HomeMy WebLinkAbout1108 Bateleur Ln - Special Inspections/Engineering - 08/03/20100
U)
m
or
Excavation
Observation
CLIENT:
Jason Luna
2206 Greenmont Ct
Ft Collins, CO 80524
C` L I THOMPSON
0 � v e t (O-e-3
ADDRESS: ar4-PA PI iD Subd., bim
1108 rr ate e.vr t
LOT to BLOCK
FILING NO.�_PROJECT NO.r_CO �JZ ?jr] -SM
Soils Exposed in Excavation Excav
i
Ground Water Conditions
2 NONE IN EXCAVATION
❑ NONE ENCOUNTERED IN BORING NO. TO FEET
R ENCOUNTERED ATZ-5 FEET IN BORING NO. TN _1
DRILLED DURING CTIJTHOMPSON PROJECT NO.f�C -'92-35" (2C
to
Soils at Foundation Level
C1
UPPER LEVEL aW , b�I .
a S
LOWER LEVEL CICLc wxllV.
Recommended Foundation System
SPREAD F
MAXIMUM
M SOILPRESSURE OF 3 .mo
PSF
❑ FOOTINGS WITH MINIMUMDEAD-LOAD
MAXIMUM SOIL PRESSURE OF
PSF.
MINIMUM DEAD -LOAD PRESSURE OF
PSF.
❑ GRADE BEAMS AND PADS DESIGNED FOR:
MAXIMUM SOIL PRESSURE OF -
PSF.
MINIMUM DEAD -LOAD PRESSURE OF
PSF.
PROVIDE A INCH VOID BENEATH GRADE BEAMS
ElDRILLED FRICTION PIERS
MAXIMUM END PRESSURE OF
PSF.
SKIN FRICTION OF
PSF.
MINIMUM DEAD -LOAD PRESSURE OF
PSF.
PROVIDE A INCH VOID BENEATH GRADE BEAMS
❑ DRILLED PIERS INTO BEDROCK
MAXIMUM END PRESSURE OF
PSF
SKIN FRICTION OF
PSF.
MINIMUM DEAD -LOAD PRESSURE OF
PSF.
PROVIDE A INCH VOID BENEATH GRADE BEAMS
6c4e `eu r Lane
Instructions to Contractor
R.
CONDITIONS AS ANTICIPATED
[3 CONTACT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER
cmiwo4v 4 aiesd-pr-�-b lo'd�p.
j v��F+►� "A� ci`fit,io lo' .
I
Erjc. w1 0_"'sm dtl0� m
C�}164-I
FIELD REPR9EOi&UfE, own i7 L ;
DATE OF
Excavation/Footing
Observation
CLIENT:
Jason Luna
2205 reenmon
Fort Collins, GO OU524
Recommended Foundation System
CTLI HOMPSON tRQCqECT NO. Er-0.51.3 120
DATED 2010 _
SPREAD FOOTINGS
MAXIMUM SOIL PRESS RE OF/+ S PSF.
MINIMUM WIDTH 17- OiC INCHES
❑ FOOTINGS WITH MINIMUM DEADLOAD
MAXIMUM SOIL PRESSURE OF
MINIMUM DEADLOAD PRESSURE OF PSF.
PROVIDE A INCH VOID BENEATH GRADE BEAMS
MINIMUM WIDTH INCHES
❑ GRADE BEAMS AND PADS
MAXIMUM SOIL PRESSURE OF
MINIMUM DEADLOAD PRESSURE OF PSF
PROVIDE A INCH VOID BENEATH GRADE BEAMS
MINIMUM WIDTH INCHES
Foundat' P an
BY T� w105A S+A" Gn MtL45
PLAN NO. T:M523 DATE ': 6 1C
WALL FOOTING WIDTH 16 YA (INCHES) DEPTH (INCHES)
COLUMN P (INCHES) DEPTH (INCHES)
COLUMN PAD (INCHES) DEPTH (INCHES)
REINFORCEMENT AS PER PLAN:
4 YES ❑ NO ❑ NONE REQUIRED
0 AT SITE ❑ INSTALLED
Soil Conditio$ At Fogting Level
PPER ULEV0. 41 S8 + ft, ►u�+.
LOWER LEVEL 1'5dM_ lb KNN4•
Ground Water Conditions
E NONE IN EXCAVATION
[:]NONE ENCOUNTERED IN BORING NO. TO FEET
N ENCOUNTERED AT FEET IN BORING NO. , T-4 1
R markks: VIea5 C��ydA �Ycwy��tta/�S
�v o�- Io-IV WdW fw pislbW-31can
ft+ km a 6
AV dxt
CTL i T HOM Ps®N
6160q(aq3
ADDRESS: eiR1 4'Am 1 V 1) S V!J(rl►V isi w
_0 e
LOT I G BLOr�CCKjK�`
FILING NO. PROJECT NO. FC-07235- 5w
ba-leleur lane
A INDICATES APPROXIMATE DEPTHNWIDTH MEASUREMENT LOCATION
Instructions to Contractor
Q FOOTING IN GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH PLAN
FOOTING REJECTED
® CONDITIONS IN EXCAVATION AS ANTICIPATED
❑ CONDITIONS IN EXCAVATION NOT AS ANTICIPATED, CONTACT
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER
u
Reinforcing Steel Quality Assurance Observation I O T L I T H O M P S O N
Per the client's request, a representative of CI7. Thompson has visually "'�'
observed the reinforcement within the formwork under construction at 6
the site referenced below. The following summarizes our observations
and opinions at the time of our visit.
Client: La,A Site Address: 1108 54— Mt,t-ug lm_
ZZ05 CymN a,c,' a FX14 CQ&L*�s .
Job #: Fte=3 Lot: " Block: Filing:
Date: w Contact: Subdivision: Ktdt"tac� Pui�
Reinforcine Plan Information
Plan By: ('•l1. Lwaivswj 14ea
Date: WICIIZoo Job#: F1CvSZ3S
Reinforcing Type(s):
❑ footing
❑ grade beam
❑ structural slab
❑ column
® foundation wall
❑ pier cap
❑ slab -on -grade
❑ other
Wall / Grade Beam Reinforcing Steel
Grade
Horizontal
VertJTies
1
f0
CtYQ_ 3amo•ca
.�
t3 Z44o.c
2
Coo
C404 T
, GQ AA40.r_�
3
ego
cl*M-.0 4.
(-,%N 6 gatra P ,
4
5
6
7
8
UFER Ground
❑ Installed - Location
® Not Observed
Max/Min wall height observed: T / 9 f
If void forms are required, are they installed as
recommended?
❑yes Ono Required thickness: in.
Concrete on -site? ❑ yes 0 no (% poured
Weather: ?fit Q'..na•s ^- 50T
Notes: ¢ 7t9ql8A4 +4aff� t,.,tj t-
ckw— FpK 1 1.,. UAs&wt.4 'tee SM l! HE
rieib1F" 74W. W,,eCL m,a41— wt1.1.
e CdV
Summary of Opinions
❑ It is our opinion that the reinforcing steel observed
was in general conformance with the plan.
a It is our opinion that the reinforcing steel observed
was not in general conformance with the plan.
(2nd observation required).
Deficiencies noted:( n1tz:r, C Sg4-Pt-d•C.
ALL ux/lS 4 WD xs�_. V w- a.tz, sn !S 4-5.krxa:-a
Ci"4- --. 96 iJtyRU_
Revised 2010: CTL I Thompson, Inc. 1 351 Linden Street, Suite 140, Ft. Collins, CO 80524