PZC Packet 050388STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
5/3/88
Lot 69, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Variance to Allow Parking Within 10 Foot Front Setback -
Public Hearing, and Design Review for a Retail
Development
INTRODUCTION
The owners of Lot 69, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
have applied for Design Review of a Retail Development
they are proposing for the site. The development
generally consists of a single story building housing
retail shops served by surface parking. The applicant
is also requesting approval of a variance to allow the
surface parking for the project to encroach
;:approximately three (3) feet into the ten (10) foot
front yard setbacks along Beaver Creek Place and East
Beaver Creek Boulevard.
Pit this time the applicant is requesting that both items
be continued to the Commission's next regular meeting.
In the case of the Public Hearing for the variance,
Staff suggests that the Commission open the Public
Flearing in order to receive input from anyone wishing to
speak on tht- variance request who cannot attend the next
regular meeting, and then continue the Public Hearing
until that time. A separate action will be required to
continue the application for Design Review.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. Introduce Application;
2. Open Public Hearing;
3. Continue Public Hearing;
4. Continue Design Review Application.
Ras ectffull�y sutbmitt�ed.,
i
n ineering Technician
Staff Report, to Planning and Zoning Commission - 5/3/88
Lot 69, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Variance to allow parking within 10 foot front yard
setback - Public Hearing, and Design Review for a Retail
Development
Page 2 of 2
PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION"
Approved as Submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended
Conditions ( y Approved with Modified Conditions ( )
Continued ( ✓)/ Denied ( i Withdrawn pt )
Date �' _Secretary_ �1tYl� C LIl l
The Commission continued this application, at the applicant's
request, until the next Planning and Zoning Meeting, May 17, 1988.
The Public Hearing, as published was opened, with no public comments
being received. The Public Hearing was also continued.
STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION - 5/3/88
Wynfield Inn
Lot 73/74, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Sign Program
Design Review
INTRODUCTION:
The Wynfield Inn has been purchased by a nationwide hotel chain and the new
owners are requesting aoproval of new signage for, the project. They are
proposing to change the two existing building mounted signs with similar pan
channel letters that read "Comfort Inn" and replace the free standing sign
with a standard Comfort Inn monument sign.
STAFF COMMENTS:
A review of this proposal shows the following sign areas being requested:
2 Building
Mounted Signs @ 31 square feet/ea.
= 62
square
feet
1 Monument
Sign @ 23 square feet/side
= _46
square
feet
Total
Sign Area Requested
108
square
feet
Total
Sign Allowance Per Code
96
square
feet
Excess
Sign Area Requested
12
square
feet
The project currently has approximatelY 96 square feet of signage divided
between three signs. The excess sign area of 12 square feet will require a
variance.
Before acting on a variance request, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall
consider the following factors:
a. The relationship of the requested variance to existing and potential
uses and structures in the vicinity;
b. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation
and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve
compatibility and uniformity ofi treatment among sites in the vicinity.
c. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable
to the requested variance.
Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Commission - 5/3/88
Wynfield Inn
Lot 73/74, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Sign Program
Design Review
Page 2 of 3
Findings Required. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall make the following
findings before granting a variance:
a. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of
special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties
in the vicinity;
b. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons:
i. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary
physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
ii. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply
generally to other properties in the vicinity.
iii. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the
specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges
enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
1. Introduce Program;
2. Presentation by Applicant;
3. Commission Review of Submitted Materials;
4. Make Findings for Variance for Monument Sign;
5. Act on Sign Design Review Application.
Respectful/ly.Submitted,
fight o—
nygineering
Technician
Staff Report to
Wynfield Inn
Lot 73/74, Block
Sign Program
Design Review
Paqe 3 of 3
Panning and Loning Commission - 5/3/88
1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION:
Approved as Submitted (V� Approved with
Recommended Conditions (
Approved with Modified Conditions ) Continued
Date 5 -`( Secretary IQ , ((c
Denied (
I
Withdrawn ( )
The Commission granted the variance which was necessary due tQ the sign change_
stating Finding - a. That the granting of the variance will not cnnstiti,tp a nrant
of special privilege inconsistent with the limitatinns on nthpr prnpprtips in
the vicinity; and Finding b. -i. The strict or litpral internretatinn and en-
forcement of the regulation would result in practical difficulty s
physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION - 5/3/88
Sunridge Phase II
Clubhouse
Preliminary Design Review
INTRODUCTION:
The Sunridge Phase II Homeowners Association has applied for Preliminary
Design Review of a Clubhouse they propose to construct. The building will
be located on the north end of the site between the parking lot and the
river, and between buildings J and K. Improvements include locker rooms,
hot tub, steam and sauna, exercise room, office, and a multi-purpose room
with a small kitchen. An area for construction of a future swimming pool
is also indicated. Materials include wood siding, river -rock, and shake
shingles.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Construction of the clubhouse in this area will require some minor modifications
to the parking lot for the project. This will result in approximately nine (9)
parking spaces being eliminated, bringing parking for this part of Phase I1 to
272 spaces, This part of Phase II has 141 units, and with parking calculated
at two (2) spaces per unit, and ten (10) guest spaces per the zoning code, the
parking requirement would be 292 spaces. However, this project qualifies for
the 15% reduction in parking for large single -use projects outlined in the Zoning
Code and with that reduction, the minimum parking requirement is actually 249
spaces. The site plan which has been submitted shows 272 spaces being provided.
In consideration of the Town's goal to construct a bike path along the Eagle
River at some point in the future, Staff requests that the applicant consider
providing adequate room between the building and the irrigation ditch to the
north for a bike path.
Access to the clubhouse by handicapped persons appears to be a requirement of
the Uniform Building Code and should also be considered.
Staff recortrtnends that the Commission review this proposal in conjunction with
the following design review guidelines.
1. The conformance with the Zoning Code and other applicable rules and
regulations of the Town of Avon.
The suitability of the improvement, including type and quality of materials
of which it is to be constructed and the site upon which it is to be
located.
Y
Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Commission - 5/3/80
Sunridge Phase II
Clubhouse
Preliminary Design Review
Page 2 of 3
3. The compatibility of the design to minimize site impacts to adjacent
properties.
4. The compatibility of proposed improvements with site topography.
5. The visual appearance of any proposed improvement as viewed from adjacent
and neighboring properties and public ways.
6. The objective that no improvement be so similar or dissimilar to others
in the vicinity that values, monetary or aesthetic will be impaired.
7. The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted
Goals, Polciies and Programs for the Town of Avon.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
If the Commission concurs, Staff recommends that Preliminary Design Review
approval be granted for the clubhouse, subject to:
1. The applicant consider locating the building to allow adequate room north
of the facilities for a future bike path;
2. Handicapped access being provided per the Uniform Building Code;
3. Final design must conform with the requirement of the Zoning Cede, Planning
and Zoning Commission Design Procedures, Rules and Regulations, and, other
modifications requested by the Commission.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. Introduce Project;
2. Presentation by Applicant;
3. Commission Review of Submitted Material;
4. Act on Application.
Respectfully submitted,
a vlrig
;�A?
Engineering Technician
Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Commission - 5/3/88
Sunridge Phase II
Clubhouse
Preliminary Design Review
Page 3 of 3
PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION:
Approved as Submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended Conditions )
Approved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( )
Date 5 " 3 �;ne0 Secretary
The Commission_granted Preliminary Design approval with the following contingt_,icies
to be addressed: 1. Give consideration to the north side of the building to
allow for bike path to be built in the future. 1. Look into current drainage
and filtration system as it exists and modifications that may need to be made
in the future in or -ler to accomodate the oro.iect. 3. Designation of an
emergency lane in front of the building to accomodate ambulance and/or fire
equipment. 4. Give consideration to handicapped access into the building.
5. Consider the landscaping design in front of the building. - These con-
tingencies muEt be addressed before final design is approved.
TA042788
To: Town of Avon
From: JF Lamont
RE:Project Review:
Date: April 27, 1988
Project: Sunridge II Clubhouse
The following Design Guidelines have been reviewed and
are offered for consideration by the reviewing authorities
and the applicant. The recommendations made in this report
are subject to change; upon the submissijn of additional
information, the content of the public hearings, and
additional research.
Section
6.00 Design Guidelines:
6.10 Design Review Considerations:
The Commission shall consider the following items in
reviewing the design of a proposed project:
6.11 The conformance with the Zoning Code and other
applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon.
Comment: See Staff Report
6.12 The suitability of the improvement, including type and
quality of materials of which it is to be constructed and the
site upon which it is to be located.
Comment: The relocation of the Sunridge II Clubhouse
to a riverside location is a suitable improvement.
The change of location is not without some measure of
negative impact.
The building bisect a critical link of bike/pedestrian
path which will follow the Eagle River's southern bank. The
increased costs and potential loss of a primary recreational
corridor will negatively effect a large portion of the
proposed Riverfront Park.
The following recommendations are suggested in order to:
1. Avoid the potential loss of bike/pedestrian path
alignment
2. Augment the on-site recreational amenities of a
large residential project,
page two
3. Improve the safety of pedestrian and bicyclists,
4. Encourge increased recreational amenities for the
projects permanent residents and increasing number of short
term visitors.
At this time, the following tei.ms and conditions should
be considered:
1. Cause the building be pulled back from the
irrigation bank a minimum of 30' additional feet.
2. Parking spaces be removed from the front of the
Clubhouse so that a drop-off and pick-up driveway be
established. A snow/rain and wind canopy should be
considered.
3. Significant and well-maintained landscaping be
encourage on the south side of the Clubhouse.
4. The Clubhouse have exterior night -lighting so that
it may be easily identified by new arrivals on Highway 6 or
Beaver Creek Blvd.
5. The Clubhouse be equipped with handicapped access.
6. New signage by provided on adjacent public rights-
of-way.
7. Noise proofing for nearby residential units
be considered. Noise proofing can be accomplished by means
of proper fence: design and the placement of appropriate
landscape materials.
8. An appropriate easement be agreed upon
which determines a public circulation corridor for
pedestrians and bicyclists along the south bank of the Eagle
River through the project.
8. A children's play area be considered on the site of
the former proposed Clubhouse.
6.13 The compatibility of the design to minimize site
impacts to adjacent properties.
Comment: The design does not appear to adversely effect
the distribution of light and air of adjacent properties.
The access of Fire Safety equipment to adjacent
properties may be adversely effected by the site design.
page three
Site drainage and landscape plans are of insufficient
detail to determine there compatibility with existing or
proposed site plan of adjacent properties.
Noise increases should be expected from unenclosed
swimming pool and hot tub.
Storage of hazardous chemicals should create minimal
risks to surrounding residential units.
6.14 The compatibility of proposed improvements with site
topography.
Comment: Insufficient information on soil conditions
has be submitted to determine if structure or adjacent
water supply ditch or its easement will be effected.
6.15 The visual appearance of any proposed improvement as
viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public
ways.
Comment: The visual appearance of the proposed
improvement does not inhibit principal views nor block the
solar exposure of adjacent and neighboring properties.
Insufficient information exists to determine if
landscaping will have an acceptable visual appearance from
the public ways and adjacent properties.
6.16 The objective that no improvement be so similar or
dissimilar to othe:-s in the vicinity that values, monetary or
aesthetic will be impaired.
Comment: The apparent mass of the three story pitched
roof structure is consistent with two and three story
structures on adjacent properties.
Building offsets are significant enough to be similar in
appearance of structure on adjacent properties.
Exterior materials, architectural detailing and color
can emphasis wood siding which is the prevalent siding
material in the vicinity.
Provision should be made for adequate fire safety access
to adjacent properties.
Landscape improvements should be qualitatively and
quantitatively increased and maintained to a higher standards
than those which are consistent with existing improvements in
the vicinity.
page four
No information or standards are available that indicates
that either the proposed use nor the aesthetics of the
improvement are so similar or dissimilar to others in the
vicinity that values, monetary or aesthetic will be
impaired.
6.17 The general conformance of the proposed improvements
with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of
Avon.
Comment: The proposed project is in substantial
compliance with the adopted development goals, policies, and
programs of the Town of Avon.
The appropriate goals, policies, and programs for the
Town -of Avon are as follows: ( The development district 5
goals and policies have been excerpted from the Town's Goals
and Policy statement and are included for benefits of the new
member.)
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FIVE
District Five Boundaries: The area South of the centerline
of the Denver Rio Grande & Western Railway right -of way, to
the centerline of Highway 6 and the sourthern boundary of the
Folson Addition; bounded on the East by the eastern
boundaries of the Nottingham Station Addition, the Kriz/White
Addition and the Folson Addition; on the West by the western
most property line of Cottonwood Addition and the Folson
Addition.
I. Economic Development:
A. Goals:
1. Encourage the expansion of residential density,
for both short and long term occupancy, provided that there
is an appropriate improvement in the mix of commercial uses,
recreational amenities and the expansion of the
pedestrian/vehicular circulation system.
*2. Encourage the expansion of the Central Business
District onto adjacent sites that are accessable by separated
or on -grade railroad grade crossing, provided that there is
an appropriate mix of commercial/residential uses, and the
extension of the pedestrian and vehicular system.
3. Promote the development of non-residential uses
provided that they are compatible with surrounding
residential uses and accommodate improvements in the
pedestrian and vehicular circulation system.
B. Policies:
1. Encourage the assemblage of parcels where it
would facilitate the development of commercial and lodging
uses.
*2. Encourage the provision of recreational,
cultural, and educational facilities in development projects.
page 21
3. Attract entertainment and restaurant uses.
4. Promote the inclusion of service and
professional offices within development projects.
5. Establish pedestrian -oriented commercial
activities.
6. Promote both day and nighttime commercial
activities.
*7. Establish Residential Development Rights on
annexed properties which meet community master planning
standards.
*8. Encourage the transfer of Residential
Development R:.ghts onto sites that can accommodate increased
residential densities.
r9. Encourage the annexation of those properties
which are located within or adjacent to the Town's
boundaries.
C. Strategies:
II. Housing Development:
A. Goals:
*1. Encourage the development of a wide variety of
residential housing types, particularly affordable dwelling
units, either by purchase or rental, to persons of all income
levels, visitor and resident alike.
*2. Encourage the physical separation of low-
density residential development from mixed-use
commercial/residential or higher density residential areas.
B. Policies:
1. Promote tourist lodging.
c. strategies:
*1. consider amending the Timesharing legislation
as a means of encouraging short term occupancy in appropriate
residential developments.
page 22
III. Transportation and Circulation:
A. Goals:
*1. Provide for both public and private mass
transportation and convenient mass transit facilities that
will reduce vehicular traffic, as well as encourage
commercial and recreational patronage.
*2. Encourage centralized public/private parking
facilities in areas where the shared use and access between
such parking facilities will improve pedestrian and vehicular
circulation.
3. Provide for the safe separation of pedestrian,
bicycle, and vehicular traffic.
4. Improve the vehicular circulation system.
5. Improve the vehicular circulation system,
particularly for service, delivery, emergency, and mass
transit vehicles.
B. Policies:
1. Provide a vehicular access control plan that
protects the safety of the streets and allows good access to
private property.
*2. Provide for the extension of greenbelt,
pedestrian, bicycle, and street right-of-ways onto lands
adjacent to the town boundaries.
*3. Encourage the acquisition of right-of-ways for
the improved circulation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic
by means of easements and other appropriate agreements with
property owners.
4. Encourage the provision of pedestrian, bicycle,
and vehicular ways on both developed and undeveloped sites.
5. Establish readily identifiable and safe
crossing points on Avon Road that will provide ease of
pedestrian access to major activity centers.
*6. Promote additional vehicular and pedestrian
crossings through the Denver Rio Grande and Western and
Highway 6 right-of-ways and the Eagle River.
page 23
C. Strategies:
*1. Promote the construction of additional on -grade
crossings and a separated pedestrian and vehicular grade
crossing on Avon Road through the Denver Rio Grande and
Western Railroad right-of-way.
IV. Community Facilities:
A. Goals:
*1. Encourage residential developers to provide on-
site cultural, educational, and recreational facilities for
their guests and residents.
2. Promote natural and landscaped open space,
parks, playgrounds, and pedestrian malls.
3. Encourage and provide for contiguous parking
facilities between adjacent sites that are available for use
by the general public.
B. Policies:
1. Encourage the joint funding, with surrounding
jurisdictions, of public facilities which fulfill a common
need.
*2. Promote the creation of a Riverfront Park that
provides for a variety of aquatic sports, passive
recreational activities, public access by means of continuous
paths and bikeways, the protection of s+treambank vegetation,
adjacent floodplains, wildlife habitat, historical buildings,
and residential privacy.
C. Strategies:
V. Community Design:
A. Goals:
1. Protect the efficiency and safety of the area
by encouraging compatible uses to develop around its
perimeter.
2. Encourage proper site planning which orients
structures to optimum passive solar exposure and view
orientation while providing view corridors for building on
adjacent sites.
page 24
3. Provide flexible setback standards, shared
parking standards and increased allowable lot coverage in
order to facilitate the development of commercial and public
uses.
4. Function as a vehicular accessible area.
*5. Encourage a minimum/maximum size and mass of
building by providing design guidelines that reinforce the
emergence of a cohesive townscape.
*6. Promote an urban townscape that provides for
structures, on the same or adjacent sites, of varying heights
from low to high profile, that incorporate and establish a
pedestrian scale; significant landscaping; continuous
interior and exterior public malls; interconnected, covered,
centralized parking, enclosed atriums, and interior open
space; community recreational, educational, and cultural
facili'
17. Encourage design standards which protect
structures against damage from natural hazards.
8. Reduce the negative influences of noise from
Highway 6 and the Denver Rio Grande and Western Railroad.
9. Reduce the negative influences from visual
blight and noxious odor.
B. Policies:
*1. Locate service, professional, and lodging uses
above grade level commercial uses.
*2. Provide for adequate snow removal and storage
facilities, as well as the retention and removal of
pollutants from surface runoff.
*3. Provide for the location of utility easements,
lines, and facilities so that they minimize damage to
native vegetation, streets, walkways, and principal view
corridors, or renders platted property unbuildable.
4. Discourage the construction upon, or removal of,
native vegetation from steep slope areas in order to prevent
erosion, landslides and unsightly scarring.
5. Provide protection for pedestrians and outdoor
recreational amenities against prevailing winter winds
through the use of appropriate landscaping and architectural
features.
page 25
6. Improve the landscaping and visual screening of
surface parking lots.
7. Encourage development projects that have
distinctive architectural character, ease of accessibility,
and that provide pedestrian malls and plazas contiguous with
adjacent sites.
8. Establish a pedestrian scale that considers the
height of surrounding buildings, solar exposure, the width of
streets, pedestrian ways, the sense of enclosure and
proximity to the Eagle River and other significant water
courses.
9. Permit the encroachment of appropriate,
pedestrian -oriented, commercial uses onto pedestrian ways.
10. Orient entrances of commercial facilities to
pedestrian ways, while providing convenient access to
centralized parking areas.
11. Protect the Eagle River and its streambanks as
well as other significant water courses from non-essential
filling and dredging, removal of trees and other established
vegetation, confinment of its floodplain, and the incursion
of pollutants.
*12. Encourage requirements and standards for the
design and construction of curb, gutter, and sidewalks on
appropriate development projects.
c. Strategies:
1. Prepare Design Guidelines which will achieve the
community's desired architectural and landscape image.
*************************************************************
TA0432788
STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMMISSION
5/3/88
Lot 3, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision
Otterman and Associates
20 Unit Condominium Project
Preliminary Design Review
INTRODUCTION:
Otterman and Associates has applied for Preliminary
Design Review of a 20 unit condominium project they
propose to construct on Lot 3, Block 5, Wildridge
Subdivision. The proposed two and three story buildings
have a flat roof design with wood siding. Surface
parking is being provided. The applicant proposes to
utilize the Town's Fractionalization Ordinance to build
the 20, one (1) bedroom units. A site plan, building
elevations and floor plans have been submitted for
Commission review.
STAFF COMMENTS•
A review of the plans submitted for this application has
resulted in the following information.
Site Area = Approximately 40,510 square feet
Building Area = 5250 square feet or 13% of site
Building height = Approximately 31 feet
Open Space = 23,060 square feet or 57% of site
Parking Requirements:
20-1 bedroom units B 1-1/2 spaces/unit = 30 spaces
5 guest spaces per zoning code = 5 spaces
35 spaces required - (35 spaces provided)
The applicant proposes to construct 20 - one (1) bedroom
units with approximately 447 square feet each.
According to the Town's Fractionalization Ordinance,
each of these units will require 1/4 of a Development
Right for a total of 5 Development Rights. Town records
indicate that there are 5 residential Development Rights
assigned to this parcel.
The site plan which has been submitted appears to
conform with parking and access requirements but without
actual dimensions it is difficult to verify this. The
Fire Department expressed concerns regarding access
around the building, adequacy of water supply, and that
areas at each stairway accessing the parking lot be
designated as emergency access lanes. Site lighting and
Staff Repurt to Planning and Zoning Commission - 5/3/98
Lot 3, Block 5, wildridge Subdivision
Otterman and Associates
20 Unit Condominium Project
Preliminary Design Review
Page 2 of 4
pedestrian circulation in the parking area are concerns
that should also op. addressed. Preliminary plans do not
indicate sidewalks between the buildings and the parking
lot, nor parking lot lighting.
The site plan also indicates that the applicant proposes
to regrade essentially the entire site during
construction, destroying virtually all natural
vegetation. Site development should be compatible with
site topography to preserve some of the natural
vegetation and co avoid potential erosion problems. The
final grading and drainage plan must address snow
storage and treatment facilities for parking lot runoff
as required by the Zoning Code.
Staff recommends that the Commission review this
application in conjunction with the following design
review guid`lines:
6.11. The conformance with the Zoning Code and other
applicable rules and regulations of the Tn:a;i of
Avon.
6.12. The suitability of the improvement, including
type and quality of materials of which it is to
be constructed and the site upon which it is to
be located.
6.13. The compatibility of the design to minimize site
impacts to adjacent properties.
6.14.. The compatibility of proposed improvements with
site topography.
6.15. The visual appearance of any proposed improvement
as viewed from adjacent and neighboring
properties and public ways.
6.16. The objective that no improvement be so similar
or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that
values, monetary or aesthetic will be inpaired.
6.17. The general conformance of the proposed
improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and
Programs for the Town of Avon.
Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Commission - 5/3/88
T Blocl• 5 Wildridge Subdivision
Lot +, +
Otterman and Associates
20 Unit Condominium Project
Preliminary Design Review
Page 3 of 11
STAFF RECOhIMGNDATION;_
If the Co:umission finds that this application conforms
with the above Design Review Guidelines, or can be
modified to be brought into conformance, Staff
recommends that Preliminary Design Review approval be
granted, subject to:
1. Final design conform with Fire Department
regulations for emergency access, fire flows, etc;
2. Final design include a fully dimensioned site plan
addressing pedestrian circulation in the parking
area and site lighting.
Fica1 design to include revisions to achieve
compatibility of proposed improvements with site
topography in accordance with Section 6.14 of Design
Guidelines.
4. Other conditions as required by the Commission to
bring the project into conformance with the Design
Review Guidelines. (Note specific design guidelines
section numbers for additional conditions)
5. Final design must conform with the requirements of
the Zoning Code, Planning and Zoning Commission
Design Procedures, Mules and Regulations.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. Introduce Project;
2. Presentation by Applica-3t;
3. Commission Review of Submitted Material;
4. Act on Application.
Resspectf�full/lY submitted,
r i gkrl.�i��
!Engineering Technician
Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Commission - 5/3/BB
Lot 3, Biock 5, Wildridge Subdivision
Otterman and Associates
20 Unit Condominium Project
Preliminary Design Review
Page 4 of 4
PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION:
Approved as Submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended
Conditions ( ) Approved with Modified Conditions ( >
i
Continued ( V) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( >
- n
Date Secretary q�(
The Commission continued this application in order to give the.
applicant time to present a more acceptable re -design of the buildings.
To: Town of Avon
From: JF Lamont
RE:Project Review:
Date: April 27, 1988
Project: Beaver View
The following Design Guidelines have been reviewed and
are offered for consideration by the reviewing authorities
and the applicant. The recommendations made in this report
are subject to change; upon the submission of additional
information, the content of the public hearings, and the
results of additional research.
Section
6.00 Design Guidelines:
6.10 Design Review Considerations:
The Commission shall consider the following items in
reviewing the design of a proposed project:
6.11 The conformance with the Zoning Code and other
applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon.
Comment: See Staff Report
6.12 The suitability of the improvement, including type and
quality of materials of which it is to be constructed and the
site upon which it is to be located.
Comment:
Lot 3 and 6, Block 5:
The suitability of the proposed use for the sites will
have the following impacts:
1. The introduction of a government subsidized, uniform
housing type will encourage transient economically unstable
residents in a stable residential subdivision which is remote
from employment and personal service centers.
2. The remoteness of the proposed subsidized housing
project indicated that transportation needs of residents may
require dependence upon mass transportation to gain access to
employment and personal services. Present uses in the
subdivision do not require mass transportation services.
3. The compatibility of small one bedroom units in a
subdivision which encourages units in excess of the proposed
square footage is not apparent.
page two
4. Building type and site plans being proposed do not
provide for a compatible relationship with existing site
conditions.
5. Building design does not provide for viewing of
parking lots from residential units in order to provide
security to project residents. To place parking lots
downhill side of residential building is unacceptable as
project only proposed recreation amenity is grassed open
space.
6. Fire safety access is needed on downhill side of
residential buildings.
7. Sidewalks for pedestrian circulation and safety are
necessary between building and parking lot.
8. Building design emphasis uniform and monolithic
building mass. Building mass should be refined with less
emphasis on flat roofs and woodsiding. Blank walls should be
eliminated.
9. Additional recreational amenities should be
considered such as a childrens playground.
10. Handicapped access and units should be included.
11. A more sensitive approach to on site landscaping and
building location should be considered in order to protect
wildlife habitat, migration corridors, and threat from
wildfire.
6.13 The compatibility of the design to minimize site
impacts to adjacent properties.
Comment: The design does not appear to adversely effect
the distribution of light and air of adjacent properties.
In case of wildfire the access of Fire Safety equipment
to adjacent properties may be adversely effected by the site
design.
Site drainage and landscape plans are of insufficient
detail to determine there compatibility with existing or
proposed site plan of adjacent properties.
Preliminary grading plans show that all native
vegetation will be stripped from sites, steep hillside may
experience erosion and offsite mud flows may result.
page three
Loss of isolated Aspen groves and productive grassland
in area of winter wildlife habitat and migration corridors
will effect adjacent greenbelt areas.
6.14 The compatibility of proposed improvements with site
topography.
Comment: Insufficient information exists to determine
the impact upon soils movement due to stripping of native
vegetation and the substantial recontouring of the land mass.
Limited effort or emphasis has been placed upon the
compatibility of the proposed improvement with site
topography.
6.15 The visual appearance of any proposed improvement as
viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public
ways.
Comment: The visual appearance of the proposed
improvement does not inhibit principal views nor block the
solar exposure of adjacent and neighboring properties.
Insufficient information exists to determine if
replacement landscaping will have an acceptable visual
appearance from the public ways or adjacent and neighboring
properties.
Exterior and unenclosed parking areas for the most part
are not located in principal views from adjacent and
neighboring properties and public ways.
6.16 The objective that no improvement be so similar or
dissimilar to others in the vicinity that values, monetary or
aesthetic will be impaired.
Comment: The apparent mass of the three story flat roof
structure is inconsistent with two and three story structures
with pitched roofs on adjacent properties and as required by
subdivision design guidelines.
Building offsets are not significant to be similar in
appearance to structure on.adjacent properties and in the
vicinity.
Exterior materials, architectural detailing and color
can be modified to emphasis wood and stucco siding which is
the prevalent siding material in the vicinity.
Provision should be made for adequate fire safety access
to the downhill side of the structures.
page four
Landscape improvements should be qualitatively and
quantitatively increased and maintained to the standards
consistent with existing improvements in the vicinity.
No information or standards is presently available that
indicates that either the proposed use nor the aesthetics of
the improvement are so similar or dissimilar to others in the
vicinity that values, monetary or aesthetic will be
impaired. However, the intent and language of the
Fractionalization ordinance permits development rights to be
fractionalized into a "combination" of smaller units. The
type and number of units being proposed for the vicinity
does not attain the intent of the fractionalization
ordinance.
The uniformity and amount of residential unit types
proposed in the improvement may remove the desirability of
a broader range and quality of housing types that could be
located on adjacent properties and in the vicinity.
6.17 The general conformance: of the proposed improvements
with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of
Avon.
Comment: Insufficient information is presently available
to determine that the proposed improvement conforms with the
adopted goals, policies and programs for the Town of Avon.
April 27, 1988
T0: Norm Wood
FM: Charles Moore
RE: Beaver View Condominium Units
1 have reviewed the plans submitted and have the following comments.
There appears to be a conflict with UFC Sec 10.207 (a) and (c) which
deal with dead end fire department access, and access to the perimeter
of the building.
As we discussed this morning, the access to the perimeter can be resolved
by a walking space on the downhill side of the building, accessible through
each stairwell. The flattened area should be sufficient to extend a ground
ladder to the window of the highest floor, plus a walking space of 4 feet.
It appears that on lot 3, a turnaround space would be difficult. If it
could not be provided, the department would accept a dry standpipe in the
stair corridors as a compromise to this requirement.
L
4/27/88
Fire Flow Calculation
data:
unit square footage 20'-4" x 23 = 466
stairwells 20 x 10 x 0.5 = 100
Laundry building 300
Since the buildings are continguous, the total for the complex is used.
y ik - %
Required-f-Irow flow can be reduced by 50% by an approved fire sprinkler system.
Additional required fire flow can be achieved through additional hydrants,
or building separations.
APPENDIX D — SAMPLE FIRE FLOW ESTIMATE CHARTS
FIRE FLOW ESTIMATE
City State DateEn
9•
Bound Block or Complex. by streets, etc: Previous Fire Flow No. _
—' 111�/�� % Fire Flow No.
✓W t%VV✓✓t ✓ Phantom No.
Route No.
Address (name of occupant if prominent) Sanborn Vol. Page
15 13 �'5 4i i� Type Dist.
Z ��= 100 'fi=(Z
Fire Area Considered
Types of Construction:w '_uV1 "' "�'
l� � No. of
Ground Floor Area ` Stories
Total Floor Area (if needed)
Fire Flow From Tab
Occupancy: abvF
Automatic Sprinklers: KA" s Subtract
Exposures
1. Front
2. Left
3. Rear
4, Right
Distance f Exposure
Notes and/or Calculations:
raw Sketch on other side if needed..
Add —
Total
Use
Appendix is
auu IUtoI
%x b= -
_
Sub Total
% xb= +
gpm(a)
gpm(b)
Total gpm
Fire Flow Required ;q4m
•1
.i
G
E=
5
llte value obtained in No. 2 above is reduced by thc percentage (if any) determined in No. 3
above and increased by the percentage (if any) determined in No.4 above.
The fire flow shall not exccc,i 12,000 gpnt nor be less than 500 V -11111 -
Note 1: llle guide is not expected to nrcessarily provide an adequate value for
lumber yards• pefrolcum storage, refineries, grain elevators, and large
chemical plants but may indicate a minimum value for these hazards.
Note 2: Judgment must he used for business, industrial, and other occupancies not
specifically mentioned.
Note 3: considrration should he given to the ronfiguralion of the building(s) being
considered and to the fire deparlme'll accessibility.
r- -,.,......
"i�`o c("y4i���ood frame structures separated by less than lU feet shall be conslJcrcd as
one fire arca.
Note 5: Party Wills — Normally an urrpierccd party (common) will may warrant up+
to a 10% exposure charge.
Note 6: lligh one -star) buildings — 11'hen a building is st:dcd as I = 2, or more
stories. the number of stories to he used in the formula depends upon file
use being made of the building. Forexamrle.considrr 1 = 3 -story building. if
the building is being used for high -piled stock, or for rack storage, the
building would probably be considered as 3 stories and, in addition, an
increased percentage for occupancy may be v:a.7;inted. However, if ihC
fit ilding is being used for steel fabrication and thrextra height is provided"
ooh• to fa.:ilit:ltelnnventenl of objects by a name, the building would.
pi.lhaili, b. .'ti•p. :n ..i as a I-sto!\ building ane a dec'rce,eu percentage for
occupancy may he warranted.
Note 7: if a buildinl', is exposed wilhi11 150 feel. nn11,.j ; tun' percentage increase
for exposure will be trade.
Note 8: Where wood shingle roofs could contrii•.utc to spreading fires, add 500 grin.
Note. 9: Any ncmconlul�tible building is considered to W:r;:aa r:n 0.9 coefficient.
Note 10: Dwellings — For groupings of 1-Gunily and small ?-family dwellings not
exceeding 2 stories in height, the following short n^cthod may be used. (For
other residential buildings, the regular method should be used.)
Exposure distances Suggested recuired fire flow
Over 100' 500 gpn.
31 - 100' 750 - 1000
I 1 -30' 1000 - 1500
10' or less 1500 - 2000•
"If file buildings are Coll till I'M I use a minimum cf'S00 r. rl l a_
"L[lude, rnpy,l¢htrd m,1rA,l ul Ica • -- •• (,(fill wtlh it, remw: n. ,'r.e r, r' :'.' -.':- •:..� Serines (linin:'
An-,endin 3
��R
LIPPER EAGLE VALLEY
.. , ii,) SANITATION DISTRICTS
am
Mr, Norman Wood, P.E.
TOWN OF AVON
Post Office Box 975
Avon, Colorado 81620
Apri.1 28, 1988
RE: BEAVER VTEW PROJECT - LOTS 3 AND 6, WILDRIDGF
FIRE HfDRANT FLOW TEST
Dear Norman:
The following is the data recorded of the above -referenced flow test:
Static Pressure 152 psi
Flow Condit.ions Flow > 1300 gpm
Residual Pressure > 60 psi
This test was performed on the upper hydrant, by Lot 6, on April 27, 1988, by
District personnel.
If you have ariv questions or commeuiti. please contact me at 476-7480.
FSH: das.8
SincerelN.
UPPER EAGI.T. 1'A .I _1' coNS01,11)ATCD SANTTATION DTf fR1
Fred S. Haslee
Engineering Technician
PARTICIPATING DISIHICTS 4�. vt.VJtl/I fl llpb IF• .'11 L' I R•11 i f fL�.OW tGH•HIIHPYCHGCK MI IL C,!!'.
• I-II INSUI Il P1LU'i M1'.
f::•':.1-V:dL f: 0116. W.. .l.•r J.... MI , •.- I I k
STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMMISSION
5/3/88
Lot 6, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision
Otterman and Associates
24 Unit Condominium Project
Preliminary Design Review
INTRODUCTION:
Otterman and Associates has applied for Preliminary
Design Review of a 24 unit condominium project they
propose to construct on Lot 6, Block 5, Wildridge
Subdivision. The proposed three story buildings have a
flat roof design with wood siding. Surface parking is
being provided. The applicant proposes to utilize the
Town's Fractionalization Ordinance to build the 24, one
(1) bedroom units. A site plan, building elevations and
floor plans have been submitted for Commission review.
STAFF COMMENTS•
A review of the plans submitted for this application has
resulted in the following information.
Site Area = Approximately 70,567 square feet
Building Area = 5250 square feet or 7% of site
Building height = Approximately 31 feet
Open Space = 47,157 square feet nr 67 of site
Parking Requirements:
24-1 bedroom units @ 1-1/2 spaces/unit = 36 spaces
5 guest spaces per zoning code = 6 spaces
42 spaces required - (42 spaces provided)
The applicant proposes to construct 24 - one (1) bedroom
units with approximately 447 square feet each.
According to the Town's Fractionalization Ordinance,
each of these units will require 1/4 of a Development
Right for a total of 6 Development Rights. Town records
indicate that there are 6 residential Development Rights
assigned to this parcel.
The site plan which has been submitted appears to
conform with parking and access requirements but without
actual dimensions it is difficult to verify this. The
Fire Department expressed concerns regarding access
around the building, adequacy of water supply, and that
areas at each stairway accessing the parking lot be
designated as emergency access lanes. Site lighting and
Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Commission - `i/3/88
Lot 6, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision
otterman and Associates
24 Unit Condominium Project
Preliminary Desigr. Review
Page 2 of 4
pedestrian circulation in the parking area are concerns
that should also be addressed. Preliminary plans do not
indicate sidewalks between the buildings and the parking
lot, nor parking lot lighting.
The site plan also indicates that the applicant proposes
to regrade essentially the entire site during
construction, destroying virtually all natural
vegetation. Site development should be compatible with
site topography to preserve some of the natural
vegetation and to avoid potential erosion problems. The
final grading and drainage plan must address snow
storage and treatment facilities for parking lot runoff
as required by the Zoning Code.
Staff recommends that the Commission review this
application in conjunction with the following design
reviev: guidelines:
6.11. The conformance with the Zoning Code and other
applicable rules and regulations of the Town of
Avon.
6.12. The suitability of the improvement, including
type and quality of materials of which it is to
be constructed and the site upon which it is to
be located.
6.13. The compatibility of the design to minimize site
impacts to adjacent properties.
6.14. The compatibility of proposed improvements with
site topography.
6.15. The visual appearance of any proposed improvement
as viewed from adjacent and neighboring
properties and public wags.
6.16. The objective that no improvement be so similar
or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that
values, monetary or aesthetic will be inpaired.
6.17. The general conformance of t!Ie proposed
imrrovements with the adopted Goals, Policies and
Programs for the Town of Avon.
Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Commission - 5/3/88
Lot 6, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision
Otterman and Associates
24 Unit Condominium Project
Preliminary Design Review
Page 3 of 4
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
If the Commission finds that this application conforms
with the above Design Review Guidelines, or can be
modified to be brought into conformance, Staff
recommends that Preliminary Design Review approval be
granted, subject to:
1. Final design conform with Fire Department
regulations for emergency access, fire flows, etc;
2. Final design include a fully dimensioned site plan
addressing pedestrian circulation in the parking
area and site lighting.
3. Final design to include revisions to achieve
compatibility of proposed improvements with site
topography in accordance with Section 6.14 of Design
Guidelines.
4. Other conditions as required by the Commission to
bring the project into conformance with the Design
Review Guidelines. (Note specific design guidelines
section numbers for additional conditions)
5. Final design must conform with the requirements of
the Zoning Code, Planning and Zoning Commission
Design Procedures, Rules and Regulations.
RECOMMENDED ACTION;
1. Introduce Project;
2. Presentation by Applicant;
3. Commission Review of Submitted Material;
4. Act on Application.
Respectf/u^lly) submitted,
right
Engineering T'echnici.an
Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Commission - 5/3/88
Lot b, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision
Otterman and Associates
24 Unit Condominium Project
Preliminary Design Review
Page 4 of 4
PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION:
Approved as Submitted ( > Approved with Recommended
Conditions ( > Approved with Modified Conditions t >
Continued Denied ( > Withdrawn ( >
Date �j � -Secretary LIliol
The Commission continued this application in order to give the
applicant time to present a more acceptable re -design of the buildings.
1^
TA042888
To: Town of Avon
From: JF Lamont
RE:Project Review:
Date: April 27, 1988
Project: Beaver View
The following Design Guidelines have been reviewed and
are offered for consideration by the reviewing authorities
and the applicant. The recommendations made in this report
are subject to change; upon the submission of additional
information, the content of the public hearings, and the
results of additional research.
Section
6.00 Design Guidelines:
6.10 Design Review Considerations:
The Commission shall consider the following items in
reviewing the design of a proposed project:
6.11 The conformance with the zoning Code and other
applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon.
Comment: See Staff Report
6.12 The suitability of the improvement, including type and
quality of materials of which it is to be constructed and the
site upon which it is to be located.
Comment:
Lot 3 and 6, Block 5:
The suitability of the proposed use for the sites will
have the following impacts:
1. The introduction of a government subsidized, uniform
housing type will encourage transient economically unstable
residents in a stable residential subdivision which is remote
from employment and personal service centers.
2. The remoteness of the proposed subsidized housing
project indicated that transportation needs of residents may
require dependence upon mass transportation to gain access to
employment and personal services. Present uses in the
subdivision do not require mass transportation services.
3. The compatibility of small one bedroom units in a
subdivision which encourages units in excess of the proposed
square footage is not apparent.
page two
4. Building type and site plans being proposed do not
provide for a compatible relationship with existing site
conditions.
5. Building design does not provide for viewing of
parking lots from residential units in order to provide
security to project residents. To place parking lots
downhill side of residential building is unacceptable as
project only proposed recreation amenity is grassed open
space.
G. Fire safety access is needed on downhill side of
residential buildings.
7. Sidewalks for pedestrian circulation and safety are
necessary between building and parking lot.
8. Building design emphasis uniform and monolithic
building mass. Building mass should be refined with less
emphasis on flat roofs and woodsiding. Blank walls should be
eliminated.
9. Additional recreational amenities should be
considered such as a childrens playground.
10. Handicapped access and units should be included.
11. A more sensitive approach to on site landscaping and
building location should Joe considered in order to protect
wildlife habitat, migration corridors, and threat from
wildfire.
6.13 The compatibility of the design to minimize site
impacts to adjacent properties.
Comment: The design.does not appear to adversely effect
the distribution of light and air of adjacent properties.
In case of wildfire the access of Fire Safety equipment
to adjacent properties may be adversely effected by the site
design.
Site drainage and landscape plans are of insufficient
detail to determine there compatibility with existing or
proposed site plan of adjacent properties.
Preliminary grading plans show that all native
vegetation will be stripped from sites, steep hillside may
experience erosion and offsite mud flows may result.
page three
Loss of isolated Aspen groves and productive grassland
in area of winter wildlife habitat and migration corridors
will effect adjacent greenbelt areas.
6.14 The compatibility of proposed improvements with site
topography.
Comment: Insufficient information exists to determine
the impact upon soils movement due to stripping of native
vegetation and the substantial recontouring of the land mass.
Limited effort or emphasis has been placed upon the
compatibility of the proposed improvement with site
topography.
6.15 The visual appearance of any proposed improvement as
viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public
ways.
Comment: The visual appearance of the proposed
improvement does not inhibit principal views nor block the
solar exposure of adjacent and neighboring properties.
Insufficient information exists to determine if
replacement landscaping will have an acceptable visual
appearance from the public ways or adjacent and neighboring
properties.
Exterior and unenclosed parking areas for the most part
are .Aut located in principal views from adjacent and
reighbor.ng properties and public ways.
6.16 The objective that no improvement be so similar or
dissimilar to others in the vicinity that values, monetary or
aesthetic will be impaired.
Comment: The apparent mass of the three story flat roof
structure is inconsistent with two and three story structures
with pitched roofs on adjacent properties and as required by
subdivision design guidelines.
Building offsets are not significant to be similar in
appearance to structure on.adjacent properties and in the
vicinity.
Exterior materials, architectural detailing and color
can be modified to emphasis wood and stucco siding which is
the prevalent siding material in the vicinity.
Provision should be made for adequate fire safety access
to the downhill side of the structures.
page four
Landscape improvements should be qualitatively and
quantitatively increased and maintained to the standards
consistent with existing improvements in the vicinity.
No information or standards is presently available that
indicates that either the proposed use nor the aesthetics of
the improvement are so similar or dissimilar to others in the
vicinity that values, monetary or aesthetic will be
impaired. However, the intent and language of the
Fractionalization ordinance permits development rights to be
fractionalized into a "combination" of smaller units. The
type and number of units being proposed for the vicinity
does not attain the intent of the fractionalization
ordinance.
The uniformity and amount of residential unit types
proposed in the improvement may remove the desirability of
a broader range and quality of housing types that could be
located on adjacent properties and in the vicinity.
6.17 The general conformance of the proposed improvements
with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of
Avon.
Comment: Insufficient information is presently available
to determine that the proposed improvement conforms with the
adopted goals, policies and programs for the Town of Avon.
April 27, 1988
T0: Norm Wood
FM: Charles Moore
RE: -Beaver View Condominium Units
I have reviewed the plans submitted and have the following comments.
There appears to be a conflict with UFC Sec 10.207 (a) and (c) which
deal with dead end fire department access, and access to the perimeter
of the building.
As we discussed this morning, the access to the perimeter can be resolved
by a walkt.ng space on the downhill side of the building, accessible through
each stairwell. The flattened area should be sufficient to extend a ground
ladder to the window of the highest floor, plus a walking space of 4 feet.
It appears that on lot 3, a turnaround space would be difficult. If it
could not be provided, the department would accept a dry standpipe in the
stair corridors as a compromise to this requirement.
�{ 7�P MW �L
NO
4/27/88
Fire Flow Calculation
data:
unit square footage 20'-4" x 23 = 466
stairwells 20 x 10 x 0.5 = 100
Laundry building 300
Since the buildings are continguous, the total for the complex is used.
-kR.
Required-f+vw flow can be reduced by 50% by an approved fire sprinkler system.
Additional required fire flow can be achieved through additional hydrants,
or building separations.
APPEh_ rk — SAMPI E FIRE FLOW ESTINIAt c CHARTS
FIRE FLOW ESTIMATE /
State
Date-
City
ate-C;ty Eng.
Bound Block or Complexby streets, etc: Previous Fire Flow No.
Fire Flow No.
,V MW ' Wvm I.." Phantom No.
V Route No.
Address (name of occupant it prominent) Sanborn Vol. - Page
tines o 7) _ It Type Dist.
h �54
Fire Area Considered t "�;:t�—
Types of Construction:
Ground Floor Area `��
No. of V
Stories
Total Floor Area (if needed) —
Fire Flow From Tab .:
Occupancy: Add orbtrac °o
/ Sub Total
Automatic Sprinklers: / Subtract %x b=
Sub Total
Exposures: Distanc1e• Exposure
1. Front Yu Add %
2. Lett 7<1A %
�Wtu -
3. Rear %
4. Right — %
Total %
Notes and/or Calculations: Use —% x b = +
draw Sketch on other side if needed.,
Appmlilix 15
gpm(a)
gpm(b)
Total -- gpm
Fire Flow Required ��4m
5. The va!uc obtained in No. 2 above is reduced by the percentage (if any) determined in No. 3
above and increased by the Percentage (if any) determined in No. 4 above.
The fire flow shall not excret! 12,000 glint nor be less than SOU tepid.
Note 1: Tlne guide is not expected to necessarily provide an adequate value fol
lumber yards, petroleum storage, refineries, grain clew, tors, and large
chemical plains but may indicate a minimum value for these hazards.
Note 2: Judgment must be used for business, industrial, and other occupancies not
specifically mentioned.
Note 3: Consideration should be given to the configuration of the building(s) being
consideted and to the fire department accessibility,
o c ""fitoodfraittc slitictures separated by less than -10 fret shall be consiJ`crerTas'
one fire area.
Note 5: Party Walls — Normally an unpierced party (common) Nvall may warrant up
to a 10% exposure charge.
Note G: Iligh one-story buildings — When a building is stated as I = 2, or more
stories, the number of stories to he used in the formula depends upon file
use being made of the building. For example, consider 1 = 3 -story building. If
the building is being used for high -piled stock, of for rack storage, the
building would probably be considered as 3 stories and, in addition, an
'increased Percentage for occupancy may be warranted. However, if tilt
tibildint, k being used for steel fabrication an+i lite extra height is provided'
only to facilitate movement of objects by a crane, the huilding would.
pioliabl. be crmtsidemd as a 1-stoly building acu a de:rea,cd percentage for
occupancy may be warranted.
Note 7: If a building is exposed within 150 fret. nonna!!y some percentage increase
for exposure will be made.-
Note
atte:Note 8: Where wood shingle roofs could connib!ic to spreading fires, add 500 gpm.
Note 9: Any noncombustible building is considered to warrant an 0.8 coefficient.
Note 10: Dwellings — For groupings of 1 -family and small 2 -family dwellings not
exceeding 2 stories in height, the following short method may be used. (Por
other residential buildings, the regular method should be used.)
Exposure distances Suggested required fire (low
Over 100' 500 gpm
31 - 100' 750 - 1000
11 -30' 1000 - 1500
10' or less 1500 - 2000•
"If the buildings are continuous lite a minimum of 1S00_i mn,
r_
"!nelude% enperirhird mtterl,l lit 1, , r. n-- ... : •:I: e, Offire with Its permm '... C1.7" I :- a. - .. Ser0cet ornce."
:Appendix 3
�� �)FFE f� r A•GLE ALLEY
V
April 28, 198x'e,
Mr. Norman Wood, P.E.
TOWN OF AVON
Post Office Box 975
Avon, Colorado 81620
RE: BEAVER VIEW PROJECT - LOTS 3 AND 6, WILDRIDGF.
FIRE HYDRANT FLOW TEST
Dear Norman:
The following is the data recorded of the above -referenced flow test:
Static Pressure 152 psi
Flow Conditions Flow > 1300 gpm
Residual Pressure > 60 psi
This test was performed on the upper hydrant, by Lot 6, on April 27, 1988, by
District personnel.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at 476-7480.
FSH:das.8
r,d
Sincerely,
UPPER EAGLE. VALLEY CONSOLIDATED SANITATION DISTRICT
Fred S. Haslee
Engineering Technician
A PARTICIPATING DISTRICTS — ARROWHEAD METRO WATER• AVON MLTRO VIA TER A 01: AVLP CREEK METRO WATCH• BERRY CREEK METRO WLTCR CLEAN
EAGLE VAIL METRO WATLHO LUWANUS METRO ',AT 11H.IAKI[ CHUG lA1.AaUWS NA1I I' • 11P14 H LAGIL--1-1-LV CO. I501LIDAT EU SANITATIO1:
f'
VAIL VALLLY CONSOLIUATLI. WA rLH • JAIL W A I IJ+ 1.141; SAT:11 A I IJrc