HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB090521Design Review Board
ACTION FORM
709 OF VA1I,
0VW.*J*A Y CEvELO aiC'.`t'
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tel: 970.479.2139 fax: 970,479.2452
web: www.vailgov.com
Project Name: BOLIN RES. TREE REMOVAL DRB Number: DRB090521
Project Description:
REMOVE 3 LIVE SPRUCE TREES TO PREVENT FURTHER BUILDING DAMAGE
Participants:
OWNER R.L. BOLIN PROPERTIES LTD 10/12/2009
IN CARE OF NAME DMS & CO
PO BOX 5677
ABILENE
TX 79608
APPLICANT PHILLIP ASHTON - HIRST 10/12/2009
PO BOX 5102
FRISCO
CO 80443
Project Address: 1017 PTARMIGAN RD VAIL
Location:
Legal Description: Lot: 1 Block: 5 Subdivision: Vail Village Filing 7
Parcel Number: 2101-092-1100-1
Comments: See conditions
BOARD/STAFF ACTION
Motion By: Action: STAFFAPP
Second By:
Vote: Date of Approval: 10/16/2009
Conditions:
Cond: 8
(PLAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate review committee(s).
Cond:201
(PLAN): DRB approval shall not become valid for 20 days following the date of
approval, pursuant to the Vail Town Code, Chapter 12-3-3: APPEALS.
Cond: 202
(PLAN): Approval of this project shall lapse and become void one (1) year following
the date of final approval, unless a building permit is issued and construction is
commenced and is diligently pursued toward completion.
Cond: CON0011130
The applicant shall install a minimum of four 2.5-inch caliper aspen trees or four
10-12-foot evergreen trees on teh site to mitigate the removal of the spruce trees.
Thes trees shall be installed prior to July 31, 2010. Once installed call Warren
Campbell at 970-479-2148 so a time can be scheduled for a final inspection.
Planner: Warren Campbell DRB Fee Paid: $20.00
09/25/2009 02:22 FAX 19406917678 R L BOLIN PROP LTD
- I- &'n :acvOOLVU4 XVZ5',K1r.UBA.NW$
09/24/2008.19:47 FAX 970 008 1468 Black Diamond Desisn
2001
Zan
G)eneral rnforma.tion: This application Is to request tree removal' In the Town of Vail. As part of this application, thq
property owner may be required to replace-trees that are removed. It required to replace, applicants must replant trees
* November, 1st of the following year from- the date of approval. Please be prepared to provide a tree replacement
elan, Please see tips for tree planting and species selection on next page. Design review approvidl expires one year
from date of approval.
- ee
Fee: *20 f live 'tree(s) 1!~O for dead Duplex tree(s)
Single Family 1
" Multi-F~mE1y .„Commpryrcia
Description of the Request: I djEE iZ yYtoV AA--_ o ~fLs%l/L~T~ C.tIL(~E &!b
~I1~,Q~ir
Tree Species (removal): Number of trees: A
Tree Species (removal): Number of trees:
Comments:, ~ 17♦~ ~ „ ~~Lr ~i~1 Lny )62'ZS /L~~r~T'~..a
Tree Species .(replacement): Number of tree(i
Comments:
Physical Address: 10/1 PrrntM I GAT _ IIA1! _
Parcel Number: Z 1 1 -2' It (9C? l (Contact Eagle Co. /assessor at 970-328-8640 for parcel no.)
Property Owner: a v.~ i L'
Mailing Address: `>LZ ~1'_S •1~~ vn p S ,31~ W:C.+~u Fal/s 767jG;18
phone,: (94,) 6°I 1-747( 0 .
miner's Signature:
Primary contact/ Owner
Mailing Address:
Phone: !?'-TO 4~Ql 91-22 f4
E=Mail:~StTON1if~~GOhL~fE'~[1G'I'Ii,NGi~MIAfL Fax: T?Q
For Office Use Only. Cash, CC! MC Last 4 CC i Auth #
Fee Paid: Q) Received From' ) I / ,
Meeting Date. it. L4 DRI5 No.:
Planner;
Project- Not • I V- J U-i -
Check #
Zoning; Land Use:
Location of the proposal; Lot: Block:, _ Subdlvlslon': \j(m I r\j A k -7
D
OCT 12 2009
TOWN OF V,
Application for Design Review
Tree Removal'
28 September 2009
b) CAUSE OF FOUNDATION FAILURE
The foundation wall does not appear to have any vertical reinforcing steel in the
masonry. 3 extremely mature spruce trees are located within 10 feet of the
foundation at the entry.. The grade around the entry is flat with minimal drainage
swales. The blacktop driveway south of the entry flows towards the entry and is
not equipped with a concrete drainage pan or gutter system. The north side of the
asphalt driveway has tension cracks indicating settlement caused by moisture
saturation of the bearing soils beneath the asphalt.
c) RANGE OF REPAIR POSSIBILITIES
The 3 spruces must be removed to gain access to the failed foundation wall.
Negotiate.replacement options with the Town of Vail, our guess is that these
specimens are to large to transplant, but please verify with a tree expert. :
The least intrusive repair. would be to pour a new reinforced concrete wall to the
south of the failed masonry wall. The wall is a one-sided forming job that would
extend the entire length of the south wall with proper backfill and drainage. The ,
issue with.this repair is that the failed masonry wall would always be.visible for
future scrutiny even though the mechanism has been stabilized. The entry area
and driveway must be regraded for proper drainage around the new foundation.
The second level.of repair would be to replace the south foundation wall. The
entire length of the wall Would be exposed on both sides of the wall.. The existing
structure would have to be temporarily supported while the existing, failed
foundation wall is removed: Install a newpoured-in-place reinforced concrete
foundation with proper backfill and drainage. `Regrade the entry and driveway
area as required for proper drainage around the new foundation.
The third level of repair is to build, new. building. This comes from the
realization that reinforcement or replacement of the south foundation wall is an
expensive repair. Chances are that the balance of the masonry foundation also is
unreinforced and therefore prone to future issues and associated repairs that are
not evident at this time.
In conclusion, the foundation displacement is the result of 3 forces. First, proper site
drainage towards and around the foundation at the entry is limited. Trapped water
saturates the soils behind the foundation wall and increases the horizontal forces on the
foundation. Secondly, the 3 large spruce trees close to the foundation have an enormous
root system that was not there when the foundation was constructed. Finally, the
masonry foundation was constructed without vertical reinforcing steel. This mechanism
is not stable and will continue to develop if not repaired. Future movement will damage
the framing and the. slab-on-grade. A variety of repair options exist from reinforcing the
t
Vail, Colorado
Denver, Colorado
Frisco, Colorado
November 19, 2009
Ashton-Hirst Construction
P.O. Box 5102
Frisco, CO 80443
Monroe & Newell
Engineers, Inc.
Re: Bolin Residence Foundation Wall Structural Observation,
Ptarmigan Road, Vail, Eagle County, Colorado (M&M #7501.1)
Gentlemen:
Monroe & Newell Engineers Inc. conducted a site visit at the Bolin Residence on September 11,
2009. The purpose of this visit was to observe the visible structural condition of the foundation
walls along the south and east of the residence.
The existing structure is approximately 40 years old and was constructed as a standard wood and
timber framed structure on a sloping site. The foundation walls below the eastern and southern
exterior building walls are approximately 8 to 9 feet tall and are retaining up to a full story of the
exterior grade. Along the south wall of the garage a concrete slab-on-grade stair follows the
slope of the grade down to the garage entrance which is located at the west side of the home. The
grade also slopes down towards the north along the east foundation wall. The south foundation
wall below the entrance of the building can be observed from an interior crawlspace.
During our site visit we observed the following:
1. The south foundation wall of the garage had been painted approximately 19 months ago
during the renovation of the garage. Since then a horizontal crack, approximately 1/8 inch
wide has opened along the grout joint in this CMU wall that is closest to the ceiling
framing. The occurrence of this crack indicates that this wall has been moved laterally
into the lower level by the exterior earth pressure. The soils at the outside face of this
wall were very moist and sprinkler heads are located in a planter that is in place alongside
this wall.
2. The interior stud framed wall at the rear of the garage appears to have racked slightly
towards the north. This is the result of the south garage wall moving at the top into the
building (see item 1). The interior door in this wall has a slightly racked frame, because
of this horizontal movement.
www.monroe-newell.com
70 Benchmark Road • Suite 204 • P.O. Box 1597 • Avon, Colorado 81620
(970) 949-7768 • FAX (970) 949-4054 . email: avon®monroe-newell.com
3. The foundation wall below the entry and under the two south walls on either side of the
entry is exposed at the inside of the crawlspace. A large horizontal gap is visible in the
top mortar joint of this CMU wall. Empty and partly grouted wall cells can be seen inside
the crack. Vertical or horizontal steel reinforcement was not found during our
observation. The crack does appear to have opened up within the last years as paint has
cracked along this joint and paint was not found inside the crack. The top course of this
wall is held in place by the wood floor framing while the lower part of the wall has
moved laterally.
4. Outside of the wall described in item 4, two very large spruce trees have grown for many
years. The root balls appear to be right adjacent to the basement wall. The large load of
these trees very probably has contributed to the horizontal loading of the foundation walls
and their subsequent localized partial failure. Roots will continue to grow and damage
this wall further.
The east wall of the basement is allowing moisture to penetrate. The owner has asked to
have the wall waterproofed, which will require removing exterior backfill soils down to
the footing and installation of a new underground perimeter drain system. This work
should be part of the repair of the whole foundation system along the south walls,
because it is probable that a new perimeter drain system will also have to be installed
along the south side of the building.
After observing the damage to the foundation walls described above we have determined the
following repair requirements and options:
A. The spruce trees located on the south side of the building have to be removed, because the
large vertical loads and the root ball systems of these trees appear to have caused new
foundation damage in recent years. Allowing these trees to remain in place without
reinforcing the foundation walls will result in complete failure of the south foundation
wall system in the future.
B. The garage foundation wall will have to be reinforced. We recommend removal of all
soils at the exterior of this wall and construction of an L - shaped concrete foundation
wall outside of the existing wall. The new wall can then be backfilled and will remain
stable for the lifespan of the building. For pricing purposes we have attached section SX1,
which shows a preliminary wall detail. Alternately the existing garage wall could be
removed and replaced with a newly designed concrete wall. This repair option will require
careful shoring of the building above and will lead to extensive drywall damage, because
shoring and replacement will lead to movement of the framing above. To provide
engineering for this replacement wall, we have to review framing loads from above this
wall, which is beyond the scope of this initial report.
Monroe & Newell Engineers, Inc. 2 Bolin Residence Foundation Observation
November 19, 2009 (M&N #7501.1)
i
C. The walls under the entry and each side of the entry can be repaired with the following
four construction methods:
C.I An L - shaped retaining wall could be constructed outside the existing
foundation as shown in the attached section SX2. This option will require
complete excavation of the soils on the south side of the building, but can be
accomplished without disturbing the framing of the residence and without
causing damage to the interior drywall. Waterproofing could be placed both
between the existing and new wall as well as outside the new wall. A new
perimeter drain would also be installed on the whole south side of the home.
C.2 The existing CMU basement wall could be reinforced with a new interior
concrete wall as shown in the attached section SX3. The new wall would be tied
to the existing wall with reinforcing dowels. The size of this wall would require
construction of a new access opening for the western crawlspace, because it
would close up the connecting narrow corridor between the two crawlspaces on
each side of the entry above. This repair will require some demolition of the
existing floor framing to allow placement of concrete within the tight spaces
below. A new perimeter drain system will also be required, because the existing
one is potentially clogged or damaged, as the existence of the high soils
pressures indicate.
C.3 The existing damaged foundation wall could be replaced and reconstructed with
a newly designed concrete wall as shown in the attached section SX4. This
repair option will require careful shoring of the building above and will lead to
extensive drywall damage, because shoring and replacement will cause
movement of the framing above. It also will require the complete excavation of
the exterior soils of the south wall and the installation of a new perimeter drain
system.
In summary, we found that the south foundation walls have recently moved laterally. Repairs to
these walls have to be made within the next year to prevent failure of these walls and extensive
damage to the residence. We have outlined repair procedures and recommend that a decision be
made which repair is to be completed. Monroe and Newell Engineers, Inc. will then be able to
provide exact detailing and foundation repair plans as well as construction administration
services as needed to help complete the work. We will also issue additional construction
documents that will allow acquisition of a building permit for this project. Our recommendation
is to not replace the existing walls that are damaged, but to install the exterior L - shaped
retaining wall system described above. Alternative exterior shoring methods such as drilled
concrete piers or pressure grouted soils are not a good option for repair, because these would
destroy existing perimeter drain systems and would be extremely costly for such a small project.
Monroe & Newell Engineers, Inc.
November 19, 2009
Bolin Residence Foundation Observation
(M&N #7501.1)
We are available to discuss these repairs in a phone conference or during a site meeting to help
decide on the next sequence of actions.
If you have any questions or comments, please call.
Very truly yours,
Monroe & Newell Engineers, Inc.
November 19, 2009
Bolin Residence Foundation Observation
(M&N #7501.1)
9
a
•r-' 'M
G~
MM
~iui
t I
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO Statement
Statement Number: R090001434 Amount: $20.00 10/12/200901:13 PM
Payment Method:Credit Crd Init: JLE
Notation: PHILLIP HIRST
Permit No: DRB090521 Type: DRB-Minor Alt,SFR/DUP
Parcel No: 2101-092-1100-1
Site Address: 1017 PTARMIGAN RD VAIL
Location:
Total Fees: $20.00
This Payment: $20.00 Total ALL Pmts: $20.00
Balance: $0.00
ACCOUNT ITEM LIST:
Account Code Description Current Pmts
DR 00100003112200 DESIGN REVIEW FEES 20.00