Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutB18-0110_Approved Documents_1531752094.pdf 75 South Frontage Road Construction West, TOWN OFVAIL B18-0110 Vail,CO 81657 Issued: 07/16/2018 TOWN of VAIL0.ZOffice:970.479.2139 Inspections: inspections@vailgov.com Property Information Address: 4872 MEADOW LN A(210113104015) Unit#:A ParcelNumber: 210113104015 LegalDescription: Subdivision:BIGHORN 5TH ADDITION Block:7 Lot:14 PARCELA BK-0461 PG-0088 QCD 04-14-87 BK-0461 PG-0551 QCD 04-22-87 Contacts ContactType:Applicant Full Name:Debra Monroe Address: 710 w.Lionshead circle 710 w.Lionshead circle Unit A Vail,CO 81637 Phone: 9704772990 ContactType:PropertyOwner Full Name:4872 MEADOW LANE LLC Address: 4705 PROSPECTST BOW MAR,CO 801231558 Phone: None ContactType:PropertyOwner Full Name:4872 MEADOW LANE LLC Address: Phone: None Contractor Contractor Type:General Company: Paragon Homes Inc. State License#: Phone: 303-525-7775 Projectlnformation ProjectName:Kuelling Residence2017 ProjectDescription: Demolition of existing duplex and new construction of unit A of a separated duplex.New Constructiomf two single familyhomes withthe separationagreementthatwas granted. Fees Paid Account#:001-0000.31111.04 Building Permit Fee Fee Amount: $6,346.05 Account:001-0000.31123.00 Building Plan ReviewFee Fee Amount: $4,124.93 Account: 110-0000.31060.00 ConstructionUse Tax Fee Fee Amount: $23,821.00 Account:001-0000.31111.04 Mechanical Permit Fee Fee Amount: $1,300.00 Account:001-0000.31123.00 Mechanical Plan ReviewFee Fee Amount: $325.00 Account:001-0000.31111.00-Plumbing Permit Fee Fee Amount: $645.00 Account:001-0000.31123.00 Plumbing Plan ReviewFee Fee Amount: $161.25 Account: 111-0000.31127.00-RecreationAmenities Fee Fee Amount: $404.25 Account:001-0000.31128.00 Will Call Fee(Building Scope) Fee Amount: $5.00 Account:001-0000.31128.00 Will Call Fee(Mechanical Scope) Fee Amount: $5.00 Account:001-0000.31128.00 Will Call Fee(Plumbing Scope) Fee Amount: $5.00 Account:001-0000.31530.00WorkStartedPenaltyFee Fee Amount: $8,291.05 TotalPaid: $45,433.53 Conditions CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH PERMITS BECOME VOID: If construction is not begun within 6 months from the date permitwas issued. If more than 5 months elapses betweeninspections. Ifincorrectinformationis given on the application at the time the permitwas issued. --../1., 4's, ChristopherJarecki-Townof Vail Building Official NOTICE: By issuance of this Permitthe applicant agrees to complywith all Titles of the Townof Vail Code and all applicable State and Federal law.Failure to do so will void this Permit and the applicant shall forfeitall applicable fees. PERMIT FEE RECEIPT TOWN OF VAIL Case # B18-0110 Date Printed: 07/16/2018 TOWN OF VAIL - FEES RECEIPT Permit Summary Case Number: B18-0110 Status: Approved Permit Number: Date Started: 04/02/2018 Permit Type: Construction Subc ases Duplex Lot Number: 14 Property: 4872 MEADOW LN A(210113104015) Contacts Contact Type: Applicant Company Name: Kh WebbArchitects Full Name: Debra Monroe Address: 710 w. Lionshead circle 710 w. Lionshead circle Unit A Vail, CO 81637 Email: debra@khwebb.com Contact Type: Property Owner Full Name: 4872 MEADOW LANE LLC Address: 4705 PROSPECT ST BOW MAR,CO 801231558 Contact Type: Property Owner Full Name: 4872 MEADOW LANE LLC Address: Permit Fees Fee Information Account Amount Permit Fee 001-0000.31111.00 $8,291.05 Construction Tax 110-0000.31060.00 $23,821.00 Recreation Amenities Fee 111-0000.31127.00 $404.25 W ill Call Fee 001-0000.31128.00 $15.00 Work Started Penalty Fee 001-0000.31530.00 $8,291.05 Payment Information Date Paid Payment Type Amount Permit Fee 07/16/2018 Check $8,291.05 Paid By:4872 Meadow Lane LLC-Notes:ck#1034 Work Started Penalty Fee 07/16/2018 Check $8,291.05 Paid By:4872 Meadow Lane LLC-Notes:ck#1034 Recreation Amenities Fee 07/16/2018 Check $404.25 Paid By:4872 Meadow Lane LLC-Notes:ck#1034 Construction Tax 07/16/2018 Check $23,821.00 Paid By:4872 Meadow Lane LLC-Notes:ck#1034 W ill Call Fee 07/16/2018 Check $15.00 Paid By:4872 Meadow Lane LLC-Notes:ck#1034 FEE TOTAL $40,822.35 AMOUNT PAID $40,822.35 1/2 °.\) PERMIT FEE RECEIPT TOWN OF VAIL Case # B18-0110 Date Printed: 07/16/2018 BALANCE DUE $0.00 75 South Frontage Road West,Vail,Colorado 81657 07/16/2018 -8:23:43 AM-Generated by:cgodfrey 2 /2 H--P-KU MAR5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Geotechnical Engineering I Engineering Geology Phone: (970)945-7988 Materials Testing I Environmental Fax:(970)945-6454 Email: hpkglenwood@kumarusa.com Office Locations: Parker,Glenwood Springs,and Silverthome,Colorado SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED KUELLING RESIDENCE LOTS 14A AND 14B, BLOCK 7 BIGHORN SUBDIVISION FIFTH ADDITION 4872A AND 4872B MEADOW LANE VAIL,COLORADO PROJECT NO. 16-7-596 FEBRUARY 7, 2017 PREPARED FOR: K.H. WEBB ARCHITECTS ATTN: KYLE WEBB 710 WEST LIONSHEAD CIRCLE, UNIT A VAIL, COLORADO 81657 kyle®khwebb.com TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY - 1 - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION - 1 - SITE CONDITIONS - 2 - GEOLOGIC HAZARDS - 2 - FIELD EXPLORATION - 3 - SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS - 4 - FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS - 5 - DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS - 5 - FOUNDATIONS - 5 - FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS - 7 - FLOOR SLABS - g - UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM - 9 SITE GRADING -10- SURFACE DRAINAGE - 10 - LIMITATIONS - 11 - REFERENCES - 12 - FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS - EXISTING CONDITIONS FIGURE 1 A- LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS-PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 4 - SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 5 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1 - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS H-P Rri KUMAR Project No. 16-7-596 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for the proposed Kuelling residence to be Iocated on Lots 14A and 14B, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision Fifth Addition,4872A and 4872B Meadow Lane, Vail, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation design. A site specific review of potential geological hazards that may impact the site was also performed. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to K.H. Webb Architects dated November 15, 2016. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain information on the general subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or swell and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered. The potential geologic hazard impacts at the site are also discussed in the report. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION An existing duplex residence on the site will be removed for the new construction. The proposed new building will be a duplex residence consisting of a two-story wood frame structure with attached garages cut into the hillside slope and located on the lot as shown on Figure 1A. The hillside cut will be up to about 16 feet deep and daylight to the west and north. Ground floors are planned to be slab-on-grade. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction. If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report. H-P KUMAR Project No. 16-7-596 -2 - SITE CONDITIONS The site was occupied by an existing three story duplex residence located as shown on Figure 1. The existing building appears to have a lower level cut about 8 feet deep into the hillside. The terrain was variable and consisted of moderately steep to steep hillside in the southeast and southwest portions of the lot transitioning to a relatively flat and strong slope down to the north toward Meadow Lane in about the northern half of the lot. Slope grades range from about 15 to 50% on the hillsides and about 8 to 4% in the flatter areas. There is a narrow drainage flowing out of the hillside terrain in the south-central portion of the lot to the northwest and into an apparent shallow detention pond with a culvert outlet towards Meadow Lane. The drainage channel area included apparent wetlands that extended to the southwest edge of the proposed building, see Figure 1A. The survey plan provided also notes springs from the bottom of the hillside along the south side of the wetlands area. The site has been graded some for construction of the existing building. Vegetation consisted of moderately thick and relatively large pine trees. The lot was covered by about 6 inches of snow at the time of our field exploration. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Potential major geologic hazards that could impact the subject site consist of rockfall and snow avalanche according to the Town of Vail mapping(Town of Vail, 2000a, 2000b and 2000c). The hazards are noted as high for the rockfall potential and possible influence zone for the avalanche potential. The avalanche hazard risk is mapped in only about the southwestern 2/3 of the lot and onto the building site. There may also be a risk of flooding from the drainage through the site which should be evaluated by the civil engineer. The rockfall risk is due to the bedrock outcrops above the site and are typically not frequent but can damage homes and property when larger rocks fall. We generally agree with the high hazard risk mapping for the rockfall. The avalanche risk occurs from snow pack on steep slopes when weak layers of snow pack develop and/or additional heavy snow or precipitation add to the snow pack. Based on the thick trees on and above the site, there has not been a recent avalanche in this H-P KUMAR Project No. 16-7-596 - 3 - area and the risk is mapped as a potential impact rather than an area of historic impact. We believe the avalanche risk at the site is low. The potential hazards appear to be an active geologic process at the subject site and in nearby areas, and should be expected in the future. However, without long term observations, it is not possible to develop a statistical recurrence probability of the hazards. We are not aware of recent rockfall or avalanche at the site. Although the probability of a rockfall or snow avalanche will hit the residence is likely Iow, a rockfall or snow avalanche has the potential to cause major damage to building with a risk of harm to the occupants. If this risk is not acceptable to the owner, then the feasibility of mitigation should be considered. Rockfall in the area has been mitigated with rockfall catching barriers and avalanche with soil berms or impact walls which may or may not be feasible at the site due to the limited area on the lot behind the residence and the adjacent properties. The mitigation would likely need to extend beyond the property lines and could encompass multiple adjacent lots that are subject to similar potential geologic hazards. If the owner does not plan to mitigate the potential geologic hazards and accepts the risk they may pose on the residence, this should be feasible based on Town of Vail code provided the proposed construction and grading does not increase the existing rockfall or avalanche hazards to adjacent properties including public streets, right-of-ways and easements. We should review the building and grading plans when they are developed. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on December 5, 2016. Two exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a truck- mounted CME-45B drill rig. Locations of the borings were limited to the areas drilled due to the existing development, trees and steep irregular terrain. The borings were logged by a representative of H-P/Kumar. H-P ft KUMAR Project No. 16-7-596 -4 - Samples of the subsoils were taken with 1% inch and 2 inch I.D. spoon samplers. The samplers were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. The subsoils encountered were somewhat variable with respect to type, depths and engineering characteristics. The subsoils encountered at Boring 1, below about 4 inches of asphalt pavement, consisted of medium dense, slightly silty to silty sand and gravel with cobbles and probable boulders that extended down to the drilled depth of 26 feet. The subsoils encountered at Boring 2, below about I foot of organic topsoil, consisted of about 13 feet of medium dense/stiff, clayey sand and silt underlain by medium dense, silty sand and gravel with cobbles that extended down to the drilled depth of 17 feet. Drilling in the sand and gravel with cobbles (coarse granular soils) with auger equipment was difficult due to the cobbles and probable boulders and drilling refusal was encountered in Boring 2 in the deposit. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content and density, and gradation analyses. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on a relatively undisturbed drive sample of the clayey sand and silt soils, presented on Figure 4, indicate moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting with a low hydro- compression potential. Results of gradation analyses performed on a small diameter drive sample (minus 1%2 inch fraction) of the coarse granular subsoils are shown on Figure 5. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1. H-P KU MAR Project No. 16-7-596 - 5 - Free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and when checked I day later at depths of about 7%i to 81/2 feet. The subsoils were generally moist becoming wet near and below the groundwater level. FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS The fine-grained clayey sand and silt soils possess low bearing capacity and, in general, a moderate settlement potential, especially if they were to become wetted. The coarse granular soils possess moderate bearing capacity and relatively low settlement potential. At proposed excavation depths, we expect the subgrade will transition from the compressible clayey sand and silt soils to the relatively incompressible coarse granular soils. Groundwater will Iikely be encountered in the deeper cut areas and require excavation dewatering and possibly subgrade stabilization of soft areas. Spread footings should be feasible for foundation support of the building with a risk of settlement. To reduce the settlement risk, we recommend a minimum 3 feet of compacted structural fill be provided below the spread footings in the fine grained clayey sand and silt soil bearing areas. The structural fill can consist of the on-site coarse granular soils (minus 6-inch fraction) or a suitable granular material such as road base can be imported. A lower risk of foundation settlement would be to extend the spread footings down to bear entirely on the coarse granular soils. Founding the building on micro-piles is also feasible and would provide a relatively low risk of foundation settlement. Provided below are recommendations for a spread footing foundation system. If recommendations for a micro-pile foundation system are desired, we should be contacted. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of the proposed construction, we believe the building can be founded with spread footings bearing on a combination of the natural sand and gravel with cobbles soils or on a minimum 3 feet of H-P 4 KUMAR Project No. 16-7-596 - 6 - compacted structural fill with some risk of settlement. The risk of settlement is primarily if the fine grained clayey sand and silt soils below the structural fill were to become wetted and precautions should be taken to prevent wetting of these bearing soils. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soils or compacted structural fill should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Based on experience, we expect initial settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be up to about 1 inch. There could be some additional settlement if the clayey sand and silt soils were to become wetted. The magnitude of the additional settlement would depend on the depth and extent of the wetting but may be on the order of%2 to 1 inch. 2) The footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. 3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of foundations at least 48 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this area. 4) Continuous foundation walls should be heavily reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies and better withstand the effects of some differential settlement such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 14 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist lateral earth pressures as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls" section of this report. 5) All existing fill, debris, topsoil and the required depth of clayey sand and silt soils should be removed to provide a minimum 3 feet of structural fill below footing areas in the non-coarse granular soil bearing areas. Any loose or disturbed soils should also be removed, the subgrade adjusted to near optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95%standard Proctor density. If water seepage is encountered, the excavation should be dewatered as needed and any softened soils H-P k KUMAR Project No. 16-7-596