HomeMy WebLinkAboutLot Certifications - 12/03/2001 (2)STONYBROOK HOMES INC 970 667 2342 P.02
SCOTT, COX & ASSOCIATES, INC. consulting engineers
1 ;i_. 1 �•1111111111
1 a i1511111111s•
CLIENT
DATE:
LEGAL: t—csC J%r
_ o�� I t S r t` L.a r� f INSP. BY
GRADING PLAN:,` gll� IZ CJo �L� 17 i %i -Z a 99
We have measured relative elevations at the above mentioned location. The observed elevations were compared to the
Grading Plan referenced above. During our observations 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.
mC The elevations as measured are in general confomutnce with the above noted Grading Plan with the following
It is our opinion these exceptions, noted above, should not adversely change the grading scheme as shown on the
above referenced plan-
o 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.
g< - 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:
Limitations
It is our opinion that the subject lot, as graded on the above date, should not interfere with ofTsite flows unless the grades
are changed or barriers are created such as fences. garden terracing, sidewalks. and/or any landscaping which may eftange
the established flow patterns by diverting or slowing runoffflow. Backfill adjacent to the residence may settle over time
and allow pending to occur around the foundation walls. The Backfill adjacent to the residence must be monitored and
maintained to ensure that runoff'will flow away from the foulmeasured were compared only to the
requirements shown on the above referenced grading plan. ftequirements which maybe specified
in the soils report or by other construction documents ar �LE,ort.
Reviewed by:
q-n) I .e,l Fax. 9C+:' nh-'va0
1 ') Cranue Street. imre 0 • Loveland . Col a e _. ,_
,; nmmq Laloctdo yah offices ,n
I
STONYEROO
K
r;IEVATION8 ®URVEYHD
II.]1-01 'r�,'t�
a ,l
Ilq
jo,2�-
oy.S
C;?-�Ouj)
'0 667 2342 P.03
TOM•1. TR'NOORdRY C99404 MAW 41 1
= LL. MACK Q WALK
Lw6ts LOMST 6POMF b (TOr or UK WMU
OU- SCIMM OR UNNDOWOL.
W. e=a ODYYOH OF WALK.OW DOOR
Op'L15SltJCj �9v+r1S(%.�ii.
iS,�
so
10.3
oq3
NotE. r GRADING s,' w
THE ELEVATIONS SHOWN HERE CN ARE BASED A5_51JIL t GRADI,`G ELEVATIONS
ON THE SURvEY PEKSOg1ED ON 11•21-mL
JOB ND-
1061 21_16.1ton brook Nom�s
SC,UT'fFATC-, COX ! ASSO&ers , INC.INGy
Il-3�DI _ Conwuny Engineers Lot 16, BfoGk 11, Foe911 do t2dnGh
suLc SIIW C✓eN\I Sas�l.6u1t. D � Lw�i•rid. GDIp•tlo emy38 Ldrimet GOUnt . G019red0
1-..20.0, rsto, bad • WIM l��GriLa.•o C..�. oy�ipl.1.11-U-IDIW
pc•Vfs r / D. r
CPH s.•.w co..m .w prrw eena•r . Lag.e+ , �o..w
P
I
<
or
c6 c6
it it
z z
iiJ
c1l
C4
C4
N
CY it it,
C*J
.......... .x.
6 , rz)
I IL