HomeMy WebLinkAboutLot Certifications - 05/09/2001 (31)FROM : Scott, Cox & Assoc. FAX NO. : 970 663 1660 May. 11 2001 08:29AM P1
"SCOTT, COX & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Od--P3i`139
consulting engineers
OVERLOT GRADING OBSERVATION SCA�htr /sue-zs-o}o3
CLIENT
LEGAL
DATE;
ISP. BY:
GPLADINGPLAN:
We have measured relative elevations at the above mentioned location. The observed elevations were compared to the
Grading Plan referenced above. During ourobservations our representative measured the relative elevations at the lot sides
and corners. top of foundation, and lowest openings. Based upon our findings it is our opinion:
^— The elevations as measured are in general conformance with the above noted Grading Plan.
�t The elevations as measured are in general conformance with the above noted Grading Plan with the following
exceptions:
It is our opinion these exceptions, noted above, Should not adversely change the grading scheme as shown on the
above referenced plan.
G During our observations our representative noted that the as measured elevations do, not conform to those
indicated on the above referenced grading plan. However. it is our opinion the grades as measured should provide
an adequate substitute to the above referenced grading scheme.
X See the attached -As-Built" grading plan.
The elevations measured are not in conformance to the above referenced trading plan. Deficiencies include;
Other cc
Limicatiuns:
It is our opinion that the subject tor, as graded on the above date, should not interfere with offsite ;lows unless the grades
are changed or harriers are created such as fences, garden terracing, sidewalks, and/or any landscaping which may change
the established Clow patterns b 4, 00iiigiarr4wing runoff flow. Sackrill adjacent to the residence may settle over time
and allow ponding co occur` �ge��'(t�i46yj walls. The backfill adjacent to the residence must be monitored and
maintained to ensure tha`� r1'•a �qm the foundation. Tag grades measured were compared only to the
requirements shown on terenc Man. Other minimum grading requirements which may be specified
n the ;oils 7etiort or by t u du are beyond the scope of this report.
Ra�iewed �y - Datc:
�o�fl !➢NO•��`\IIiC85m .�Oulrlry _, .��nM urt L�h�+Intl)
FROM : Scott, Cox 8 Assoc.
s
0
ELE /AT:CNS SURvEreD
5's-mi
TB11-1 09,! la.o.W.J.
1
09.4
I SZ6- Z GS�-ai-�9.8 -
S�-ol
(lmst)
I Lm
(:UJ5Li
m9.5 —
1
09.1
P�8,4
r
FAX NO. : 970 663 1660
TWIN WASH SQUARE
May. 11 2001 08:30AM P2
mS.b CB.O.W.J P>8.b l B.O.W,I
J \
om9.m lB.O.W.J
J\�
An
l
_
Top of Foundation=11.6
0�
lop
a9.1
a
Y
m9.3 CB.O.W.J �--
1 r
([lust)
m
m9s (B.ov') X1
f
013.4 ! B.O.LUJ
NOTE;
THE s•
eeLE:5 SRCLLN ERE CN AIRS gpgEp AS -BUILT (SRADING ELEVATIONS
mr -Ne suSURVS-er ae�no�aM-+Eo c�.l 3.mt
sec w
326-25-'-5 a��CO
'" 4 t SCOTT, WX t ,4S50G(ATE3, ING. 511(L D E ,e5
ee'aW::� n, ee•s
m _07 I, BLOCK 3, POSSIL LAKE RANCF; s.+�c g - g
5110 G ones SvMt, 5wta O e aunq C ti ae E0550 -ORT COLL INS. COLORAOO
;a^VNf010/ 663 mlyp U/GMWRaG pS76-35-1.]OLLG
DAP 5"WWlW •M 0fNl w . SaIN - Lase• . L—r. D�
®r,
.4. o, 7-F
V 4: WA
x
" 157'
NEW!
4F�
41
1
PE�
57
14.6
YPE A
oor
�I VV
M�F 5 1�.
MIN TF= 14.5
L�TYPEA
ti3
6
I 1b
J MIN-F9 15.SI
5
MIN 15.0I
MIN TF=
1
TF= 15.7
LOT TYPE A I
L J
-
_MIN
LOT TYPE A
L J
N
b
L/ - n �f
S—
\\
12
MIN FG= 1 /
MIN TF= 14-2
LOT TYPE AA
` v
j
1�
4 �F3 M�FG= 12.4 FG= 1
MIN FG=JA
MIN TF= 13.6 LOT
TF= 13.1 MIN TF= 12.6
MIN TF= LOT TYPE A LOT TYPE A LOT TYPE A
ILOT TYPO L
MIN 'F-- 13.3
MINI'TF= 14.0
LOT TYPE B
MIN FG- 14 °°
MIN TF- 15.2
LOT TYPE A
1
10' TYPE R'INLET
— & LET 12
f 10' TYPE R lNt T
10
11
mmalwo",
Y
_I
11 I l
.3 MIN F2 1�: [MIN 1
M�G= 1� MIN TF= 11.8 MIN TF= 11.3
0.11
MIN TF= 12.3 LOT TYPE B LOT TYPE B LOT TYPE B
I
J
06
RTHERN ENGINEERING
/� I
SERVICES1,`