER SET REF
SPRING TENSIONER ANCHOR SPAN
FOR OVERLAPS
ANCHOR SPAN
ANCHOR SPAN
OOR OVERLAP
POLE
OOR OVERLAP
POLE
ANCHOR
POLE
ANCHOR
POLE
OOR CONTACT
WIRE DIMENSION
(SEE OCS WIRING
LAYOUT PLAN)
30'30'30'30'AS REQUIRED
30'30'30'
OOR CONTACT
WIRE DIMENSION
(SEE OCS WIRING
LAYOUT PLAN)
FIXED TERMINATION ANCHOR SPAN
FOR OVERLAPS
30'
HANGER ALLOCATION TABLE
IN-RUNNING
CONTACT WIRE
HEIGHT (NOTE 1)
IN-RUNNING
CONTACT WIRE
HEIGHT (NOTE 1)
CW HT
CW HT
DOWNGUY ASSEMBLY
FOR ANCHOR HEIGHT, SEE OCS WIRING
LAYOUT PLANS OR STANDARD ANCHOR
HEIGHT TABLE
FIXED TERMINATION
ASSEMBLY FT-01
HANGER SET ASSEMBLY
(SEE TABLE)(SEE NOTE 2)
HANGER SET ASSEMBLY
(SEE TABLE)(SEE NOTE 2)
SEE NOTE 3
SEE NOTE 3
POTENTIAL JUMPER JP1
(INSULATED OVERLAPS ONLY)
POTENTIAL JUMPER JP1
(INSULATED OVERLAPS ONLY)
1
2
3
4
5
6
HA-1
HA-2
HA-3
HA-4
HA-5
HA-6
20'
30'2'
-
0
"
(T
Y
P
)
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
20'AS REQUIRED
FOR ANCHOR HEIGHT,
SEE OCS WIRING
LAYOUT PLANS
SPRING TENSIONER
ASSEMBLY ST-01
TOP OF POLE
TOP OF POLE
UP TO 60
90
120
150
180
210
BALANCE WEIGHT ANCHOR SPAN
FOR OVERLAPS
ANCHOR SPAN
OOR OVERLAP
POLE
ANCHORPOLE
OOR CONTACT
WIRE DIMENSION
(SEE OCS WIRING
LAYOUT PLAN)
30'30'30'30'AS REQUIRED
IN-RUNNING
CONTACT WIRE
HEIGHT (NOTE 1)
CW HT
HANGER SET ASSEMBLY
(SEE TABLE)(SEE NOTE 2)
SEE NOTE 3
POTENTIAL JUMPER JP1
(INSULATED OVERLAPS ONLY)
20'FOR ANCHOR HEIGHT,
SEE OCS WIRINGLAYOUT PLANS
SPRING TENSIONER
ASSEMBLY ST-01
TOP OF POLE
Y7182
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
TYPICAL ANCHOR SPANS
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-182.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
1
8
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1. CONTACT WIRE HEIGHT IS FOR THE IN-RUNNING CONTACT
WIRE AT THE ANCHOR POLE.
2. ADJUST HANGER LENGTHS TO ACHIEVE SMOOTHLY
GRADED CONTACT WIRE.
3. INSULATORS SHALL BE 4'-0" MINIMUM, 5'-0" MAXIMUM
LATERALLY AND HORIZONTALLY FROM SUPERELEVATED
CENTERLINE OF TRACK.
NOTES:
FT
FULL FEEDING JUMPER
TYPE JF1 (TYP)
MAIN LINE
OCS
MAIN LINE
OCS
TURNOUT/CROSSOVER
OCS
CANTILEVER FOR
TURNOUT/CROSSOVER OCS
CANTILEVER FOR
MAINLINE OCS
>
~
SE
E
L
A
Y
O
U
T
P
L
A
N
4'
-
0
"
(
T
Y
P
)
POLE POLE
CROSSOVER SPAN - VARIES
TURNOUT SPAN - VARIES
POLE
4'
-
0
"
(
T
Y
P
)
POLE
1"
FT OR ST SPAN - VARIES
(ST SPAN SHOWN)
ST OR FT SPAN - VARIES
(FT SPAN SHOWN)
* SEE OCS LAYOUT SHEETS FOR POLE AND CANTILEVER STYLE
TURNOUT/CROSSOVER OCS PROFILE
MAINLINE OCS >
TWIN CANTILEVER
ARRANGEMENT
5'
-
0
"
(
T
Y
P
)
12
"
M
I
N
.
SECTION INSULATOR
(IF REQUIRED)FULL FEEDING
JUMPER TYPE JF-1
(TYP)
CROSSOVER
OCS
CROSS CONTACT
BRIDGE (TYP.)
DOUBLE CANTILEVER
FULL FEEDING
JUMPER TYPE JF-1
(TYP)
FULL FEEDING
JUMPER TYPE JF-1
(TYP)
MAIN LINE OCS
MAIN LINE OCS
GUY WIRE FOR
FEEDER SUPPORT
CLCL CL CL
ST
ST
ST
ST
FT
6 FOOT MIN. BETWEEN
INSULATORS
6-9 FEET TO POLE
4' MIN, TO
MAINLINE
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-183.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
1
8
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-7-183.dwg
Y7183
OCS DIAMOND CROSSOVER
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. DIMENSION SHOWN FOR SYSTEM HEIGHTS AND
TERMINATIONS ARE TYPICAL; FOR ACTUAL VALUES
REFER TO OCS LAYOUT AND ALLOCATION PLANS.
NOTE:
PUSH OFF PULL OFF
PUSH OFF PULL OFF
Y7190
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
TYPICAL CENTER POLE STRUCTURES
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-190.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
1
9
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1. FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0002.
3. FOR SITE SPECIFIC POLE OFFSETS, WIRE HEIGHTS AND
STAGGERS SEE OCS LAYOUT PLAN AND ALLOCATION
SCHEDULE.
4. FOR SITE SPECIFIC POLE AND WIRING ASSEMBLY
REFERENCES SEE OCS WIRING LAYOUT PLAN AND
ALLOCATION SCHEDULE.
NOTES:
POLE
SCALE: NTS
TUBULAR POLE SHOWN SEE DRAWING CE-OC-5174 FOR
CONDUIT ON WIDE FLANGE AND DETAIL "C" FOR WIDE FLANGE
ATTACHMENT. THE WIRE RUN FROM THE SURGE ARRESTER
TO THE OCS IS THE SAME FOR EITHER STYLE POLE.
SCALE: NTS
A
CL
DETAIL D
-
SURGE ARRESTER
UNIT
BRACKET FOR SURGE ARRESTER
SEE DETAIL "C" OR "D"
CABLE TIES
2/0 AWG INSULATED
COPPER CABLE MESSENGER
WIRE
FEEDER SPOUT
18" BELOW
CANTILEVER SURGE ARRESTER ASSEMBLY FOR
SIMPLE CATENARY SA-01-X (# OF FEEDERS)
FEEDER CABLES
(SEE NOTE 3)
POLE
CL
SURGE ARRESTER
UNIT
2/0 AWG 2000 VOLT
INSULATED GROUND
WIRE
2/0 AWG INSULATED CABLE
(FROM SURGE ARRESTER TO
MESSENGER WIRE)
BRACKET FOR SURGE
ARRESTER
2" CONDUIT WITH 2/0 AWG, INSULATED
COPPER WIRE TO GROUND ROD, STRAPPED TO
POLE (SEE NOTE 1)
SURGE ARRESTER GROUNDING
(SEE NOTE 2)
3ft. LONG 2" dia.
PVC CONDUITCADWELD
2/0 AWG 2000 VOLT
INSULATED GROUND
WIRE
.75" x 10' COPPER
CLAD GROUND ROD
24"
2" DIA CONDUIT FOR SURGE ARRESTER
CABLE AT EVERY FEEDER POLE AND AT
ANY FOUNDATION WHERE SURGE ARRESTERS
HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED.
FEEDER CABLE CONDUIT
SEE NOTE 2
ELEVATION
POLE
CL
MOUNTING PLATE FOR
TUBULAR POLE USE SS
STRAPPING ATTACHMENT
SCALE: NTS
DETAIL C
-
MOUNTING PLATE FOR
TUBULAR POLE USE SS
STRAPPING ATTACHMENT
SCALE: NTS
DETAIL A
-SCALE: NTS
DETAIL B
-
2/0 AWG CABLE TO
MESSENGER WIRE CLAMP
MESSENGER
WIRE
SURGE ARRESTER
CABLE
2/0 AWG CABLE TO
MESSENGER WIRE CLAMP
CONTACT
WIRE
D&C DETAIL "C" IS FOR
THE WIDE FLANGE
POLES AND SHOWS
THE LINDAPTER ATTACHMENT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-191.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
1
9
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7191
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
TYPICAL SURGE ARRESTOR
STRUCTURE
B.DEMERS
S.KHAYYAT
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. CONNECT SURGE ARRESTER NEGATIVE CABLE DIRECT
TO GROUND ROD(S).
2. SURGE ARRESTER GROUND RESISTANCE TO BE LESS
THAN 5 OHMS. ADDITIONAL GROUND RODS SHALL BE
INSTALLED AS NEEDED TO OBTAIN THIS RESISTANCE.
3. FOR FEEDER CABLE CONNECTION TO OCS, SEE FEEDER
JUMPER ASSEMBLY DRAWING NO.# CE-OC-5191.
NOTES:
Y7192
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
BYPASS DISCONNECT SWITCH
STRUCTURE
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-192.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
1
9
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1. FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES, SEE DRAWING Y0001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES SEE DWG Y0002.
3. LIGHTNING ARRESTER SHALL BE MOUNTED ON POLES AS SHOWN
ON DRAWING Y7233.
4. OUT-OF-RUNNING SECTION INSULATORS ARE NOT PART OF
ASSEMBLY TYPES SHOWN IN THIS DRAWING, FOR LOCATION, SEE
WIRING LAYOUT PLANS AND ALLOCATION SCHEDULES.
5. LIST OF MATERIAL & COMPONENTS SHOWN AND QUANTITIES ARE
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND THE OCS
SUPPLIER.
6. TYPICAL CABLES FOR BYPASS DISCONNECT SWITCH ARE 2-500
kcmil CABLES.
7. EXTERNAL OPENING DEVICE SUITABLE FOR MANUAL HOOK STICK
OPERATION.
8. ALL JUMPER CLAMPS SHALL BE DUPLICATE.
NOTES:
TRACK
OOR MW
CW
MW
NO
T
E
4
NOTE 4
NO
T
E
4
POLE
FOUNDATION
HEADSPAN
WIRE
CROSS-SPAN
WIRE
POLE FOUNDATION (TYP)
FOR DETAILS SEE
FOUNDATION SCHEDULE
DWG. Y7195
GROUND ROD
FOR POLE
GROUNDING
STRUCTURE NUMBER DECAL
EACH SIDE OF POLE Y7202
TUBULAR POLE
ASSEMBLY PE-XX
DWG. Y7201
INSULATION (TYP)
HEADSPAN ASSEMBLY,
DWG. Y7209 BRACKET HEIGHTS
NOTE 3 AND 6
BRACKET HEIGHTS
NOTE 3 AND 6
GROUND ROD FOR
POLE GROUNDING
OOR CW
CL CLTRACK
TYPICAL HEADSPAN STRUCTURE
Y7194
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
TYPICAL HEADSPAN STRUCTURES
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-194.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
1
9
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1. HEAD SPAN STRUCTURES SHALL ONLY BE USED WHERE SITE
CONDITIONS DO NOT ALLOW CANTILEVER POLES TO BE
INSTALLED.
2. A SITE SPECIFIC SCALED CROSS SECTION DRAWING OR SHOP
DRAWING SHALL BE PREPARED FOR EACH HEAD SPAN
STRUCTURE.
3. SAG OF HEADSPAN SHALL BE APPROXIMATELY SPAN/8.
4. CONTACT AND MESSENGER WIRE HEIGHTS AND STAGGERS
SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON OCS WIRING LAYOUT AND
ALLOCATION SCHEDULES.
5. EACH CROSS SECTION DRAWING SHALL INCLUDE A
COMPLETE LIST OF ASSEMBLIES FOR THE TOTAL
INSTALLATION OF THE STRUCTURE.
6. ATTACHMENT HEIGHTS OF HEADSPAN POLE BRACKETS
SHALL BE SHOWN ON EACH SITE SPECIFIC CROSS SECTION
DRAWING.
NOTES:
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-201.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-7-201.dwg
Y7201
TAPERED TUBULAR STEEL POLE
ASSEMBLIES, TYPE PA, PB, PC, PD, & PE
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
SCALE OF DWG
01-16-26
OCS
1. THE FABRICATION OF POLE ASSEMBLY SHALL BE IN
CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AISC
SPECIFICATION FOR THE DESIGN, FABRICATION AND ERECTION
OF THE STRUCTURAL STEEL OF BUILDINGS, LATEST EDITION.
2. POLE SHALL HAVE A UNIFORM TAPER OF APPROXIMATELY
FOURTEEN HUNDREDTHS (.14) OF AN INCH PER LINEAR FOOT.
THE 0.14" : 1' SLOPE IS THE REDUCTION RATE IN DIAMETER.
3. WELDING SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE AWS DI.I
SPECIFICATIONS OF LATEST EDITION.
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR
EACH POLE ASSEMBLY REFERENCE REQUIRED.
5. POLE HARDMARK SHALL INCORPORATE POLE ASSEMBLY
REFERENCE.
6. ALLOCATE POLES WITH LENGTH IN INTEGRAL FEET, SHOWN AS
"XX" IN THE POLE ASSEMBLY REFERENCE.
7. FOR POLE LENGTH, SEE OCS WIRING LAYOUT AND MATERIAL
ALLOCATION DRAWINGS.
8. STRUCTURE NUMBER DECALS SHALL FACE ALONG TRACK EACH
WAY. TWO NUMBER DECALS ARE REQUIRED PER POLE. SEE
DWG. Y7210.
9. THE HANDHOLE SHALL BE REINFORCED TO MEET THE
ALLOWABLE BENDING MOMENT SHOWN IN THE POLE SCHEDULE
TABLE.
10. INSTALL POLE SUCH THAT THE HAND HOLE IS LOCATED SO
THAT IT FACES THE DIRECTION OF INCREASING TRACK
STATIONING.
11. ALLOWABLE BENDING MOMENT SHOWN IN THE POLE SCHEDULE
IS THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE BENDING MOMENT AT POLE BASE,
AND ASSUMES LOAD IS APPLIED AT THE MESSENGER WIRE
HEIGHT FROM TOP OF THE BASE PLATE. POLE SHAFT SHALL
HAVE A MINIMUM YIELD STRESS OF 55,000 PSI.
NOTES:
POLE ELEVATION
CHARACTER DIMENSIONS
Y7202
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
OCS POLE ID NUMBER
ASSEMBLY SD-01 AND SCHEDULE
B.DEMERS
S.KHAYYAT
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-202.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1. ALL OCS POLES SHALL BE IDENTIFIED USING CONSECUTIVE
NUMBERED REFLECTIVE SELF-ADHESIVE BLACK DECALS,
POSITIONED AS SHOWN.
2. DECAL NUMBERS SHALL BE SIMILAR TO EXISTING UTA-LRT
POLE DECAL NUMBERS.
3. ONE STRUCTURE DECAL ASSEMBLY SD-01 COMPRISING TWO
DECAL NUMBERS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER POLE.
4. POLE ID NUMBERS SHALL BE INSTALLED FACING ALONG TRACK
FACING APPROACHING TRAIN
5. DECALS SHALL BE PERMANENTLY FIXED TO EACH POLE. ALL
SURFACE PREPARATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
DECAL MANUFACTURER INSTRUCTIONS.
6. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTAL FOR
UTA APPROVAL.
NOTES:
TYP
TYP
HANDHOLE DETAIL "A"
SECOND SPOUT IF
REQUIRED
TYP
FEEDER SPOUT SEE DETAIL "B"
FOR TRACTION POWER FEED.TYP
17' (NOMINAL) SPOUT IS SET
457mm BELOW CONTACT WIRE
SCALE: NTS
SCALE: NTSSCALE: NTS
SCALE: NTS
SCALE: NTS
CL
CABLE SUPPORT
HOOK SEE DETAIL "C"
HEX. HEAD STAINLESS
STEEL SCREWS
HANDHOLE COVER
1mm THICK SUPPLIED
WITH GASKET
HAND HOLE
SEE DETAIL "A"
REMOVABLE
POLE CAP
ELEVATION
TUBULAR FEEDER POLE PE-XX-F
ORIENTATION OF
FEEDER SPOUT AND HANDHOLE
A
-
DETAIL "A"
FEEDER SPOUT
POLE WALLHANDHOLE RIM
(Fy=55 ksi MIN)
TUBING
SECTION
CLPOLE
DETAIL " B "
(FOR TRACTION POWER FEED)
CLPOLE
102mm STEEL
PIPE SPOUT
TOP OF
POLE
CABLE SUPPORT HOOK
(WELD TO POLE)
DETAIL " C "
(SECTION THRU POLE)
A
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL ON RAIL
TAPERED TUBULAR
POLE
4"
61
0
m
m
17mm 25mm
12"
45
°
75mm
4"
8"(
T
Y
P
)
1" T
H
R
E
A
D
(
T
Y
P
)
30°
4"
Y7203
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
B.DEMERS
S.KHAYYAT
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-203.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1. MODIFICATIONS SHOWN ARE TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE
STANDARD POLE DETAIL, TO ACCOMODATE
FEEDER/SNOW MELTER CABLES TO BE INSTALLED WITHIN
THE TUBULAR POLES.
2. ORIENTATION AND LOCATION OF FEEDER SPOUT AND
HANDHOLES WITH RESPECT TO ANCHOR BOLTS TO BE
SUPPLIED AS SHOWN UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE
LAYOUT AND ALLOCATION DRAWINGS.
3. ALL STEEL FABRICATED PARTS TO BE MANUFACTURED PER
SPECIFICATIONS.
4. DETAILS SHOWN ARE TYPICAL. MANUFACTURER'S
STANDARD DETAILS MAY BE SUBSTITUTED UPON APPROVAL
OF THE ENGINEER.
NOTES:
3
2
1
HINGE BRACKET
CLEVIS ATTACHMENT
CLAMP HALF - BOLT HEAD SIDE
CLAMP HALF - NUT SIDE
POLE BAND STRAP
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
SU
I
T
S
W
I
V
E
L
HI
N
G
E
F
U
R
N
I
S
H
E
D
WI
T
H
C
A
N
T
I
L
E
V
E
R
DI
M
E
N
S
I
O
N
T
O
7
6
9
4
8
UP T
O
1
5
"
DIAM
E
T
E
R
4"
1
1
-
4
-
1
ASSEMBLY TYPE BC-01
TWO BRACKETS PER POLE
FOR SINGLE CANTILEVER
SU
I
T
S
W
I
V
E
L
HI
N
G
E
F
U
R
N
I
S
H
E
D
WI
T
H
C
A
N
T
I
L
E
V
E
R
DI
M
E
N
S
I
O
N
T
O
ASSEMBLY TYPE BC-02
TWO BRACKETS PER POLE FOR
BACK-TO-BACK CANTILEVERS
HINGE TYPE POLE BAND BRACKET ASSEMBLY
FOR CANTILEVERS
ONE BRACKET PER POLE
FOR EACH TERMINATION
(NOTE 5)
STIFFENERS
BOLT WITH SELF LOCKING NUT AND WASHER
THREADED STUD
HEXAGON NUTS
BAND SECTION WITH FILLET PLATES
TYPICAL FILLET DETAIL
XX IS POLE DIAMETER IN INCHES
RIVET WITH
COTTER PIN
HDG
RIVET WITH
COTTER PIN
HDG
ASSEMBLY TYPE TB-02-XX
DESCRIPTION REMARKS
EXAMPLE MATERIALS LIST
ITEM
APPLICATION RULE
TWO PIECE POLE BRACKET ASSEMBLY
FOR BACKBONE, CROSSPAN, AND CONDUCTOR TERMINATIONS
(NOTE 9)
BC TYPE POLE BANDS ARE ALLOCATED IN PAIRS IN
THE ASSEMBLY REFERENCES SHOWN IN THE WIRING
LAYOUTS AND ALLOCATION SCHEDULE.
Y7207
OCS POLE BRACKET ASSEMBLIES
FOR TUBULAR POLES
TYPES BC-XX AND TB-02-XX
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.,LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-207.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
0
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1. FOR GENERAL NOTES, SEE DWG NO. Y0001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS, SEE DWG NO. Y0002.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE THIS DRAWING TO PREPARE SHOP
DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR SHOP DRAWINGS SHAL GIVE LIST OF
SUPPLIER COMPONENTS WITH PART NUMBERS. COMPONENT
DRAWINGS SHALL ACCOMPANY SHOP DRAWINGS.
4. SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL CARRY THE SAME TITLES AS THESE
CONTRACT DRAWINGS. THE EXAMPLE MATERIAL LIST BELOW
GIVES TYPICAL COMPONENT NAMES.
5. COMPONENT DRAWINGS SHALL ACCOMPANY SHOP DRAWINGS.
6. CONTRACTOR DESIGNS SHALL CONFORM TO FIT AND FUNCTION
OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.
7. FOR CONDUCTOR MAXIMUM TENSIONS SEE Y7003.
8. IF BACK TO BACK CANTILEVERS ARE POSSIBLE ON
A POLE, ASSEMBLY BC-02 CAN BE SUBSTITUTED FOR TWO BC-01.
9. DIMENSION XX SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE CONTRACTOR.
NOTES:
Y7209
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
HEADSPAN ASSEMBLIES HS-1, HS-1A,
HS-2, AND HS-2AX
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-209.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
0
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
NOTES:
Y7210
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
CONFIGURATION AND LOADING DIAGRAM
TYPE HS-1 AND HS-2
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-210.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
1
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1. FOR SITE SPECIFIC APPLICATION OF THESE HEADSPAN
ASSEMBLIES REFER TO WIRING LAYOUT AND ALLOCATION
SCHEDULE.
2. WIRE HEIGHTS, STAGGERS AND POLE OFFSETS ARE INDICATED
ON OCS LAYOUT PLAN. STAGGERS ARE RELATIVE TO THE
SUPERELEVATED TRACK CENTERLINE AT CONTACT WIRE
LEVEL.
3. THE CONTRACTOR'S SUPPLIER SHALL PREPARE SHOP
DRAWINGS FOR THE ASSEMBLIES LISTED, INCLUDING BRACKET
DIMENSIONS RELATIVE TO IN-RUNNING CONTACT WIRE HEIGHT.
4. EACH SHOP DRAWING TITLE BLOCK SHALL SHOW THE SPECIFIC
ASSEMBLY REFERENCES ILLUSTRATED.
5. THE SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL SHOW A LIST OF MATERIAL AND
COMPONENTS. QUANTITIES ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
CONTRACTOR AND THE PARTS SUPPLIER.
6. FOR VEHICLE AND PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE ENVELOPE SEE
DWG. Y7005.
7. EACH CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY SHALL BE USED IN CONJUNCTION
WITH A POLE BRACKET ASSEMBLY CALLED OUT SEPARATELY.
8. MAXIMUM LOADS ARE REQUIRED CAPACITIES OF EACH
HEADSPAN ASSEMBLY. MAXIMUM LOADS ARE BASED ON THE
WIRE TENSION CHARTS FOUND ON DWG. Y7015.
9. HEADSPAN SELF-WEIGHT IS NOT INCLUDED.
10. FOR HEADSPAN ASSEMBLY, SEE DWG. Y7209.
NOTES:
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-211.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
1
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7211
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY PULL-OFF
TYPES CA-01L, CA-01M AND CA-01H
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0002.
3. FOR CANTILEVER TYPE AND ALLOCATION REFER TO OCS
WIRING LAYOUT PLAN.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE THIS DRAWING TO PREPARE SHOP
DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL GIVE LIST
OF SUPPLIER COMPONENTS WITH PART NUMBERS.
COMPONENT DRAWINGS SHALL ACCOMPANY SHOP DRAWINGS.
5. SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL CARRY THE SAME TITLES AS THESE
CONTRACT DRAWINGS. THE EXAMPLE MATERIAL LIST BELOW
GIVES TYPICAL COMPONENT NAMES.
6. COMPONENT DRAWINGS SHALL ACCOMPANY SUBMITTED SHOP
DRAWINGS.
7. WIRE HEIGHTS, STAGGERS AND POLE OFFSETS ARE INDICATED
ON OCS LAYOUT PLAN AND MATERIAL ALLOCATION DRAWINGS.
STAGGERS ARE RELATIVE TO THE SUPERELEVATED TRACK
CENTERLINE AT CONTACT WIRE LEVEL.
8. POLE BRACKET ASSEMBLIES CALLED OFF SEPARATELY. FOR
WF POLES SEE DWG Y7208 FOR TUBULAR POLES SEE DWG
Y7207
9. CONTRACTOR DESIGNS SHALL CONFORM TO FIT AND FUNCTION
OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.
10. FOR UNIVERSAL PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE ENVELOPE SEE
DWG. Y7005.
NOTES:
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-212.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
1
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7212
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
CONFIGURATION AND LOADING DIAGRAM
TYPES CA-01L, CA-01M, AND CA-01H
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. FOR SITE SPECIFIC APPLICATION OF THESE CANTILEVER
ASSEMBLIES REFER TO LAYOUT PLANS AND MATERIAL
ALLOCATION DRAWINGS.
2. WIRE HEIGHTS, STAGGERS AND POLE OFFSETS ARE INDICATED
ON OCS WIRING LAYOUT PLAN. STAGGERS ARE RELATIVE TO
THE SUPERELEVATED TRACK CENTERLINE AT CONTACT WIRE
LEVEL.
3. THE CONTRACTOR'S SUPPLIER SHALL PREPARE SHOP
DRAWINGS FOR THE ASSEMBLIES LISTED, INCLUDING BRACKET
DIMENSIONS RELATIVE TO IN-RUNNING CONTACT WIRE HEIGHT.
4. EACH SHOP DRAWING TITLE BLOCK SHALL SHOW THE SPECIFIC
ASSEMBLY REFERENCES ILLUSTRATED.
5. THE SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL SHOW A LIST OF MATERIAL AND
COMPONENTS. QUANTITIES ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
CONTRACTOR AND THE PARTS SUPPLIER.
6. FOR VEHICLE AND PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE ENVELOPE SEE
DWG. Y7005.
7. EACH CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY SHALL BE USED IN CONJUNCTION
WITH A POLE BRACKET ASSEMBLY CALLED OUT SEPARATELY.
8. MAXIMUM LOADS ARE REQUIRED CAPACITIES OF EACH
CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY. MAXIMUM LOADS ARE BASED ON THE
WIRE TENSION CHARTS FOUND ON DWG. Y7015.
9. CANTILEVER SELF-WEIGHT IS NOT INCLUDED.
10. VERTICAL LOAD AT MESSENGER ONLY.
NOTES:
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-213.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
1
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7213
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY PUSH-OFF
CA-03L, CA-03M, AND CA-03H
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0002.
3. FOR CANTILEVER TYPE AND ALLOCATION REFER TO OCS
WIRING LAYOUT PLAN AND ALLOCATION SCHEDULES.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE THIS DRAWING TO PREPARE SHOP
DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL GIVE LIST
OF SUPPLIER COMPONENTS WITH PART NUMBERS.
COMPONENT DRAWINGS SHALL ACCOMPANY SHOP DRAWINGS.
5. SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL CARRY THE SAME TITLES AS THESE
CONTRACT DRAWINGS. THE EXAMPLE MATERIAL LIST BELOW
GIVES TYPICAL COMPONENT NAMES.
6. COMPONENT DRAWINGS SHALL ACCOMPANY SUBMITTED SHOP
DRAWINGS.
7. WIRE HEIGHTS, STAGGERS AND POLE OFFSETS ARE INDICATED
ON OCS LAYOUT PLAN AND MATERIAL ALLOCATION DRAWINGS.
STAGGERS ARE RELATIVE TO THE SUPERELEVATED TRACK
CENTERLINE AT CONTACT WIRE LEVEL.
8. POLE BRACKET ASSEMBLIES CALLED OFF SEPARATELY. FOR
WF POLES SEE DWG Y7208 FOR TUBULAR POLES SEE DWG
Y7207.
9. CONTRACTOR DESIGNS SHALL CONFORM TO FIT AND FUNCTION
OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.
10. FOR VEHICLE AND PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE ENVELOPE SEE
DWG. Y7015.
NOTES:
1'
-
0
"
TY
P
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-214.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
1
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7214
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
CONFIGURATION AND LOADING DIAGRAM
TYPES CA-03L, CA-03M, AND CA-03H
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. FOR SITE SPECIFIC APPLICATION OF THESE CANTILEVER
ASSEMBLIES REFER TO LAYOUT PLANS AND MATERIAL
ALLOCATION DRAWINGS.
2. WIRE HEIGHTS, STAGGERS AND POLE OFFSETS ARE INDICATED
ON OCS LAYOUT PLAN AND MATERIAL ALLOCATION DRAWINGS.
STAGGERS ARE RELATIVE TO THE SUPERELEVATED TRACK
CENTERLINE AT CONTACT WIRE LEVEL.
3. THE CONTRACTOR'S SUPPLIER SHALL PREPARE SHOP
DRAWINGS FOR THE ASSEMBLIES LISTED, INCLUDING BRACKET
DIMENSIONS RELATIVE TO IN-RUNNING CONTACT WIRE HEIGHT.
4. EACH SHOP DRAWING TITLE BLOCK SHALL SHOW THE SPECIFIC
ASSEMBLY REFERENCES ILLUSTRATED.
5. THE SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL SHOW A LIST OF MATERIAL AND
COMPONENTS. QUANTITIES ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
CONTRACTOR AND THE PARTS SUPPLIER.
6. FOR VEHICLE AND PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE ENVELOPE SEE
DWG. Y7005.
7. EACH CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY SHALL BE USED IN CONJUNCTION
WITH A POLE BRACKET ASSEMBLY CALLED OUT SEPARATELY.
8. MAXIMUM LOADS ARE REQUIRED CAPACITIES OF EACH
CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY. MAXIMUM LOADS ARE BASED ON THE
WIRE TENSION CHARTS FOUND ON DWG. Y7015.
9. CANTILEVER SELF-WEIGHT IS NOT INCLUDED.
10. VERTICAL LOAD AT MESSENGER ONLY.
NOTES:
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-215.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
1
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7215
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY OUT-OF-RUNNING
TYPES CA-05AM, AH AND CA-05BM, BH
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0002.
3. FOR CANTILEVER TYPE AND ALLOCATION REFER TO OCS
WIRING LAYOUT PLAN AND ALLOCATION SCHEDULE.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE THIS DRAWING TO PREPARE SHOP
DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL GIVE LIST
OF SUPPLIER COMPONENTS WITH PART NUMBERS.
COMPONENT DRAWINGS SHALL ACCOMPANY SHOP DRAWINGS.
5. SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL CARRY THE SAME TITLES AS THESE
CONTRACT DRAWINGS. THE EXAMPLE MATERIAL LIST BELOW
GIVES TYPICAL COMPONENT NAMES.
6. COMPONENT DRAWINGS SHALL ACCOMPANY SUBMITTED SHOP
DRAWINGS.
7. WIRE HEIGHTS, STAGGERS AND POLE OFFSETS ARE INDICATED
ON OCS LAYOUT PLAN AND MATERIAL ALLOCATION DRAWINGS.
STAGGERS ARE RELATIVE TO THE SUPERELEVATED TRACK
CENTERLINE AT CONTACT WIRE LEVEL.
8. POLE BRACKET ASSEMBLIES CALLED OFF SEPARATELY. FOR
WF POLES SEE DWG Y7208 FOR TUBULAR POLES SEE DWG
Y7207.
9. CONTRACTOR DESIGNS SHALL CONFORM TO FIT AND FUNCTION
OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.
10. FOR VEHICLE AND PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE ENVELOPE SEE
DWG. Y7005.
NOTES:
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-216.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
1
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7216
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
CONFIGURATION AND LOADING DIAGRAM
TYPES CA-05AM, AH AND CA-05BM, BH
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. FOR SITE SPECIFIC APPLICATION OF THESE CANTILEVER
ASSEMBLIES REFER TO LAYOUT PLANS AND MATERIAL
ALLOCATION DRAWINGS.
2. WIRE HEIGHTS, STAGGERS AND POLE OFFSETS ARE INDICATED
ON OCS LAYOUT PLAN AND MATERIAL ALLOCATION DRAWINGS.
STAGGERS ARE RELATIVE TO THE SUPERELEVATED TRACK
CENTERLINE AT CONTACT WIRE LEVEL.
3. THE CONTRACTOR'S SUPPLIER SHALL PREPARE SHOP
DRAWINGS FOR THE ASSEMBLIES LISTED, INCLUDING BRACKET
DIMENSIONS RELATIVE TO IN-RUNNING CONTACT WIRE HEIGHT.
4. EACH SHOP DRAWING TITLE BLOCK SHALL SHOW THE SPECIFIC
ASSEMBLY REFERENCES ILLUSTRATED.
5. THE SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL SHOW A LIST OF MATERIAL AND
COMPONENTS. QUANTITIES ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
CONTRACTOR AND THE PARTS SUPPLIER.
6. FOR VEHICLE AND PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE ENVELOPE SEE
DWG. Y7005.
7. EACH CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY SHALL BE USED IN CONJUNCTION
WITH A POLE BRACKET ASSEMBLY CALLED OUT SEPARATELY.
8. MAXIMUM LOADS ARE REQUIRED CAPACITIES OF EACH
CANTILEVER ASSEMBLY. MAXIMUM LOADS ARE BASED ON THE
WIRE TENSION CHARTS FOUND ON DWG. Y7015.
9. CANTILEVER SELF-WEIGHT IS NOT INCLUDED.
10. VERTICAL LOAD AT MESSENGER ONLY.
NOTES:
PO-2-H
SCALE: NTS
CL CL
STAINLESS STEEL WIRE
INSULATION LOOP
OVAL SLEEVE & THIMBLE
CONTACT WIRE CLIP
STAINLESS STEEL WIRE PULL OFF ARM
GALVANIZED
OVAL SLEEVE & THIMBLE CONTACT WIRE CLIP OVAL SLEEVE & THIMBLE
PO-2
SCALE: NTS
CL CL
OVAL SLEEVE
& THIMBLE
STAINLESS STEEL WIRE OVAL SLEEVE & THIMBLE
CONTACT WIRE CLIP
INSULATION LOOP
PULL OFF ARM
GALVANIZED
OVAL SLEEVE & THIMBLE
CONTACT WIRE CLIP
PULL OFF ARM
GALVANIZED
OVAL SLEEVE & THIMBLE
A
B
TEST
Y7220
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
TWO TRACK PULL-OFF PO-2 AND PO-2A
B.DEMERS
S.KHAYYAT
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-220.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
2
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SCALE: NTS
SECTIONA
SCALE: NTS
SECTIONB
CL CL
CONTACT WIRE CLIP
STAINLESS STEEL WIRE
PULL OFF ARM
GALVANIZED
OVAL SLEEVE &
THIMBLE
CONTACT WIRE CLIP
OVAL SLEEVE
& THIMBLE
CL CL
CONTACT WIRE CLIP
PULL OFF ARM
GALVANIZED
OVAL SLEEVE &
THIMBLE
CONTACT WIRE CLIP
PULL OFF ARM
GALVANIZED
OVAL SLEEVE
& THIMBLE
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-221.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
2
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7221
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
CATENARY BRIDLE ASSEMBLY PULL-OFF
TYPE BB-02D
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0002.
3. FOR CATENARY SUPPORT TYPE AND ALLOCATION REFER TO
OCS LAYOUT DRAWINGS.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE THIS DRAWING TO PREPARE SHOP
DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL GIVE LIST
OF SUPPLIER COMPONENTS WITH PART NUMBERS.
COMPONENT DRAWINGS SHALL ACCOMPANY SHOP DRAWINGS.
5. SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL CARRY THE SAME TITLES AS THESE
CONTRACT DRAWINGS. THE EXAMPLE MATERIAL LIST BELOW
GIVES TYPICAL COMPONENT NAMES.
6. COMPONENT DRAWINGS SHALL ACCOMPANY SHOP DRAWINGS.
7. WIRE HEIGHTS, STAGGERS AND POLE OFFSETS ARE INDICATED
ON OCS LAYOUT DRAWINGS. STAGGERS ARE RELATIVE TO THE
SUPERELEVATED TRACK CENTERLINE AT CONTACT WIRE
LEVEL.
8. ANCHOR BRACKET ASSEMBLIES CALLED OFF SEPARATELY.
SEE DWG Y7207 AND Y7208 FOR POLES BRACKET ASSEMBLIES.
9. CONTRACTOR DESIGNS SHALL CONFORM TO FIT AND
FUNCTION OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.
10. FOR VEHICLE AND PANTOGRAPH CLEARANCE ENVELOPE SEE
DWG. Y7005.
11. THERE ARE TWO BRIDLE GUY ANCHOR ASSEMBLIES IN EACH
BB-02D ASSEMBLY. ONE WILL BE AT MESSENGER WIRE LEVEL
AND THE OTHER AT CONTACT WIRE LEVEL.
12. STEADY ARMS MINIMUM LENGTH 4'6".
NOTES:
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-222.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
2
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7222
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
CONFIGURATION AND LOADING DIAGRAM
TYPE BB-02D
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y7001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y7002.
3. WIRE HEIGHTS, STAGGERS AND POLE OFFSETS ARE INDICATED
ON OCS LAYOUT PLAN AND MATERIAL ALLOCATION DRAWINGS.
STAGGERS ARE RELATIVE TO THE SUPERELEVATED TRACK
CENTERLINE AT CONTACT WIRE LEVEL.
4. LOADINGS WILL BE DEPENDENT UPON CONTRACTOR BRIDLE
DESIGN AND CALCULATIONS SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH SHOP
DRAWINGS.
5. MAXIMUM MESSENGER WIRE AND CONTACT WIRE TENSIONS
FOR DESIGN ARE GIVEN IN DWG. Y7003.
NOTES:
2
6
87
5
7 8
1
4
87
5
7 8
6
2
MESSENGER DEAD END
STRAIN INSULATOR
TURNBUCKLE
OPEN THIMBLE
COMPRESSION SLEEVE
ELEVATION
PLAN AT CONTACT WIRE LEVEL
INSULATOR SADDLE
6
8
5
6
7
8
7
8
8
3
END VIEW
500 KCMIL COPPER
MESSENGER WIRE
5
8
7
7
33
4
SUPPORT WIRE
SECTION INSULATOR
8
87
8
2'
-
0
"
(M
I
N
)
CONTACT WIRE
350 KCMIL
CONTACT WIRE
4
3
2
1
REMARKSDESCRIPTION
5
6
7
8
ITEM
EXAMPLE MATERIALS LIST
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-223.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
2
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7223
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
SECTION INSULATOR ASSEMBLY
TYPE MLSI-01
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. CONTACT WIRE TO BE INSTALLED TO MANUFACTURER
INSTRUCTIONS.
2. CONTRACTOR SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL GIVE WEIGHT OF
ASSEMBLY AS SHOWN TO NEAREST LB. WT.
NOTES:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
STRAIN INSULATOR
CONTACT WIRE DEAD END
MESSENGER DEAD END
TURNBUCKLE
DESCRIPTION
EXAMPLE MATERIAL LIST
6'-0" (MIN)
12'-0" (MAX)
6'-0" (MIN)
12'-0" (MAX)
14 2 32 3 4 MESSENGER WIRE
6
7
CONTACT WIRE
5
14 2 32 3 47
8
OPEN THIMBLE
(NOTE 5)
TAIL WIRE - NON TWIST STEEL STRAND
FIXED TERMINATION ASSEMBLY FT-01
TO POLE TERMINATION BRACKET
TO POLE TERMINATION BRACKET
(NOTE 3)
(NOTE 3)
4800 LB NORMAL TENSION
3000 LB NORMAL TENSION
DEADEND FOR TAIL WIRE
7037 LB MAX TENSION
4491 LB MAX TENSION
ANTI-TORSION ROD ASSEMBLY - HA-4
ITEM REMARKS
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-224.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
2
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7224
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
FIXED TERMINATION ASSEMBLY
TYPE FT-01
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. POLE BRACKETS CALLED OFF SEPARATELY.
2. FOR FINISHED WORK: TURNBUCKLES SHALL HAVE AT
LEAST 6 INCHES OF TAKE-UP ADJUSTMENT REMAINING.
3. INSULATION SHALL BE INSTALLED IN TOUT-OF-RUNNING
WIRES AT A POINT, MINIMUM 4 FEET MAXIMUM 5 FEET
HORIZONTALLY FROM THE SUPERELEVATED CENTERLINE
OF THE TRACK.
4. IN ALL CASES, INSULATORS IN MESSENGER AN CONTACT
WIRES SHALL LINE UP VERTICALLY.
5. FOR TERMINATION HEIGHTS, SEE OCS WIRING LAYOUTS.
NOTES:
CLEVIS-EYE TURNBUCKLE WITH LOCK NUTS
CONTACT WIRE CLAMP
7 STRAND HS STL GALV WIRE
JB STRAIN INSULATOR
THIMBLE 1/2" OPEN
MESSENGER DEAD-END CLAMP
STRANDVISE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
5 1/2" x 7/8" BULL-RING
BOLT TYPE CHAIN SHACKLE W/COTTER PIN
EXAMPLE MATERIAL LIST
DESCRIPTIONITEM REMARKS
CLEVIS-CLEVIS LINK8
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-225.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
2
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7225
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
CATENARY BRIDLE TERMINATION
ASSEMBLIES BT-01, BT-02 & BT-03
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES, SEE DRAWING Y0001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS, SEE DRAWING Y0002.
3. POLE BRACKETS CALLED OFF SEPARATELY SEE DWG. Y7207.
4. LOCATE BULLRINGS OVER CENTERLINE OF TRACK +/- 6 INCHES
5. AT HIS OPTION, CONTRACTOR MAY SUPPLY ALTERNATIVE OCS
COMPONENTS THAT PERFORM THE SAME FUNCTION.
NOTES:
NOTE 7 & 8 NOTE 7 & 8
WF POLE CALLED OFF
SEPARATELY
NOTE 7 & 8 NOTE 7 & 8 NOTE 7 & 8MIDPOINT SPAN GUY WF POLE CALLED OFF
SEPARATELY
FOR TYPICAL WF ANCHOR
POLE SEE DWG. Y7193
FOR TYPICAL WF ANCHOR
POLE SEE DWG. Y7193
W3 MIDPOINT STRUCTURE
SEE DWG. Y7173
TYP
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-226.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
2
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7226
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
MIDPOINT ANCHOR ASSEMBLY
TYPE MP-01
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1. FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0002.
3. FOR MIDPOINT ANCHOR ARRANGEMENT SEE DWG. Y7173.
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR THIS
ASSEMBLY INCLUDING DIMENSIONS.
5. NOT USED
6. WHEN TWO MIDPOINT ANCHOR ASSEMBLIES ARE INSTALLED
BACK TO BACK THE FIRST LEVEL INSULATION MUST ALLOW 4 FT
MINIMUM SPACING BETWEEN THE INSULATORS.
7. CANTILEVER BRACKETS CALLED FOF SEPARATELY.
8. CANTILEVERS CALLED OFF SEPARATELY.
NOTES:
EXAMPLE MATERIAL LIST
DESCRIPTION REMARKSITEMNO.
6
5
4
3
2
7
8
CHAIN EYE WITH NUT
9
10
11
12
13
2-PULLEY SHEAVE
POLE BRACKET FOR BW ASSEMBLY
1/2" THIMBLE (OPEN)
1/2" WIRE ROPE CLIP
1
SUPPORT ROD - 1 1/2" DIA
BALANCE WEIGHT STOP BRACKET
C
SINGLE PULLEY SHEAVE
11
BALANCE WEIGHT - 2600 LB
L
POLE
2
2
12
GUIDE ROD - 2" Ø PIPE
DEAD END CLAMP FOR MESSENGER WIRE
DEAD END CLAMP FOR CONTACT WIRE
BALANCE WEIGHT GUIDE BRACKET ASSEMBLY
6
20
7
20
BALANCE WEIGHT ASSEMBLY ON TUBULAR POLE
BW-04
4
5
TOP OF BASE PLATE
NOTE 7
NOTE 7
3'
-
0
"
13
'
-
6
"
8'
-
0
"
A
T
6
0
°
F
LINE OF BLOCK
CENTER POINT
(DETAIL 2)
8
-
2BALANCE WEIGHT TEMPERATURE
STOP BRACKET ASSEMBLY
(ITEM 8)
14 YOKE PLATE FOR 7800 LB
3
1
DOWNGUY ATTACHMENTIF REQUIRED
12'-0" TO 15'-0" NOM
-
1DETAIL
YOKE PLATE 14ITEM
8"
5"
6"
13 / 16 " DIA.RIGGING HOLE
3,000 LB NORMAL TENSION
4,800 LB NORMAL TENSION
5,885 LB MAXIMUM TENSION
4,035 LB MAXIMUM TENSION
-
1DETAIL
18 4 14 15 16 19 17 15 13
9151719171615
10
STOP ANGLE
15
17
16
18
1 / 2 " SPIRAL WRAP W/ THIMBLE
TURNBUCKLE 5/8" X 1' - 0" CLEVIS - EYE
STAINLESS STEEL NON-ROTATIONAL WIRE ROPE
STRAIN INSULATOR - CLEVIS/EYE 10" MIN. INSULATION
19 GALVANIZED STEEL STRAND EXTRA HIGH STRENGTH NOTE 2
NOTE 1
20 BALANCE WEIGHT EYE BRACKET
(NOTE 4)
(NOTE 4)
TY
P
.
DETAIL
NOTE 6
NOTE 8
NOTE 8
MESSENGER WIRE 500 KCMIL
CONTACT WIRE 350 KCMIL
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-227.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
2
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7227
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
BALANCE WEIGHT FOR TUBULAR POLE
TYPE BW-04
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
-6
1. BALANCE WEIGHT SHALL BE SOLID STEEL OR C.I. WEIGHTS NOT
TO EXCEED 8'-6" LONG AND WEIGH 2600 LB, AND FINISH PAINTED
WITH APPROVED GRAY TWO PART EPOXY PAINT.
2. GALVANIZED STEEL STRAND SHALL BE WELDLESS EXTRA HIGH
STRENGTH.
3. WEIGHT MOVEMENT TABLE BASED UPON CONTACT WIRE HAVING
ACOEFFICIENT OF LINEAR EXPANSION OF 9.4 x 10 .
4. INSULATOR TO BE INSTALLED 4 FEET MINIMUM AND 5 FEET
MAXIMUM DIMENSION HORIZONTAL TO SUPERELEVATED
CENTERLINE OF TRACK.
5. A TOLERANCE OF PLUS 6" -ZERO" ON THIS DIMENSION IS
PERMITTED
6. WEIGHTS SHALL IMPACT THE LOW TEMPERATURE STOP AT 0° F.
7. INSTALL EYE BRACKETS RIGIDLY ON BALANCE WEIGHT AT THE
ONE THIRD POINTS.
8. INSTALLATION HEIGHT OF WEIGHT YOKES AND WEIGHT STOPS
ARE DEPENDANT UPON WIRE RUN LENGTH. SEE ALONG TRACK
MOVEMENT CHART ON DWG. Y7014.
CL CTST POLE
5
10
4
6 7
8 9
7
VARIES
(SEE NOTE 6)
1 3 8 10 8 11
MESSENGER
WIRE
NORMAL
9
10
9
9
TENSION=4800LB
8 CONTACT WIRE
NORMAL
10
5 2
3 4 97
86
5 1 2
SECTION
SCALE: NTS
A
TEMP °F
5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
CONSTANT-TENSION SPRING ASSEMBLY WIRE MOVEMENT
DISTANCE FROM MID-POINT ANCHOR / FIXED TERMINATION (FT)
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800
-1.2 -2.5 -3.7 -5.0 -6.2 -7.4 -8.7 -9.9 -11.2 -12.4 -13.6 -14.9 -16.1 -17.4
-4.5-1.1 -2.3 -3.4
-0.9 -1.8 -2.7 -3.6
-5.6 -6.8 -7.9 -9.0 -10.2 -11.3 -12.4 -13.5 -14.7 -15.8
- 4.5 -5.4
-0.7 -1.4 -2.0 -2.7 -3.4 -4.1 -4.7
-0.5 -0.9 -1.4 -1.8 -2.3 -2.7 -3.2 -3.6 -4.1
-6.1 -6.8 -7.4 -8.1 -8.8 -9.5
-4.5 -5.0
0.5 0.9 1.4 1.8 2.3 2.7 3.2 3.6 4.1
5.40.7 1.4 2.0 2.7 3.4 4.1 4.7
4.5 5.40.9 1.8 2.7 3.6
4.5
5.4
6.1 6.8
6.3 7.2 8.1 9.0
1.1 2.3 3.4
1.4 2.7 4.1
0.0
2.5
5.0
7.4
-5.4
0.0
2.7
5.4
0.0
2.9
5.9
8.1 8.8
0.0
3.2
6.3
9.5
-5.9 -6.3
-0.2 -0.5 -0.7 -0.9 -1.1 -1.4 -1.6 -1.8 -2.0 -2.3 -2.5 -2.7 -2.9 -3.2
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.2 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.3
4.5
9.9 10.8 11.7 12.6
5.6 6.8 7.9 9.0 10.2 11.3 12.4 13.5 14.7 15.8
6.8 8.1 9.5 10.8 12.2 13.5 14.9 16.2 17.6 19.0
1.6 3.2 4.7 6.3 7.9 9.5 11.1 12.6 14.2 15.8 17.4 19.0 20.5 22.1
DIMENSION GIVEN IN INCHES (SEE NOTE 1)
WIRE MOVEMENT: "-" MOVES AWAY FROM SPRING ASSEMBLY, "+" MOVES TOWARD SPRING ASSEMBLY
ITEM
NO.DESCRIPTION
BILL OF MATERIALS
UNITS
TOP
OF RAIL (TYP)
1 TENSIONING SPRING ASSEMBLY - MESSENGER WIRE EA
2 TENSIONING SPRING ASSEMBLY - CONTACT WIRE
3 YOKE PLATE - MESSENGER WIRE
4 YOKE PLATE - CONTACT WIRE
5 MOUNTING BRACKETS
6 SHACKLE
7 TURNBUCKLE
8 STRAIN INSULATOR
9 WIRE END FITTING
SCALE: NTS (SEE NOTE 10)
10 STAINLESS STEEL WIRE ROPE
11 MESSENGER WIRE DEAD END CLAMP
12 CONTACT WIRE DEAD END CLAMP
EA
EA
EA
EA
EA
EA
EA
EA
LF
EA
EA
-
1
-
4
2
1
2
2
AS REQ'D
1
-
-6.3 -7.2 -8.1 -9.0 -9.9 -10.8 -11.7 -12.6
-5.4
10
1266'-0" MIN
TENSION=3000LB
QUANTITIES PART
CTST-1-MW-XXXX CTST-1-CW-XXXX
1 -
1
-
1
4
2
1
2
2
AS REQ'D
-
1
NO./REMARKS
NOTE 12
NOTE 12
NOTE 3, 10
NOTE 2
MAX ANGLE OF INSTALLATION
SCALE: NTS
CT
S
T
T
E
R
M
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
H
E
I
G
H
T
S
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
O
C
S
L
A
Y
O
U
T
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
CT
S
T
T
E
R
M
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
H
E
I
G
H
T
S
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
O
C
S
L
A
Y
O
U
T
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
32
"
(
M
I
N
)
CONSTANT-TENSION SPRING TERMINATION
ST-1-MW AND ST-1-CW = 1 ST-01
POSITION SETTING
(ENGLISH UNITS) 10° MAX.
A
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-228.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
2
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7228
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
SPRING TENSIONER
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
1.THE WIRE MOVEMENT VALUES SHOWN IN THE TABLE PROVIDED ARE
BASED ON A 1:1 RATIO OF SPRING SYSTEM TO WIRE MOVEMENT.
CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT POSITION SETTING TABLES BASED ON WIRE
MOVEMENT FOR EACH CONSTANT-TENSION SPRING TERMINATION
ASSEMBLY.
1. OCS WIRES SHALL MOVE FREELY WITHIN THE TEMPERATURE RANGE OF
0°F TO 120°F.
2. AFTER FINAL ADJUSTMENT OF WIRING, TURNBUCKLES SHALL BE
EXTENDED 6" MINIMUM FROM MINIMUM LENGTH.
3. MOUNTING BRACKET SHALL BE FURNISHED TO PERMIT ALONG TRACK AND
ACROSS TRACK ADJUSTMENTS OF SPRING TENSIONING ASSEMBLY.
4. FOR SYMBOLS, LEGEND, AND ABBREVIATIONS SEE DRAWINGS L05-JON001
AND L05-JON002.
5. OCS HARDWARE SUPPLIER SHALL PROVIDE THIS DIMENSION RANGE,
BASED ON PHYSICAL AND MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE
AUTOMATIC-TENSIONING ASSEMBLY AND THE ALONG TRACK MOVEMENT
OF THE CATENARY.
6. THE MOUNTING ARRANGEMENT OF THE SPRING TENSIONING ASSEMBLY
AS SHOWN IS TYPICAL. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DEVELOP THE ACTUAL
CONFIGURATION BASED ON THE EQUIPMENT USED AND THE
MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT NO INTERFERENCE OCCURS
BETWEEN ALL POLE CLAMPS, BRACKETS, AND OTHER MOUNTED
EQUIPMENT IN THE VICINITY AND THE WIRE MOVEMENT OF THE SPRING
TENSIONING ASSEMBLY.
8. THE BILL OF MATERIALS DETAILS ARE TYPICAL FOR THE ASSEMBLY
STYLES SHOWN. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ITEMIZE THE TABLE WITH
DESCRIPTIONS AND PART NUMBERS OF COMPONENTS REQUIRED TO
COMPLETE EACH ASSEMBLY.
9. CTST-1-MW-XXXX AND CTST-1-CW-XXXX DESIGNATION INCLUDES UNITS
FOR THE MESSENGER WIRE AND CONTACT WIRE TENSIONING
ASSEMBLIES RESPECTIVELY. "XXXX" IN THE DESIGNATION DENOTES THE
MAXIMUM TENSION LENGTH IN FEET.
10. BRACKETS SHALL BE DESIGNED AND FABRICATED FOR USE WITH THE
DOWN GUY ASSEMBLIES.
11. CTST UNITS SHALL INCLUDE WEEP HOLES TO ENSURE PROPER DRAINAGE
BASED ON MOUNTING ORIENTATION.
NOTES:
Y7231
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
FEEDER CONNECTION ASSEMBLY
TYPE FR-04
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-231.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
3
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
NOTES:
POTENTIAL EQUALIZING JUMPER FOR CATENARYFULL FEEDING JUMPER FOR CATENARY
IN SPAN JUMPER FOR CATENARY
Y7233
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
JUMPER ASSEMBLIES
TYPES JF-1, JP-1 AND JS-1
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-233.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
3
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
NOTES:
1. FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES, SEE DWG. Y0001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0002.
3. ALL JUMPERS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH CABLE ENDS
POINTING IN THE NORMAL DIRECTION OF TRAVEL.
4. MINIMUM RADIUS FOR ALL JUMPER CABLE BENDS SHALL BE 12
INCHES.
5. SUFFICIENT SLACK SHALL BE ALLOWED IN THE JUMPER DRAPE
BETWEEN MESSENGERS TO ACCOMMODATE DIFFERENTIAL
ALONG-TRACK MOVEMENT BETWEEN THE MESSENGERS, YET
NOT PULL TIGHT. JUMPERS SHALL HAVE ENOUGH WIRE LENGTH
TO ALLOW FULL MOVEMENT OF CATENARY IN EACH DIRECTION
DUE TO TEMPERATURE VARIATIONS AND SHALL BE ARRANGED
TO AVOID FOULING THE PANTOGRAPH OVER FULL
TEMPERATURE RANGE.
6. EACH PAIR OF MESSENGER CLAMPS ON ONE MESSENGER
SHALL BE INSTALLED SIDE-BY-SIDE TO THE MESSENGER
CLAMPS ON THE PARALLEL MESSENGER.
7. LIST OF MATERIAL & COMPONENTS SHOWN AND QUANTITIES
ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND THE OCS
SUPPLIER.
8. CONTRACTOR SHALL SHOW EACH TYPE OF ASSEMBLY ON A
SEPARATE SHOP DRAWING WITH TITLE TO MATCH ASSEMBLY
REFERENCE GIVEN IN TITLE BLOCK OF THIS DRAWING.
9. SECURE ENDS OF JUMPER, CABLE SHALL BE WRAPPED TO
PREVENT CABLE FRAYING.
Y7235
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
HANGER ASSEMBLIES
TYPES HA-1 THROUGH HA-7
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-235.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
3
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
NOTES:
1. FOR ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0001.
2. FOR SYMBOLS AND STRUCTURAL NOTES SEE DWG. Y0002.
3. FOR DEFINITION OF H1, H2, H3..., AND FOR THEORETICAL
QUANTITIES AND LENGTHS OF HANGERS IN HANGER SET, SEE
DWG. Y7012.
CONTACT WIRE CONTACT WIRE
MESSENGER WIRE
BEFORE COMPRESSION
AFTER COMPRESSION
CONTACT WIRE
MESSENGER WIRE
OUT-OF-RUNNING CONTACT WIRE INSULATION ASSEMBLY
CONTACT WIRE BRIDGE ASSEMBLY
MESSENGER WIRE SPLICE ASSEMBLY
CONTACT WIRE SPLICE ASSEMBLY
OUT-OF-RUNNING CUT-IN INSULATION ASSEMBLY
OUT-OF-RUNNING MESSENGER INSULATION ASSEMBLY
5'-0" (TYP)
CONTACT WIRE STRAIN CLAMPCONTACT WIRE STRAIN CLAMP
NO-BO INSULATOR
OPEN THIMBLE
COMPRESSION SLEEVE
TIPS FOR 350 KCMILCONTACT WIRE TIPS FOR 350 KCMIL
CONTACT WIRE
CONTACT WIRE SPLICE -350 KCMIL CONTACT WIRE
CONTACT
WIRE
CROSS OVER
CONTACT WIRE
CONTACT
WIRE
IN-RUNNING CUT-IN INSULATION ASSEMBLYALSO FOR LOW OUT OF RUNNING CLEARANCE
IN-RUNNING SECTIONING INSULATION ASSEMBLYALSO FOR LOW OUT OF RUNNING CLEARANCECONTACT WIRE ONLY
MESSENGER
WIRE
MESSENGERWIRE
MESSENGER WIREDEADEND SHOE
MESSENGER
WIRE
2KV INSULATORROD
2KV INSULATORROD
MESSENGER WIRE DEADEND
SHOE
MESSENGER WIRE DEADENDSHOE 2KV INSULATORROD
MESSENGERWIRE
2KV INSULATORROD CONTACT WIRE STRAIN CLAMP
CONTACT WIRECONTACT WIRE
CONTACT WIRE STRAIN CLAMP
COMPRESSION SPLICE
FOR MESSENGER WIRE
MESSENGER WIRE DEADEND SHOE 2KV INSULATORROD
MESSENGER WIRE DEADEND SHOE
MESSENGERWIREMESSENGERWIRE
CONTACT
WIRE
TIPS FOR 350 KCMILCONTACT WIRE
OPEN THIMBLE
COMPRESSION SLEEVE
COPPER MESSENGER WIRE CLIP
COMPRESSION SLEEVE
COMPRESSION SLEEVE
OPEN THIMBLE
OPEN THIMBLE
TIPS FOR 350 KCMIL
CONTACT WIRE
CONTACT
WIRE
COPPER MESSENGER WIRE CLIPNO-BO INSULATOR
MAIN LINE CONTACT WIRE
DUPLEX CW CLIPTO 12" ROD OR
CONTACT WIRE
DUPLEX CW CLIPTO 12" ROD OR
CONTACT WIRE
6.4mm KEVLAR CABLE
COMPRESSION SLEEVE
OPEN THIMBLEOPEN THIMBLE
COMPRESSION SLEEVE
Y7236
OCS CUT-IN INSULATOR AND
CONTACT BRIDGE ASSEMBLIES
TYPE CI-01, CI-02, CC-01
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-236.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
3
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1/4"
1/4"
1/4"TYP
1-1/2"1-1/2"
4'-3"
4"
POLE DIAMETER
PLUS 1"
1-3/4"
4'
-
3
"
4'
-
3
"
4'
-
3
"
TO
S
U
I
T
CA
N
T
I
L
E
V
E
R
H
I
N
G
E
EACH ASSEMBLY COMPRISES BRACKETS
FOR TOP AND BOTTOM ATTACHMENTS
POLE DIAMETER
2"
PLUS 1"
SCALE: NTS SCALE: NTS SCALE: NTS
2'-0"2'-0"
POLE DIAMETER
PLUS 1"
POLE DIAMETER
PLUS 1"
POLE
DIA
POLE
DIA
POLE
DIA
10
2
m
m
1-3/4"
(2) 34" DIA x 1-1/2"
SLOT HOLES
C
A
B
NTS
SECTION B
NTS
SECTION A NTS
VIEWNAME C
ASSEMBLY TCB-02 ASSEMBLY TCB-03 ASSEMBLY TCB-04
5/8 DIA BOLT
(TYP)
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-237.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
2
3
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7237
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
MULTI-CANTILEVER BRACKETS
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
NTS
01-16-26
10"
10"
10"
10"
10"
10"
10"
10"
10"
10"
10"
10"
10"
10"
ST
A
.
2
0
3
+
0
0
ST
A
.
2
0
3
+
8
0
ST
A
.
2
0
4
+
5
3
ST
A
.
2
0
5
+
2
0
ST
A
.
2
0
6
+
2
5
ST
A
.
2
0
6
+
9
3
ST
A
.
2
0
1
+
7
1
ST
A
.
2
0
5
+
8
5
10"
10"
129 80
73
67
65
40
68
MSO-0"
MSO-0"
MSO-3.7"
MSO-3.5"
MSO-5.8"
MSO-5.3"
MSO-3.5
"
MSO-3.6
"
MSO-2.3
"
MSO-2.7
"
MSO-5.2
"
MSO-5.0
"
MSO-
3
.
6
"
MSO-
4
.
0
"
MSO
-
1
.
6
"
FP
L
L
MPA
1139
1516 5 5
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-303.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
3
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-7-303.dwg
Y7303
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
WIRING LAYOUT & ALLOCATION SCHEDULE
WB STA 201+00 TO WB STA 207+00
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
1"=20'
01-16-26
MAT
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
7
+
0
0
SEE
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Y
-
7
-
3
0
4
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
EB TRACK CL
WB TRACK CL
1. ALL STATIONING BASED ON THE WESTBOUND TRACK.
OFFSETS BASED ON THE WESTBOUND TRACK CENTER LINE.
NOTE:
EXISTING POLES
BEGINNING OF
NEW TRACK
S250
C250
207+
0
0
208+
0
0
209+00
210+00 211+00 212+00
207+
0
0
208
+
0
0
209+
0
0
210+00 211+00 212+00
TS =
W
B
2
0
8
+
6
5
.
3
3
ST =
W
B
2
0
7
+
2
4
.
3
6
ST
=
W
B
2
1
0
+
2
6
.
3
4
CS =
W
B
2
0
6
+
9
3
.
3
6
CS
=
W
B
2
0
9
+
9
5
.
3
4
SC
=
W
B
2
0
8
+
9
6
.
3
3
PC
=
E
B
2
1
1
+
9
4
.
2
4
TS =
E
B
2
0
8
+
5
3
.
9
9
ST =
E
B
2
0
7
+
1
5
.
1
8
ST
=
E
B
2
1
0
+
2
4
.
9
4
CS =
E
B
2
0
6
+
8
4
.
1
8
CS
=
E
B
2
0
9
+
9
3
.
9
4
SC
=
E
B
2
0
8
+
8
4
.
9
9
10"
10"
10"
10"
0
0
10"
10"
10"
10"3"10"
10"
ST
A
.
2
0
7
+
8
6
ST
A
.
2
0
8
+
8
7
L
ST
A
.
2
0
9
+
5
7
ST
A
.
2
0
9
+
8
4
ST
A
.
2
1
0
+
3
2
ST
A
.
2
1
1
+
7
0
ST
A
.
2
0
9
+
8
8
10"
10"
ST
A
.
2
0
8
+
9
0
ST
A
.
2
1
1
+
9
9
13deg
13deg
13deg
ST
A
.
2
1
0
+
3
3
ST
A
.
2
1
1
+
7
0
93
104
18
38
44
48 138
39
MSO-
4
.
0
"
MSO
-
1
.
6
"
MSO
-
1
.
9
"
MSO
-
2
.
3
"
MSO
-
2
.
3
"
MSO-6.0"
MSO-2.0"
3"
MSO-3"
MSO-3"MSO-3.4"
MSO-3.4"
12deg
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-304.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
3
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
3
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-7-304.dwg
Y7304
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
WIRING LAYOUT & ALLOCATION SCHEDULE
WB STA 207+00 TO WB STA 211+17
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
1"=20'
01-16-26
MAT
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
7
+
0
0
SEE
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Y
-
7
-
3
0
3
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
2
+
0
0
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Y
-
7
-
3
0
5
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
EB TRACK CL
OUTBOUND
WB TRACK CL
INBOUND
1. ALL STATIONING BASED ON THE WESTBOUND TRACK.
OFFSETS BASED ON THE WESTBOUND TRACK CENTER LINE.
NOTE:
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
S260
S270
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
PS
N
O
6
T
/
O
WB
2
1
2
+
9
5
.
6
3
PI
T
O
WB
2
1
3
+
1
6
.
8
8
PI
T
O
WB
2
1
4
+
5
3
.
9
3
PS
N
O
6
T
/
O
WB
2
1
4
+
7
5
.
1
8
PC
=
E
B
2
1
1
+
9
4
.
2
4
PC
=
E
B
2
1
2
+
5
3
.
4
9
PT
=
E
B
2
1
2
+
2
3
.
4
9
PT
=
E
B
2
1
2
+
8
2
.
7
5
PS
N
O
.
6
T
/
O
EB
2
1
2
+
9
6
.
7
4
PI
T
O
EB
2
1
3
+
1
7
.
9
9
PI
T
O
EB
2
1
4
+
5
5
.
0
4
PS
N
O
.
6
T
/
O
EB
2
1
4
+
7
6
.
2
9
3"
10"
10"10"
10"
10"
ST
A
.
2
1
3
+
1
6
ST
A
.
2
1
4
+
5
6
ST
A
.
2
1
5
+
2
1
ST
A
.
2
1
2
+
8
2
ST
A
.
2
1
3
+
1
7
ST
A
.
2
1
2
+
6
0
ST
A
.
2
1
1
+
9
9
13deg 12deg
ST
A
.
2
1
2
+
8
9
ST
A
.
2
1
2
+
3
8
ST
A
.
2
1
5
+
2
1
146
28
39 45
137
142
0"
10"
10"
10"
0
6"
10"
ST
5
FT
6
1139
1919
STX5
245
STX6
243X6
FT
238X5
FT
STA. 215+90
STA. 215+93
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7-305.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
s
h
a
d
i
.
k
h
a
y
y
a
t
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
3
s
y
s
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
-
3
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-7-305.dwg
Y7305
OVERHEAD CONTACT SYSTEM
WIRING LAYOUT & ALLOCATION SCHEDULE
WB STA 212+00 TO WB STA 215+96.33
B.DEMERS
N.WU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
1"=20'
01-16-26
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
2
+
0
0
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Y
-
7
-
3
0
4
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
EB TRACK CL
OUTBOUND
WB TRACK CL
INBOUND
1. ALL STATIONING BASED ON THE WESTBOUND TRACK.
OFFSETS BASED ON THE WESTBOUND TRACK CENTER LINE.
NOTE:
STANDARD COMMUNICATION SYMBOLS ABBREVIATION DESCRIPTION ABBREVIATION DESCRIPTION
CH COMMUNICATION HOUSE
PULL BOX / HANDHOLE / MANHOLE
UNDERGROUND CONDUIT /
DUCTBANK
PULL BOX / HANDHOLE / MANHOLE
WITH UNDEGROUND RACEWAYS OR
CONDUITS
SINGLE-MODE FIBER CABLE WITH
NUMBER OF STRAND
POWER CONTROL CABINET (PCC)
##
CLOSED-CIRCUIT TELEVISION
SYSTEMCCTV
ETEL
PA/PIS
SCR
TVM
FDP
EMERGENCY TELEPHONE
PUBLIC ADDRESS / PUBLIC
INFORMATION SIGNS
SMART CARD READER
TICKET VENDING MACHINE
FIBER DISTRIBUTION PANEL
MC
SEH
PLATFORM
MEDIA CONVERTERS
SIGNAL EQUIPMENT HOUSE
CAT 6A CATEGORY 6 NETWORK CABLE
CCTV CLOSED-CIRCUIT TELEVISION
CTS COMMUNICATION TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
ETEL EMERGENCY TELEPHONE
F/O FIBER OPTIC
FDP FIBER OPTIC DISTRIBUTION PANEL
GBPS GIGABIT PER SECOND
GIG-E GIGABIT ETHERNET
I/O INPUT / OUTPUT
IP INTERNET PROTOCOL
MC MEDIA CONVERTERS
NVR NETWORK VIDEO RECORDER
OMF OPERATION / MAINTENANCE FACILITY
PA PUBLIC ADDRESS
PCC POWER CONTROL CABINET
PLC PROGRAMMABLE LOGIC CONTROLLER
PSTN PUBLIC SWITCHED TELEPHONE NETWORK
RTU REMOTE TERMINAL UNIT
SCADA SUPERVISORY CONTROL AND DATA AQUISITION
SCR SMART CARD READER
SEH SIGNAL EQUIPMENT HOUSE
SM SINGLE-MODE
STP SHIELDED TWISTED PAIR CABLE
TX / RX TRANSMIT / RECEIVE
UPS UNINTERRUPTIBLE POWER SUPPLY
VAC VOLTAGE ALTERNATING CURRENT
VOIP VOICE OVER INTERNET PROTOCOL
POE POWER OVER ETHERNET
PDU POWER DISTRIBUTION UNIT
CPP COPPER PATCH PANELCOMMUNICATIONS CABLE / CAT 6A
CPP COPPER PATCH PANEL
GBB
PDU
MC/POE
CPP
CTS
FDP
CO
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
GBB GROUNDING BUS BAR
FST FIBER SPLICE THROUGH
IT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
TVM TICKET VENDING MACHINE
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-0-800.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
8
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
u
r
t
.
e
f
f
e
r
t
z
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
0
-
8
0
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-0-800.dwg
Y0800
COMMUNICATIONS
SYMBOLS, ABBREVIATIONS AND
GENERAL NOTES
M.WESTERGARD
K.EFFERTZ
M.NEALE
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. LABELING AS SHOWN IN DETAILS SHALL BE TYPICAL FOR UTA.
2. REFER TO SYSTEMWIDE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR SIGNAL CONDUIT
PLAN.
3. REFER TO SYSTEMWIDE ELECTRICAL DUCTBANK PLANS FOR
UNDERGROUND RACEWAY AND CABLE PLANS.
4. SIGNALING COMMUNICATION DETAILS INCLUDING ELECTROLOGIXS OFFICE
COMMUNICATIONS TO BE DETAILED ON SIGNAL CIRCUIT PLANS. EXPECTED
PROTOCOL TO BE 9600 BAUD GENISYS. PRELIMINARY SIGNAL CIRCUIT
PLANS WILL SHOW CONTROL AND INDICATION CHARTS, LOCATION ID AND
GENISYS CONFIGURATION SETTINGS.
5. FINAL SIGNAL COMMUNICATION DETAILS SHALL BE CONFIRMED WITH UTA
AND PROVIDED FOR UPDATING NMS AND TDX SYSTEMS FOR CONTROL AT
THE OMF.
48 SM
CH
UNION
CENTRAL POINTE STATION
POWER CONTROL
CABINET (PCC), TYP
ETEL
CCTV
PA/PIS
TVM
SCR
CAT6 CABLE TYP
S. SALT LAKE CITY STATION
POWER CONTROL
CABINET (PCC), TYP
ETEL
CCTV
PA/PIS
TVM
SCR
300 EAST STATION
POWER CONTROL
CABINET (PCC), TYP
ETEL
CCTV
PA/PIS
TVM
SCR
500 EAST STATION
POWER CONTROL
CABINET (PCC), TYP
ETEL
CCTV
PA/PIS
TVM
SCR
700 EAST STATION
POWER CONTROL
CABINET (PCC), TYP
ETEL
CCTV
PA/PIS
TVM
SCR
FAIRMONT STATION
POWER CONTROL
CABINET (PCC), TYP
ETEL
CCTV
PA/PIS
TVM
SCR
CAT 6A CABLE TYP
SUGAR HOUSE STATION
POWER CONTROL
CABINET (PCC), TYP
ETEL
CCTV
PA/PIS
TVM
SCR
SUGARMONT STATION
POWER CONTROL
CABINET (PCC), TYP
ETEL
CCTV
PA/PIS
TVM
SCR
UNION C
INTERLOCKING
SIGNALS
SH1 TPSS
SUBSTATION
GAMMA
INTERLOCKING
SIGNALS
ALPHA A
INTERLOCKING
SIGNALS
ALPHA B
INTERLOCKING
SIGNALS
HIGHLAND DRIVE
INTERLOCKING
SIGNALS
SH2 TPSS
SUBSTATION
BETA
INTERLOCKING
SIGNALS
24 SM 24 SM
GBB
PDU
MC/POE
CPP
CTS
FDP
CO
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
144 SM48 SM48 SM 48 SM 48 SM 48 SM 48 SM
GBB
PDU
MC/POE
CPP
CTS
FDP
CO
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
GBB
PDU
MC/POE
CPP
CTS
FDP
CO
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
GBB
PDU
MC/POE
CPP
CTS
FDP
CO
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
GBB
PDU
MC/POE
CPP
CTS
FDP
CO
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
GBB
PDU
MC/POE
CPP
CTS
FDP
CO
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
GBB
PDU
MC/POE
CPP
CTS
FDP
CO
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
GBB
PDU
MC/POE
CPP
CTS
FDP
CO
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
144 SM24 SM24 SM24 SM24 SM
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-1-801.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
u
r
t
.
e
f
f
e
r
t
z
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
1
-
8
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-1-801.dwg
Y1801
COMMUNICATIONS
SYSTEMWIDE SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM
M.WESTERGARD
K.EFFERTZ
M.NEALE
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. GRAY ITEMS INDICATE EXISTING.
2. BOTH SIGNAL AND IT F/O CABLES CONNECT BACK TO OMF VIA EXISTING
CONNECTION ON OTHER F/O CABLES AT THE UNION COMMUNICATIONS
HOUSE OR UNION C INTERLOCKING.
3. SCOPE INCLUDES CABLING TO END DEVICES AND PIS INSTALLATION. END
DEVICES INCLUDING CCTV, TVM, SCR & ETEL SHALL BE PROVIDED AND
INSTALLED BY UTA OR OTHERS.
NOTES:
1.SEE FIBER ALLOCATION TABLES ON SHEET Y3803 & Y3804 FOR
FIBER DISTRIBUTION PANEL TERMINATION DETAILS.
2. GRAY ITEMS INDICATE EXISTING.
3. EXISTING FDP FOR 24 SM CABLES ARE 6 PANEL WALL MOUNT
STYLE.
4. NEW FDP FOR 144 SM CABLES ARE 12 PANEL RACK MOUNT STYLE.
5. F/O JUMPERS ARE REQUIRED BETWEEN THE NEW AND EXISTING
FDP FOR REQUIRED CONNECTIONS.
LEGEND:
SINGLE-MODE FIBER OPTIC CABLE
FIBER OPTIC DISTRIBUTION PANEL
FIBER OPTIC SPLICE ENCLOSURE
8-PORT ST-TYPE PIGTAIL MODULE TO BE USED IN FIBER OPTIC
DISTRIBUTION PANEL
12-PORT SC-TYPE PIGTAIL TO BE USED IN FIBER OPTIC
DISTRIBUTION PANEL
FUSION SPLICE
FIBER END COILED IN PANEL
8ST
12SC
SIGNAL / SCADA / TPSS
FIBER OPTIC CABLE
BETA
INTERLOCKING
1-8
9-16
17-24
8ST
8ST
CONTINUED BELOW
8ST
XXX XX
12
S
C
12
S
C
1-12
13-24
25-144
144 SM
FDP 1 FDP 2
12
S
C
12
S
C
1-12
13-24
25-144
FDP 1
24 SM
HIGHLAND DRIVE
INTERLOCKINGSH2 TPSS
1-8
9-16
17-24
8ST 8ST
1-8
9-16
17-24
FDP 1
24 SM
CONTINUED ABOVE
GAMMA
INTERLOCKING
1-8
9-16
17-24
8ST
8ST
8ST
8ST
1-8
9-16
17-24
FDP 1
24 SM
1-8
9-16
17-24
1-8
9-16
17-24
24 SM
ALPHA A
INTERLOCKING
8ST
8ST
8ST
8ST
FDP 1
ALPHA B
INTERLOCKING
1-8
9-16
17-24
8ST
8ST
8ST
8ST
1-8
9-16
17-24
FDP 1
24 SM
1-8
9-16
17-24
SH1 TPSS
1-8
9-16
17-24
8ST 8ST
FDP 1
24 SM
1-8
9-16
17-24
UNION C
INTERLOCKING
8ST
8ST
8ST
FDP 1
24 SM
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-1-802.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
u
r
t
.
e
f
f
e
r
t
z
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
1
-
8
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-1-802.dwg
Y1802
COMMUNICATIONS
SIGNAL FIBER OPTIC
CABLE PLAN
M.WESTERGARD
K.EFFERTZ
M.NEALE
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
BETA INTERLOCKING - WALL MOUNT FDP 1 (EXISTING)
CABLE FIBER DISTRIBUTION PANEL CONNECTION
ORIGINATION TYPE BUFFER COLOR STRAND PANEL POSITION CONNECTION
TYPE
LOCAL
CONNECTION
FAR END
CONNECTION
FAR END
LOCATION
WE
S
T
T
O
S
H
2
T
P
S
S
24 SINGLE-MODE
BLUE
BLUE 1
A
1 ST RS400 PORT 1 RS400 PORT 2 ALPHA A
INTERLOCKINGORANGE 2 2 ST
GREEN 3 3 ST
BROWN 4 4 ST
SLATE 5 5 ST PATCHCORD TO FDP
2 PORTS 5/6 RS400 PORT 2 ALPHA B
INTERLOCKINGWHITE 6 6 ST
RED 7 7 ST
BLACK 8 8 ST
YELLOW 9
B
9 ST VHLC PORT B VHLC PORT D ALPHA B
INTERLOCKINGVIOLET1010ST
ROSE 11 11 ST
AQUA 12 12 ST
ORANGE
BLUE 13 13 ST
ORANGE 14 14 ST
GREEN 15 15 ST
BROWN 16 16 ST
SLATE 17
C
17 ST
WHITE 18 18 ST
RED 19 19 ST
BLACK 20 20 ST
YELLOW 21 21 ST
VIOLET 22 22 ST
ROSE 23 23 ST
AQUA 24 24 ST
BETA INTERLOCKING - RACK MOUNT FDP 2 (NEW)
CABLE FIBER DISTRIBUTION PANEL CONNECTION
ORIGINATION TYPE BUFFER COLOR STRAND PANEL POSITION CONNECTION
TYPE
LOCAL
CONNECTION
FAR END
CONNECTION
FAR END
LOCATION
EA
S
T
T
O
H
I
G
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
I
N
T
E
R
L
O
C
K
I
N
G
144 SINGLE-MODE
BLUE
BLUE 1
A
1 SC RS400 PORT 2 RS400 PORT 1 HIGHLAND DRIVE
INTERLOCKINGORANGE 2 2 SC
GREEN 3 3 SC
BROWN 4 4 SC
SLATE 5 5 SC PATCHCORD TO FDP
1 PORTS 5/6 RS400 PORT 2 HIGHLAND DRIVE
INTERLOCKINGWHITE66SC
RED 7 7 SC
BLACK 8 8 SC
YELLOW 9 9 SC VHLC PORT D ELECTROLOGIXS
SERIAL PORT SLOT 1
HIGHLAND DRIVE
INTERLOCKINGVIOLET1010SC
ROSE 11 11 SC
AQUA 12 12 SC
ORANGE
BLUE 13
B
13 SC
ORANGE 14 14 SC
GREEN 15 15 SC
BROWN 16 16 SC
SLATE 17 17 SC
WHITE 18 18 SC
RED 19 19 SC
BLACK 20 20 SC
YELLOW 21 21 SC
VIOLET 22 22 SC
ROSE 23 23 SC
AQUA 24 24 SC
GREEN ALL 25-36
UNTERMINATED &
COILED IN PANEL ---
BROWN ALL 37-48
SLATE ALL 49-60
WHITE ALL 61-72
RED ALL 73-84
BLACK ALL 85-96
YELLOW ALL 97-108
VIOLET ALL 109-120
ROSE ALL 121-132
AQUA ALL 133-144
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-3-803.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
u
r
t
.
e
f
f
e
r
t
z
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
3
-
8
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-3-803.dwg
Y3803
COMMUNICATIONS
SIGNAL BETA INTERLOCKING
FIBER ALLOCATION TABLE
M.WESTERGARD
K.EFFERTZ
M.NEALE
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. GRAY ITEMS INDICATE EXISTING.
HIGHLAND DRIVE INTERLOCKING - RACK MOUNT FDP
CABLE FIBER DISTRIBUTION PANEL CONNECTION
ORIGINATION TYPE BUFFER COLOR STRAND PANEL POSITION CONNECTION
TYPE
LOCAL
CONNECTION
FAR END
CONNECTION
FAR END
LOCATION
WE
S
T
T
O
B
E
T
A
I
N
T
E
R
L
O
C
K
I
N
G
144 SINGLE-MODE
BLUE
BLUE 1
A
1 SC RS 400PORT 1 RS 400PORT 2 BETA INTERLOCKINGORANGE 2 2 SC
GREEN 3 3 SC
BROWN 4 4 SC
SLATE 5 5 SC RS 400PORT 2 RS 400PORT 2 ALPHA B
INTERLOCKINGWHITE66SC
RED 7 7 SC
BLACK 8 8 SC
YELLOW 9 9 SC ELECTROLOGIXS
SERIAL PORT SLOT 1 VHLC PORT D BETA INTERLOCKINGVIOLET1010SC
ROSE 11 11 SC
AQUA 12 12 SC
ORANGE
BLUE 13
B
13 SC
ORANGE 14 14 SC
GREEN 15 15 SC
BROWN 16 16 SC
SLATE 17 17 SC
WHITE 18 18 SC
RED 19 19 SC
BLACK 20 20 SC
YELLOW 21 21 SC
VIOLET 22 22 SC
ROSE 23 23 SC
AQUA 24 24 SC
GREEN ALL 25-36
UNTERMINATED &
COILED IN PANEL ---
BROWN ALL 37-48
SLATE ALL 49-60
WHITE ALL 61-72
RED ALL 73-84
BLACK ALL 85-96
YELLOW ALL 97-108
VIOLET ALL 109-120
ROSE ALL 121-132
AQUA ALL 133-144
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-3-804.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
u
r
t
.
e
f
f
e
r
t
z
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
3
-
8
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-3-804.dwg
Y3804
COMMUNICATIONS
SIGNAL HIGHLAND DRIVE
FIBER ALLOCATION TABLE
M.WESTERGARD
K.EFFERTZ
M.NEALE
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1.SEE FIBER ALLOCATION TABLES ON SHEET Y3811 & Y3812 FOR
FIBER DISTRIBUTION PANEL TERMINATION DETAILS.
2. GRAY ITEMS INDICATE EXISTING.
3. NEW FDP FOR 144 SM CABLES ARE 12 PANEL RACK MOUNT STYLE.
4. F/O JUMPERS ARE REQUIRED BETWEEN THE NEW AND EXISTING
FDP FOR REQUIRED CONNECTIONS.
IT DATA COMMUNICATIONS
FIBER OPTIC CABLE
CONTINUED BELOW
FAIRMONT
STATION
12
S
C
12
S
C
1-12
13-24
49-144
144 SM
FDP 1
12
S
C
12
S
C
13-24
25-36
49-144
FDP 1
SUGAR HOUSE
STATION
SUGARMONT
STATION
12
S
C
12
S
C
1-12
13-24
25-48
48 SM
FDP 1
1-12
13-24
25-48
48 SM
1-12
13-24
25-48
CONTINUED ABOVE
300 EAST STATION
12
S
C
12
S
C
1-12
13-24
25-48
48 SM
FDP 1
12
S
C
12
S
C
1-12
13-24
25-48
FDP 1
500 EAST STATIONSOUTH SALT LAKE
CITY STATION
12
S
C
12
S
C
1-12
13-24
25-48
48 SM
FDP 1
1-12
13-24
25-48
48 SM
1-12
13-24
25-48
700 EAST STATION
12
S
C
12
S
C
1-12
13-24
25-48
48 SM
FDP 1
1-12
13-24
25-48
48 SM
1-12
13-24
25-48
CENTRAL POINT
STATION
12
S
C
12
S
C
1-12
13-24
25-48
FDP 1
1-12
13-24
25-48
48 SM
CH
UNION
12
S
C
12
S
C
25-48 37-48
1-12
LEGEND:
SINGLE-MODE FIBER OPTIC CABLE
FIBER OPTIC DISTRIBUTION PANEL
FIBER OPTIC SPLICE ENCLOSURE
12-PORT SC-TYPE PIGTAIL TO BE USED IN FIBER OPTIC
DISTRIBUTION PANEL
FUSION SPLICE
FIBER END COILED IN PANEL
COMMUNICATION HOUSE
12SC
XXX XX
CH
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-1-810.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
u
r
t
.
e
f
f
e
r
t
z
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
1
-
8
1
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-1-810.dwg
Y1810
COMMUNICATIONS
IT FIBER OPTIC
CABLE PLAN
M.WESTERGARD
K.EFFERTZ
M.NEALE
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
FAIRMONT (MCLELLAND ST.) PCC FDP
CABLE FIBER DISTRIBUTION PANEL CABLE FIBER DISTRIBUTION PANEL
ORIGINATION TYPE BUFFER COLOR STRAND PANEL POSITION CONNECTION
TYPE ORIGINATION TYPE BUFFER COLOR STRAND PANEL POSITION CONNECTION
TYPE
WE
S
T
T
O
S
U
G
A
R
M
O
N
T
(
9
0
0
E
)
P
C
C
48
S
T
R
A
N
D
S
I
N
G
L
E
-
M
O
D
E
BLUE
BLUE 1
A
1 SC
EA
S
T
T
O
H
I
G
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
.
P
C
C
14
4
S
T
R
A
N
D
S
I
N
G
L
E
-
M
O
D
E
BLUE
BLUE 1
B
13 SC
ORANGE 2 2 SC ORANGE 2 14 SC
GREEN 3 3 SC GREEN 3 15 SC
BROWN 4 4 SC BROWN 4 16 SC
SLATE 5 5 SC SLATE 5 17 SC
WHITE 6 6 SC WHITE 6 18 SC
RED 7 7 SC RED 7 19 SC
BLACK 8 8 SC BLACK 8 20 SC
YELLOW 9 9 SC YELLOW 9 21 SC
VIOLET 10 10 SC VIOLET 10 22 SC
ROSE 11 11 SC ROSE 11 23 SC
AQUA 12 12 SC AQUA 12 24 SC
ORANGE
BLUE 13
FST
TO F144SM-MCL-1
STRANDS 13-48
ORANGE
BLUE 13
FST
TO F48SM-900-1
STRANDS 13-48
ORANGE 14 ORANGE 14
GREEN 15 GREEN 15
BROWN 16 BROWN 16
SLATE 17 SLATE 17
WHITE 18 WHITE 18
RED 19 RED 19
BLACK 20 BLACK 20
YELLOW 21 YELLOW 21
VIOLET 22 VIOLET 22
ROSE 23 ROSE 23
AQUA 24 AQUA 24
GREEN
BLUE 25
GREEN
BLUE 25
ORANGE 26 ORANGE 26
GREEN 27 GREEN 27
BROWN 28 BROWN 28
SLATE 29 SLATE 29
WHITE 30 WHITE 30
RED 31 RED 31
BLACK 32 BLACK 32
YELLOW 33 YELLOW 33
VIOLET 34 VIOLET 34
ROSE 35 ROSE 35
AQUA 36 AQUA 36
BROWN
BLUE 37
BROWN
BLUE 37
ORANGE 38 ORANGE 38
GREEN 39 GREEN 39
BROWN 40 BROWN 40
SLATE 41 SLATE 41
WHITE 42 WHITE 42
RED 43 RED 43
BLACK 44 BLACK 44
YELLOW 45 YELLOW 45
VIOLET 46 VIOLET 46
ROSE 47 ROSE 47
AQUA 48 AQUA 48
SLATE ALL 49-60
UNTERMINATED
& COILED IN
PANEL
--
WHITE ALL 61-72
RED ALL 73-84
BLACK ALL 85-96
YELLOW ALL 97-108
VIOLET ALL 109-120
ROSE ALL 121-132
AQUA ALL 133-144
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-3-811.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
u
r
t
.
e
f
f
e
r
t
z
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
3
-
8
1
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-3-811.dwg
Y3811
COMMUNICATIONS
FAIRMONT PCC
IT FIBER ALLOCATION TABLE
M.WESTERGARD
K.EFFERTZ
M.NEALE
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. FST DENOTES FIBER BEING FUSION SPLICED THROUGH WITH NO
TERMINATIONS INSIDE PANEL.
2. GRAY ITEMS INDICATE EXISTING.
SUGAR HOUSE PCC FDP
CABLE FIBER DISTRIBUTION PANEL
ORIGINATION TYPE BUFFER COLOR STRAND PANEL POSITION CONNECTION
TYPE
WE
S
T
T
O
F
A
I
R
M
O
N
T
(
M
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
.
)
P
C
C
14
4
S
T
R
A
N
D
S
I
N
G
L
E
-
M
O
D
E
BLUE
BLUE 1
A
1 SC
ORANGE 2 2 SC
GREEN 3 3 SC
BROWN 4 4 SC
SLATE 5 5 SC
WHITE 6 6 SC
RED 7 7 SC
BLACK 8 8 SC
YELLOW 9 9 SC
VIOLET 10 10 SC
ROSE 11 11 SC
AQUA 12 12 SC
ORANGE
BLUE 13
B
13 SC
ORANGE 14 14 SC
GREEN 15 15 SC
BROWN 16 16 SC
SLATE 17 17 SC
WHITE 18 18 SC
RED 19 19 SC
BLACK 20 20 SC
YELLOW 21 21 SC
VIOLET 22 22 SC
ROSE 23 23 SC
AQUA 24 24 SC
GREEN
BLUE 25
C
25 SC
ORANGE 26 26 SC
GREEN 27 27 SC
BROWN 28 28 SC
SLATE 29 29 SC
WHITE 30 30 SC
RED 31 31 SC
BLACK 32 32 SC
YELLOW 33 33 SC
VIOLET 34 34 SC
ROSE 35 35 SC
AQUA 36 36 SC
BROWN
BLUE 37
D
37 SC
ORANGE 38 38 SC
GREEN 39 39 SC
BROWN 40 40 SC
SLATE 41 41 SC
WHITE 42 42 SC
RED 43 43 SC
BLACK 44 44 SC
YELLOW 45 45 SC
VIOLET 46 46 SC
ROSE 47 47 SC
AQUA 48 48 SC
SLATE ALL 49-60
UNTERMINATED &
COILED IN PANEL --
WHITE ALL 61-72
RED ALL 73-84
BLACK ALL 85-96
YELLOW ALL 97-108
VIOLET ALL 109-120
ROSE ALL 121-132
AQUA ALL 133-144
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-3-812.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
u
r
t
.
e
f
f
e
r
t
z
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
3
-
8
1
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-3-812.dwg
Y3812
COMMUNICATIONS
SUGAR HOUSE PCC
IT FIBER ALLOCATION TABLE
M.WESTERGARD
K.EFFERTZ
M.NEALE
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
144 SM
FDP
SUGAR HOUSE STATION PLATFORM SUGAR HOUSE STATION PCC COMMS CABINET
CTS SWITCH
CPP
SCR
ETEL
CCTVPA/PISPA/PISCCTV
SCR
TO
FAIRMONT
PCC
CAT 6A STP
CAT 6A PATCH CABLES
SM F/O PATCH CABLES
2" UNDERGROUND
CONDUITS
TYPE II
PULLBOX
TVM
TYPE II
PULLBOX
TYPE II
PULLBOX
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-8-813.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
u
r
t
.
e
f
f
e
r
t
z
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
8
-
8
1
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-8-813.dwg
Y8813
COMMUNICATIONS
SUGAR HOUSE STATION
RISER DIAGRAM
M.WESTERGARD
K.EFFERTZ
M.NEALE
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. SEE SHEET P1201 AND P3203 FOR LOCATIONS OF DEVICES ON PLATFORM.
2. SEE ELECTRICAL SHEET E0208 FOR TYPE II PULLBOX INFORMATION.
1
2
3
KEY NOTES:
1. CTS DEVICE & CONNECTIVITY BY OWNER.
2. SCOPE INCLUDES CABLING TO END DEVICES AND PIS INSTALLATION. END
DEVICES INCLUDING CCTV, TVM, SCR & ETEL SHALL BE PROVIDED AND
INSTALLED BY UTA OR OTHERS.
3. SEE ELECTRICAL SHEET E1205 FOR CONDUIT ROUTING AND DETAILS FROM
PCC TO PLATFORM AND END DEVICES.
CABINET
HEATER
PDU
CCTV POE INJECTORS/
SURGE SUPPRESSORS
CABLE MANAGEMENT
CABLE MANAGEMENT
CABLE MANAGEMENT
CABLE MANAGEMENT
CPP
CTS SWITCH
CTS SWITCH
FDP
42
SUGAR HOUSE STATION PCC COMMS CABINET
CA
B
L
E
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
CA
B
L
E
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
GBB
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-8-814.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
u
r
t
.
e
f
f
e
r
t
z
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
8
-
8
1
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-8-814.dwg
Y8814
SUGAR HOUSE STATION
PCC COMM CABINET RACK
ELEVATION
M.WESTERGARD
K.EFFERTZ
M.NEALE
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. EACH BRACKET REPRESENTS 1U=1.75 INCHES.
2. RACK PDU SUPPLIED BY DEDICATED ELECTRICAL CIRCUIT.
3. RACK SHALL BE ELECTRICALLY ISOLATED AND BONDED.
1
2
1
KEY NOTES:
1. CTS CONNECTIVITY BY OWNER.
2. CCTV DEVICE INSTALLATION BY OTHERS.
SUGAR HOUSE STATION COMMUNICATIONS CABLE SCHEDULE
CABLE ROUTE
# ID CONSTRUCTION TYPE SOURCE LOCATION SOURCE DEVICE TERM. PORT PATH TYPE DESTINATION LOCATION DESTINATION DEVICE TERM. PORT TAG
01 ETEL CAT 6A STP PERMANENT PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 04 2" UNDERGROUND PLATFORM ETEL RJ45 -ETEL - CAT 6A STP: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P04 TO PLATFORM ETEL
02 SCR-01 CAT 6A STP PERMANENT PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 02 2" UNDERGROUND PLATFORM W SCR-01 RJ45 -SCR-01 - CAT 6A STP: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P02 TO PLATFORM W SCR-01
03 SCR-02 CAT 6A STP PERMANENT PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 03 2" UNDERGROUND PLATFORM E SCR-02 RJ45 -SCR-02 - CAT 6A STP: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P03 TO PLATFORM E SCR-02
04 TVM CAT 6A STP PERMANENT PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 01 2" UNDERGROUND PLATFORM TVM RJ45 -TVM - CAT 6A STP: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P01 TO PLATFORM TVM
05 PIDS/PA CAT 6A STP PERMANENT PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 05 2" UNDERGROUND PLATFORM CANOPY PIDS RJ45 -PIDS/PA - CAT 6A STP: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P05 TO PLATFORM CANOPY PIDS
06 CCTV-01 CAT 6A STP PERMANENT PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 06 2" UNDERGROUND PLATFORM CANOPY CCTV-01 RJ45 -CCTV-01 - CAT 6A STP: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P06 TO PLATFORM CANOPY CCTV-01
07 CCTV-02 CAT 6A STP PERMANENT PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 07 2" UNDERGROUND PLATFORM CANOPY CCTV-02 RJ45 -CCTV-02 - CAT 6A STP: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P07 TO PLATFORM CANOPY CCTV-02
08 COMMFIBER 144 SM F/O PERMANENT PCC RU 02 FDP-01 SC 1-48 UNDERGROUND FAIRMONT STATION PCC FDP-01 NA NA COMMFIBER - 144 SM F/O: PCC RU 02FDP-01 P1-48 TO FAIRMONT STATION PCC FDP-01
SUGAR HOUSE STATION COMMUNICATIONS PATCH CABLE SCHEDULE
CABLE ROUTE
# ID CONSTRUCTION TYPE SOURCE LOCATION SOURCE DEVICE TERM. PORT PATH TYPE DESTINATION LOCATION DESTINATION DEVICE TERM. PORT TAG
09 ETEL CAT 6A PATCH JUMPER PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 04 NA PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH RJ45 TBD ETEL - CAT 6A: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P04 TO PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH
10 SCR-01 CAT 6A PATCH JUMPER PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 02 NA PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH RJ45 TBD SCR-01 - CAT 6A: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P02 TO PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH
11 SCR-02 CAT 6A PATCH JUMPER PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 03 NA PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH RJ45 TBD SCR-02 - CAT 6A: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P03 TO PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH
12 TVM CAT 6A PATCH JUMPER PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 01 NA PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH RJ45 TBD TVM - CAT 6A: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P01 TO PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH
13 PIDS/PA CAT 6A PATCH JUMPER PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 05 NA PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH RJ45 TBD PIDS/PA - CAT 6A: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P05 TO PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH
14 CCTV-01 CAT 6A PATCH JUMPER PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 06 NA PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH RJ45 TBD CCTV-01 - CAT 6A: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P06 TO PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH
15 CCTV-02 CAT 6A PATCH JUMPER PCC RU 11 CPP-01 RJ45 07 NA PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH RJ45 TBD CCTV-02 - CAT 6A: PCC RU 11CPP-01 P07 TO PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH
16 CTS-01 DUPLEX SM, F/O PATCH JUMPER PCC RU 02 FDP-01 SC 1/2 NA PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH LC TBD CTS-01 - DUPLEX SM, F/O: PCC RU 02FDP-01 P1/2 TO PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH
17 CTS-02 DUPLEX SM, F/O PATCH JUMPER PCC RU 02 FDP-01 SC 12/13 NA PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH LC TBD CTS-02 - DUPLEX SM, F/O: PCC RU 02FDP-01 P12/13 TO PCC RU 07 CTS SWITCH
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-3-815.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
k
u
r
t
.
e
f
f
e
r
t
z
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
3
-
8
1
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-3-815.dwg
Y3815
COMMUNICATIONS
SUGAR HOUSE STATION
CABLE SCHEDULE
M.WESTERGARD
K.EFFERTZ
M.NEALE
Y.LIU
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. REFER TO PLATFORM ELECTRICAL FOR CONDUIT DETAILS.
2. CABLING TYPE SHALL BE RATED FOR INTENDED PATHWAY.
3. CAT 6A SHIELDING TO BE GROUNDED ON PCC END ONLY TO PREVENT
GROUND LOOPS.
4. SURGE SUPPRESSION IN PCC ON CAT 6A CABLES RUN TO ELEVATED
STATION CANOPY LOCATIONS.
S240
L
C240
L
201+80 202+00
203+00
204+00
205+00
206+0
0
207+
0
0
203+00
204+00
205+00
206+0
0
207+
0
0
PO
B
=
W
B
2
0
2
+
9
2
.
1
7
TS
=
W
B
2
0
3
+
1
3
.
0
5
ST =
W
B
2
0
7
+
2
4
.
3
6
CS =
W
B
2
0
6
+
9
3
.
3
6
SC
=
W
B
2
0
3
+
4
4
.
0
5
BE
G
I
N
B
O
L
L
A
R
D
S
WB
2
0
3
+
7
2
.
3
8
TS
=
E
B
2
0
3
+
1
3
.
7
6
ST =
E
B
2
0
7
+
1
5
.
1
8
CS =
E
B
2
0
6
+
8
4
.
1
8
SC
=
E
B
2
0
3
+
4
4
.
7
6
PO
B
=
E
B
2
0
2
+
9
2
.
8
8
EB
T
R
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
2
0
3
+
7
5
.
0
0
TCB
L
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-1-235.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
1
-
2
3
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-1-235.dwg
Y1235
DUCTBANK PLAN
WB STA 201+00 TO WB STA 207+00
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.Duzan
Y.LU
1"=20'
01-16-26
MAT
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
7
+
0
0
SEE
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Y
-
1
-
2
3
6
EXISTING
McCLELLAND ST.
STATION
1. REFER TO DWG. Y3216 AND Y3215 FOR DUCTBANK FOUNDATION
DETAIL, CONDUIT SCHEDULE, AND PULL BOX DIMENSIONS.
2. DUCTBANK IS INSTALLED 36" MINIMUM BELOW TOP OF SLAB AND
FINISHED GRADE.
3. NOT USED
4. DUCTBANK DIMENSIONS CAN VARY. REFER TO DWG. Y4217 AND Y4218
FOR TYPICAL DUCTBANK SECTIONS/ SIZES.
5. COORDINATE DUCTBANK LOCATION WITH SIGNAL FOUNDATION PLAN.
6. DUCTBANK TO RUN BETWEEN OCS FOUNDATION AND EDGE OF
TRACK SLAB AND ONLY COME INTO THE CENTER FOR MANHOLE
PLACEMENT.
7. CONDUIT BETWEEN JUNCTION BOX AND DETECTION LOOP TO BE
DIRECT BURIED. CONDUIT CONNECTION TO BE COMPLETED AFTER
EMBEDDED TRACKS INSTALLED.
8. NOT USED
9. UDOT/SLC CONDUIT NOT CONNECTED INTO UTA COMMUNICATION
PULL BOX.
10. CONDUIT INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN TRAFFIC CONTROLLER AND
PULL BOXES SHALL BE PROVIDED ON TRAFFIC PLANS.
11. TRACK CIRCUIT IS LOCATED IN COMMUNICATION PULL BOX. CONDUIT
BETWEEN PULL BOX AND SIGNAL DEVICES TO BE DIRECT BURIED.
CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE CONDUIT CONNECTION TO SIGNAL
TRACK CONNECTION BOX/DEVICE IN COORDINATION WITH THE
CONTRACTOR'S SIGNAL DESIGN AND SIGNAL DESIGNER.
12. TRAIN DETECTION CIRCUIT TRAFFIC CONTROLLER IS INSTALLED INTO
COMMUNICATION PULL BOX. CONDUIT CONNECTION TO LOOP TO BE
COMPLETED AFTER EMBEDDED TRACK INSTALLED.
13. SIGNAL CONDUIT ROUTED THROUGH UTA COMMUNICATION PULL
BOX.
14. CONDUIT INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN PCC AND PULL BOXES SHALL
BE PROVIDED ON STATION PLANS.
15. REFER TO SHEET Y3216 FOR CONDUIT SCHEDULE.
16. ALL PULL BOXES THAT ARE BEING INSTALLED FOR UDOT/SLC SHALL
BE LABELED PER UDOT/SLC STANDARDS OR AS APPROVED BY THE
ENGINEER.
DUCTBANK (TYP.)
OCS TYP.
PULL BOX 206+00
SIGNAL
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
WB TRACK CL
EB TRACK CL
PULL BOX 202+73
TRAIN DETECTION
PULL BOX 203+94
COMMUNICATION
9
9 9
149
9
9 9
9 7
9
9 9
9 14
14
7
7
7
8
TRAFFIC CONTROLLER PULL
BOX TYPE 3 SEE NOTE 10
TRAFFIC CONTROLLER
UNDERGROUND SERVICE
PEDESTAL
OCS POLE FOR
TRACTION POWER TAP
201+70
2-500KCMIL NEW AND
2-500KCMIL EXISTING POSITIVE
FEEDER CABLE IN EXISTING
CONDUITS FROM TPSS # S2,
REFER DETAIL E ON DWG. Y7314
FOR DETAILS
TPSS #S2
20
20
20
20
20
UDOT/SLC FIBER PULL BOX
TYPE 2 SEE NOTE 16
EXISTING STATION
POWER CONTROL
CENTER (PCC)
SEH 4
7 8
9
9 9
9 7
7
9
9 9
9 7
7
9
9 9
9 14
14
7
8
EXISTING
COMMUNICATION
PULL BOX (TYP.)
13
7
NOTES:
2-500KCMIL NEW AND
2-500KCMIL EXISTING
NEGATIVE RETURN CABLES
IN EXISTING CONDUITS
FROM TPSS # S2, REFER
DETAIL D ON DWG. Y7314
FOR DETAILS
EXISTING UDOT/SLC
PULL BOX TYPE 2
20
BAR SIGNAL 204+00 SEE TRAFFIC
PLAN FOR DETAIL CONDUIT AND
CABLE ROUTING
SIGNAL COUPLER
BOX 202+97
14
14
01+
S250
C250
207+
0
0
208
+
0
0
209+00
210+00 211+00 212+00
207+
0
0
208+
0
0
209+
0
0
210+00 211+00 212+00
WB T
R
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
WB 2
0
7
+
2
5
.
0
0
TS =
W
B
2
0
8
+
6
5
.
3
3
ST =
W
B
2
0
7
+
2
4
.
3
6
ST
=
W
B
2
1
0
+
2
6
.
3
4
CS =
W
B
2
0
6
+
9
3
.
3
6
CS
=
W
B
2
0
9
+
9
5
.
3
4
SC
=
W
B
2
0
8
+
9
6
.
3
3
END
B
O
L
L
A
R
D
S
BEG
I
N
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
WB 2
0
8
+
7
2
.
1
4
END
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
WB 2
0
8
+
8
2
.
1
6
BE
G
I
N
SH
A
R
E
D
U
S
E
WB
2
0
9
+
5
6
.
0
1
PC
=
E
B
2
1
1
+
9
4
.
2
4
TS =
E
B
2
0
8
+
5
3
.
9
9
ST =
E
B
2
0
7
+
1
5
.
1
8
ST
=
E
B
2
1
0
+
2
4
.
9
4
CS =
E
B
2
0
6
+
8
4
.
1
8
CS
=
E
B
2
0
9
+
9
3
.
9
4
SC
=
E
B
2
0
8
+
8
4
.
9
9
EB T
R
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
20
8
+
7
5
.
0
0
WB
T
R
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
WB
2
1
0
+
2
9
.
0
0
BE
G
I
N
S
H
A
R
E
D
U
S
E
20
9
+
1
4
.
6
5
TCB
TC
B
L
L
L
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-1-236.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
1
-
2
3
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-1-236.dwg
Y1236
DUCTBANK PLAN
WB STA 207+00 TO WB STA 212+00
A.JAIN
Y.LIU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
1"=20'
01-16-26
MAT
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
7
+
0
0
SEE
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Y
-
1
-
2
3
5
1. REFER TO DWG. Y3216 AND Y3215 FOR DUCTBANK FOUNDATION
DETAIL, CONDUIT SCHEDULE, AND PULL BOX DIMENSIONS.
2. DUCTBANK IS INSTALLED 36" MINIMUM BELOW TOP OF SLAB AND
FINISHED GRADE.
3. NOT USED.
4. DUCTBANK DIMENSIONS CAN VARY. REFER TO DWG. Y4217 AND
Y4218 FOR TYPICAL DUCTBANK SECTIONS/ SIZES.
5. COORDINATE DUCTBANK LOCATION WITH SIGNAL FOUNDATION
PLAN.
6. DUCTBANK TO RUN BETWEEN OCS FOUNDATION AND EDGE OF
TRACK SLAB AND ONLY COME INTO THE CENTER FOR MANHOLE
PLACEMENT.
7. CONDUIT BETWEEN JUNCTION BOX AND DETECTION LOOP TO BE
DIRECT BURIED. CONDUIT CONNECTION TO BE COMPLETED
AFTER EMBEDDED TRACKS INSTALLED.
8. UDOT/SLC CONDUIT NOT CONNECTED INTO UTA
COMMUNICATION PULL BOX.
9. CONDUIT INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN TRAFFIC CONTROLLER
AND PULL BOXES SHALL BE PROVIDED ON TRAFFIC PLANS.
10. TRACK CIRCUIT IS LOCATED IN COMMUNICATION PULL BOX.
CONDUIT BETWEEN PULL BOX AND SIGNAL DEVICES TO BE
DIRECT BURIED. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE CONDUIT
CONNECTION TO SIGNAL TRACK CONNECTION BOX/DEVICE IN
COORDINATION WITH THE CONTRACTOR'S SIGNAL DESIGN AND
SIGNAL DESIGNER.
11. TRAIN DETECTION CIRCUIT TRAFFIC CONTROLLER IS INSTALLED
INTO COMMUNICATION PULL BOX. CONDUIT CONNECTION TO
LOOP TO BE COMPLETED AFTER EMBEDDED TRACK INSTALLED.
12. SIGNAL CONDUIT ROUTED THROUGH UTA COMMUNICATION PULL
BOX.
13. CONDUIT INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN PCC AND PULL BOXES
SHALL BE PROVIDED ON STATION PLANS.
14. NOT USED
15. ALL PULL BOXES THAT ARE BEING INSTALLED FOR UDOT/SLC
SHALL BE LABELED PER UDOT/SLC STANDARDS OR AS
APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER.
DUCTBANK (TYP.)
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
PULL BOX 208+44
COMMUNICATION
WB TRACK CL
EB TRACK CL
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
2
+
0
0
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Y
-
1
-
2
3
7
PULL BOX 211+90
TRAIN DETECTION
PULL BOX 210+30
TRAIN DETECTION
7 7
7
7
7 7 7
7
7
87 7
9
9 9 14
9 7
7
7
8
9
9 9 14
9 7 7 PULL BOX 211+70
COMMUNICATION 147
9
9 9
9 14
TRAFFIC CONTROLLER PULL
BOX TYPE 3 SEE NOTE 10
TRAFFIC CONTROLLER
UNDERGROUND
SERVICE PEDESTAL
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
UDOT/SLC FIBER PULL BOX
TYPE 2 SEE NOTE 15
UDOT/SLC FIBER PULL BOX
TYPE 2 SEE NOTE 15
13
13 13
13
20
7
NOTES:
EXISTING TRAFFIC
CONTROLLER
1-1/2" PVC CONDUIT FOR
POWER CABLE FROM
EXISTING TCB TO UTA BEACON
1-1/2" PVC CONDUIT FOR
POWER CABLE FROM
EXISTING TCB TO UTA BEACON
PEDESTRAIN LANK-OUT SIGN 208+84,
SEE TRAFFIC PLAN FOR DETAIL
CONDUIT AND CABLE ROUTING
WHEEL SENSOR 3
211+90
WHEEL SENSOR 4
210+30
PULL BOX FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL MOUNTED
ON POLE P13, 209+95 SEE TRAFFIC PLAN
FOR DETAIL CONDUIT AND CABLE ROUTING
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
212+81.65, 9.00' RT
BE
G
I
N
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
WB
2
1
5
+
0
5
.
1
8
EN
D
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
WB
2
1
5
+
6
5
.
1
8
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-1-237.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
1
-
2
3
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-1-237.dwg
Y1237
DUCTBANK PLAN
WB STA 212+00 TO WB STA 215+88.5
A.JAIN
Y.LIU
Y.LIU
B.DEMERS
1"=20'
01-16-26
1. REFER TO DWG. Y3216 AND Y3215 FOR DUCTBANK FOUNDATION
DETAIL, CONDUIT SCHEDULE, AND PULL BOX DIMENSIONS.
2. DUCTBANK IS INSTALLED 36" MINIMUM BELOW TOP OF SLAB AND
FINISHED GRADE.
3. NOT USED
4. DUCTBANK DIMENSIONS CAN VARY. REFER TO DWG. Y4217 AND
Y4218 FOR TYPICAL DUCTBANK SECTIONS/ SIZES.
5. COORDINATE DUCTBANK LOCATION WITH SIGNAL FOUNDATION
PLAN.
6. DUCTBANK TO RUN BETWEEN OCS FOUNDATION AND EDGE OF
TRACK SLAB AND ONLY COME INTO THE CENTER FOR MANHOLE
PLACEMENT.
7. CONDUIT BETWEEN JUNCTION BOX AND DETECTION LOOP TO BE
DIRECT BURIED. CONDUIT CONNECTION TO BE COMPLETED
AFTER EMBEDDED TRACKS INSTALLED.
8. NOT USED.
9. CONDUIT INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN TRAFFIC CONTROLLER
AND PULL BOXES SHALL BE PROVIDED ON TRAFFIC PLANS.
10. TRACK CIRCUIT IS LOCATED IN COMMUNICATION PULL BOX.
CONDUIT BETWEEN PULL BOX AND SIGNAL DEVICES TO BE DIRECT
BURIED. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE CONDUIT CONNECTION
TO SIGNAL TRACK CONNECTION BOX/DEVICE IN COORDINATION
WITH THE CONTRACTOR'S SIGNAL DESIGN AND SIGNAL DESIGNER.
11. TRAIN DETECTION CIRCUIT TRAFFIC CONTROLLER IS INSTALLED
INTO COMMUNICATION PULL BOX. CONDUIT CONNECTION TO
LOOP TO BE COMPLETED AFTER EMBEDDED TRACK INSTALLED.
12. SIGNAL CONDUIT ROUTED THROUGH UTA COMMUNICATION PULL
BOX.
13. CONDUIT INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN PCC AND PULL BOXES
SHALL BE PROVIDED ON STATION PLANS.
14. THE DUCTBANK IS RUN UNDER THE TRACK AND OVER THE
EXISTING DRAINAGE CANAL AT STATIONING 212+00. THE MINIMUM
DEPTH OF THE DUCTBANK IS 18" BELOW TOP OF SLAB.
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
DUCTBANK (TYP.)
SIGNAL HOUSE
PULL BOX 214+82
TRAIN DETECTION
PULL BOX 214+75.18
SIGNAL/SWITCH
PULL BOX 212+87
SIGNAL
WB TRACK CL
EB TRACK CL
PULL BOX 214+82
SIGNAL
161721
1414
PULL BOX 214+81
COMMUNICATIONS
14
14
14 14
16
21
17 14
14 14
16
21
21
7
7
PULL BOX 214+00
TRAIN DETECTION
7
PULL BOX 213+31
TRAIN DETECTION
PULL BOX 215+75
TRAIN DETECTION
7
7
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
2
+
0
0
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Y
-
1
-
2
3
6
147 7 14
OCS POLE (TYP.)
FUTURE MAINLINE
DUCTBANK AND
SIGNAL CONDUIT
PULL BOX 212+96
PULL BOX 214+82
14
PCC
ENCLOSURE
8
7
8
7 7
14 14
14
14 14
16
21
17
16 17 21
20 20 20 20 20 20
NOTES:
1-1/2" PVC CONDUIT
FOR POWER CABLE
FROM EXISTING TCB
TO UTA BEACON
1-1/2" PVC CONDUIT FOR
POWER CABLE FROM
EXISTING TCB TO UTA BEACON 5" SIGNAL MAST
PULL BOX NEAR BASE OF 5" SIGNAL MAST
JUNCTION BOX FOR SWITCH HEATER HEATING ELEMENT CONNECTIONS
JUNCTION BOX FOR SWITCH MACHINE CABLE CONNECTIONS
TRACK CONNECTION BOX
EMBEDDED WHEEL SENSOR BOX
PULL BOX 212+95.63
SWITCH/HEATER
PULL BOX FOR CONTROL SELECTOR AND ROUTE SELECTOR
14
17
1721 14
14
14
14
16 17
17
17
14
14
S240
L
C240
L
202+00
203+00
204+00
205+00
206+0
0
207+
0
0
203+00
204+00
205+00
206+0
0
207+
0
0
PO
B
=
W
B
2
0
2
+
9
2
.
1
7
TS
=
W
B
2
0
3
+
1
3
.
0
5
ST =
W
B
2
0
7
+
2
4
.
3
6
CS =
W
B
2
0
6
+
9
3
.
3
6
SC
=
W
B
2
0
3
+
4
4
.
0
5
BE
G
I
N
B
O
L
L
A
R
D
S
WB
2
0
3
+
7
2
.
3
8
TS
=
E
B
2
0
3
+
1
3
.
7
6
ST =
E
B
2
0
7
+
1
5
.
1
8
CS =
E
B
2
0
6
+
8
4
.
1
8
SC
=
E
B
2
0
3
+
4
4
.
7
6
PO
B
=
E
B
2
0
2
+
9
2
.
8
8
EB
T
R
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
2
0
3
+
7
5
.
0
0
S
M
C
C
L
E
L
L
A
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT DRIVE
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
SIMP
S
O
N
A
V
E
SUGARMONT DRIVE
M
TCB
SL-C-Y-1-238.dwg
Y1238
ELECTRICAL PLAN
STA 201+00 TO STA 207+00
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.DUZAN
Y.LIU
SCALE OF DWG
01-16-26
UTILITY SERVICE NOTES:NOTES:TRENCH NOTES:
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-1-238.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
6
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
1
-
2
3
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
MAT
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
7
+
0
0
SEE
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Y
-
1
-
2
3
6
1. ONE (1) 3" PVC CONDUIT PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR. RMP
SHALL INSTALL CONDUCTORS.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXTEND AND/OR MODIFY EXISTING
ELECTRICAL SERVICE AS REQUIRED FOR THE RELOCATION OF
EXISTING EQUIPMENT. ALL WORK SHALL BE PER ALL NEC
CODES.
3. REFER TO TRAFFIC PLANS SHEET SL-C-T-1-1201 FOR DETAILS.
4. SALT LAKE CITY WILL OWN DUCTBANK AND CONDUITS UPON
COMPLETION
1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ELEMENTS (CONCRETE PADS,
CONDUIT, ETC.) REQUIRED TO MAKE CONNECTION TO RMP.
ASSUMED TO BE LOCATED WITHIN 100' OF SERVICE PEDESTAL.
CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH RMP.
2. CONTRACTOR INSTALLS RISER AND CONDUITS FROM RMP
POLE TO IDENTIFED LOCATIONS.
3. CONTRACTOR EXCAVATES AS NEEDED FOR GROUND SLEEVE
AND SPLICE CABINET INSTALLATION.
4. RMP FURNISHES AND INSTALLS GROUND SLEEVE AND SPLICE
CABINET. 10' OF CLEARANCE IS REQUIRED IN FRONT OF
GROUND SLEEVE.
5. CONTRACTOR INSTALLS CONDUITS TO TRANSFORMER
LOCATION.
6. RMP FURNISHES AND INSTALLS TRANSFORMER.
CONTRACTOR INSTALLS CONDUIT TO METERED LOCATIONS.
7. RMP INSTALLS CONDUCTORS AND MAKES CONNECTIONS TO
LINE SIDE OF METER.
1. TRENCH BACKFILL SHALL BE PER SPECIFICATION 02221 AND
APWA PLAN NO. 381, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
2. PIPE ZONE CONSIDERED TO EXTEND 12" ABOVE CONDUITS.
SAND FILL SHALL EXTEND 12" ABOVE CONDUITS.
3. NATIVE COMPACTABLE BACKFILL OR 3/4" MINUS BASE ROCK.
PEA GRAVEL SHALL NOT BE PLACED IN ANY PART OF THE
TRENCH.
4. WHERE SUBJECT TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC 8" MINIMUM 3/4"
MINUS ROAD BASE SHALL BE USED. WHERE NOT SUBJECT TO
VEHICULAR TRAFFIC 4" MINIMUM 3/4" MINUS ROAD BASE
SHALL BE USED.
5. COMPACT ALL BACKFILL TO A MODIFIED PROCTOR DENSITY
OF 95 PERCENT OR GREATER.
6. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE DEEPER TRENCH AS
NECESSARY TO CROSS EXISTING LATERALS. ALTERNATIVELY,
CONTRACTOR MAY LOOP WATER SERVICE PER APWA PLAN
NO. 542.
7. TOP OF THE SAND FILL SHALL BE 5' MINIMUM BELOW TOP OF
RAIL AT ALL TRACK CROSSINGS.
10"
10"
10"
10"
0
0
10"
10"
10"
10"3"10"
10"
ST
A
.
2
0
7
+
8
6
ST
A
.
2
0
8
+
8
7
L
ST
A
.
2
0
9
+
5
7
ST
A
.
2
0
9
+
8
4
ST
A
.
2
1
0
+
3
2
ST
A
.
2
1
1
+
7
0
ST
A
.
2
0
9
+
8
8
10"
10"
ST
A
.
2
0
8
+
9
0
ST
A
.
2
1
1
+
9
9
13deg
13deg
13deg
ST
A
.
2
1
0
+
3
3
ST
A
.
2
1
1
+
7
0
93
104
18
38
44
48 138
39
MSO-
3
.
6
"
MSO
-
1
.
6
"
MSO
-
1
.
9
"
MSO
-
2
.
3
"
MSO
-
2
.
3
"
MSO-6.0"
MSO-2.0"
3"
MSO-3"
MSO-3"MSO-3.4"
MSO-3.4"
12degS250
L
L
L
C250
207+
0
0
208
+
0
0
209+00
210+00 211+00 212+00
207+
0
0
208+
0
0
209+
0
0
210+00 211+00 212+00
WB T
R
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
WB 2
0
7
+
2
5
.
0
0
TS =
W
B
2
0
8
+
6
5
.
3
3
ST =
W
B
2
0
7
+
2
4
.
3
6
ST
=
W
B
2
1
0
+
2
6
.
3
4
CS =
W
B
2
0
6
+
9
3
.
3
6
CS
=
W
B
2
0
9
+
9
5
.
3
4
SC
=
W
B
2
0
8
+
9
6
.
3
3
END
B
O
L
L
A
R
D
S
BEG
I
N
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
WB 2
0
8
+
7
2
.
1
4
END
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
WB 2
0
8
+
8
2
.
1
6
BE
G
I
N
SH
A
R
E
D
U
S
E
WB
2
0
9
+
5
6
.
0
1
PC
=
E
B
2
1
1
+
9
4
.
2
4
TS =
E
B
2
0
8
+
5
3
.
9
9
ST =
E
B
2
0
7
+
1
5
.
1
8
ST
=
E
B
2
1
0
+
2
4
.
9
4
CS =
E
B
2
0
6
+
8
4
.
1
8
CS
=
E
B
2
0
9
+
9
3
.
9
4
SC
=
E
B
2
0
8
+
8
4
.
9
9
EB T
R
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
20
8
+
7
5
.
0
0
WB
T
R
A
C
K
L
U
B
R
I
C
A
T
O
R
WB
2
1
0
+
2
9
.
0
0
BE
G
I
N
S
H
A
R
E
D
U
S
E
20
9
+
1
4
.
6
5
SIMP
S
O
N
A
V
E
SIMPSON AVE
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
S
1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
M
TC
B
TCB
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-1-239.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
1
-
2
3
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-1-239.dwg
Y1239
ELECTRICAL PLAN
STA 207+00 TO STA 212+00
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.DUZAN
Y.LIU
SCALE OF DWG
01-16-26
UTILITY SERVICE NOTES:NOTES :TRENCH NOTES:
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
MAT
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
0
7
+
0
0
SEE
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Y
-
1
-
2
3
5
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
2
+
0
0
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Y
-
1
-
2
3
7
1. ONE (1) 4" PVC CONDUIT PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR. RMP
SHALL INSTALL CONDUCTORS.
2. REFER TO TRAFFIC PLANS SHEETS SL-C-T-1-1202 AND
SL-C-T-1-1203 FOR DETAILS.
3. REFER TO DRAWING Y1241 FOR RMP UTILITY RELOCATED
RACEWAY DESIGN FOR DUCTBANK AND CONDUIT ROUTING
DETAIL.
1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ELEMENTS (CONCRETE PADS,
CONDUIT, ETC.) REQUIRED TO MAKE CONNECTION TO RMP.
ASSUMED TO BE LOCATED WITHIN 100' OF SERVICE PEDESTAL.
CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH RMP.
2. CONTRACTOR INSTALLS RISER AND CONDUITS FROM RMP
POLE TO IDENTIFED LOCATIONS.
3. CONTRACTOR EXCAVATES AS NEEDED FOR GROUND SLEEVE
AND SPLICE CABINET INSTALLATION.
4. RMP FURNISHES AND INSTALLS GROUND SLEEVE AND SPLICE
CABINET. 10' OF CLEARANCE IS REQUIRED IN FRONT OF
GROUND SLEEVE.
5. CONTRACTOR INSTALLS CONDUITS TO TRANSFORMER
LOCATION.
6. RMP FURNISHES AND INSTALLS TRANSFORMER.
7. CONTRACTOR INSTALLS CONDUIT TO METERED LOCATIONS.
8. RMP INSTALLS CONDUCTORS AND MAKES CONNECTIONS TO
LINE SIDE OF METER.
1. TRENCH BACKFILL SHALL BE PER SPECIFICATION 02221 AND
APWA PLAN NO. 381, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
2. PIPE ZONE CONSIDERED TO EXTEND 12" ABOVE CONDUITS.
SAND FILL SHALL EXTEND 12" ABOVE CONDUITS.
3. NATIVE COMPACTABLE BACKFILL OR 3/4" MINUS BASE ROCK.
PEA GRAVEL SHALL NOT BE PLACED IN ANY PART OF THE
TRENCH.
4. WHERE SUBJECT TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC 8" MINIMUM 3/4"
MINUS ROAD BASE SHALL BE USED. WHERE NOT SUBJECT TO
VEHICULAR TRAFFIC 4" MINIMUM 3/4" MINUS ROAD BASE SHALL
BE USED.
5. COMPACT ALL BACKFILL TO A MODIFIED PROCTOR DENSITY
OF 95 PERCENT OR GREATER.
6. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE DEEPER TRENCH AS
NECESSARY TO CROSS EXISTING LATERALS. ALTERNATIVELY,
CONTRACTOR MAY LOOP WATER SERVICE PER APWA PLAN
NO. 542.
7. TOP OF THE SAND FILL SHALL BE 5' MINIMUM BELOW TOP OF
RAIL AT ALL TRACK CROSSINGS.
S260
S270
212+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
213+00 214+00 215+00
BE
G
I
N
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
WB
2
1
5
+
0
5
.
1
8
EN
D
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
WB
2
1
5
+
6
5
.
1
8
PO
E
=
W
B
2
1
5
+
8
4
.
1
8
EN
D
E
M
B
E
D
D
E
D
BE
G
I
N
D
F
WB
2
1
2
+
9
3
.
0
5
EN
D
D
F
BE
G
I
N
E
M
B
E
D
D
E
D
WB
2
1
4
+
7
7
.
7
6
PC
=
E
B
2
1
2
+
5
3
.
4
9
PT
=
E
B
2
1
2
+
2
3
.
4
9
PT
=
E
B
2
1
2
+
8
2
.
7
5
PO
E
=
E
B
2
1
5
+
8
5
.
2
9
EN
D
E
M
B
E
D
D
E
D
BE
G
I
N
D
F
EB
2
1
2
+
9
4
.
1
6
EN
D
D
F
BE
G
I
N
E
M
B
E
D
D
E
D
EB
2
1
4
+
7
8
.
8
7
BE
G
I
N
E
X
C
L
U
S
I
V
E
TR
A
C
K
WB
2
1
2
+
8
0
.
3
7
BE
G
I
N
E
X
C
L
U
S
I
V
E
TR
A
C
K
2
1
2
+
6
9
.
6
0
EN
D
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
WB
2
1
4
+
8
8
.
4
2
BE
G
I
N
P
E
D
X
I
N
G
WB
2
1
4
+
7
8
.
4
2
BE
G
I
N
G
U
I
D
E
W
A
Y
C
U
R
B
WB
2
1
3
+
0
9
.
4
6
EN
D
G
U
I
D
E
W
A
Y
C
U
R
B
WB
2
1
3
+
6
0
.
0
0
BE
G
I
N
G
U
I
D
E
W
A
Y
C
U
R
B
EB
2
1
3
+
0
6
.
1
2
EN
D
G
U
I
D
E
W
A
Y
C
U
R
B
EB
2
1
4
+
6
1
.
1
1
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
MM
3"
10"
10"10"
10"
10"
ST
A
.
2
1
3
+
1
6
ST
A
.
2
1
4
+
5
6
ST
A
.
2
1
5
+
2
1
ST
A
.
2
1
2
+
8
2
ST
A
.
2
1
3
+
1
7
13deg 12deg
ST
A
.
2
1
2
+
8
9
ST
A
.
2
1
2
+
3
8
ST
A
.
2
1
5
+
2
1
146
28
39 45
137
142
0"
10"
10"
10"
0
6"
212+81.65, 9.00' RT
10"
ST
5
ST
6
1139
1919
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-1-240.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
1
-
2
4
0
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-1-240.dwg
Y1240
ELECTRICAL PLAN
WB STA 212+00 TO WB STA 215+85.29
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.DUZAN
Y.LIU
1"=20'
01-16-26
UTILITY SERVICE NOTES:NOTES :TRENCH NOTES:
20 40
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
01020
(1" = 20')
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
:
S
T
A
2
1
2
+
0
0
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Y
-
1
-
2
3
6
1. ONE (1) 4" PVC CONDUIT PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR. RMP
SHALL INSTALL CONDUCTORS.
2. FOUR (4) 4" PVC CONDUIT FOR PCC PROVIDED BY
CONTRACTOR. RMP SHALL PROVIDE CONDUCTORS.
3. TWO (2) 4" PVC CONDUIT PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR. RMP
SHALL INSTALL CONDUCTORS.
4. A 480V TO 120/240V SINGLE PHASE TRANSFORMER IS
PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY RMP TO SUPPLY POWER TO
SIGNAL HOUSE.
1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ELEMENTS (CONCRETE PADS,
CONDUIT, ETC.) REQUIRED TO MAKE CONNECTION TO RMP.
ASSUMED TO BE LOCATED WITHIN 100' OF SERVICE PEDESTAL.
CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH RMP.
2. CONTRACTOR INSTALLS RISER AND CONDUITS FROM RMP
POLE TO IDENTIFED LOCATIONS.
3. CONTRACTOR EXCAVATES AS NEEDED FOR GROUND SLEEVE
AND SPLICE CABINET INSTALLATION.
4. RMP FURNISHES AND INSTALLS GROUND SLEEVE AND SPLICE
CABINET. 10' OF CLEARANCE IS REQUIRED IN FRONT OF
GROUND SLEEVE.
5. CONTRACTOR INSTALLS CONDUITS TO TRANSFORMER
LOCATION.
6. NOT USED
7. CONTRACTOR INSTALLS CONDUIT TO METERED LOCATIONS.
8. RMP INSTALLS CONDUCTORS AND MAKES CONNECTIONS TO
LINE SIDE OF METER.
1. TRENCH BACKFILL SHALL BE PER SPECIFICATION 02221 AND
APWA PLAN NO. 381, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
2. PIPE ZONE CONSIDERED TO EXTEND 12" ABOVE CONDUITS.
SAND FILL SHALL EXTEND 12" ABOVE CONDUITS.
3. NATIVE COMPACTABLE BACKFILL OR 3/4" MINUS BASE ROCK.
PEA GRAVEL SHALL NOT BE PLACED IN ANY PART OF THE
TRENCH.
4. WHERE SUBJECT TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC 8" MINIMUM 3/4"
MINUS ROAD BASE SHALL BE USED. WHERE NOT SUBJECT TO
VEHICULAR TRAFFIC 4" MINIMUM 3/4" MINUS ROAD BASE
SHALL BE USED.
5. COMPACT ALL BACKFILL TO A MODIFIED PROCTOR DENSITY
OF 95 PERCENT OR GREATER.
6. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE DEEPER TRENCH AS
NECESSARY TO CROSS EXISTING LATERALS. ALTERNATIVELY,
CONTRACTOR MAY LOOP WATER SERVICE PER APWA PLAN
NO. 542.
7. TOP OF THE SAND FILL SHALL BE 5' MINIMUM BELOW TOP OF
RAIL AT ALL TRACK CROSSINGS.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-3-215.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
3
-
2
1
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-3-215.dwg
Y3215
SYSTEMWIDE ELECTRICAL
PULLBOXES DETAILS AND SCHEDULE
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.DUZAN
Y.LIU
AS SHOWN
01-16-26
NOTES:
1. STEEL REINFORCING MUST MEET OR EXCEED
MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
2. TOP OF PULL BOXES SHALL BE FLUSH WITH SURROUNDING
GRADE OR TOP OF ADJACENT CURB, EXCEPT THAT IN
UNPAVED AREAS WHERE PULL BOX IS NOT IMMEDIATELY
ADJACENT TO AND PROTECTED BY A CONCRETE
FOUNDATION, POLE OR OTHER PROTECTIVE CONSTRUCTION,
THE BOX SHALL BE PLACED WITH ITS TOP MIN. 1.5 INCHES
ABOVE SURROUNDING GRADE. WHERE PRACTICABLE, PULL
BOXES SHOWN IN THE VICINITY OF CURBS SHALL BE PLACED
ADJACENT TO THE BACK OF CURB.
3. THE OUTSIDE EDGE OF PULL BOXES AND COVERS FOR TYPES
"AA" AND "BB" SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM RADIUS OF 4 INCH.
4. THE DEPTH OF THE PULL BOX IN SIDEWALK AREA, SHALL BE
ADJUSTED SO THAT THE TOP OF THE BOX IS FLUSH WITH THE
TOP OF SIDEWALK.
5. PULL BOX SHALL NOT BE WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF NEW
OR EXISTING WHEELCHAIR RAMPS.
6. ALL CONDUITS AND CABLES SHALL BE LABELED AS SPECIFIED
IN THE CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS.
7. ALL CONDUITS SHALL BE SEALED AS SPECIFIED IN THE
CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS.
8. ALL PULL BOXES THAT ARE BEING INSTALLED FOR THE UTA
SHALL READ "UTA ELECTRICAL", "UTA TELEPHONE". "UTA
COMMUNICATION", OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE LABEL THAT
IS APPROVED BY THE UTA ENGINEER.
9. PULL BOXES THAT ARE BEING INSTALLED FOR AN AUTHORITY
OTHER THAN UTA, SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THAT
AUTHORITY.
10. EXTENSIONS MAY BE USED PER MANUFACTURER'S
GUIDELINES.
11. KNOCK-OUT AREA AROUND CONDUIT SHALL BE GROUTED
WITH NON-SHRINK GROUT PER CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS.
12. CONDUITS SHALL SLOPE DOWN TOWARDS THE PULL BOX SO
AS TO ALLOW THE CONDUITS TO DRAIN INTO THE PULL BOX.
13. PULL BOXES SHALL BE VEHICULAR TRAFFIC RATED BASED ON
ASTM C-857 "MINIMUM STRUCTURAL DESIGN LOADING FOR
UNDERGROUND PRECAST CONCRETE UTILITY STRUCTURES".
14. WHERE CONDUITS ARE TO REMAIN EMPTY, CONTRACTOR
SHALL MANDREL THE CONDUITS PER NEMA TCB 2-2000 AND
INSTALL A PULL STRING. IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING, THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL AND TIGHTEN DOWN THE PULL
BOX COVERS. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER
48 HRS PRIOR TO MANDRELING.
15. INSTALL PERMEABLE MATERIAL UNDER PULL BOXES
CONSISTING OF CRUSHED STONE 12" MINIMUM IN DEPTH AND
6" MINIMUM IN WIDTH, FREE FROM ORGANIC MATERIAL. CLAY
BALLS, OR OTHER DELETERIOUS MATERIAL.
16. CONTRACTOR MAY USE A TRAFFIC RATED PULL BOX IN LIEU
OF CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-3-216.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
9
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
3
-
2
1
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-3-216.dwg
Y3216
SYSTEMWIDE RACEWAY
DETAILS AND SCHEDULE
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.DUZAN
Y.LIU
AS SHOWN
01-16-26
3'-0"
FINISHED GRADE
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
FINISHED GRADE FINISHED GRADE FINISHED GRADE FINISHED GRADE
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
1"
2
3'-0"3'-0"3'-0"3'-0"
1
3"3"
2"2"
1"
21
3"
2"
2"
3"
1"
211
1"
211
4-1 12" CONDUITS 4-1 12" CONDUITS
1-2" CONDUIT
4-1 12" CONDUITS
1-3" CONDUIT 4-1 12" CONDUITS
1-2" CONDUIT
1-3" CONDUIT
4-1 12" CONDUITS
2-2" CONDUIT
5-3" CONDUIT
6-2" CONDUITS4-1 12" CONDUITS
2-3" CONDUIT
4-1 12" CONDUITS
2-2" CONDUIT
1-3" CONDUIT
4-1 12" CONDUITS
2-2" CONDUIT
2-3" CONDUIT
3"3"
3"
3"
2"2"
2"1" 1"
22
1"
22
1"
21 1"
21
1"
211
1"
21'-3
1"
211
3"2"2"
1"
21 1"
21
1"
22 3"
3"
2"
3"
1"
23
1"
21'-4
3"2"2"
1"
21 1"
21
3"
3"
1"
23
1"
22 1"
21
3"
1"
23
1"
21'-4
1"
21'-1
1"
22'-6
1"
21'-2 1"
21
3"
1"
23
3"
1"
23
2"2"
1"
21 1"
21
3" 1"
22 1"
23 1"
23 1"
23
1"
21 1"
21 1"
21
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
FINISHED GRADE FINISHED GRADE
FINISHED GRADE FINISHED GRADE FINISHED GRADE
1"
21'-2
3"2"2"
1"
21 1"
21
3" 1"
23
2"2"
1"
21 1"
21
3"2 3
1"
21
1"
2
1"
2 3"
3" 1"
22
1"
21
3"
1"
23
2"2"
1"
21 1"
21
3"2 3
1"
21
1"
2
1"
2 3"
1"
21'-4 1"
21'-8 1"
21'-8
1"
21'-8 1"
21'-4
2"2"
1"
21
3" 1"
23 1"
23
1"
21 1"
21
3"
3"
1"
22 1"
21
3"
1"
23
3" 1"
22 1"
22 1"
22 3"
3"
3"
1"
22
1"
22
1"
21 1"
21
1"
21
3"
3'-0"3'-0"
3'-0"3'-0"3'-0"
1"
23
1"
23
1"
23
3"
1"
21 1"
21'-0
3"
1"
21
1"
23
1"
23
3"
1"
21 1"
21'-0
3"
1"
21'-2
4-1 12" CONDUITS
1-2" CONDUIT
2-3" CONDUIT
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-4-217.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
4
-
2
1
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-4-217.dwg
Y4217
SYSTEMWIDE ELECTRICAL
RACEWAY SECTIONS
SHEET-1
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.DUZAN
Y.LIU
AS SHOWN
01-16-26
FINISHED GRADE FINISHED GRADE FINISHED GRADE
FINISHED GRADE
FINISHED GRADE FINISHED GRADE FINISHED GRADE
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
3'-0"
3'-0"3'-0"
3'-0"
3'-0"
3'-0"
3'-0"
3" 1"
22 1"
22
1"
21
3"
3"
3"
1"
22 1"
28
1"
21'-0
2-2" CONDUIT
1"
21'-0
1"
21'-0
3" 1"
22 1"
22
1"
21
3"
1"
21
1"
22
3"
1"
22
3"
4-2" CONDUIT
1"
21'-0
3" 1"
22 1"
22
1"
21
1"
22 3"
1"
21'-4
3"
3"
3"3" 1"
23
1"
21
1"
23
1"
23
1"
21'-2
1"
29
2-3" CONDUIT
3"
1"
23
1"
23
1"
23
1"
21
1"
21 1"
21'-2
1"
21'-1
2-3" CONDUIT
1-2" CONDUIT
1"
21 1"
21 1"
21
1"
21
3"
3"
3"
3"3"
3"
3"
1"
24 1"
24 1"
24
1"
24
1"
24
1"
21'-4
1"
22'-4
1"
21 1"
21 1"
21 1"
21 1"
21 1"
21 1"
21
3"3"
3"
3"
1"
23 1"
23 1"
23 1"
23 1"
23 1"
23 1"
23
1"
23
1"
23
1"
21'-2
1"
23'-8
8-4" CONDUIT 16-3" CONDUIT
5-2" CONDUIT
1"
21
1"
21
1"
22
1"
22
3"
3"
1"
22
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-4-218.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
4
-
2
1
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Y-4-218.dwg
Y4218
SYSTEMWIDE ELECTRICAL
RACEWAY SECTIONS
SHEET-2
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
Y.LIU
Y.LIU
AS SHOWN
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Y-7314.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
y
-
7
3
1
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Y7314
TRACTION POWER SYSTEM
RACEWAY SECTIONS
A.JAIN
A.JAIN
D.Duzan
Y.LU
AS NOTED
01-16-26
1. WHERE CROSSING UNDER TRACK, TOP OF DUCT BANKS SHALL BE
4'-6" MIN BELOW TOP OF PAVED TRACK UNLESS OTHERWISE
INDICATED.
2. TRANSITION FROM PULL BOX ENTRANCE TO NORMAL DEPTH AS
SHOWN ON DUCT BANK SECTIONS SHALL BE MADE WITH LONG
CONDUIT SWEEPS.
3. MINIMUM DIMENSIONS DO NOT APPLY AT CROSSINGS UNDER
UTILITY PIPES.
NOTES:
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
SIMP
S
O
N
A
V
E
SIMPSON AVE
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
S
1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT DRIVE
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
Y1241.dwg
Y1241
RMP UTILITY RELOCATION PLAN
D.TREADWELL
X.LIU
Y.LIU
Y.LIU
SCALE OF DWG
01-16-26
GENERAL NOTES:
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Y1241.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
r
m
p
p
o
w
e
r
r
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
s
t
r
e
e
t
li
g
h
t
d
e
s
i
g
n
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
y
1
2
4
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1. ITEMS IN BOLD ARE NEW DEVICE, AND ITEMS IN GRAY ARE EXISTING TO
REMAIN.
2. REFER TO SHEET Y1243 FOR DETAILED TRENCH CROSS SECTIONS.
LEGEND
PROPOSED 6" PVC SCHEDULE 40 DIRECTLY BURIED CONDUIT
WITH 3/C#250KCMIL+1/C#250KCMIL
PROPOSED ELECTRICAL PULL BOX
KEY NOTES:
1. RMP SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING INCOMING POWER FEED. NEW
CONDUITS SHALL BE TIED INTO EXISTING 6" CONDUIT.
2. RELATED WIRES SHALL BE REMOVED BY RMP.
3. REFER TO SALT LAKE CITY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES - STREET
LIGHTING STANDARDS "STREET LIGHT PULL BOX DETAILS AND STREET LIGHT
LOCATION AND WIRE SPECIFICATIONS" FOR PULL BOX DETAILS.
4. REFER TO SALT LAKE CITY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES - STREET
LIGHTING STANDARDS CS4 "STREET LIGHT UTILITY TRENCH SECTION DETAILS"
FOR HIGH VOLTAGE CABLE AND FIBER OPTIC JOINT USE TRENCH DETAIL.
5. NEW FEEDER CABLE FROM RMP SHALL FEED THE EXISTING POWER POLE,
WHICH WILL BE UTILIZED TO FEED THE ADJACENT AREA.
6. EXISTING SERVICE PEDESTAL WILL BE FED BY NEW UNDERGROUND FEEDER
CABLE FROM POWER POLE ACROSS STREET.
7. VAULT SI# 8004414 & SLEEVE #7999125.
8. VAULT SI# 7992596 AT PT 30.
9. CONNECT TO THE EXISTING BOX.
10. ABANDON COMCAST AND MCI/VERIZON IN PLACE
11. THIS CONDUIT RUN NEEDS TO BE PLACED UNDER THE NEW SIDEWALK, A
MINIMUM OF 10 LF FROM PROPOSED OCS POLE FOUNDATIONS.
12. PLACE ALL JUNCTION BOXES, HAND HOLES, AND MANHOLES A MINIMUM OF 10
LF FROM CENTERLINE(S) OF PROPOSED TRACKS.
13. REFER TO SHEET Y1243 FOR DETAILED TRENCH CROSS SECTIONS.
1
2
2
2
3(TYP.)
PROPOSED 4" PVC SCHEDULE 40 CONDUIT FOR FIBER OPTICS
5
6
PROPOSED 2-2" PVC SCHEDULE 40 CONDUIT FOR COMCAST
FIBER OPTICS
2
2
8
7
10
11
9
4
13
13
SIMPS
O
N
A
V
E
SIMP
S
O
N
A
V
E
SIMPSON AVE
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
S
1
1
0
0
E
A
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
SUGARMONT DRIVE
HIG
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
I
V
E
Y1242.dwg
Y1242
STREET LIGHTING PLAN
X.LIU
X.LIU
Y.LIU
Y.LIU
SCALE OF DWG
01-16-26
GENERAL NOTES:
HORIZ SCALE IN FEET
0 10 20510
(1" = 10')
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Y1242.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
r
m
p
p
o
w
e
r
r
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
s
t
r
e
e
t
li
g
h
t
d
e
s
i
g
n
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
y
1
2
4
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1. ITEMS IN BOLD ARE NEW DEVICE, AND ITEMS IN GRAY ARE EXISTING TO
REMAIN.
2. 2/C#10+1/C#10G CIRCUIT WILL BE UTILIZED TO FEED EACH NEW POLE
LIGHTING.
LEGEND
(EX)EXISTING STREET LIGHT
(EX)
(EX)
PROPOSED STREET LIGHT
D1
D1
D1
KEY NOTES:
1. BUILDINGS WILL BE DEMOLISHED.
2. TRAFFIC CONTROL BOX (TCB) WILL BE UTILIZED TO FEED NEW DECORATIVE
STREET LIGHTS.
3. 2" PVC CONDUIT DIRECTLY BURIED BELOW THE GROUND. THE CONDUIT SHALL
BE BURIED AT LEAST 24" TO THE TOP OF THE GROUND. REFER TO SALT LAKE
CITY PUBLIC UTILITIES - STREET LIGHTING STANDARDS CS4 FOR DETAILS.
4. PULL BOX SHALL BE PREPARED FOR EACH NEW LIGHTING POLE. REFER TO
SALT LAKE CITY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SHEET CS5 "TERMINAL
POLE DETAILS" FOR DETAILS.
5. NEW PROPOSED POLE LIGHTING CIRCUIT SHALL BE TIED TO THE EXISTING
STREET LIGHT CIRCUIT.
6. STREETLIGHT PER SALT LAKE CITY PUBLIC UTILITIES STREET LIGHTING
STANDARD DRAWING SL-17. CONCRETE OR DIRECT BURY FOUNDATION PER
STANDARD DRAWING CS-3 AND MANUFACTURES RECOMMENDATIONS.
7. EXISTING STREETLIGHT TO BE REMOVED. SEE SHEETS C4001 AND C4002.
8. EXISTING LIGHT TO BE REMOVED.
2
1
1
1 D1
3
3
3
4(TYPICAL)
56WB STA 211+307
7
D1
3
67WB STA 206+23
6WB STA 207+22
6WB STA 207+86
8
7
7
Y1243.dwg
Y1243
TRENCH SECTION
D.TREADWELL
X.LIU
Y.LIU
Y.LIU
SCALE OF DWG
01-16-26
GENERAL NOTES:
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Y1243.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
n
i
n
g
n
i
n
g
.
w
u
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
7
e
l
e
c
\
r
m
p
p
o
w
e
r
r
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
s
t
r
e
e
t
li
g
h
t
d
e
s
i
g
n
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
y
1
2
4
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
1. ALL UNDERGROUND CONDUITS SHALL BE PVC SCHEDULE 40
OR EQUIVALENT.
2. REFER TO SHEET Y1241 FOR SITE PLAN.
3. JOINT TRENCH PER RMP UNDERGROUND CONDUIT SYSTEMS
FOR PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CONDUCTORS (REV 11), SEPT.
2021, SECTION 2.3
4. LOCATE JOINT TRENCH 10.5 LF FROM EB CENTERLINE
5. JOINT TRENCH CONCRETE TO BE DYED RED. SEE
SPECIFICATIONS FOR DETAILS.
NOTE:SOME SYMBOLS/LINES MAY BE SHOWNENLARGED FOR CLARITY.
SIGNALS SYMBOLS
BUMPING POST
8x12 SIGNAL HOUSE, 400 AMP SERVICE
WITH LCP-OBSERVER ORIENTATION
8x12 SIGNAL HOUSE, 400 AMP SERVICE
WITHOUT LCP
8X12
400A
8X12
400A
CABLE CONDUCTOR QUANTITY AND SIZE2C#6
COUPLER CASE MOUNTED TO I-BEAM OCS POLE
DUAL CONTROL POWER SWITCH MACHINE
EMBEDDED POWER SWITCH MACHINE
PP
N
POWER SWITCH NORMALLY ALIGNED FOR STRAIGHT ROUTE
PLATFORM PRIORITY SELECTOR
RS ROUTE SELECTOR
TRACK CONNECTION
WHEEL SENSOR FOR AXLE COUNTING SYSTEM
IMPEDANCE BOND
TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROLLER
STREETCAR DETECTOR LOOP
LRT BAR SIGNALS MOUNTED SIDE-BY-SIDE ON MAST
IN TRACK/EMBEDDED DUAL CONTROL
POWER SWITCH MACHINE
INSULATED JOINT - TRACK CIRCUIT TO LEFT
INSULATED JOINT - TRACK CIRCUIT TO RIGHT
INSULATED JOINT - TRACK CIRCUIT EACH SIDE
LRT BAR SIGNALS ON MAST
OR
OR AUDIO FREQUENCY TRACK CIRCUIT TRANSMITTER
AUDIO FREQUENCY TRACK CIRCUIT RECEIVER
PED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING BLANK-OUT SIGN WITH BELL
OR
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-0-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
0
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-0-001.dwg
Z0001
SIGNALS SYMBOLS
J. MITCHELL
J. MITCHELL
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
SIGNALS ABBREVIATIONS
EOP
DISC
GS
AC
CC
CL
RC
RS
SM
SS
SW
SIG
STA
TK
TOR
TPSS
TW
TWPR
TYP
WS
AIR CONDITIONING OR ALTERNATING CURRENT
COUPLER CASE
CENTERLINE
DISCONNECT
END OF PLATFORM
GALVANIZED STEEL
SUBSTATION
SWITCH OR SWITCH MACHINE
SIGNAL
STATION
TRACK
TOP OF RAIL
TRACTION POWER SUBSTATION
WHEEL SENSOR
TYPICAL
TWISTED PAIR
TWISTED
RELAY CASE
ROUTE SELECTOR
SINGLE MODE FIBER OPTIC CABLE
IJ
JB
KHZ
PB
MIN
LRT
LED
OD
NTS
NOM
INSULATED JOINT
JUNCTION BOX
KILOHERTZ
LIGHT EMITTING DIODE
LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT
MINIMUM
NOMINAL
NOT TO SCALE
PUSHBUTTON OR PULL BOX
OUTSIDE DIAMETER
PED PEDESTRIAN
HSE HOUSE
XING CROSSING
WB WESTBOUND
PS
PP PLATFORM PRIORITY
POINT OF SWITCH
POE END OF PROJECT
AFO AUDIO FREQUENCY OVERLAY
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-0-002.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
0
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
GENERAL
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-0-002.dwg
Z0002
SIGNALS ABBREVIATIONS
J. MITCHELL
J. MITCHELL
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-7-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
7
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-7-001.dwg
Z7001
SIGNALS SYSTEM
OVERALL SCHEMATIC
WB STA 196+00 TO WB STA 207+65
C. ORTEGA
C. ORTEGA
J. MITCHELL
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Z
-
7
-
0
0
2
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-7-002.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
7
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-7-002.dwg
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Z
-
7
-
0
0
1
Z7002
SIGNALS SYSTEM
OVERALL SCHEMATIC
WB STA 207+65 TO WB STA 216+00
C. ORTEGA
C. ORTEGA
J. MITCHELL
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
SL-C-Z-7-003.dwg
205+00Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-7-003.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
7
-
0
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
Z7003
EASTBOUND CONTROL LINE PLAN
STA. 186+00 TO STA. 203+00
J. MITCHELL
J. MITCHELL
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
-08/17/12 PHASE 1 SUBMITTAL
1 10/12/12 REVISED PER UTA CHECK COMMENTS
REDRAWN SHEET ECLSHZO007.DWG.
REVISION NOTES ARE FROM ORIGINAL DRAWING.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-7-004.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
7
-
0
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-7-004.dwg
Z7004
EASTBOUND CONTROL LINE PLAN
STA. 203+00 TO STA. 215+85
J. MITCHELL
J. MITCHELL
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-7-005.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
7
-
0
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-7-005.dwg
Z7005
WESTBOUND CONTROL LINE PLAN
STA. 186+00 TO STA. 203+00
J. MITCHELL
J. MITCHELL
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
-08/17/12 PHASE 1 SUBMITTAL
1 10/12/12 REVISED PER UTA CHECK COMMENTS
205+00
REDRAWN SHEET WCLSHZO007.DWG.
REVISION NOTES ARE FROM ORIGINAL DRAWING.
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-7-006.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
7
-
0
0
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-7-006.dwg
Z7006
WESTBOUND CONTROL LINE PLAN
STA. 203+00 TO STA. 215+85
J. MITCHELL
J. MITCHELL
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-7-007.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
7
-
0
0
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-7-007.dwg
Z7007
SIGNALS
TRACK CIRCUIT ARRANGEMENT
C. ORTEGA
C. ORTEGA
J. MITCHELL
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-7-008.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
7
-
0
0
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-7-008.dwg
Z7008
SIGNALS
ROUTE AND ASPECT CHART
BETA INTERLOCKING
C. ORTEGA
C. ORTEGA
J. MITCHELL
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
ROUTE SIGNAL REQUESTS PREVENTS AUTO ROUTE APPROACH TRACK DETECTOR TRACK SIGNAL ASPECT LOCKING SWITCHES LOCKED SECTIONAL RELEASE PUSH BUTTON REQUEST REMARKS
18-20 18 20, 22 NO 18AT 1T VERTICAL
BAR APPROACH 1N NO NO MODIFY PROGRAM TO REMOVE
AUTO ROUTING ON THIS ROUTE
18-22 18 20 ,22 YES 18AT 1T, 1AT DIAGONAL RIGHT
BAR APPROACH 1R NO NO AUTO ROUTING THIS ROUTE ONLY
20-18 20 18, 22 NO 20AT 1T VERTICAL
BAR APPROACH 1N NO YES
22-18 22 18, 20 NO 22AT 1AT,1T DIAGONAL RIGHT
BAR APPROACH 1R NO YES ROUTE REQUESTED FROM
LCP OR OCC
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-7-009.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
7
-
0
0
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-7-009.dwg
Z7009
SIGNALS
ROUTE AND ASPECT CHART
HIGHLAND DRIVE INTERLOCKING
C. ORTEGA
C. ORTEGA
J. MITCHELL
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
ROUTE SIGNAL REQUESTS PREVENTS AUTO ROUTE APPROACH TRACK DETECTOR TRACK SIGNAL ASPECT LOCKING SWITCHES LOCKED SECTIONAL RELEASE PUSH BUTTON REQUEST REMARKS
30-34 30 34 NO 30AT 1BT VERTICAL BAR APPROACH 3N, 1N NO NO
30-36 30 32, 34, 36 NO 30AT 1BT, 1BXT DIAGONAL RIGHT BAR APPROACH 3R, 1N NO NO
32-34 32 30, 34, 36 YES*32AT 1AT, 1BXT DIAGONAL LEFT BAR APPROACH 1R, 3N NO NO ROUTE AUTO-CALLED ONLY WITH
36AT OCCUPIED
32-36 32 36 YES 32AT 1AT VERTICAL BAR APPROACH 1N, 3N NO NO
34-30 34 30 YES 34AT 1BT VERTICAL BAR APPROACH 1N, 3N NO YES
34-32 34 30, 32, 36 NO 34AT 1BT, 1BXT DIAGONAL LEFT BAR APPROACH 1R, 3N NO NO
36-30 36 30, 32, 34 YES 36AT 1AT, 1BXT DIAGONAL RIGHT BAR APPROACH 3R, 1N NO YES
36-32 36 32 NO 36AT 1AT VERTICAL BAR APPROACH 3N, 1N NO NO
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-8-001.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
8
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-8-001.dwg
Z8001
SIGNALS TRACK AND CABLE PLAN
1 OF 2
J. MITCHELL
J. MITCHELL
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Z
-
8
-
0
0
2
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-8-002.dwg
24-03849
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
8
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-8-002.dwg
Z8002
SIGNALS TRACK AND CABLE PLAN
2 OF 2
C. ORTEGA
C. ORTEGA
J. MITCHELL
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
SE
E
D
W
G
S
L
-
C
-
Z
-
8
-
0
0
1
REVERSE
(YELLOW)
NORMAL
CANCEL
(NORMALLY OPEN PUSH BUTTONS)
(GREEN)
(RED)
5'
-
0
"
M
I
N
XX
TOP OF RAIL
NOTES:
1. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT FOUNDATION DESIGN FOR ENGINEER'S
APPROVAL.
2. 6'-6" MINIMUM CLEARANCE BETWEEN CENTERLINE OF TRACK AND SIGNAL
EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURES, SELECTORS OR SIGNALS. UNDER NO
CIRCUMSTANCE SHALL SIGNALING DEVICES INTERFERE WITH VEHICULAR
TRAFFIC.
3. PLATFORM CONTROL SELECTOR AND ROUTE SELECTORS SHALL BE
ENCLOSED WITHIN A WEATHER-TIGHT ENCLOSURE WITH A HINGED AND
LOCKING COVER.
4. SELECTOR NAME PLATES SHALL HAVE 2.5" TALL CHARACTERS.
5. SIGNAL NAME PLATES SHALL MATCH SIZE DESCRIBED IN DRAWING Z3002
NOTE 6.
12"x12" RED LENS
12"x12" YELLOW LENS
JUNCTION BOX
XX
PRE-CAST OR
POURED IN PLACE
FOUNDATION
NOTE 1
#6 INSULATED WIRE
GROUND LEVEL
8' COPPER CLAD
GROUND ROD
PLATFORM
CONTROL
SELECTOR
ROUTE SELECTORS
TOP OF PLATFORM
7'
-
6
"
4'
-
6
"
NOTE 5 (2 PLACES)NOTE 4
ROUTE SELECTOR
PUSH BUTTON FACEPLACEPLATFORM CONTROL SELECTOR AND ROUTE SELECTOR DETAIL
LRV SIGNAL ON STANDARD SIGNAL POLE
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-3-001.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
3
-
0
0
1
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-3-001.dwg
Z3001
SIGNALS WAYSIDE
SIGNALING DETAILS 1 OF 2
J. MITCHELL
J. HOWARD
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
7'
-
6
"
T.O.R.
I
I
LRT TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEADS
CATENARY POLES
C TRACKSL
CROSS
STREET
CATENARY POLE
6'-6"6'-6"
JB
VARIES
MIN MIN
JB h/2
h
POLE
ELEVATION HOLES TO MOUNT
J. B. OR R. C.
(TYP.)
PLAN VIEW
ORRC
OR
RC
(WHERE APPLICABLE)
4'
-
6
"
C TRACK C TRACKLL
?
LETTERNUMERAL
6 R3"±
TYP
4"
5"
TYP
4"
TYP
1. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXTEND COILED CABLE FROM
PULLBOXES ADJACENT TO CATENARY POLES TO THE
LRT TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEAD. CONTRACTOR SHALL
TERMINATE WIRES AT THE DEVICES. NOTIFY CITY
TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO TERMINATION.
2. BRACKET DETAIL SHALL BE PAINTED THE SAME COLOR
AS THE POLE.
3. LABEL SHALL HAVE 2.5" TALL LETTER AND NUMBERS.
4. RELAY CASE EQUIPMENT AND JUNCTION BOX
TERMINALS SHALL BE ENCLOSED WITHIN A WEATHER
TIGHT ENCLOSURE WITH HINGED AND LOCKING COVERS.
5. FOR JUNCTION BOXES AND RELAY CASES ON
TUBULAR TAPERED POLES SEE MOUNTING BRACKET
DETAIL 2.
6. NUMBER PLATES AND LABELING SHALL HAVE NUMBERS
AND LETTERS THAT ARE 3"x4" AS SHOWN BELOW.
NUMBER FRAME SHALL ALLOW NUMBERS TO BE
INSERTED FROM THE SIDES. LETTERING SHALL BE
BLACK ON A WHITE BACKGROUND.
NOTES:
CLAMPS (TYP.)
G.S. UNISTRUT
(TYP.) (NOTE 5)
CABLE/RELAY
CASES NOTE 3, 4
HOLES TO MOUNT BRACKETS
ON POLE WITH STAINLESS
STEEL CHANNEL WELDMENT
BRACKET
G. S. ALL THREAD
BOLTS WITH G. S.
NUTS & WASHERS
(TYP.)
12" MAX JB &
RC WIDTH
CABLE TO WAYSIDE EQUIPMENT IN
RIGID PVC UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
MOUNTING BRACKET FOR
TUBULAR POLES
LRT TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEAD
AT CATENARY POLE
JUNCTION BOX AND POLE MOUNTED RELAY
CASES CLEARANCE DIAGRAM
NTS
LAYOUT
TYPICAL LRT TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEAD MOUNTING BRACKET FOR
SIDE FLANGE POLES
DETAIL 1
DETAIL 2
12" x 12" LED
(TYP)
SCH 80 PVC
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-3-002.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
3
-
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-3-002.dwg
Z3002
SIGNALS WAYSIDE
SIGNALING DETAILS 2 OF 2
J. MITCHELL
J. HOWARD
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
SWITCH POINT HEATING LOCATIONS
NOT TO SCALE
A
-
KICK ON CLIP & RAIL SECTION
NOT TO SCALE
1
-
STAINLESS STEEL KICK ON CLIP
NOT TO SCALE
2
-
11
2
.
m
m
143mm"
13
.
4
m
m
166°
115°
73.
6
m
m
8.8
m
m
GAUGE SIDE OF RAIL
STAINLESS STEEL
KICK ON CLIP
300W WATT PER FOOT
HEATING ELEMENT
STOCK RAIL HEATER
STOCK RAIL HEATER
CRIB HEATERS
ISOMETRIC VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
3
-
300W WATT PER FOOT
HEATING ELEMENT
NOTE 4
HEATER CONTROL PANEL
SWITCH HEATER
JUNCTION BOX
MOVING RAIL HEATERS
NOTES 1, 2
5'-0"
TYPICAL
7'
-
0
"
MI
N
MAIN TRACK CL
NOTE 3
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-3-003.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
3
-
0
0
3
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-3-003.dwg
Z3003
SIGNALS
SWITCH HEATER LAYOUT
J. MITCHELL
J. HOWARD
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
1. EACH HEATING ELEMENT TYPICALLY FURNISHED WITH
15 FOOT LONG LEADS, 2C#8, EXANE INSULATION.
VERIFY LEAD CABLE CONSTRUCTION AND LENGTH
WITH MANUFACTURER.
2. PROTECT HEATING ELEMENT LEADS WITH FLEXIBLE
CONDUIT BETWEEN THE JUNCTION BOX AND HEATING
ELEMENT TO PREVENT ABRASION OF LEAD
INSULATION.
3. CABLE SIZE AND LENGTH BETWEEN JUNCTION BOX
AND HEATER CONTROL PANEL TO BE SIZED FOR 3%
MAXIMUM VOLTAGE DROP AT 125% NOMINAL POWER
RATING OF ALL HEATING ELEMENTS CONNECTED TO
THE CABLE. RAIL HEATERS AND CRIB HEATERS ARE
TYPICALLY POWERED THROUGH SEPARATE CABLES.
4. INSTALL ONE KICK ON CLIP BETWEEN EACH TIE OR
RAIL FASTENER.
NOTES:
RAIL
RAIL
1. CABLES SHALL BE CONNECTED TO THE
RAIL THROUGH BOLT STYLE
CONNECTIONS UNLESS OTHERWISE
NOTED.
2. USE CAD WELD CONNECTIONS ON FROG.
2-500 MCM
4-500 MCM
1-500 MCM
2-500 MCM
2-250 MCM - RAIL HEAD WELD
E
DETAIL
TYPICAL POWER BONDING - TURNOUT
MAIN TRACK TO MAIN TRACK
1
-
ALL RAIL JOINTS IN
TURNOUT EXCEPT IJ'S
CONTINUE
WELDED RAIL A E A C2
-
E A C
DETAIL
FROG BONDING
2
-
E A
E
C A E
C E
DETAIL
CROSS BONDING FOR
NON-SIGNALED RAIL
3
-
D
A
B
C
D
E
DETAIL
DIAMOND BONDING
4
-
A A
AE
C
A E
C
A A
AE
C
A E
C
A A
E
E
E
E
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-3-004.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
3
-
0
0
4
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-3-004.dwg
Z3004
SIGNAL TYPICAL BONDING DETAILS
J. MITCHELL
J. HOWARD
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
NOTE:
1.PREFERRED DISTANCE FOR WAYSIDE SIGNAL HOUSE IS
25'-0" FROM CENTER LINE OF NEAREST TRACK.
2. HOUSE GROUND CONNECTION TO GROUNDING PLATE AT
EACH CORNER OF HOUSE. GROUNDING PLATE TO BE
BURNDY YGF292N OR EQUIVALENT.
3. #4 AWG (MINIMUM) BARE COPPER GROUND RING THAT
CREATES A CONCRETE-ENCASED GROUNDING ELECTRODE
PER NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE (NEC).
WALL ELEVATION "C"
SCALE:NTS
3
-
WALL ELEVATION "A"
SCALE:NTS
2
-
SIGNAL HOUSE TOP VIEW
SCALE:NTS
4
-
WALL ELEVATION "D"
SCALE:NTS
1
-
8'-0"
12
'
-
0
"
SEE NOTE 1
DISC SW.
AC
SERVICE
AIR
CONDITIONER
WALL "A"
WALL "D"
WALL "C"WALL "B"
TYPICAL 8' X 12'
HOUSE
12'-0"
10
'
-
0
"
8'-0"
8'-0"
SLAB FOUNDATION
SLAB FOUNDATION
TOP OF RAIL
2'-0"
SWITCH HEATER CONTROL
#2 BARE COPPER WIRE
NOTE 2
CONNECTION TO GROUND RING
#2 BARE COPPER WIRE
NOTE 2
CONNECTION TO GROUND RINGNOTE 3
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-3-005.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
3
-
0
0
5
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-3-005.dwg
Z3005
SIGNALS
HOUSE INSTALLATION DETAILS
J. MITCHELL
J.HOWARD
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
NOTES:
1.NO GROUNDING CONNECTION REQUIRED FOR WHEEL SENSOR
INSTALLATION.
2. PROTECTIVE HOSE PER SIGNAL SYSTEM SPECIFICATION.
2 1116"
5 12"
1116"
2 38"
38"
2
38"6
58"
RAIL CLAW SK-140-016
SCALE:NTS
2
-
DIRECT FIXATION TRACK
WHEEL SENSOR JUNCTION BOX
SCALE:NTS
1
-
TOP OF JUNCTION BOX
NOT TO EXCEED TOP OF
RAIL
JUNCTION BOX
NOTE 2
1" (1.5" O.D.)
AIR HOSE
SL-C-Z-3-006.dwg
Z3006
SIGNALS
TYPICAL WHEEL
SENSOR INSTALLATION
J. MITCHELL
J. HOWARD
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-3-006.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
3
-
0
0
6
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-3-007.dwg
Z3007
SIGNALS
TYPICAL WHEEL SENSOR
EMBEDDED TRACK INSTALLATION
J. MITCHELL
J. HOWARD
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-3-007.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
3
-
0
0
7
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
DETAIL
RAIL WITH SENSOR
1
Z3007
SECTION
RAIL WITH SENSOR
2
Z3007
1'-7 1/8"
2 3/8"
11
3
/
4
"
1
1
/
8
"
1
3
/
8
"
2"6 3/8"2"
8
3
/
4
"
6 1/4"
POLYURETHANE
FILLERCABLE TO EVALUATOR
CONCRETE SLAB
FRAUSCHER
TH400 CABLE
CONNECTOR
WHEEL SENSOR
AXLE COUNTER
SENSOR CABLE
11
5
R
E
R
A
I
L
EM
B
E
D
E
D
IN
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
CONCRETE TRACK
SLAB
1'-5 3/8"3 7/8"
2"
FRAUSCHER TH400
CABLE CONNECTOR
POLYURETHANE
FILLER
CABLE TO
EVALUATOR
WHEEL SENSOR
L TRACKC
RA
I
L
G
A
U
G
E
56
1
/
2
"
L RAILC
2
3
/
8
"
POLYURETHANE
FILLER
CONCRETE SLAB
6 1/4"
AXLE COUNTER
COUNTER CABLE
ALTERNATE INSTALLATION LOCATION
2
Z3007 NTS
TYPICAL RAIL PLAN AT SENSOR
1
Z3007
DRAIN OR CABLE CONDUIT
AS REQUIRED BY DESIGN
(2 PLACES)
SL-C-Z-3-008.dwg
Z3008
SIGNALS
TYPICAL VEHICLE DETECTOR
LOOP INSTALLATION
J. MITCHELL
J. MITCHELL
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-3-008.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
3
-
0
0
8
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
NTS
VEHICLE DETECTOR LOOP - EMBEDDED TRACK A
-
CONDUIT STUB UP IN ACCESS WELL
NTS
1
-
LOOP WIRES IN EMBEDDED TRACK SAW CUT
NTS
2
-
NOTES:
1. PRIOR TO LOOP INSTALLATION, SUBCONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WITH
ENGINEER FOR EXACT LOCATION OF LIGHT RAIL DETECTOR LOOP
PLACEMENT.
2. SAW CUT GROOVES TO BE FREE OF DEBRIS AND WATER PRIOR TO WIRE
INSTALLATION AND SEALING.
3. LOOP WIRE 1C#14 XHHW OR AS RECOMMENDED PER VEHICLE LOOP
DETECTOR MANUFACTURER. TWIST WIRES TOGETHER, SIX TWISTS PER
FOOT, BETWEEN CONDUIT STUB-UP AND VEHICLE LOOP DETECTOR.
4. NUMBER OF LOOP WIRE TURNS IN SAW CUT PER VEHICLE LOOP DETECTOR
MANUFACTURER. FIVE LOOPS IS ESTIMATED.
5. FILL SAW CUT GROOVES WITH APPROVED SEALANT.
1
-
2
-NOTE 3
LOOP WIRES IN SAW CUT
ACCESS WELL SET IN EMBEDDED TRACK CONCRETE
ASPHALT OR APPROVED SEALANT 5" I.D. MINIMUM DIAMETER
ACCESS WELL, PVC PIPE
SCHEDULE 40
30-60 MESH SILICA SAND
DUCT SEAL
2" DIAMETER PVC CONDUIT SCHEDULE 40
TO MOTOR VEHICLE TRAFFIC SIGNAL
CONTROLLER CASE
LOOP SEALANT PER
ROADWAY SPECIFICATIONS
EMBEDDED TRACK CONCRETE
LOOP WIRES. SEE NOTE 4.
1.
5
"
(
A
P
P
R
O
X
.
)
3'-0"
3'
-
0
"
10"
4'-8 1/2"
TRACK CENTERLINE
EMBEDDED TRACK CONCRETE
45 DEGREE ANGLED SAW CUTS
TYPICAL ALL CORNERS
6"
(
A
P
P
R
O
X
.
)
TOP OF EMBEDDED TRACK CONCRETE
EMBEDDED TRACK CONCRETE
11 1116"
1'-3"
11
11
16
"
1'
-
2
34"
1'
-
4
16"
2-7/8" X 1 14" SLOT 4X
12
'
-
0
"
3'-9"
2'-6 12"
JUNCTION
BOX 5" ALUM SIGNAL
SPLIT BASE
10 14"
9"
1'
-
5
"
1'
-
2
34"
10
"
TOP VIEW SIGNAL BASE
SCALE:NTS
1
-TERMINAL BLOCK VIEW
SCALE:NTS
4
-
PEDESTRIAN CROSSING SIGN
SCALE:NTS
2
-
PEDESTRIAN CROSSING SIGN
SCALE:NTS
3
-
ISOMETRIC VIEW SIGNAL BASE
SCALE:NTS
A
-
BLANK
OUT
SIGN
ELECTRONIC
HIGHWAY
CROSSING BELL
5" DIA ALUM.
MAST
TERMINAL
BLOCK
NOTES:
1. TWO-WAY BLANK OUT SIGN TO DISPLAY MUTCD GRAPHIC W10-7.
2. GRAPHIC TO BE FORMED BY INDIVIDUAL LEDS AND EQUIVALENT TO ORANGE TRAFFIC,
PART NUMBER LSW10-7F, OR APPROVED EQUAL.
3. 24" X 24" DISPLAY MOUNTED IN 28" X 28" (OUTSIDE DIMENSIONS) FRAME.
4. ATTACHMENT TO MAST IS SHOWN AS 2" NOMINAL PIPE SIZE WITH STAINLESS STEEL
BAND MOUNT. MOUNTING SYSTEM WILL VARY PER SIGN MANUFACTURER.
APPROXIMATE
SIGN DIMENSIONS
PER NOTE 3
Approved By:REV DATE Description Submitted By:
Designed By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
CADD Filename:
UTA Contract No.:
Drawing No.:
Submittal Date
Scale:
UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY
SL-C-Z-3-009.dwg
24-03849
STANDARD DRAWINGS
Sheet No.
1/
1
5
/
2
0
2
6
c:
\
u
s
e
r
s
\
c
h
r
i
s
t
o
p
h
e
r
.
o
r
t
e
g
a
\
d
c
\
a
c
c
d
o
c
s
\
k
i
e
w
i
t
\
5
4
9
7
1
-
s
l
i
n
e
d
o
u
b
l
e
t
r
a
c
k
\
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
i
l
e
s
\
4
0
d
e
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
\
2
4
c
o
m
\
c
a
d
\
s
h
e
e
t
s
\
s
l
-
c
-
z
-
3
-
0
0
9
.
d
w
g
S-LINE EXTENSION PROJECT
SL-C-Z-3-009.dwg
Z3009
SIGNALS
PEDESTRIAN CROSSING BLANK OUT SIGN
J. MITCHELL
J. HOWARD
C. ORTEGA
D. NGUYEN
NTS
01-16-26
This page has intentionally been left blank
Item G2
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLC.GOV/COUNCIL
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet
Deputy Director, City Council
DATE:March 24, 2026
RE:MOTION SHEET – Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement, Utah Inland Port Authority
Please note, this same resolution will be considered by the CRA Board at the same March 24 formal meeting.
MOTION 1
I move that the Council adopt a resolution approving the second amendment to the Interlocal Agreement with
the Utah Inland Port Authority.
MOTION 2
I move that the Board reject the resolution.
City Council Announcements
March 24, 2026
Information Needed by Council Staff
A. Metro Water District Board Vacancy Announcement
One of the Council's five appointed trustees to the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake
and Sandy Board of Trustees, Cindy Cromer, has recently resigned from the board.
The Council will need to appoint a new trustee to fill this vacancy.
Interested candidates may apply at slc.gov/boards. Applications are being accepted through
April 20, 2026. This vacancy is being publicly noticed, and any member of the public may
apply for consideration.
If Council Members have recommendations for qualified candidates, please send them to
Austin or another Council staff member. Staff is also seeking up to three Council Members to
serve on a review subcommittee. The subcommittee will review applications and recommend a
candidate to the full Council for appointment.
Are there two or three Council Members that would be interested in serving on the
subcommittee?