Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB18-0266 Approved DRB Documents Design ReviewBoard(DRB) Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road West TOWN OF VAIL ACTION FORM Vail,CO81657 Tel: 970-479-2139 www.vailgov.com Project Name: West Lupine LLC 2018 Application Number: DRB18-0266 Application Type: New Construction Date Applied: 06/21/2018 Project Description: Demolitionof an existing home and construction of a new primary/secondary residence. CONTACTS Contact Ty pe: Applicant Full Name: West Lupine, LLC (Rich Laws) Address: 8931 E Wesley Ave Denver,CO 80231 Phone: 3032294779 Contact Type: Property Owner Full Name: WEST LUPINELLC Address: Phone: None Project Address: 3796 LUPINEDR (210111101006) (210111101006) Job Site Location: Legal Description: Subdivision: BIGHORN SUBDIVISION 2ND Lot: 7 Block:No ADDITION Data Parcel Number: 210111101006 BOARDS/STAFF ACTION Motion By: Cope Action: Approved Second By: Campbell Vote: 3-0-0 Date: 07/18/2018 Conditions: - 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. - Design Review Board approval does not constitute a permit for building. Please consult with Town of Vail building personnel priorto construction activities. - Design Review Board approval shall not become valid for 20 days following the date of approval, pursuant to the Vail Town Code, Chapter12-3-3 Appeals. - No changes to these plans maybe made without the written consent of Town of Vail staff and/orthe appropriate review committee(s). Planner: Justin Lightfield Laws Residence 3796 Lupine Drive Vail, CO mar liw , di. 1i!!. j ir .� Aiv,- . 1!!! 11. 111.111 - . j - _ .MI 1111111110111111111.1 It 11 1 June20,2018 Town of Vail Design Review Board Re:3796 Lupine Drive Proposed Materials and Colors We propose the use of the following finish materials and colors on the residence to be constructed at 3796 Lupine Drive in Vail,CO: Roof StandingSeam Metal—Color. BurnishedSlate(cmgmetals.com) Siding 6"Cedar Shiplap—Sherwin Williams Woodscapes semi-transparent—Color:SW 3542-Charwood Exterior Stone Sunset Stone—KansasCityLimestone—Color. Lavon Gray Groutto Match Stucco Sand Finish—Color Sherwin Williams SW 7514- Foothills Facia Cedar—Color:Sherwin WilliamsSW 7020—Black Fox Soffit 4"T&G Cedar—Color:Sherwin Williams—SW 3542-Charwood Windows Manufacturer TBD—Exterior Metal Clad—Color. Bronze Window Trim In Cedarfield:4"cedar—Color:Sherwin WilliamsSW 3542— Charwood, In stuccofield:None Front Doors Accurate Window and Door C ustomDoor Oak or Mahogany, stained to match cedar Siding Metal Railings CustomHorizontal Metal-Color: Matt Black Chimneys Stone-ColorLavonGraywith Bronze Metal CustomCaps Flashing Bronze Retaining Walls Concrete wing wall at patios:StoneVeneer—SunsetStone, (if needed) Kansas C ityLimestone—Color: Lavon Gray Garage Doors Ankmar Parkhill Collection—Cedar poorStainedSherwin Williams SW 3542—Charwood, with SW—7020—Black Fox accenttrim. Note:8 divided light windowsabove(No arch) Exterior Lighting Recessedcans and dark skysurface mount fixtures as marked on site plan. Surface Mount:Hinkley Shelter 15-1/2"Wall mount.Dark Sky Rated—Color: Bronze We look forward to yourfeedback. Sincerely, Richard Laws West Lupine, LLC 8931 E.WesleyAve. Denver, CO80231 F - mow_= f a SEE WHAT COULD BE + ` ��\ ._.+ ` „ i • 3796 Lupine Dave. Vail COLOR. �a s,Cosu.c raoesezC. .wwrwOoo SHERWIN s • '1 6,20.2018 MI IN I SILICCO•690FRILS• 1111 • ll II ir MENU .7- /11 .1111.11 num i � � _ . � . _ _■■ ■ ■ i ■ � ■ ■■ - - I -W • aA rol. '� ' FaakLwa,ra..S1011eSUNSRT COLOGARAe� ,..w,a,ae�w3DOORS 50CRO:�TAMM DOOR � : Exterior Stone. Sunset Stone -- Kansas Ci = toMLimestone. CobColor: Lavon Gray. Grout Match Chimney: Stone In Levan Gray w/ MEM. e enarcustobronzemetol caps to match Vato.e7.aiiings !� zi torte _ _ ' _ t , Sack Front Door Accurate Window and Surfact Mount Exterior Ankmar Pork fill Collection -Cedar Door m CustoDoor, Ook or Mahogany. Lighting : Hinkley Shelter Stained Sherwin Williams 5W 3542- I Stained to match cedar siding of t -1/2' Wall Mount w/ Chorwoodwith SW7020Block Fox cc- rt o Seeded Gass. Dark Skycent tfim NoteBdivided l ght windows sn - sne.wnw ams .,w Isis Foothills -c - Rated Co or. Bronze above 1 rendering for visual ^^' V Godden Sudik • 3111 303455443% 5975 S QUEBEC ST. STE 250 ..twin n. . , ro2001ack Fo+ windows Heritage Collection 2606 Fin rn - eronzer r Slang - Cedar ShIplop - Sherwin WilllomSWooacopes Semi Transparent - SW 3542 Charwood CENTENNIAL CO 80111 11 Laws Residence 3796 Lupine Drive Vail, CO mar liw , di. 1i!!. j ir .� Aiv,- . 1!!! 11. 111.111 - . j - _ .MI 1111111110111111111.1 It 11 1 June20,2018 Town of Vail Design Review Board Re:3796 Lupine Drive Proposed Materials and Colors We propose the use of the following finish materials and colors on the residence to be constructed at 3796 Lupine Drive in Vail,CO: Roof StandingSeam Metal—Color. BurnishedSlate(cmgmetals.com) Siding 6"Cedar Shiplap—Sherwin Williams Woodscapes semi-transparent—Color:SW 3542-Charwood Exterior Stone Sunset Stone—KansasCityLimestone—Color. Lavon Gray Groutto Match Stucco Sand Finish—Color Sherwin Williams SW 7514- Foothills Facia Cedar—Color:Sherwin WilliamsSW 7020—Black Fox Soffit 4"T&G Cedar—Color:Sherwin Williams—SW 3542-Charwood Windows Manufacturer TBD—Exterior Metal Clad—Color. Bronze Window Trim In Cedarfield:4"cedar—Color:Sherwin WilliamsSW 3542— Charwood, In stuccofield:None Front Doors Accurate Window and Door C ustomDoor Oak or Mahogany, stained to match cedar Siding Metal Railings CustomHorizontal Metal-Color: Matt Black Chimneys Stone-ColorLavonGraywith Bronze Metal CustomCaps Flashing Bronze Retaining Walls Concrete wing wall at patios:StoneVeneer—SunsetStone, (if needed) Kansas C ityLimestone—Color: Lavon Gray Garage Doors Ankmar Parkhill Collection—Cedar poorStainedSherwin Williams SW 3542—Charwood, with SW—7020—Black Fox accenttrim. Note:8 divided light windowsabove(No arch) Exterior Lighting Recessedcans and dark skysurface mount fixtures as marked on site plan. Surface Mount:Hinkley Shelter 15-1/2"Wall mount.Dark Sky Rated—Color: Bronze We look forward to yourfeedback. Sincerely, Richard Laws West Lupine, LLC 8931 E.WesleyAve. Denver, CO80231 F - mow_= f a SEE WHAT COULD BE + ` ��\ ._.+ ` „ i • 3796 Lupine Dave. Vail COLOR. �a s,Cosu.c raoesezC. .wwrwOoo SHERWIN s • '1 6,20.2018 MI IN I SILICCO•690FRILS• 1111 • ll II ir MENU .7- /11 .1111.11 num i � � _ . � . _ _■■ ■ ■ i ■ � ■ ■■ - - I -W • aA rol. '� ' FaakLwa,ra..S1011eSUNSRT COLOGARAe� ,..w,a,ae�w3DOORS 50CRO:�TAMM DOOR � : Exterior Stone. Sunset Stone -- Kansas Ci = toMLimestone. CobColor: Lavon Gray. Grout Match Chimney: Stone In Levan Gray w/ MEM. e enarcustobronzemetol caps to match Vato.e7.aiiings !� zi torte _ _ ' _ t , Sack Front Door Accurate Window and Surfact Mount Exterior Ankmar Pork fill Collection -Cedar Door m CustoDoor, Ook or Mahogany. Lighting : Hinkley Shelter Stained Sherwin Williams 5W 3542- I Stained to match cedar siding of t -1/2' Wall Mount w/ Chorwoodwith SW7020Block Fox cc- rt o Seeded Gass. Dark Skycent tfim NoteBdivided l ght windows sn - sne.wnw ams .,w Isis Foothills -c - Rated Co or. Bronze above 1 rendering for visual ^^' V Godden Sudik • 3111 303455443% 5975 S QUEBEC ST. STE 250 ..twin n. . , ro2001ack Fo+ windows Heritage Collection 2606 Fin rn - eronzer r Slang - Cedar ShIplop - Sherwin WilllomSWooacopes Semi Transparent - SW 3542 Charwood CENTENNIAL CO 80111 11 f'j ;,,1,,,:..1.,;,„.,:if.talwlilr:eaw18.h81k7Geirechnical.,Inc. F1 F ' HM,,thorne,Colundo 80498 111 mt.::970-468-1989 HEPWORTH-PAW L„A k G EGTECH N1CAL : , Fux;970-468,5891 eirdi hygeol.hpgeomc.b.com. • • SUBSOIL STUDY • • FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESIDENCE LOt 7,BIGHORN ADDITION,FILING 2 VAIL,COLORADO • I " • JOE NO.408 200A JULY 10,2008 • PREPARED FOR: S I'EVEN FISCHER )SLOPE DRIVE SHORT HILLS,NEW JERSEY 07078 ,...... • • Glenwood Spings 970-945-7988 1* Parker 303-841-71 * Colorado Springs 719-633 ))---62 I � TABLE OF CONTENTS FUR: SE AND SCOPE OF STUDY - 1 - PROP SED CONSTRUCTION____.... ...... . - 1 - i SITE NDITIONS,.._,_.,,. FII?L EXPLORATION ...,.............. .« .,,.«........,.. -2- SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...«........««.. «..........................-2- FO 1 ATION BEARING CONDITIONS -3 DESI a N RECOMMENDATIONS -4- ItO ► DATIONS -4- I DATION AND RETAINING WALLS FL+I OR SLABS ,,..«..«.« «..,.....».... ... ,».»»..»»..... ...»........,Y, .....<,. 7- UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM 7- SI 1 GRADING - N- BO DER WALL -9- S; ' FACE DRAINAGE .....................«...._..................,_........... ...............<..,«,,,a, 10 LIMIT. ATIONS ....... ........«,«.». ...,,.,..........,........»_»._.._.«..,_,».._,......»»»,..,....»........- 11 FIGLi 1 -LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING FIGU 12 LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING FIGU . 3 -LEGEND AND NOTES 1 F1. II'.ES 4 AND 5 -SWELL-CONSOLIDATION .ZEST RESUL S FIGU`' 6-GRADATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 7-TYPICAL UNDERDRAIN DETAIL FIGURE 8 -BOULDER WALL DETAIL PURPOSE AND SCOPE F STUDY This port presents the results of a subsoil study for proposed primary and secondary &- to be located on Lot 7, Bighorn Addition,Filing 2 in Vail Colorado. The prof- site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop reco i endations for the foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with o I agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Steven Fischer dated June 5, 2008. Our services do not include evaluating geolot4:•cai hazards. A exploration program consisting of one exploratory boring was conducted to obtain inf& &&.lion on the subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field ploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, -bility or swell and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exp ; ion and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for f* 4 on types,.depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation.. This • summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, des'y recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the pro*s•;,'•cl construction and the subsoil conditions encountered. PROPOSE!)CONSTRUCTION The s**posed primary and secondary residences will be two story structures over garden level *-.,..ements. Conventional wood frame construction will be used above grade with casi:* *lace concrete foundation walls below grade. Ground floor wil.l likely be slab-on- grade. Grading for the structures is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths I- &•about 4 to 12 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings,typical of the -4.5 type of construction. If buil.`rig loadings,location or grading plans change significantly from those described ahoy- we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report I - Job No.408 200A Gigrfbech - 2 - SITE CONDITIONS i , The si - is located at 3796 Lupine Drive. An existing duplex occupies the site. We I a- a -. that the duplex will be demolished and the debris removed from the site. The , . sitel is .§unded by U.S. forest lands to the southwest,developed lots to the northwest and so4th4st,and Lupine Drive to the northeast. The ground surface slopes steeply down towans the northeast at the back of the lot and becomes gently sloping at the front of the lot. V etation at the site consists of landscaped grass areas and pine and aspen trees. Large boulders up to 8 to 10 feet in diameter were observed,on the lot. 1 FIELD EXPLORATION The fl id exploration for the project was conducted on June 25,2008. One exploratory boringwas drilled at the location shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface __. condi ons. The boring was advanced with 4 inch diameter continuous flight augers pow 44 by a truck-mounted CME-45B drill rig. The boring was logged by a re>1 .,•:,- •tive of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical,Inc. 1 1 Samp :, 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 A Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relati density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Log of Exploratory Boring, Figure 2. • samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and SUBSURFACE COINTITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. An explanation of the notes and symbols used on the log is presented on Figure 3. The subso encountered below the asphalt driveway generally consist of about 8.5 feet of Job No.408 200A GL,--xtech I - 3 - very la*se,trace to slightlyclayey,sandy to very sady silt overlying about 2 feet of very loose, a :: to slightly clayey,silty to very silty sand. Below the very loose sand,at a depth ,f about 11 feet,medium dense,slightly silty to silty,sandy to very sandy gravel _._ was auntered to the depth explored. LalSo try testing performed on samples obtained from the boring consisted of natural moisture content and density,percent passing the No.200 sieve,liquid and plastic limits, swellonsoli:dation and gradation analyses. Results of swell-consolidation testing perfo ed on relatively undisturbed drive samples, presented on Figures 4 and 5,indicate high compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. Results of gradation anal),- performed on a small diameter drive sample of the natural coarse granular soils are; own on Figure 6. The laboratory test results ares �4 on Figure 2. Free ' 'er was encountered in the boring at the time of drilling at the depth shown on Fi 2. A piezometer consisting of l Y2-inch diameter hand--slotted PVC pipe was install a in the boring after drilling to monitor water levels. Free water was observed in the piezometer when checked 13 days after drilling at the depth shown on Figure 2. The s ' were generally moist to wet. FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS 1 The existing native,very loose silt(ML)and sand(SM)encountered at the site are poor soil • .ditions for support of the proposed structures. Spread footings and slabs placed ort thy: soils could undergo excessive settlements. We recommend that the very loose I silt x• •s sand soils be removed and the structures founded on the medium dense gravel soils( P-QM)which were encountered in our exploratory boring at a depth of about 11 feet •, on a compacted granular fill placed on the gravel soils. Groundwater was e °• .+atered at a depth of about i feet below the ground surface and constriction. •. .tering will be required for excavations below the groundwater level. It is anticipated that trenches and sumps can be used to collect the water and pumps used to remove the water.; Recommendations for foundation support are discussed below. Job No_408 200A Ggstech - 4 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FO rATIONS Consit-.ring the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory boring and the nature of the posed construction,we recommend the structures be founded with spread footinli. bearing on the natural gravel soils or compacted granular fill. 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 granular fill should be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot. Based on experience,we expect settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be up to about 1 inch or less. 2) The footing should have a I/Unix/ruin 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 42 inches below exterior grade is typically used in this area. Concrete should not be placed on frost,frozen soil, snow or ice, 4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 10 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, very loose silt and sand,and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the relatively dense natural gravel soils. The exposed soils in footing areas should then compacted. As an alternative to extending the footing bearing level down,compacted granular fill can be placed on top of the natural gravel soils. Water seepage will be encountered during Job No_408 200A Giggtech - 5 excavation. The footing areas should be dewatered to a depth of 2 feet below the upper limit of gravel sods before structural fill/concrete placement and we should be contacted for further evaluation. 6) Structural fill used for support of the structure s should consist of a relatively well-graded imported gramtlar material with no rock larger than about 6 inches in diameter and be properly placed and compacted to reduce the risk of settlement and distress. Structural fills should be placed in unifonn lifts not to exceed 10 inches thick and compacted to at least 98%of the maximum standard Proctor(ASTM D-698)dry density at a moisture content within 2%of optimum. Fill should extend laterally beyond the edges of the footings a distance at least equal to the depth of fill below footing subgrade. Prior to the fill placement,the sub.,, e should be carefully prepared by removing all existing till,vegetation and topsoil and compacting to at least 98%of the maximum standard Proctor dry density. Any wet and soft subgrade soils should be removed prior to fill placement 7) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions. FO ' ATION AND RETAINING WALLS Fours .tion walls and retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth ressure ccanputed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 55 poun4 per cubic foot(pet)for backfill consisting of imported granular materials or any on-site granular soils approved by the geotechnical.engineer. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the structures and can be expected to deflect suI'fic ently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 45 pc for backfill consisting of imported granular materials or any on-site granular soils app ed by the geotechnical engineer. The backfill should not contain rock larger than about inches in diameter. The very loose silt and sand deposits containing organics - - ed in our boring are not suitable for use as wall backfill:.. Required fill can Job.No.408 200A G,14ritect, -6- consi of any on-site granular soils devoid of vegetation,topsoil, silt and sand deposits with organics,and oversized rock. All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and • surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings,traffic, construction materials and equipment. The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the wailsnd a horizontal backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward slopin backfill surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or re ' ' g structure. An underdrain should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure tainata buildup behind walls. Backfill in pavement and walkway areas should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 9S%of the maximum standard Proctor(ASTM D-698)dry density at a moisture content within 2%of optimum. Backfill in landscape areas should be compacted to at least 90%of the maximum standard Proctor dry density at a moisture come t near optimum. Care should be taken not to overeompact the backbit or use large equip. ent near the wall,since this could cause excessive lateral pressure on the wall. Some ettlement of deep foundation wall backfill should be expected,even if the material is pladed correctly,and could result in distress to facilities constructed on the backfill, The I eral resistance of foundation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of the slidin resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure againt the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.4. Passive pressure of compacted backfill against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 350 pcf or 200 pcf for the buoyant condition. The coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will occur at the ultimate strength,particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be a granular material compacted to at least 95%of the maximum standard Proctor dry density at a moisture content near optimum Job Na:408 200A Gatech _ ... I I -7- FLOOR SLABS The I tural on-site soils,exclusive of topsoil and the very loose silt and sand deposits, are suita e to support lightly loaded slab-on-grade construction. The natural silt and sand soilsjhould be removed beneath slab areas. To reduce the effects of some differential movement,floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with ex;.< ,.ion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints shout i be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint s.• -'g and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and I intended slab use. A minimum 4 inch layer of free-draining gravel should be pla.b beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage, This material should€onsist of min ; 2 inch aggregate withat least 50%retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve. Struc fill placed for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95%of maximum standard Proctor dry density at a moisture content within 2%of optimum. Req " ed fill should consist of an imported granular soil approved by a representative of the g technical engineer. UNDERDRAIN SYS[EM Freer was encountered during our exploration and it has been our experience in mountainous areas that local perched groundwater can rise during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen groundduring spring runoff can create a perched condi 'on. We recommend below-grade construction, such as retaining walls,crawlspace and ., =4 ent areas,be kept at least 2 feet above the high groundwater level and be prat-. ed from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain and wall drain system. High groundwater level typically occurs in late spring or early summer. Weather conditions, snowpack and elevation are a few factors that determine the level and time of high groundwater. High groundwater level can vary annually. The underdrain system should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall ba~kfill surrounded above the invert level with free-draining gravel. The drainpipe Job No.405 200A G tech it - 8 - +' be placed at each level of excavation and at least 2 feet below lowest adjacent f,'sh a .se and sloped at a minimum 1%to a suitable gravity outlet or sump and pump syste 1 If he garden level slab is constructed within 2 feet of high groundwater level,lateral I#<+ should be used below the building slabs to connect the underslab gravel with the tinder system. The lateral drains should be adequately spaced to provide proper drai ge for groundwater encountered in the building configuration. We can provide additi a nal recommendations for lateral drains,including placement and elevation, upon red;•:,: I F " 'ti ..o;'ig gravel used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2%passing the N._200 sieve, less than 50%passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum m size of 2 inch . The drain gravel backfill should be at least 21h feet deep and extend at least 1 foot ahoyel any water seepage observed in the excavation cut slope. A wall drain system consisting of a geocomposite or I foot of clean gravel should be p o. adjacent to below grade construction walls. The wall drain system should connect into 4 • underdrain and extend to within 1 to 2 feet of the ground surface. A typical unkiern ;' detail is shown on Figure 7. SITE 'RARING The .,. of construction-induced slope instability at the site appears low provided cut and fill =.'I are limited. We assume the cut depths for the garden levels will not exceed one l#;el,about.10 to 12 feet. Fills should be limited to about 4 to 6 feet deep. Tern*+ excavation cut slopes should be made inaccordance with OSHA requiments. A Type C sail may be assumed for temporary cuts and should be verified by th. contractor's competent person. Embankment fills should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor dry density within 2%of optimum moisture content. Prior to fill placement,the subgrade should be carefully prepared by removing all vegetation and topsoil and compacting to at least 95%of the maximum standard Job No.408 200A G tech