HomeMy WebLinkAboutRetaining Wall Memo 0804081,-0 If! .
l
Memorandum ,v4iwF,g.1„c.
To: Cady O'Kelly. Vail Resorts
CC:
From: Glenn Palmer AEL 970-926-3373ph. 970-926-3390(fax)
Date: August 4. 2(X)8
Re: Vail Front Door Retaining Wall Hcight
The purpose of this merino is to discuss the proposed height, and design limitations, for the proposed
retaining walls near inlet R49 (lust west of the snorkel).
I . The original grading plan proposed 6 foot high (max) exposed walls along the stairs/walkway
that provides access to the Chalets. However, this (original) plan did not take into consideration
the location of the permanent shoring wall below it. The original grading plan would have
required cutting approx 10 vertical feet off the top of the shoring wall.
2. A meeting was held with Schnabel Const (Shoring designer and contractor) in March 2(X)8, to
determine options and requirements for changing/cutting into the existing shoring wall.
a. The shoring wall is a permanent design. It provides global slope stability (to the hillside
above the Chalets), as well as reduces lateral earth loads on the adjacent (below grade)
structure and building walls.
b. Todd Duncan (Schnabel) said that the TOP 1 to 1.5 feet of existing shoring wall could
be removed. BUT STRONGLY advised against any more removal. The wall consists of
tiebacks drilled into the slope, which restrain the sharing wall with reinforced "blocks".
The blocks transfer wall loads to the tieback in a heavily reinforced section that is
approx 5 feet wide and 5 feet tall. The top of "blocks" are about I to 1.5 feet from the
top of the shoring wall. Removal of a block would increase the loads to adjacent
"blocks", which the wall was not designed for.
(See attached portions of Shoring Plans which show the hock locations and details.)
3. 1 worked on numerous options (since March) to provide a plan which did not remove more than a
foot of shoring, had less than 6 foot wall heights (with adjacent walls separated by 4 feet hioriz.),
etc. Following is a summary of existing site constraints:
a. The location of the walk should be reasonubly- close to the original design. The garage
ventilation (snorkels) and a fire hydrant (which has clearance requirements) are located
within the next 120 feet east of the area, eliminating the option to relocate the walk
further east .
b. The location of the snorkels eliminate the option to shift the walk 25 feet further east ,
where there is enough separation between the shoring wall and cul-de-sac (CDS) to add
additional walls to break up the wall heights,
c. The widest part of the CDS (or center of CDS) occurs immediately adjacent to the stair
connection: It is at the narrowest point between the existing shoring wall and CD,S,
which does not provide mifficient width for more than 2 adjacent galls (or l2 feet
elevation). The shoring wall is 16 feet above the CDS, and the walkway has to start at
the CDS. so that one of the walls needs to be over 6 feet tall.
August 12, 2008
d. It was determined that the best option is to "screen " the high wall b' v providing walls
and landscaping in front of the high wall so that (as viewed from the CDS), most of the
walls would "appear" to be less than 6 feet tall. Onl%, if yoa looked into the stait-waY (or
behind the screening walls) ssould rou notice that walls were taller.
I have studied the grading, and options for addressing ALL of the very difficult constraints and
requirements, and feel that we have done the best that we can do. If you have any questions,
please feel free to contact me.
C-'-~' cll~
Glenn Palmer. PF
Vai1FrontDoor%%a11( riicnu d,,,
2
pp / X" p
'I
/
\ ! 89 r N r
'o
v / 1.
Ij F- E 1- 'T.
4T, <t ° y C1
5~'x. ~.-al I
m ` c~~ppv• N°i f I 1 ZOZ
C;;'., drab O ~ Z
Icm r -
f
+ r
LLJ
'co
• 9~i~ 1 r~ IIWT
M
UW~ ~
ocv °
a _
4 C)
c_j
I ~ _ µ
• ~i 8 $ vch o !;f~~ ~ J
pp Af i OHO J r ~ I
W~m /
V `8g m
• rv p 00 N
c> cli
N i
~ w
CF; I
L1-
J
O
i- H
it
f' I -J J
~o. x ~ 'o i V
g ~'o
f
i
cp li
T
J
CIR
Is,
I I ~I I
1 ll~~~
Ri5
fI f
^ \ -j
Z8'9 +Z
M Z I
r~ I
Ms a I
r O
1LV
I o ~ ~ m y'
X01' SL
eO 0.
LU
m ~
`0 y
i A
Y~ 0 o
~m 1 ' f ! I
o.
a (
0
a
m
O
O
a
s~
0
z
f
in
r
:n
O ~
W
w
z
QQ ccw
j
*~z
a
~u,~
w
m
z
f
v
tL ~
O
w
m
J
a
J
h
1
C
ac
J`
Q~
L t
C
+ 1
k
:W
t 11 W
LLI
f
m: f iU W
N c`v cmv ~ n O cv ~ ~ 0 LI) Q m r
Q m CC4 d) d) d)
, ~ jzz
ry
L u
l~l
J
3
v1
t~
D
a
Q
m
0
Q
N'
e
TOWN O WAIL
Department of Public Works & Transportation
1309 Elkhorn Drive
Vail, CO 81657
970-479-2158
Fax: 970-479-2166
www.vailgov.com
MEMO
To:
From
Re:
Date:
CC:
Scott Miller, Hyder Construction
Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer
Chalet Buildings 1,2, & 4
7/24/08
Cody O'Kelly, Martin Haberle, C
Sandoval
The following items must be
Buildings 1,2,&4
pletely`fenced (6') off from any
parking garage. All construction debris,
all public areas (around TCO'd chalets,
weep and clean Vail Lane.
a clean green screen 6' barrier
and Vail Lane.
The
complete prior to TCO of Chalet Building 3
kas throughout the site, along Forest Rd and Vail Rd. must be
vegetated as per plan or existing conditions.
behind Holy Cross infrastructure along Forest Rd. must be
completed.
3. Asphalt damage along Forest Rd and Vail Rd. must be repaired (Infrared).
4. Install permanent stop sign for Forest Rd.
5. Holy Cross vault at intersection shall be hidden with another row of
boulder(s).
6. The walk at the east curb return of Vail Lane shall be replaced, a flow line
shall be carried around curb return, currently water flows down sidewalk.
7. Add shoulder (w/ boulders) at edge of walk that enters west side of Chalet #1
, Mike Mcgee, Leonard
,
F!]
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
X1'7.
18.
19
AGO
21.
The following retaining walls shall be regarded with soil or boulder walls,
with min. 4' benches, to meet 6' max requirement. Walls have been labled
with nearest inlet number:
a. R8 & R10
b. R413 (5' west)
c. R14
d. R15A
e. R28
f. R18A
Cut existing stair wall by R13A so max height is -6'.
Install better Tree wall along evergreen west of Chalet
Construct wall or veneer soil nail wall that is exposed behind Chalet #4
Relocate inlete R20 to design location
Install swale as per plan behind Chalet #4 4nd,8 or as approved change to
plan.
Provide letter from parking/traffic engineer regarding the 17' width entrance
at the garage. Highlights should include, number of anticipated trips per hour
in and out of garage, control point'at card readet, hoequate sight distance to
allow for entering cars right of way, a sign within the structure stating
"Entering Vehicles have bight of Way".
Clean, grout all pipe conneons, and camera Town storm sewer at west end
of project. Place rip rap -20' up ditch at the top of this storm sewer along ski
way. Reveg. Disturbed ditch sections in this area as well to mitigate sediment.
Ski Yard plaza inlets must be regarding to not present htrip hazards. Grout all
pipe connections.
An approved bikepath ramp to the/*i yard must be in place per our
Per the current TCQfor the Loading and Delivery garage, the tunnel must be
~d clear at all times. This has not be accomplished. Enforcement of
tms writ oe regUireaa
The Loading and Deliverv aEreement between the Town and VR must be in
from the appropriate owner(s) at Lodge at Vail must be provided
or not allowing wildflower alley to be regarded.
Checkpoint Charlie improvements must be in place.
6 e kw r 6s (ua4l-4-
i5l/s/cyci