Scope & limitations
This narrative is educational. It does not describe your property, infer detectability, or promise outcomes. Actual projects are scoped in writing with explicit limits.
- Setting
- Urban / suburban Ohio corridor—active commercial frontage, asphalt and landscaped strips, limited shutdown windows.
- Objective
- Reduce strike risk for a shallow trench by better imaging suspect utility runs crossing the work window—complementary to public locate marks where applicable.
- Methods
- GPR transects orthogonal to the corridor, frequency chosen for expected cover thickness; field correlation to visible features and accessible vault cues; marks placed at interpreted crossing zones consistent with the purchase order.
- Constraints
- High-clutter paving, overhead noise from adjacent conductors, and moisture swings after recent rain reduced certainty in one segment—called out in the PDF with a narrower confidence statement.
- Outcome
- Marked crossing zones plus a date-stamped summary PDF suitable for the GC’s dig package; explicit “interpretive / site conditions” language in the limitations block.
- Lessons
- Early photos of stakeout and pavement type save back-and-forth; pairing corridor GPR with a clear trench centerline reference tightens mark usefulness for the excavator.
For another sanitized corridor-style note with different site assumptions, see sidewalk utility crossing (field note).
Related services
Discuss a similar scope for your corridor