HomeMy WebLinkAbout619 CHERRY ST - SPECIAL INSPECTIONS - 8/24/2016r,xcavatton S2uallty Assurance
Observation (Open -Hole):
Per the client's request. a representative of CTL has visually observed the soils
exposed within the excavation at the site referenced below. The following
summarizes our observations and opinions at the time of our visit.
Client: �jx,v,.H..,. �r —7;7 4�
Job #: oi,8�9,cbo
Date: oContact: ale
Background Information:
Soils Report by: &I
Date: Job#-
Anticiipated Soil Profile: S,-it e%, 0 -✓
Foundation Plan by: ef72 _
Date: o y / , 6 Job#: Gryo i1 yB•onA
Anticipated foundation type?
}spread footing ❑ wall on grade
❑ footing with voids ❑ pad and grade beam
❑ drilled piers ❑ other (describe)
Observed Soil Profile: O —3
<- Gz��
Notes:
Site Address: 6/9 of �4
Lot: — Block: — Filing: —
Subdivision:
Summary of opinions:
A It is our opinion that the exposed soils are generally
consistent with those anticipated.
❑ Rejected (2"d observation required)
Corrective action:
Field
E
Date
r
Footing Quality Assurance Observation
Per the client's request, a representative of CTL Thompson has visually
observed the footing forms under construction at the site referenced
below. The following summarizes our observations and opinions at the
time of our visit.
Client: RrrunewnrjLs T'tn.ber
Job #: WyoIZ88.000
Date: 8L15 Ilo Contact: Pdrru,n Tones
Foundation Plan Information
PlanBy: CTL Them qon
Date: H I to Job#: W y Ol Z 88 • oo p
Ftgsizes: 62 , 18, bz , Zq .2,0 in X 8 M.
Pad sizes : [ILI j A H� I. X Sin ,; Lit, to s� x 12
Concrete on -site? ❑ yes , Okno, (+/- % ftg poured
Are the footing fo s free of loose material, frost, water and
or ice, roots, etc? byes , ❑ no
Are the Footing / Pad form sizes in general conformance to
the above foundation plan? Dyes , ❑ no
Is the footing/pad reinforcing steel in -place or on site per the
above foundation plan? D4 yes, ❑ no
Weather: 5vrvt3 &0' F
Notes: Does no4- include, de+a.cheal
Aartoe-,
v
Site Address: _[ol q Cherry 5+ree-'
R?r% Collin S , C010MCIY0
Lot: Block: Filing:
Subdivision:
Summary of Opinions
l$ It is our opinion that the footing formwork is in
general conformance with the foundation design
referenced above.
❑ It is our opinion that the footing formwork differs
significantly from the foundation design referenced
above (2"d observation required).
Corrective action:
Field Repre,,dfUZ4b,, Date
Date
I
22-
Reinforcing Steel Quality Assurance Observation C T LL, I T H ®M P S Op N
Per the client's request, a representative of CTL Thompson has visually —
observed the reinforcement within the formwork under construction at
the site referenced below. The following summarizes our observations
and opinions at the time of our visit.
Client: Frwneworlcs ?'•,,,ber
Job #: W YOtz88.000
Date: g uo Contact: Hdrla.n Tongs
Reinforcing Plan Information
Plan By: CTL Thonwpson
Date: LjA6't
bid Job#: WYo,eB.000
Reinforcing Type(s):
❑ footing Xfoundation wall
❑ grade beam ❑ pier cap
❑ structural slab ❑ slab -on -grade
❑ column ❑ other
Wall / Grade Beam Reinforcing Steel
Grade
Horizontal
Vert./Ties
I
(oD Z
48 P@8o'o.
#4 Q 24"
2
(o0 2
9 T*6
1 #yGsu"
3
24tqT+8
14fy@y8"
4
too
1 # q @ U
l.+ y & 12„
Pier Cap / Slab Reinforcing Steel
Grade Longitudinal Lateral
A
B
C
D
UFER Ground
XInstalled —Location SEE ATTACHED
❑ Not Observed
Max/Min wall height observed:
If void forms are required, are they installed as
recommended? t4hq
❑yes ❑no Required thickness: in.
Concrete on -site? ❑ yes 0 no (% poured
Weather: _Srn_, Soo
Notes:
Site Address: Lo l9 Che rng St
For* Collins, Colorado
Lot: —Block: — Filing:
Subdivision:
Summary of Opinions
Or It is our opinion that the reinforcing steel observed
was in general conformance with the plan.
❑ It is our opinion that the reinforcing steel observed
was not in general conformance with the plan.
(2"d observation required).
Deficiencies noted:
3
H
Perimeter Drain / Dampprooftnt? Quality
Assurance Observation
_� •IC�L TFiOf��S • P�
Per the client's request, a representative of CTL has visually observed
the perimeter drain and/or dampproofing at the site referenced above.
The following summarizes our observations and opinions at the time of
our visit.
Client: , Site Address: �^ / ,G/
Job : Lot: Block: — Filing:
Date: os $y�< Contact: ,,� , Subdivision:
Project Specifications
Foundation Plan By:
Date Job# G,.yaia8s, oca
Geotechnical Report By: .111M
Date — Job#
Recommended Drain type?
.d.Exterior perimeter ❑ Interior
❑ other
Observations
Perimeter drain observed around:
ABasement ❑ Crawlspace
❑ Other:
Where does the perimeter drain discharge?
❑ Daylight Asump pit ❑ Subdivision drain
Dampproofing observed around:
.(Basement f,Crawlspace ❑ All backfill areas
Comments
G�
dD>t 11
onao�uto�m
rt�a ��
W��77��1
�7i1Q�p�pp�®�1
Summary of Opinions
.f It is our opinion that the foundation drain and/or
dampproofing observed generally conform with the
project referenced above.
❑ It is our opinion that the foundation drain and/or
dampproofing observed differs significantly from the
project specifications (2nd observation required).
Corrective Action:
PTI I
Footing Quality Assurance Observation
�:,: CTL -f R ( 11
Per the client's request, a representative of CTL Thompson has visually
observed the footing forms under construction at the site referenced
below. The following summarizes our observations and opinions at the
time of our visit.
Client: ��Et 0AxS % ,M 6'R Site Address: &/I Cheer St
Job #: WYC) i .e8. coo
Date: V25 1co Contact: 4)drit n Tons
Foundation Plan Information
Plan By: LTL 7-bogpSoO
Date: / 5 Ito Job#: W Y012-9 '. oo o
Ftgsizes: lz in. if /2,
Pad sizes :
Concrete on -site? ❑ yes, A no, (+/- % ftg poured _)
Are the footing forms free of loose material, frost, water and
or ice, roots, etc?.GKyes , ❑ no
Are the Footing / Pad form sizes in general conformance to
the above foundation plan? l2(yes , ❑ no
Is the footing/pad reinforcing steel in -place or on site per the
above foundation plan? V yes, ❑ no
Weather: overca-st , 65"
Notes: C?c rc. e e , "-q e n M
�or-f Can s C a l o ratio
Lot: — Block: — Filing: —
Subdivision: —
Summary of Opinions
1< It is our opinion that the footing formwork is in
general conformance with the foundation design
referenced above.
O It is our opinion that the footing formwork differs
significantly from the foundation design referenced
above (2"d observation required).
Corrective action:
Field
8/25 / L�
Date
Date