HomeMy WebLinkAboutLot Certifications - 12/26/2006J I UMIMMI CPC
12/18/2886 16:89 9702781910 ADVANCED ENGINEERING R9<CBVRD
ino= cons IMO i;rT 1 82006
VERLOT GRAL)INGQBS RYATION DAT> :
CLIENT: AUSka 13yj&-Q62S MEM JOB #: lot=.-Q)-OZ LI
LEGAL : r� 7 8,acK hossr4LowA 1NSP. BY: C*
ADDRESS: A4 "oSg-gAj- Cd44&le-
f�/Jv SITEIGRADING PLAN: 6,,o g fo,44 9•1� ou Ge.F fool
We have measured relative elevations at the above mentioned location. The observed elevations were compared to the
Grading Plan reftrencedabove. During ourobservationsourrqmsentadve measured the relative elevations atthe lot sides
and comers, 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.
❑ no 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 nut adversely change the grading scheme as shown on the
above referenced plan.
IK 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, '� , Sg5.f- 07►►XX2 Ca-u%e,^t
73aWV4
4; See the attached "As -Built" grading plan.
❑ The elevations measured are not in conformance to the above referenced grading plan. Deficiencies include:
Other comments and/or observations:
8 rY 'L.�E�s16±2 t/.3 l4rG.usi T11.aJ a�lyresr�,.d.l�
Limitations:
It is our opinion that the subject lot, as graded on the above date, should not interfere with of site flows unless the grades are changed
or barriers are created such as fences, garden terracing, sidewalks, and/or any landscaping which may change the established flow
patterns by diverting or slowing runoff flow. Backfill adjacent to the residence may settle over time and allow ponding to occur
around the founUtion walls. The backfill adieoent to the residence must be monitored and maintained to ensure that runof vdil flow
away from the foundation. The grades measured were compared only tothe requirements shown on the above referenced grading plan.
Other minimum grading requirements which maybe specified in the soils report or by other construction documents are beyond the
scope of this report.
_ 0,0p. REC/o_
Reviewed by: Advanced Engineering, LLC
Jason E. Baker, P.E.
office
3105 5UJMac st wt
Port Collhu, Colorado W526
Phony (97o)9W9774
Fax: (970) 49a-M
hermitham8'aol.crm
T 33739
12/18/2006 16:09 9702781910 ADVANCED ENGINEERING PAGE 02/03
LEGEND,
T.O.F. = TOP OF FOUNDATION
W.W = WINDOW WELL
B.O.W. = BACK OF WALK
TBM-1 T.B,M.-1 = TEMPORARY BENCH MARK 1
97 7 NDTE, THIS INFORMATION IS BASED ON THE SURVEY PERFORMED ON 12-12-06.
SITE PLAN AND GRADING INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED BY CLIENT,
3489 .
98.0 Re fK C4
98.1 VRT
99.8
SLAB 00.0 ,...._.� 97.2
8,4 SAM
o
00.3 z"
97.5
99.0
00.3
99,2
T,O.F, = 01.4
.W.=01.2 W.W,=01.1
.W. r+ 01.1�W.W. a 01100.3
98.5
98.9
99.3
03.7�����
7.9
"AS -BUILT ❑VERL❑T GRADING ❑BSERVATI❑NS
DATE: 12-14-06 /It MEM CONSULTING, LLC LOT
ABBC❑
SCALE, 1'=20' 3105 SUMAC STREET OR 2, BLOCK 7, FOSSIL LAKE 2ND
F
JOB # 1000-01-02A / FORT COLLINS, CO 90526 FORT COLLINS, CO
DRAFTED BY; CPH (970) 986-9774
• t 12/18/2006 16:09 9702781910 ADVANCED ENGINEERING PAGE 03/03
m 1-1� kkt� w
1 i
03.5 03.3
12:
F(;= 04.0 FG= 03.8
\ TF� n4.7