EXHIBIT H LOT 317 GRADING AND SITE PLAN

Transcription

1 EXHIBIT H LOT 317 GRADING AND SITE PLAN

2

3 EXHIBIT I LOT 317 ELEVATIONS

4 ridge height 4915'-6" GENERAL & KEYED NOTES ridge height 4905'-9" A ridge height 4910'-6" 2 ridge height 4906'-3" 1 Provide soffit, ridge, & j-vents for adequate attic ventilation equal to 1/300 of attic space as per IRC 2 Class 'A' architectural asphalt composition shingles as per owner 3 Gable vents as per owner 4 Standing seam copper roof as per owner 5 10" aluminum fascia w/ decorative crown & vented soffit as per owner 6 Stone veneer as per owner w/ 22 ga. 16" o.c. each way 7 Board & batten siding as per owner 8 Synthetic stucco system w/ hardcoat as per owner 9 Doors & windows as per floor plans, schedules, & owner 10 Provide 36" (min.) guardrail as per IRC 11 10" x 10" column w/ stone base as per owner 29' - 6" FRONT ELEVATION ridge height 4915'-6" ridge height 4910'-6" ridge height 4906'-3" ridge height 4905'-9" 4 INOUYE DESIGN 1443 W. 800 N. Suite 102 Orem, Utah Phone: Emery Residence A5.2 REAR ELEVATION The Cove at Bear Canyon, Lot 317 Contractor shall verify all dimensions, conditions and measurements at the job prior to construction. These plans and documents are the property of Inouye Design, and any reuse or further distribution thereof in part or in whole without the written permission of the designer is strictly prohibited. Designer is not an architect or engineer. C Copyright 2015 Inouye Design 12 x 18 (sheet size): 1/8"=1'-0" 24 x 36 (sheet size): 1/4"=1'-0" Project August 2015 Draper, Utah A3.1 FRONT & REAR ELEVATIONS

5 ridge height 4910'-6" ridge height 4912'-0" 9" ridge height 4911'-6" GENERAL & KEYED NOTES 1 Provide rock retaining as req'd 9" ridge height 4905'-0" LEFT ELEVATION ridge height 4911'-6" 9" ridge height 4912'-0" 1 INOUYE DESIGN 1443 W. 800 N. Suite 102 Orem, Utah Phone: Emery Residence RIGHT ELEVATION The Cove at Bear Canyon, Lot 317 Contractor shall verify all dimensions, conditions and measurements at the job prior to construction. These plans and documents are the property of Inouye Design, and any reuse or further distribution thereof in part or in whole without the written permission of the designer is strictly prohibited. Designer is not an architect or engineer. C Copyright 2015 Inouye Design 12 x 18 (sheet size): 1/8"=1'-0" 24 x 36 (sheet size): 1/4"=1'-0" Project August 2015 Draper, Utah A3.2 LEFT & RIGHT SIDE ELEVATIONS

6 GENERAL & KEYED NOTES FRONT LEFT PERSPECTIVE FRONT RIGHT PERSPECTIVE BACK RIGHT PERSPECTIVE INOUYE DESIGN 1443 W. 800 N. Suite 102 Orem, Utah Phone: Emery Residence Draper, Utah Contractor shall verify all dimensions, conditions and measurements at the job prior to construction. These plans and documents are the property of Inouye Design, and any reuse or further distribution thereof in part or in whole without the written permission of the designer is strictly prohibited. Designer is not an architect or engineer. C Copyright 2015 Inouye Design 12 x 18 (sheet size): 1/8"=1'-0" 24 x 36 (sheet size): 1/4"=1'-0" BACK LEFT PERSPECTIVE Project August 2015 A3.3 PERSPECTIVE VIEWS The Cove at Bear Canyon, Lot 317

7 EXHIBIT J APPLICANT LETTER

8

9 EXHIBIT K GEO-TECHNICAL AND SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS REVIEWS

10

11

12 SA Simon Associates LLC geologic, environmental, & geotechnical consultants 1981 East Curtis Drive Salt Lake City, Utah December 11, 2015 Mr. Keith Collier Chief Building Official Draper City 1020 East Pioneer Road Draper, Utah Subject: Geologic Review Letter No. 2 Lot 317, Phase 3, The Cove at Bear Canyon South Kodiak Court, Draper, Utah SA Project No: Report: AGEC Response to Draper City Geologic Review, Lot 317, The Cove at Bear Canyon, Phase 3, South Kodiak Court, Draper, Utah (AGEC Project No ), dated October 12, 2015: prepared for Alvin Emery, 1164 Sunset Dunes Way, Draper, UT Geologic Submittal Status: COMPLETE SUBMITTAL Dear Mr. Collier, At your request, SA reviewed the above referenced October 21, 2015, AGEC Geotechnical, Inc., (AGEC), letter. The October 21, 2014, AGEC letter was submitted in response to the following: 1. Draper City Community Development Department Memorandum, Engineering Division, dated March 26, The March 26, 2006, Draper City Community Development Department Engineering Division Memorandum was submitted in response to AGEC Surface Fault Rupture Hazard Study, The Cove at Bear Canyon, Lot 317, South Kodiak Court, Draper, Utah, (AGEC Project No ), dated February 22, 2006: prepared for Ryan Anderson Custom Homes, P.O. Box 95310, South Jordan. Utah Draper City project meeting on October 12, 2015 (SA, 2015).

13 Geologic Review Letter No. 2 SA Project No Lot 317, Phase 3, The Cove at Bear Canyon December 11, South Kodiak Court, Draper, Utah Page 2 of 7 The purpose of SA s review is to evaluate whether or not the AGEC documents adequately address geologic conditions at the site, consistent with concerns for public health, safety, and welfare; reasonable professional standards-of-care, and; Draper City s Geologic Hazards Ordinance (2007; 2010). SA Conclusions Based substantially in and on reliance of the technical documentation and assurances provided by AGEC, including their findings and conclusions, it is SA s opinion that the October 21, 2014, AGEC letter adequately: 1. Responded to the items in the March 26, 2006, Draper City Community Development Department Engineering Division Memorandum, and; 2. Characterized the geologic conditions at the subject property. SA Recommendations SA recommends Draper City consider the AGEC submittals complete from a geologic perspective. AGEC Conclusions Findings and conclusions from the October 12, 2015, AGEC response letter follow: Draper City Review Comment Item 2: a. The fault at station , as shown on the trench profile (Figure 6 of the February 22, 2006 AGEC report), juxtaposes lacustrine deposits (AGEC Unit 4) against slump deposits (AGEC Unit 3; the lacustrine deposits displaced down relative to the slump deposits). The trench profile also indicates that the fault extends into the overlying colluvium (AGEC Unit 2). The February 22, 2006 AGEC report states: "The fault displaces lacustrine deposits and does not appear to extend upward into the colluvium," (Page 8). The consultant should clarify the discrepancy. Simon Associates LLC

14 Geologic Review Letter No. 2 SA Project No Lot 317, Phase 3, The Cove at Bear Canyon December 11, South Kodiak Court, Draper, Utah Page 3 of 7 b. In the May 1, 2006 report AGEC states: The displacement was determined by measuring the offset of a sandy fine gravel bed within the lacustrine deposit. This bed, with a displacement of 1 foot, is clearly shown on Figure 6." Draper City Engineering cannot identify a sandy fine gravel bed within the lacustrine deposit that is lic1early" displaced 1 foot. Once again, based on the trench profile, it appears that only a minimum displacement can be determined. The consultant should provide further documentation on how the 1 foot of displacement was determined. Based on the documented displacement of the lacustrine deposits (AGEC Unit 4), slump deposits (AGEC Unit 3), and colluvium (AGEC Unit 2L the displacement is at least 4.5 feet. AGEC Response to Item 2 The lacustrine deposits encountered between Station to were mislabeled on Figure 6 for Exploratory Trench No.2. The field logs are submitted with the appropriate numbering of units. The sandy fine gravel bed is highlighted to show the bed used for determining fault offset. In addition, the slump materials have been reinterpreted to be soft-sediment deformation of Lake Bonneville sediments and this change is explained later in this letter. Draper City Review Comment Item 3: a. The fault at station , as shown on the trench profile (Figure 6 of the February 22, 2006 AGEC report juxtaposes colluvium (AGEC Unit 2) against slump deposits (AGEC Unit 3). In the May 1, 2006 report AGEC states, The displacement along the fault at station was determined by measuring the vertical offset between the colluvium and the lacustrine contact." The trench profile does not document any lacustrine sediments south of station (We have assumed south"; neither the trench profile nor the text indicate the orientation of the trenches, nor do the trench profiles indicate the wall that was logged.). In the same paragraph AGEC states The contact between Unit 2 and Unit 3 was measured." According to AGEC's description of soil units and symbols on Figure 7 of the February 22, 2006 report, Unit 2 designates colluvium" and Unit 3 designates "slump deposits." AGEC should clarify the discrepancy. Simon Associates LLC

15 Geologic Review Letter No. 2 SA Project No Lot 317, Phase 3, The Cove at Bear Canyon December 11, South Kodiak Court, Draper, Utah Page 4 of 7 b. AGEC further states: Figure 6 has a match line through the fault and doesn't line up as well as it should. The original field logs were reviewed and the displacement was determined to be between 2.5 and 3.0 feet." AGEC should resubmit the trench profile of Trench 2, such that the displacement is correctly shown. AGEC should also clarify the specific displacement documented. AGEC Response to Item 3 The incorrect numbering of the lacustrine deposits resulted in the confusion concerning soil units and estimated displacement along the faults identified. The field log shows the layers used to determine the 2½-foot fault offset at approximate Station 0+75 (Approximate Station 0+05 on the field log). Draper City Review Comment Item 4 The consultant should provide the data supporting the following statements: a. While the soils encountered in the eastern portion of Lot 317 appear to be deformed, their current condition is considered to be stable." Specifically, provide the data to support that the soils encountered in the eastern portion of Lot 317 are stable. b. "Soil movement and deformation appear to be old and no evidence of active movement was found." Specifically, provide the data supporting that the soil movement and deformation are in fact "old" and the specific data supporting that the movement is pre-holocene. c. Additional geotechnical engineering studies of the site (AGEC Project No ) reported that no signs of major slope instability were observed." Specifically, please define "major slope instability" and provide the specific geotechnical data that "major" slopes are stable. AGEC Response to Item 3 The deposit interpreted as slump material has been reinterpreted to be soft-sediment deformation of Lake Bonneville deposits and this deformation would have occurred Simon Associates LLC

16 Geologic Review Letter No. 2 SA Project No Lot 317, Phase 3, The Cove at Bear Canyon December 11, South Kodiak Court, Draper, Utah Page 5 of 7 when the lake was above the level of the site, more than 10,000 years ago. Similar softsediment deformation will not occur at this site since the lake is no longer near the elevation of the site. This reinterpretation of the origin of the deposit labeled as a slump deposit in the report to soft-sediment deformation is based on review of trench photographs of the deposit (attached) and a review of aerial photographs and geologic maps for the area, which indicate that slump deposits are not consistent with the topography and geologic setting of the area. The soil encountered at the site consists of sand and gravel. No water was encountered to the depth investigated. Slopes in the area are typically flatter than 3 horizontal to 1 vertical. Recommendations are given in the geotechnical report for permanent, unretained cut and fill slopes for the proposed development. Item 7 of the Project Meeting Memo Item 7 of the project memo of September 29, 2015 reads: Mr. Collier noted Figure 2 in the February 22, 2006 AGEC letter queried the northern location of a fault documented on the property and additional investigation should be performed to document the location of the fault in the north part of the property. AGEC Response to Item 7 Research finds that a trench was excavated in a general east/west direction just north of the property line by AGRA. The trench found no evidence of a fault in the area in question. This was discussed in a meeting on October 9, 2015 at Draper City offices with Mr. Collier and Mr. Simon. It is our professional opinion that the information is sufficient to indicate that the fault dies out before the AGRA trench. The fault is shown on attached Figure 1 to continue to the north of the queried location to just south of the AGRA trench. No additional trenching is recommended at this time. Closure Comments and recommendations in this review are based on data presented in the referenced Consultant s report. SA accordingly provides no warranty that the data in the Consultant s report or any other referenced reports are correct or accurate. SA has not performed an independent site evaluation. Comments and recommendations presented Simon Associates LLC

17

18 Geologic Review Letter No. 2 SA Project No Lot 317, Phase 3, The Cove at Bear Canyon December 11, South Kodiak Court, Draper, Utah Page 7 of 7 References Cited SA, 2015, SA Memorandum for Project Meeting on October 9, 2015, Lot The Cove at Bear Canyon, South Kodiak Court, Draper, Utah (SA Project No: ), dated October 12, 2015: prepared for Keith Collier, Chief Building Official, Draper City, 1020 East Pioneer Road, Draper, Utah Draper City, 2010, Chapter 9-19 Geologic hazard ordinance of Title 9 Land Use and Development Code for Draper City, adopted December 30, 2003, per Ordinance No. 547; amended December 11, 2007 per Ordinance No. 796; amended June 1, 2010, per Ordinance No Draper City, 2007, Appendix B, Minimum standards for surface fault rupture hazard studies, Chapter 9-19 Geologic hazard ordinance of Title 9 Land Use and Development Code for Draper City, adopted December 30, 2003, per Ordinance No. 547; amended December 11, 2007 per Ordinance No Simon Associates LLC

19 EXHIBIT L RESIDENT LETTERS

20

21

22

23

24