HomeMy WebLinkAboutSite Certifications - 03/02/2021Page 1
OVERALL SITE and DRAINAGE CERTIFICATION
Commercial, Multi-Family and Subdivision Certification Form and Checklist
Project Name:
Date:
Building Permit Numbers:
(Commercial or multi-family)
Per the requirement in Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM) Chapter 3, Section 3.0 to certify as-
built construction to the approved drainage and grading plans, please fill in all applicable items in this
Certification Form for Commercial, Multi-Family and Overall Single Family sites. NOTE: several items must be
verified during construction. A copy of the approved grading plan must be submitted with the as-built grading
plan. (As-built elevations must be written in red next to the approved elevations.)
•Use “Yes” for items completed as described.
•Use “N/A” for items that are not applicable to the site being certified.
•If any blanks are “No,” attach an explanation referencing the item number below.
Attach an explanation or description of the as-built condition for any items listed or for anything not listed but
shown on the approved construction plans.
Provide an as-built redline or Mylar drawing with the following:
I.Water Quality and Quantity Detention Basin - FCSCM Ch. 6 and 7
For multiple detention basins on a site, provide the following for each basin separately:
A. Volume: As-built topographic verification is attached at 1-foot (or less) contour intervals and
volume verification calculations for the water quality capture volume and the 100-year detention storage
volume.
1. Detention basin topography was prepared by a professional land surveyor registered in the state
of Colorado.
2.Both proposed and as-built contours are shown on the same plan sheet (dashed lines for
proposed and solid lines for as-built).
3.All critical spot elevations as shown on the approved construction plans have been verified and
the as-built elevations are shown on the plan sheet.
4.Stage-storage-discharge tables are provided on a separate document.
5.Verification that designed drain time is in compliance with Colorado Revised Statute § 37-92-
602(8) is attached and has been uploaded to the Statewide Compliance Portal
(tinyurl.com/COCompliancePortal) for approval. Uploaded documents must include:
a.The cover sheet from the approved drainage report
b.The stamped certification page from the approved drainage report
c.As-built topographic survey
d.Stamped certification page from the Overall Site & Drainage Certification
e.PDF output from the Stormwater Detention and Infiltration Design Data Speadsheet
11/19
Beebe Christian School & Seventh Day Adventist Church
02-11-2021
B1702311
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
Page 2
B.Water Quality and Quantity Detention Basin Grading: Attached is as-built verification that there is
a minimum 2% positive fall into the concrete trickle pans or flow-line(s) from all areas in the bottom of
the detention pond. If there is a “soft pan” in the flow-line, all areas still must meet the minimum 2%
grade requirement.
1.Low Flow: Choose one of the following detention basin low flow options as applicable:
a. Turf swale for low flow path in detention basin.
There is a minimum 2% grade in the flow-line(s) of the detention basin. The flattest as-built grade
is .
b.Concrete pan for low flow in detention basin.
There is a concrete pan installed that meets the grades as shown on the approved construction
plans. (Show as-built spot elevations.)
c.Soft pan for low flow in detention basin.
•Verify and document the soft pan material gradation, trench width and depth - to be verified
during construction by engineer. Picture documentation is preferred or engineer’s statement of
visual inspection and compliance. (Choose one below.)
o There is a soft pan with an underdrain installed that meets the design on the approved
construction plans. (Show the underdrain grades, bedding material, geotextile, spot elevations,
bends, cleanouts, etc.)
o There is soft pan installed without an underdrain but there is a type A or B soil. The soil
type must be documented by supplying verification from a registered professional geotechnical
engineer.
NOTE: Spot elevations are to be within 0.2 ft. +/-.
2. Side Slopes: The as-built side slopes of the detention basin have been calculated and are shown.
Indicate the side slope with an arrow and a numerical value (e.g., 6.25:1). The maximum slope allowed
is 4:1. Small areas of 3:1 may be acceptable, but slopes steeper than 3:1 must be stabilized or re-
graded. Provide documentation if a variance was granted for steeper slopes during the design process.
3.Spillway: The following items must be field verified:
a.The location of the spillway is indicated on the as-built plan.
b.The width of the spillway is indicated on the as-built plan.
c.The elevation(s) of the spillway is shown on the as-built plan.
d.A concrete ribbon defines the location and grade of the spillway.
e.There is downstream scour protection in the spillway as per the construction plans. Indicate
type: (riprap size “D50” gradation and bedding type, geotextile, buried
riprap with inches of bury, etc.).
f.There are no obstructions in the spillway, such as trees, bushes, sidewalks, landscape
features, rocks, etc.
11/19
Yes
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
Scour Stop
N/A
Yes
Page 3
4.Outlet Structure:
a.The orifice plate for the approved release rate is installed with the correct size and location of
the orifice.
b.The orifice plate for the water quality outlet is installed with the correct hole size, number of
rows and columns of holes.
c.The bottom hole on both the water quality and quantity outlets are at the bottom of the plate
so no water ponds in front of the plate.
d.The well screen is the correct material and is installed as shown on the construction plans.
e.100-year overflow grate elevation is . (Elev. A on detail D-46)
f.The top elevation of the water quality capture volume is . (Elev. B on detail
D-46)
g.Overflow grate is made of the correct material, has the correct bar spacing, is hinged at the
top and bolted at the bottom.
h.The bottom of the outlet box has no obstructions or misalignments that will cause it to retain
runoff water and is sloped at 2% towards outlet.
II.Channels/Swales - FCSCM Ch. 8, Sec. 2.0 and Ch. 9, Sec. 5.0
A. Capacity: The as-built capacity of all the major channels and swales has been verified. They meet
or exceed capacity requirements shown in the approved drainage study for this project.
1.All swales are located within the drainage easements as shown on the construction plans.
2.Longitudinal slopes and side-slopes (cross-sections) have been verified. Design criteria requires
longitudinal slopes of 2% min. (on vegetated swales) and side-slopes no steeper than 4:1. If these
criteria are not met, the certification engineer will write a justification and propose mitigation for each
instance or have the issues corrected. If variances to these criteria have previously been approved and
are shown on the construction plans, no justification is needed.
3.As-built spot elevations on channels/swales are shown that correspond to spot elevations
shown on the approved construction plans.
4.All permanent erosion control measures are installed as shown on the approved construction
plans (e.g., drop structures, riprap, TRMs, etc.). (Include pictures and verification of the materials used
as part of this verification.)
5.All pans, curbs, storm pipes or other appurtenances appropriately tie into each other in the
system. (Pictures at tie-in points suggested.)
6.The minimum freeboard is provided for all channels and swales as shown on the approved
construction plans or as identified in the approved drainage study. (Show the freeboard provided on
the cross-sections as on the construction plan set or attached as separate documentation.)
7.The low flow portion of all channels or swales is clear of obstructions. (No landscaping, trees,
shrubs, sod, etc. infringe on the low flow portion of channels or swales.)
11/19
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes 4943.50
Yes 4938.27
Yes
Yes
N/A
Page 4
III.Storm Pipes (aka storm drains) - FCSCM Ch. 9, Sec. 4.0
A. Storm Drain Pipe Capacity: The as-built capacity of all pipes installed on this project has been
verified and meets or exceeds the capacity requirements shown in the approved drainage study for this
project.
1.All storm drain pipe sizes and materials have been verified and are in conformance with the
approved construction plans. (Indicate on the plan and profile sheets that they have been verified.)
Material and size substitutions must be approved prior to installation. If a pipe size or material was
changed during construction, the certification engineer must attach the approval documents or supply
them with this certification. Approval documents must include a calculation documenting the capacity
equivalency (equal or greater) of the substituted size.
2.The longitudinal slope of the pipe is as shown on the approved construction plans. The
acceptable minimum slope is 0.4%. All slopes flatter than the designed slope on the construction plans
must be justified with capacity calculations on an attached sheet.
3.The as-built invert elevations have been verified and are shown on the plan and profile sheets of
the approved construction plans.
B.Storm Drain Pipe Installation Requirements: All pipes are installed in accordance with the
approved construction plans and construction specifications.
1.The minimum cover requirements for all pipes have been met as shown on the approved
construction plans. These will be called out in critical locations.
2.All encasements and clearances as specified on the approved construction plans have been met.
3.Any specific joint types or construction methods specified on the approved construction plans
have been met. (List on a separate sheet and attach to this certification.)
IV.Concrete Pans - FCSCM Ch. 8, Sec. 2.0
A. Construction/Installation: All concrete pans have been constructed in accordance with the
approved construction plans.
1.The concrete pans are the correct size/width as shown on the approved construction plans.
2.The longitudinal slopes of the pans are as shown on the approved construction plans. The
certification engineer must justify or mitigate longitudinal slopes less than the minimum of 0.4% unless
a flatter slope was approved and is shown on the approved construction plans. Provide mitigation or
justification by separate document.
3.The cross-section of the pan is as shown on the construction plans. (Specifically, the pan cross-
section is “V” shaped and meets the side slope shown on the detail.)
4.The concrete pans are a minimum of 6 inches thick without reinforcement and a minimum of 4
inches thick with a minimum of 6X6-W14xW14 reinforcement per detail D20B and D20C. (Provide
documentation of the reinforcement used if different than shown on the details or on the approved
construction plans.)
5.The spot elevations shown on the concrete pan(s) have been verified and are shown on the as-
built drawings.
11/19
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
Page 5
V. Storm Drain Inlets - FCSCM Ch. 9, Sec. 3.0
A. Construction/Installation: All storm drain inlets have been constructed in accordance with the
approved construction plans and construction specifications.
1.The size and type of inlets are consistent with the inlets shown on the approved construction
plan. Indicate by writing “Verified” on each inlet on the plan sheet or list on a separate document the
inlet number(s), type and size (length). If the inlet installed is other than the one on the approved
construction plan detail sheet, provide the name and source of the detail with justification for equal or
better capacity.
2.The size of the inlet opening is consistent with the approved detail. (Check height and width.)
3.The elevation of the grate (if applicable) is at the elevation shown on the street profile or as
indicated by a spot elevation on the construction plans.
4.The as-built invert elevations of all pipes entering and leaving the inlet are shown on the plan
and profile sheets within construction tolerance of 0.2 feet. If substantially different, provide
justification and capacity calculations to show the capacity is not affected or propose mitigation.
5.The as-built size of the inlet box is as shown on the construction plans or an explanation or
justification is attached.
6.All Type C, R, 13 and 16 inlet covers are stenciled or stamped with the following designation (or
an equivalent): NO DUMPING – DRAINS TO POUDRE RIVER.
VI.Culverts - FCSCM Ch. 9, Sec. 4.0
A. Construction/Installation: All culverts have been constructed and/or installed in accordance with
the approved construction plans and construction specifications.
1.All culvert sizes have been verified as indicated on the as-built construction plans as correct.
2.The culvert material type for all culverts installed is as on the approved construction plans and is
indicated on the as-built plans.
3.The as-built invert “in and out” elevations have been verified and are indicated on the as-built
construction plans.
4.The culvert headwalls or wing walls have been installed as shown on the approved construction
plans. Headwalls or wing walls may be needed in the as-built conditions onsite if the slopes adjacent to
the culvert are greater than 4:1. Please note areas needing stabilization in the certification narrative.
An alternative to consider is a turf reinforcement mat (TRM).
VII.Sub-Drains
A. Construction/Installation: All sub-drains shown on the construction plans have been installed in
accordance with those plans and the construction specifications. Sub-drains installed with the sanitary
sewer are to be verified on the sanitary sewer plan and profile sheets of the construction plans. (NOTE:
Indicate any sub-drains installed after the plans were approved on the as-built plans.)
1.The size of the sub-drains are as approved on the construction plans and are indicated on the as-
built plans.
2.The type of sub-drain, in particular the perforated and non-perforated sections of the drain, are
as indicated on the approved construction plans.
11/19
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Page 6
3.The cover requirements per the construction plans are provided.
4.The cleanouts have been installed at the locations shown on the construction plans and are
accessible for cleaning. (Cleanouts can be buried a maximum of 6 inches deep with their locations
marked.)
5.The backfill materials for sub-drains are as shown on the approved construction plans. (This
includes the type, depth and width.)
6.The geo-textile liner completely wraps the sub-drain and the permeable backfill material unless
shown otherwise on the approved construction plans. (Sub-drain pipe wrapped in a sock filter material
is accepted only if approved prior to installation.)
VIII.Curb Cuts
A. Construction: All curb cut openings are constructed in accordance with the approved construction
plans and construction specifications.
1.The size (width) of the curb cut opening is as shown on the approved construction plans.
2.The curb cut openings tie into a downstream swale, pipe, or other appurtenances with a smooth
transition and there no obstructions such as riprap or sod impeding the flow downstream of the curb
cut.
IX.Sidewalk Culverts & Chases
A. Construction/Installation: All sidewalk culverts have been installed at the locations shown on the
approved construction plans.
1.The size (width and length) of the culverts are as shown on the approved construction plans.
2.The cover plate is a minimum 5/8-inch galvanized plate bolted to a galvanized angle iron per the
detail shown on the approved construction plans or per the City’s detail.
3.The sidewalk culvert invert “in and out” elevations have been verified and are indicated on the
as-built plans.
4.The sidewalk culvert opening is as shown on the approved construction plans or per the City’s
detail.
5.There is a smooth transition both on the inlet and outlet ends of the sidewalk culvert with no
obstructions such as riprap or sod impeding the flow into or out of the sidewalk culvert.
X. Site Grading - FCSCM Ch. 8
A. Construction: All common open spaces have been graded in accordance with the approved
construction plans.
1.The grading on all common open spaces bordering private lots has been verified as correct and
the as-built rear lot corner elevations have been shown on the as-built plans.
11/19
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Page 7
2.The as-built contours for “overlot grading” are shown on the as-built construction plans for all
common open spaces, tracts, outlots, etc. If not in compliance, please attach a narrative describing the
situation for noncompliance and when it may be corrected. An escrow for overlot grading may be
required. (NOTE: Residential Lot Grading Certification is a separate process from this Overall Site
Certification. It is understood that residential lots will be brought to final grade once the foundation is
backfilled so they may be lower than the plan shows at this Overall Site Certification stage.)
3.All turf reinforcement mats (TRMs) have been installed as shown on the approved construction
plans and the slopes are stabilized.
XI.Permanent Erosion Control BMPs - FCSCM Ch. 9, Sec. 7.0
A. Construction: All permanent erosion control BMPs have been installed per the approved
construction plans.
1.All riprap has been installed in the locations and sizes indicated on the approved construction
plans.
2.All fabric has been installed in the locations and sizes indicated on the approved construction
plans.
a.All fabric was installed per the details on the approved construction plans.
XII.Post-Construction Site Cleanup - FCSCM Ch. 3, Sec. 2.0
A. Construction: All construction debris and obstructions of any kind have been removed from
drainage paths.
1.All construction debris has been removed except in staging area(s).
2.All ruts have been smoothed out in all construction areas.
3.All areas needing reseeding have been identified and future stabilization goals have been
coordinated with the Erosion Control Inspector and in accordance with FCSCM Vol.2 Chapter 12. Note
the area needing stabilization in the narrative.
XIII.Certification of LID and Water Quality Facilities - FCSCM Ch. 7
A.Attached are the During Construction Inspection Checklist for Low Impact Development (LID) and
other items to be verified during construction, along with pictures and other required documentation.
B.Attached is verification of the rain garden and/or sand filter flat surface area(s) and ponding
volume(s). This verification includes survey of critical elevations.
C.Attached is verification of the underground infiltration required volume(s), weir elevations,
orifices, inspection ports and filtering fabric. This verification includes survey of critical elevations.
D.All visible LID design features were verified as part of the engineer's site visit.
11/19
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
Roche Constructors
Rain Garden Size Verification
2/17/2021
Beebe Christian School ‐ 2040 Nancy Gray Ave.
Req'd Area Req'd Vol Act. Area Act. Vol.
Basin 1 379 sf 572 cf 380 sf 741 cf
Basin 2 804 sf 1213 cf 861 sf 1263 cf
PROPOSED DETENTION POND - STAGE/STORAGE
Pond: 1.0
Location: Bebee - Proposed WQ & Detention Pond
Calculated By: MRB
Date: 5/1/2017
V = 1/3 d (A + B + sqrt(A*B))
V = Volume between Contours, ft^2
d = Depth between Contours, ft
A = Surface Area of Contour, ft^2
4936.4 0
4937 40 0.000 0.000
4938 2990 0.026 0.026
WQCV = 4938.27 3521 0.020 0.046 0.000
4939 6291 0.081 0.127 0.081
4940 8052 0.164 0.291 0.245
4941 9922 0.206 0.497 0.451
4942 11913 0.250 0.748 0.702
4943 14033 0.297 1.045 0.999
100‐Year WSEL = 4943.5 15142 0.167 1.213 1.166
4944 16283 0.180 1.393 1.347
4944.5 17448 0.194 1.586 1.540
Required Detention Volume = 1.031 See "Detention Volume Calculations" this report
Provided Detention = 1.166
Required WQCV = 0.046 Per "Stantec Report" WQ = 0.033, Per calcs this
Provided WQCV = 0.046 report WQCV = 0.046
Total Required Volume = 1.077
Total Volume Provided = 1.212
Stage
(ft)
Surface
Area
(ft^2)
Incremental
Storage
(ac‐ft)
Total
Storage
(ac‐ft)
Detention
Storage (ac‐
ft)
JO
S
E
P
H
A
L
L
E
N
D
R
.
SCHOOL/CHURCH
NANCY GRAY AVE.
S.
T
I
M
B
E
R
L
I
N
E
R
D
.
GRADING PLAN
C-2.0
8 Of
PROJECT TITLE
REVISIONS
SHEET TITLE
SHEET INFORMATION
SEAL
DATE
PREPARED FOR
R TIDGEOPENGINEERING & CONSULTING
5255 Ronald Reagan Blvd.,
Ste. 210
Johnstown, CO 80534
T (303) 322-6480
W ridgetopeng.com
CITY COMMENTS 11/28/2016
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
PROJECT NO.:
ROCHE
CONSTRUCTORS
BEEBE CHRISTIAN
SCHOOL AND
SEVENTH DAY
ADVENTIST CHURCH
361 71ST AVE.
GREELEY , CO
2103 NANCY GRAY AVE.
FORT COLLINS, CO
16-026-001
MRB
BSA/RSB
13
SUBMITTAL
PROJECT
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
07/11/2017
LOGO
CITY COMMENTS 01/03/2017
CITY COMMENTS 04/18/2017
GRADING NOTES
LEGEND
12/15/2017RAIN GARDEN
ADDED NOTES
09/03/2020
CITY COMMENTS
ASBUILT REPRINT
Stormwater Facility Name:
Facility Location & Jurisdiction:
User Input: Watershed Characteristics User Defined User Defined User Defined User Defined
Watershed Slope =0.020 ft/ft Stage [ft]Area [ft^2]Stage [ft]Discharge [cfs]
Watershed Length =780 ft 0.00 1 0.00 0.01
Watershed Area =5.44 acres 0.60 40 0.60 0.01
Watershed Imperviousness =52.0%percent 1.60 2,990 1.60 0.01
Percentage Hydrologic Soil Group A =0.0%percent 2.60 6,291 2.60 1.10
Percentage Hydrologic Soil Group B =0.0%percent 3.60 8,052 3.60 1.10
Percentage Hydrologic Soil Groups C/D =100.0%percent 4.60 9,922 4.60 1.10
5.60 11,913 5.60 1.10
User Input 17 6.60 14,033 6.60 1.10
7.10 15,142 7.10 1.10
7.60 16,283 7.60 1.10
WQCV Treatment Method =40.00 hours
After completing and printing this worksheet to a pdf, go to:
https://maperture.digitaldataservices.com/gvh/?viewer=cswdif
create a new stormwater facility, and
attach the pdf of this worksheet to that record.
Routed Hydrograph Results
Design Storm Return Period =WQCV 2 Year 5 Year 10 Year 50 Year 100 Year
One-Hour Rainfall Depth =0.53 0.98 1.36 1.71 2.91 3.67 in
Calculated Runoff Volume =0.096 0.209 0.338 0.465 0.997 1.354 acre-ft
OPTIONAL Override Runoff Volume =acre-ft
Inflow Hydrograph Volume =0.096 0.208 0.337 0.464 0.996 1.353 acre-ft
Time to Drain 97% of Inflow Volume =40.2 37.5 34.5 31.6 19.8 16.3 hours
Time to Drain 99% of Inflow Volume =42.3 42.1 41.9 41.8 41.7 41.7 hours
Maximum Ponding Depth =1.98 2.52 3.14 3.75 5.83 6.94 ft
Maximum Ponded Area =0.10 0.14 0.17 0.19 0.28 0.34 acres
Maximum Volume Stored =0.066 0.129 0.224 0.334 0.827 1.170 acre-ft
Stormwater Detention and Infiltration Design Data Sheet
BeBee Christian School/Church
2040 Nancy Gray Ave, Fort Collins, CO
Location for 1-hr Rainfall Depths (use dropdown):
Workbook Protected Worksheet Protected
Copy of SDI_Design_Data_v1.08, Design Data 7/12/2018, 4:21 PM
WQCV_Trigger =1
RunOnce=1
CountA=1
Draintime Coeff=1.0
0 1 2 3
#N/A
#N/A
0 1 2 3
#N/A
#N/A
Check Data Set 1 Check Data Set 1
Stormwater Detention and Infiltration Design Data Sheet
Area
Discharge
0
5
10
15
20
25
0.1 1 10
FL
O
W
[
c
f
s
]
TIME [hr]
100YR IN
100YR OUT
50YR IN
50YR OUT
10YR IN
10YR OUT
5YR IN
5YR OUT
2YR IN
2YR OUT
WQCV IN
WQCV OUT
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0.1 1 10 100
PO
N
D
I
N
G
D
E
P
T
H
[
f
t
]
DRAIN TIME [hr]
100YR
50YR
10YR
5YR
2YR
WQCV
Copy of SDI_Design_Data_v1.08, Design Data 7/12/2018, 4:21 PM
Yellow Shaded
Areas not included
within this As-Built
Certification
DATE: February 17, 2021
TO: Dan Mogen, City of Fort Collins
FROM: Mike Beach, P.E.
PROJECT: Beebe Christian School; 2040 Nancy Gray – Overall Site Certification
DA Reception Number - 20170043924
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Ridgetop Engineering was the original civil engineer of record on this project. This memo is to clarify
and explain issues surrounding the as-constructed grading elevation certifications per our original
approved Grading Plan, dated 07-11-2017.
The Overall Site and Drainage Certification and Certification of Lot Grading must be read in the context
of this memo. Although some of the grades adjacent to the building are higher/lower than our original
design called for, there is still positive drainage away from the building and its foundation. Runoff will
be conveyed positively to the water quality facilities according to the survey.
The as-built survey was completed in 2018 and provided to Ridgetop by Roche Constructors. However,
some modifications to the parking lot and northern swale have been completed since then because, after
construction was complete, it was determined that some installation did not follow our design
recommendations and drainage needed to be improved. Ridgetop Engineering was not involved in those
changes and is not certifying those changes as part of this Certification. We understand that the
subsequent civil engineering firm that was engaged in this process will Certify their design efforts.
Please see the attached “2020 Partial As-Built” drawing showing the areas being included within this
Certification which were within Ridgetop Engineering’s original scope of services.
The original approved Grading Plan by Ridgetop Engineering did not require a new spillway to be
installed because there is an existing Concrete Weir near the northeastern corner of the existing pond that
was design by others. The project Storm Report was approved with slight modifications to increase the
volume of the existing pond and minor changes to the outlet structure. The existing Outlet Structure per
the design was to remain with only the orifice plates being modified/changed.
It is my opinion that there will be no adverse impacts to the building from stormwater runoff within this
area and that the runoff will make its way as intended to the water quality devices and detention facility.
Attachments:
2017-07-11 Approved Grading Plan
2017-07-11 Approved Drainage Plan
2017-05-04 Beebe Christian School Drainage Report Cover Sheet
2017-5-01 Stage Storage Table
2018-07-12 SDI Drain Times
2020-12-02 Overall Site Certification
2021-02-02 As-Built Survey
January 25, 2021
Stormwater Engineer
City of Fort Collins Stormwater Utilities
700 Wood Street
Fort Collins, CO 80525
RE: Revised Drainage & Grading Certification Cover Letter
Beebe Christian School and Seventh Day Adventist Church
To Whom it May Concern:
LandOne Engineering, LLC was hired by Roche Constructors to analyze the drainage of
the constructed parking lot and the original construction documents for Beebe Christian
School and Seventh Day Adventist Church. As a result of that analysis, LandOne
amended the Grading Plans to improve the drainage of the parking lot. The original
intent of the approved drainage design has not been changed.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me.
Sincerely,
LandOne Engineering, LLC
Mark Harris, PE
Project Engineer
N
www.LandOne.co 361 71st Avenue, Suite 100 Greeley, CO 80634 970-632-2311
www.rocheconstructors.com
February 18, 2021
VIA EMAIL ONLY
Mr. Dan Mogen
City of Fort Collins Utilties
222 Laporte Ave.
Fort Collins, CO 80524
Re: Beebe Christian School, 2040 Nancy Gray Ave.
Dear Dan:
As part of the certification package required to close out this project with the City of Fort Collins this
letter will serve as clarification on why two civil engineers were used for design services.
Ridgetop Engineering (Ridgetop) was hired initially to provide a complete set of civil drawings which
were permitted through the city. Upon installation and completion of this project there was an
apparent delay in which final certification information was never sent to the City of Fort Collins. During
this time the building portion of the work was completed and signed off, however, an escrow was held
in Roche Constructors, Inc.’s (Roche) name until the completed certifications were provided.
Unfortunately, after completion of the project it was apparent the school had drainage related
problems. Roche engaged Ridgetop regarding these problems and, in short, a resolution could not be
made. In an effort to be a good partner with the school Roche engaged a new engineer, LandOne
Engineering, LLC (LandOne), to provide new drawings related to the west parking lot to resolve the
drainage issues we were having there.
During this change in engineers, Carlin Nafziger, Roche Vice President of Operations, engaged the City
of Fort Collins regarding these new drawings. It was discussed that the existing permit was still open and
that we could implement these changes then as-built the new conditions. We implemented these
changes in October of 2019.
Ridgetop will only certify their original drawings and will not certify the modifications that LandOne and
Roche implemented. This is the reason that two engineers are listed with certifications on this lot. We
had no further issues with drainage once these changes were implemented. If any further clarification is
needed, please feel free to reach out to me.
Sincerely,
ROCHE CONSTRUCTORS, INC.
Aaron Evans
Project Manager
AE/ss
cc: Carlin Nafziger
Corporate Office:
361 71st Avenue
Greeley, CO 80634
(970) 356-3611
Regional Office:
Suite 130
7680 W. Sahara Avenue
Las Vegas, NV 89117
(702) 252-3611
License No. A/B 42653
Regional Office:
Suite 100
1235 W. 124th Avenue
Westminster, CO 80234
(303) 920-5555