HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.res.186.1999111111111111111111111111111111111111111III 1111111111111
438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
1 of 20 R 0.00 0 0 00 N 0 00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY,
COLORADO, FINDING A TAKING AND GRANTING 1041 HAZARD REVIEW, CONCEPTUAL
SUBMISSION AND SCENIC OVERLAY APPROVAL TO THE NEWFOUNDLAND LODE
Resolution No. 99- 18'6
RECITALS
1. Win Win, LLC ("Applicant") has requested development approval following a staff determination
that a previous approval had not been common law vested and that application of current Code standards
would result in a taking. The approval sought is to construct a single-family residence following a takings
determination by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners ("BOCC").
2. The property is located at the base of Aspen Mountain adjacent to the Hoag Subdivision on Ute
Avenue, and is described as the Newfoundland Lode Mining Claim, M.S. 5190.
3. The property contains approximately 10 acres and is zoned AFR-10.
4. The BOCC granted Scenic Foreground Overlay, General Submission and 1041 Hazard Review
approval to construct a single family residence on the Newfoundland Lode, pursuant to Resolution No. 91-
87.
5. The BOCC subsequently granted an extension of vested rights pursuant to Resolution No. 94-198.
6. The vested rights expired on October 25, 1997.
7. The County Zoning Officer issued a notice of violation in 1996 for excavation of the building
envelope on the Newfoundland Lode without permits. Section 7-20-030(E)(2) of the Land Use Code
provides that "no land use approvals or building or other development permits shall be issued with respect to
the property where the violation is believed to exist during the period of such violation." This outstanding
violation has not been remedied.
8. The BOCC heard the Applicant's request at its regularly scheduled meeting of October 27, 1999, at
which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application.
Resolution No. 99- ! ?(e
Page 2
11111 111111 11111E111 IIIII 11111111 IIIII 11111111
438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
2 of 20 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
9. The BOCC finds that the application of Code criteria does constitute a taking of all reasonable use
and economic return from the subject property, since there are no developable areas on the subject property
that avoid slopes in excess of 30%, or are located outside of severe wildfire hazard and potential avalanche
hazard areas.
10. The BOCC further finds that the property owner has a reasonable investment backed expectation to
some residential development of the property.
11. The BOCC finds that the property is not appropriate for any use other than residential and that this
application proposes development in the best possible location, given the hazards identified on the property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT RESOLVED by the BOCC that it does hereby grant 1041 Hazard
Review and Conceptual Submission approval for the Newfoundland Lode, subject to the following
conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest:
1. This resolution repeals and replaces BOCC Resolution Nos. 91-87 and 94-198.
2. The Applicant shall submit a 24" by 36" 1041 site plan to the Community Development Department
for approval and recording, prior to submission of any building permit applications. The site plan
shall also be submitted in digital format for integration into the County's GIS system. The site plan
shall comply with the provisions of Section 5-70-040 of the Land Use Code.
3. Prior to issuance of any permits and within a reasonable amount of time, the Applicant shall:
A. Pay $1,560 (8 hours at $185/hour) to the Community Development Department to satisfy
the time spent inspecting and responding to the Code violations.
B. Submit a financial security in an amount and form acceptable to the County Attorney's
Office for remediation of the existing violation. If the site is not developed in accordance
with the development approval and the violation remedied within 24 months of the date of
this approval, the BOCC may use the security to remediate the violation on the property
This does not limit the BOCC from choosing other additional remedies to address this or
other violations of the Code.
4. Prior to submittal of any building permits, the Applicant shall:
A. Obtain an access permit from the County Engineer to extend the driveway to the residence
and to construct a portion of the required fire turnaround, if necessary.
B. Submit documentation that a fire hydrant was installed as part of the excavation for the
driveway, as required. If a hydrant is not in place, the Applicant shall install a hydrant prior
to issuance of any building permits.
C. Provide documentation that the proposed residence complies with the recommendations
made in the following reports: Dr. Nicholas Lampiris' letter of March 21, 1990, Chen
111111 11111 111111 IIIII Mill III 11111 IIII IIII
Resolution No.99-14 438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
Page 3
3 of 20 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0 00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
Northern's letter of April 18, 1990, Dr. Arthur Mears' letter of August 2, 1990 and report
dated September 1990, Schmueser Gordon Meyer's report of September 25, 1990, and
Design Structures' letter of October 15, 1990 (attached as Exhibits B-F).
D. Submit a drainage and erosion control plan for review and approval by the County
Engineer. The plan shall address means of controlling drainage and erosion during as well
as following construction. The Applicant shall comply with the recommendations made by
Schmueser Gordon Meyer in the "Gordon Miller Residence Drainage Report" dated
September 25, 1990 (attached as Exhibit E).
E. Submit a revegetation plan for review and approval by Land Management. The plan shall
include an estimate of the cost of the revegetation (labor and plants).
F. Submit an improvements agreement to address erosion, rockfall and drainage issues
associated with the proposed access, excavation and construction stages of the
development. The improvements agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the County
Attorney, County Engineer and Community Development Director.
G. Obtain Board of Adjustment approval for necessary setback variances.
H. File a fireplace/woodstove permit with the Community Development Department.
I. Submit a plan depicting the design and location for the required avalanche hazard warning
signs, for review and approval by the Zoning Officer.
J. Submit documentation that the property will be served by the City of Aspen Water
Department.
K. Submit documentation that the property will be served by the Aspen Consolidated
Sanitation District.
L. Submit a fugitive dust control plan for review and approval by the Environmental Health
Department. The Applicant shall ensure that mud and dirt is not carried out onto
surrounding roads by vehicle traffic from the site during construction.
M. Demonstrate proof of insurance to protect neighboring properties from potential water flow
and rockfall damage during construction of the residence to the satisfaction of the County
Attorney.
5. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the Applicant shall:
A. Post avalanche hazard warning signs along the driveway, as approved by the Zoning
Officer.
B. Submit financial security in a form acceptable to the County Attorney to ensure the
successful revegetation of the property pursuant to the approved Revegetation Plan. Land
Management shall specify the required amount of the financial security. The financial
security shall be held for a minimum of one full growing season after the revegetation is
completed, unless Land Management specifies a longer term.
C. Submit financial security in a form acceptable to the County Attorney to ensure compliance
with the improvements agreement. The County Engineer and Community Development
Director shall specify the required amount of the financial security.
6. All areas disturbed by construction shall be revegetated to limit water consumption and additional
runoff within one growing season of project completion.
7. No development activity, including grading, landscaping, and vegetation removal or disturbance
shall occur outside the building envelope, with the exception of driveway and utility extension and
maintenance and the performance of wildfire mitigation required as part of this approval. Native
Resolution No. 99-11,(P
Page 4
11E11 11111 111111 11111 111111 11111 11111 III IIIII 1111
438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
4 of 20 R 0.00 D 0 00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
vegetation shall be maintained outside the building envelope (except for actions necessary to
comply with the required wildfire mitigation).
8. No expansion of the approved square footage of the residence shall be permitted in the future.
Development on the property is limited to a 5,930 square foot residence, all inclusive, and a 750
square foot garage.
9. The Applicant shall install an automatic fire sprinkler system in the residence, and shall comply with
the codes and requirements of the Aspen Fire Protection District, including provision of an adequate
fire turnaround and installation of a fire hydrant.
10. The Applicant shall comply with the following landscaping and wildfire defensible space mitigation
standards to the satisfaction of the Colorado State Forest Service, prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the residence:
A. Brush, debris, and non -ornamental vegetation shall be removed within a minimum 10 foot
perimeter around the structure.
B. Vegetation shall be reduced to break up the vertical and horizontal continuity of the fuels a
minimum of 45 feet uphill and to the sides of all structures.
C. Spacing between clumps of brush and vegetation within the perimeter shall be a minimum
of two times the height of the fuel. Maximum diameter of the clumps shall not exceed 10
feet. All measurements shall be from the edges of the crowns of the fuel.
D. All branches from trees and brush within the perimeter shall be pruned to a height of 10 feet
above the ground and ladder fuels from around trees and brush shall be removed.
E. Tree crown separation within the perimeter shall have a minimum of 10 feet between the
edges of the crowns.
F. All branches which extend over the roof eaves shall be trimmed and all branches within 15
feet of the chimneys shall be removed.
G. The density of fuels within a 100 foot perimeter of all structures shall be reduced.
H. All deadfall within the 100 foot perimeter shall be removed.
I. Low vegetation shall be maintained within a 10 foot perimeter around all structures.
J. The Applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible space
vegetation requirements.
11. The Applicant shall comply with the following additional wildfire mitigation standards:
A. An exterior sprinkler system shall be installed.
B. Roofs shall have a Class A, non-combustible roof system. Wood shake/shingle roof
coverings and flat roofs (up to a 3:12 pitch) are prohibited in all wildfire hazard areas.
C. Vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh with mesh 14 inch maximum.
D. Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris.
E. Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash, and flammable debris.
F. All flammable materials shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away
from any structure.
G. Weeds and grasses within the 10 foot perimeter shall be maintained to a height not more
than 6 inches.
H. Firewood/wood piles shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away
from the structure.
I. Swimming pools shall be accessible to Fire Department vehicles.
111111 11111 111111 11111 111111 11111 11111 III 11111 1111 1111
Resolution No. 99- )74
438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
Pages 5 of 20 R 0.00 D 0 00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
J. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris.
K. Wood fences shall not connect to the structure.
L. Any outbuildings or additional structures shall adhere to the same standards as structures.
M. Fuel tanks shall be installed underground with an approved container.
N. Propane tanks shall be installed according to NFPA 48 standards and on a contour away
from the structure with standard defensible space vegetation mitigation around anyabove-
ground tank. Any wood enclosure around the tank shall be constructed with materials
approved for 2 hour fire -resistive construction on the exterior side of the walls.
O. Each structure shall have a minimum of one 10 pound approved ABC fire extinguisher
placed in a visible and accessible location.
P. Addresses shall be clearly marked with 2 inch non-combustible letters and shall be clearly
visible at the primary point of access from the public or common access road and installed
on a non-combustible post.
Q. All utility lines shall be buried within the driveway or the utility easement.
12. The Applicant shall comply with the following 3ructural design and construction options:
A. Projections (Heat Traps):
1) Projections at the roof line (which include but are not limited to eaves, cornices,
soffits and roofs over open decks) shall be sheathed with materials approved for
1 hour fire -resistive construction.
a) For projections below the roof line (including, but not limited to, exterior
balconies, decks, porches, cantilevered floor projections, and bay
windows, which extend over a flat or slopes surface) the open space
between grade and the underside of projections below the roof line shall
be enclosed by solid, vertical walls. These walls shall be constructed
with materials approved for 1 hour fire -resistive construction on the
exterior side of the wall and shall extend from the top of grade to the
underside of the floor decking or walls of the projection.
b) An alternative construction method for such projections would require
use of noncombustible building materials, or heavy timber or log wall
construction, if the underside of the projecting portion is covered with
materials approved for one hour fire resistive construction and if there
are no inside angles of less than 75 degrees. Areas below such
projections shall be void of vegetative or other combustible materials.
These areas below projections shall be protected from accumulation of
vegetative materials by placement of a vegetative barrier covered with
rocks or gravel or by coverage with concrete or stone. There shall be no
storage of combustible materials under projections. The walls
underneath projections shall be constructed with materials approved for
1 hour fire -resistive construction on the exterior side of the wall.
Window openings in walls below projections shall be tempered glass.
Doors shall be noncombustible or 1 3/4" solid wood.
B. Windows and Glass: Glazed openings shall be provided with close -able, solid, exterior
non-flammable shutters or shall be tempered glass.
Resolution No. 99- )
Page 6
IIIIII11111 ������ (111111111111111IBM 11111 IIII IIII
438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
8 of 20 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
C. Exterior Walls and Siding: Siding and exterior wall construction shall have a minimum 1
hour fire -resistive rating ground level to roof line. Exterior doors shall be
noncombustible or 1 3/4" solid wood.
D. Foundations: Foundations, skirting and crawl space openings shall be fully enclosed and
constructed with materials approved for 1 hour fire -resistive construction on the exterior
side of the walls and shall extend from the top of grade to the underside of the floor
decking or walls.
E. Stilt Construction: The underside of decks and structures with stilt foundations shall be
fully enclosed and constructed with materials approved for 1 hour fire -resistive
construction on the exterior side of the walls and shall extend from the top of grade to the
underside of the floor decking or walls.
13. All trash/garbage shall be contained in approved bear proof garbage containers.
14. The Applicant shall comply with the following standards for development within avalanche
hazard areas:
A. The foundation shall be designed by a certified engineer.
B. Structural avalanche defenses shall be designed by a certified engineer to withstand
avalanche impact forces.
C. The owner shall bear the costs of any avalanche control meaures that may be required to
mitigate the hazard.
15. The Applicant shall comply with the following standards for development on slopes of greater
than 15%:
A. Adequate mechanical support shall be provided for cut slopes.
B. Adding water which may decrease slope stability shall be avoided.
C. Adding weight to the top of the slope shall be avoided.
D. Disturbed slopes must be contoured so that they can be revegetated.
E. Steepening of existing slopes shall be avoided.
F. Confine cuts, fills, grading and excavation to the minimum area needed for construction.
16. The exterior of the residence shall be finished in earth tones, which blend with the colors of the
natural surrounding environment. Roof materials, gutters, downspouts, flashing, etc. shall be non -
reflective and of earthtone colors.
17. Any exterior lighting on the residence shall be down -lighting and shall comply with the Code
regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance. Landscape and driveway lighting shall
be prohibited.
18. If mine waste, waste rock or mine dumps are encountered during excavation of the property, the
Applicant shall contact the Environmental Health Department.
19. For any free market residential structure of 5,000 gross square feet or greater, the Applicant shall
comply with Section 4.01.01(B) of the Pitkin County Road Management and Maintenance Plan,
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
Resolution No. 99- / p 4o
438010 11/24/1989 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
Page7 7 of 20 R 0.00 D 0 00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
which requires the Applicant to provide construction trip and residential trip generation studies. The
Applicant shall comply with this provision as it is in effect at the time of building permit issuance to
the satisfaction of the County Engineer.
20. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made in the application and in the public
meetings.
21. The vested rights for this approval shall expire on October 27, 2002.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED on the 27th day of October, 1999.
PUBLISHED AFTER,,IDOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS in the
Aspen Times Weekly on thee/day of /VD l/ , 1999.
ATTEST:
yneIR Dean, Clerk to the BOCC
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
fi2WA 19 // 9. 99
Cindy Houben
Community Development Director
PID #2737-183-00-001
Exhibits
A. Legal Description
B. Nicholas Lampiris leter dated 3/21/90
C. Chen Northern's letter dated 4/18/90
D. Arthur Mears' letter dated 8/3/90
E. Arthur Mears' report dated 9/90
F. Schmueser Gordon Meyer's report dated 9/25/90
G. Design Structure's letter dated 9/25/90
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
John Ely
Coun Attorney
IIIIII IIIII Bill IIIII Ell IIIII III lilt Ill Iil l
438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
8 of 20 R 0.00 D 0 00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
Exhibit "A"
4: 9f-/p-
Legal Description:
The Newfoundland Lode Mining Claim, M.S. 5190;
excluding that portion of Newfoundland M.S. 5190 ouverlapping Hoag
Subdivision, City of Aspen, Colorado, Lot 3.
Starting at point #3, S 04 degrees 49'48" W 227.9 feet, -
thence N 55 degrees 48'50".W 33.54 feet;
thence N 65 degrees 31'10" W 37.97 feet;
to rebar and plastic cap #9184 leaving line N 59 degrees 54' E
134.21 feet.
k: f?
•.Nicnotas Lampins, rn.u.
CONSULTING G£OLOG7st
0793 VALLEY ROAD
CARBONDALE. COLORADO 81673
p031963.3603 (7t moues)
Jahn R. Wedum
616 East Hyman, Suite 102
Aspen CO 81611
RE: Newfoundland Claim
Dear Randy:
Exhibit B
I have completed my geologic investigation for purposes of
House Bill 1041 of the building site on the Newfoundland..
Mining Claim on the north -facing slope of Aspen Mountain..:•,
above Ute Avenue as shown on the accompanying map. This is
along the southern edge of the Town of Aspen within the Aspen
7 1/2 minute quadrangle, Pitkin County, Colorado.
There is a proposed driveway to another homesite beyond the
'proposed site which is on a steep, conifer -covered hillside.
There is no bench or.other break'in slope near the site and.
the cnly other feature of note is an old portal into the
mountainside which can be seen about two hundred feet east of
the building site and below it.
The geology of the site consists of a thin veneer of
colluvial deposits containing angular blocks of limestone,
sandstone and some granitic rocks. The matrix is mostly
silty sand. This surficial deposit has been mapped by Bruce
Bryant, 1971, as a talus deposit but I believe that the tern
colluvium is mare accurate at this location. The underlying
bedrock.ceuld not be determined because of lack of nearby
outcrops, but is probably the Cambrian ace Sawatch Quartzite
or one of the Lower Paleozoic carbonate units. Because of
the steep attitude of bedrock units in t`is area and the
faulting present, the bedrock could even be the Precambrian
age quartz manzonite. At'.any rate, the appearance of the
rocks within the colluvium indicates that the'bedrock is near
surface.
Snow sliding and minor rock fal.i is a possibility cn this
property but there are two well established chutes on either
side of the site which should contain most of these hazardous
events. These paths can be well seen and their relationship,.
to the site evaluated from across the valley in the Smuggler
area.
11111111111111111111111111111111 IIIII III IIIII Ill It
438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
9 of 20 R 0.00 D 0 00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
1111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111 1111
438010 11/24/199S 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
10 of 20 R 0 00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
k : 99-04
This, in addition to the extensive tree cover above the Site,
should minimize the potential hazard to the site;
nevertheless, the rear foundation wall should be designed' to
protrude at least six feet above finished grade and be
without doors cr windows an this upslope-facing side of the
home. It should be strong enough. to withstand farces of at
least 200 pounds per square foot, or the equivalent if the
building can be designed to be prow -shaped up the hilh,
thereby reducing the:forces potentially affecting the
proposed home.
Slope stability is the most important consideration for this '
site because of the steepness. There is n., indication of
-long term instability on this site. .The °pistol -butting" of
.some trees is probably due to down hill snow pressure rather
than instability of the.colluvium, but a factor of safety
analysis is 'efinitely in order. The nearness of bedrock to
the surface is a positive factor because presumably the
foundation can be anchored to it. Positive drainage around
the home will be important and natural vegetation not
requiring watering is advised to further insure stability of
the site. Obviously, soils' engineering will be an important
aspect of this project.
The faulting mapped in the area has been inactive for
' thousands of years with nn evidence in the field of recent.
movement. The above -referenced portal trends well east of
the site but subsurface maps of the area should be evaluated
'to' be sure there is no near -surface tunnel or stope directly
under the site.
I believe that water and waste disposal systems will be
available from municipal sources. In order to prevent the
possible accumulation of radon gas, adequate sub -floor
ventilation should be provided ir, the construction of the
home. If there are further quettions., please do not hesitate
to contact me.
Sincerely,
12-1.4
Nicholas Lampiris
Consulting Geologist
,e : ff" /t6
1111111 Hill 1111111111I 1111111111111111 III 01111 III 1111
438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
11 of 20 R 0 00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
Exhibit C
--.Apr`! 18, 1990
Randy Wader
616 East Hyman, Suite 102
Aspen CO 81611-1981 .
Subject: Review cf Soil and Geologic Corziitions, Newfoundland Parcel, Pitkin
County, Colorado.. _
Job No. 4 319 90
As requested, we are .prov'.ding cuimrsrts regarding the soil and geologic
contiticaz at the subject :Ate based on cur experience in the area. Chen
Northern previously conducted geotes±nical studies en the adjacent let 2, Hoag
Subdivision, for feasibility and foundation design of a prcposed residence and
reported our fitdirgs under Jai No. 4 275 89.
Aresidence is proposed at the lower end of the Newfa:rrdlarii Par which will
use a carmen driveway with int 3. The hillside terrain is consistent in the a -ea
and we expect the subsoil and geologic conditions are also similar to those
identified cn Lot 3. The proposed building site lies within a potential
avalanche zone and could be impacted by debris flaws.
•
Eased cn our experience in the area, development on the property appears feasible
from a geotec± nical viewpoint. There is a risk of construction induced slope
instability. A design level geotec'.^.nical study should be conducted to &dress
the site stability, foundation, drainage and grading for the proposed bui .dim.
The site should be evaluated for avalanche and debris flow risk andany monied
mitigation.
We are available to conduct the subsoil study at ycur request. If you have any
questions or if we can be of further assistance, ploan let us know.
Sincerely,
CHE N-NORTHERN, LNC.
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
SIP/ec
♦acne, dnc
(H n4
Taadcon:m
—/n
Exhibit D
ARTHUR 1. MEARS, P.E., INC.
Nanrtni Hazards Canuiuu<u
222 Lag Cothk A...
G...:.-. Colo..& 81230
303-641.3214
August 3, 1990
Mr. John Wedum
Wedum Design and Development
616 E. Hyman Ave.
Aspen, CO 81612
Dear Mr. Wedum:
At your request, I conducted a site inspection of the lot
identified as „Newfoundland MS 5190' above 'Jte Avenue on August 2,
1990. The purpose of this site inspect n was to evaluate the
potential for snow avalanches at the build_ag site and to consider
the feasibility of avalanche mitigation.
AVALANCHE -HAZARD POTENTIAL
Inspection of the terrain and vegetation at and above the building
site indicates the proposed construction area is within range of
sma:3 avalanches that fl a through the trees and can impact the
proposed building. Charazteristic avalanche damage near the site
consists of bent and deformed main stems of fir trees, broken
trees, and vegetative debris align,.1 downslope. Small avalanches
may reach the site at 10-year return periods, on the average.
However, even during design -:magnitude ("lo0-year") avalanche
conditions, avalanches will be small and will not possess great
destructive energy.
AVALANCHE MITIGATION
Avalanche mitigation at this site is feasible and can be achieved
through "direct protection" of t'le building. This would be
accomplished by reinforcing the uphill wall/roof system for
avalanche static and dynamic loads. The magnitudes, directions,.
and areas affected by these loads cannot be determined at the
present time. Loading characteristics can be determined given
final architectural details about building size, shape, and
orientation. The building should be designed to eliminate or
minimize activity on the uphill side. Reinforcement of the
building for avalanche loads would stop the avalanche at the uphill
side of the building and therefore would reduce the hazard on the
driveways below the site which are now exposed to avalanches.
.j�ncerely,
( .O.(4 4. \ 11ee
Arthur I. Mears, P.E.
Avalanche -control emit eer
IIIIII IIIII IIIIII IIIII IIIIII IIII"II'I III "I'll III IIII
438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
12 of 20 R 0.00 D 0 00 N 0 00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
it: 99-i*b
Exhibit E
IIIIII 11111 IIIIII 1111111111 11111 11111III 111111 III IIII
438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
13 of 20 R 0 00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
'.SNOW—AfALANCEE LOADING ANALYSIS
PROPOSED BUILDING AT "NEWFOUNDLAND MS 5190"
UTE AVENUE, NEAR ASPEN, COLORADO
Prepared For
Mr. John Wedum
Prepared By
Arthur I. Mears, P.E., Inc.
Gunnison, Colorado
September, 1990
R:99-in.
OBJECT=VES AND LISITATICNS
This analysis'cf snow -avalanche loads was requested by Mr. John
Wedum of Wedum Design and Development. The proposed building
analyzed in this report is located on the lot identified as
"Newfoundland MS 5190," above U':e Avenue, near Aspen, Colorado.
The objectives of this study are:
a. Computation of design -magnitude ("100-year")
avalanche velocities and pressure potentials at the
building site;
b. Calculation of forces on exposed building surfaces
at the above -described lot;
c. Description of the avalanche loads and effects of
the avalanche on the structure; and
d. Description of the change in avalanche hazard
resu.'ting from the proposed project. .
This analysis considers snow avalanches and snow -avalanche loads
only. Other geological and/or meteorological process and the
interaction of such processes on the proposed structure have not
been considered. In particular, design snow loads which usually
are applied in design at this location must be added to the
avalanche loads given here.
The loads computed depend on building location, size, shape, and
orientation as specified in the John Wedum drawings which were
drawn on September 18, 1990. Significant changes tc these plans
may invalidate the loads given in this report.
2 DESIGN -AVALANCHE CHARACTERISTICS
The design avalanche, or event with an estimated return period of
100 years (a constant 1% annual probability), will begin on the
steep, northeast -facing slope approximately 400 feet above the
building site, at an elevation of 8,500 feet. Although this
slope supports a continuous ccnifer forest, the spacing of trees
in the forest is not sufficiently close to anchor the snowpack
prevent avalanche release. Damage to t ees above and at the site
indicates avalanches have occurred in the past.
The design avalanche was computed by application of statistical
and dynamic mciels as described in Mears (1989) and Mears (in
prep.). The design -avalanche parameters used in load
computations are: velocity = 11.0 m/s (25 mph);•flow density =
400 kg/m3 (25 lbs/ft3); flow depth = 1.0 m (3.3 ft). Soil and
vegetative debris, including tree trunks, may be entrained in the
avalanche debris and complicate loading characteristics, as
discussed 4.n Section 3.
IIIIII IIIII IIIIII IIIII IIIIII IIIII IIIII III IIIIII III IIII
438010 11/24/1988 12:08P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
14 of 20 R 0.00 D 0 00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
X: 99-'fl
3 AVALANCL LOADS AND LOAaDING c3IRACTISSTICS
Building surfaces exposed to avalanches and receiving avalanche
loads are ;hown as surfaces "A" through "Y" on Figure 1.
goof surfaces "A," "B." and "0" receive impact
(deflection) loads as the avalanche flaw direction is
changed by the roof and receive depositional loads as
the compressed avalanche debris is deposited on the
roof. The deflection and depositional loads are not
simultaneous, however. The design case on these
surfaces will be a static depositional load which is
trapezoidal in cross section as shown on Figure 2.
This load may persist for the entire snow season, a
period which may extend from December through April at
this location.
The "elevator wedge." surfaces "V" and "W" are vertical
surfaces that receive avalanche impact loads. As shown
in Figure 2, unit loads on the elevator wedge have been
resolved into 3 components which are normal (P3),
horizontal shear (P4), and vertical shear (Ps). These
are impact loads which will increase over the entire
10-foot height cf the wedge from zero tb the maximum
specified in Figure 2 in 0.2-to-0.4 seconds. Because
they increase quickly, the strains produced by these
loads may be greater than those resulting from an
equivalent static load of equal magnitude, a fact that
should be considered by the structural engineer in
final design.
The guide walls "X" and "Y" are intended to protect the
sloping glass surface "C," as the avalanche expands
laterally on the roof. As shown on Figure 2, the guide
walls receive a uniform, horizontal impact load (P6),
as specified. These horizontal loads are assumed to be
constant to the top cf the guide walls which decrease
in height in the downhill direction (north). These
loads also increase from zero to maximum in 0.2-to-0.4
seconds and probably also must be treated as impact
loads because they may produce strains in excess of
those resulting from an equivalent static load.
All of the impact loads specified in this report have been
computed ass.ning the avalanche is a homogeneous "fluid" of a
density of 400 kg/m3 (25 lbs/ft3) at the instant of impact. In
fact, the avalanche will probably contain small rocks, tree
trunks, and other solid material which can produce point loads
that may exceed the average loads given in this report. However,
the loading surface areas for these point loads will be small
(less than 1 ft2), therefore would not precipitate general
structural failure. They may, however, produce localized damage
to the surface receiving impact, a fact that should be considered
in design and maintenance.
1 IIIIN 11111 111111 11111 111111 11111 11111 III 111111 III 1111
438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
15 of 20 R 0.00 D 0 00 N 0 00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
R : 99-ir4
4 CHANGE 2:7 AVALANCHE HAZARD
In general avalanche "hazard" will increase in proportion to the
number of persons exposed to the avalanche process. The proposed
project, similar to other projects planned and/or built in
avalanche areas throughout the United States, Canada, and Europe,
will draw an increased number of persons into avalanche terrain,
therefore may increase the overall hazard. The persons one
wishes to protect simply may not be in the specially -design
building when the avalanche occurs. They would be exposed to
avalanches if they were above the building or in the forest on
the sides of the building. However, the proposed project does
not plan exposed living areas or decks in the avalanche areas.
Furthermore, this project will stop avalanches before .they reach
the access road. Therefore the exposure to avalanches below the
building and on the road will be reduced as a result of this
project.
•
Because there may be a small increase in overall avalanche hazard
simply because more people may be in avalanche terrain after
building construction, this increase can be minimized if
residents educate themselves about the avalanche'phenomena and
heed all official avalanche warnings and advisories. Such self
education is recommended for all those who plan to live in
avalanche terrain.
•
Report submitted by,
E
Arthur I. Mears, P.E.
Avalanche -control engineer
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
438010 11/24/1999 12:09P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI
18 of 20 R 0 00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO
Roof rfaces A. ?. and D
P
Q:41 /8b
7-1 = 300 fzs/ft`
15ft ..�
P2 = 150 lbt
(Static loads)
Surfaces V and W (elevator wedre)
P3 = 23o lbs/ft2
P4 = 130 lbs/ft2
P5 = 130 lbs/ft2
(P3, P. and'P5
are impact loads)
P5 is vertical (upward) shear acting
on surfaces V and W.
L
Guide Walls X and Y
t
{
c
P
P6 = 100 lbs/ft2
P6 is a uniform, impact load acting
td the upper edge of the Guide walls,
which are variable in height.
FIGURE 2. Directions and magnitudes of avalanche loads on,.'arious
exposed building surfaces. These avalanche loads are in addition to
other loads (including snow loads) usually considered in design at this
location. See text for limitations and additional discussion.
�`
V 'CONSULTING £NGiN£EP.S L /°TORSI is 01-4
- >
—JN
6-1 Paz
ENO
=.,o
— a
Paz
8-1
—n n
�O- m
neinW61
d'm
O.Z
—mm
—N�
CIc
▪ 61
� •
e 0
c.l
Cr
wm
—sN
_.. ,.
CD o
de• co
September 25, 1990
Exhibit F
Mr. Randy Wedum
616 East Hyman Avenue, Suite 102
Aspen, Co. 81611
RE: Gordan Killer Residence Drainaze Report
Dear Randy:
This letter is in follow-up to•your request for a drainage report
for the Cordon'Hiller Property, also known as the Newfoundland H.S.
5190 Mining Claim, off of Ute Avenue in Aspen. This report is based
on our discussion of September 19, 1990, the schematic building
plans which you provided to me at that time, a site visit on
September 24, 199c and the review of a drainage plan for the Hoag
Snbdivision, Lot 3, located Just to the west of. this building site.
It is my understanding that this drainage report is being requested
in order to verify that off -site drainage -will not impact the
proposed structure and -that drainage passing through the building
site can be directed and controlled 1: an appropriate !I? -Ire:.
Based predominantly on my field inspection'of September 24, 1990, I
do not anticipate that off -site drainage represents a significant
hazard to the proposed building envelope. During my site inspection
I noted that there are no on -site gullies which would appear to
direct a significant storm flow into the building area. The area is
generally well vegetated including numerous large fir trees and
gives no evidence of even seasonal drainage'lmpacts. In addition,
as noted in Nick Lampiris's letter to you of March 21, 1990, there
exists two large chutes, one on either side of the building site,
which would tend to contain the more significant snowelide and
rockfall events. As a result, drainage which may impact tie Miller
.Parcel will generally tend to be sheet flow from the areas
immediately above the site. The storm drainage plan prepared for
the Hoag Subdivision, Lot 3, by Tim Beck of High Country
Engineering, provides several applicable conditions for a site
nearly identical to the Hiller Property. comparable calculations
for upslope drainage area, soil type, and run-off coefficients
indicate that drainage impacting the Miller Residence should be in
the range of 0.7 of a cubic foot per second (cfs) in a 100 year
storm event. Because the upslope area is well vegetated and
topography would not encourage a concentrated flow impacting the
site, a debris flow event is tighly unlikely. For purposes of
design, however, I would be inclined tc utilize a debris flo•:.
bulking factor of 50% resulting in a total 100 year storm flow of
1.05 cfs. Even with these conservative assumptions, a 1.05 cfs flow
does not represent a significant concern.
1512 Grand Avenue, Suite 212 • Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 • (303) 945-1004
99-/tl
�' September 25, 1990
C, Mr. Randy Wed
�o Page 2
Paz
Y
1.4
an d Mitigation Recommendations
SO- B
4/3
Generally speaking, desired mitigation of the potential storm run-
d z off impacting this site comprises a series of wales that will
S UM m direct the flow around the structure to the uphill aide of•the entry
O EM N B drive. The proposed awale south of the uphill building wall, as
m ahown on your plans delivered to me on September 9, 1990, is more
N amde
than adequate to intercept a 1 cfs flow. I would recommend that this
m • swale•be continued around. the structure utilizing a triangular
0=1N m section 4 feet wide by 1 foot deep on both sides of the building,
• This Swale should be revegetated utilizing erosion control matting,'
" ▪ N topsoil and seeding with native plant types that would not interfere
m o with storm flows through the Swale.
min
maim
— a " As you had noted on the building plan, design•will entail retaining
walls immediately above the road. I would suggest including a catct
basin above the retaining walls on each side of the structure to
intercept storm flows before they over -top the wall. Flows would be
routed behind the wall and then through the bottom of the wall to
the uphill side of the road. Along the uphill side of the road
where the driveways would be crossing, I would recommend tte
Dlacementof 18° diameter culvert crossings connecting to the borrow
ditch on the uphill side of the road. These culvert sizes are
Significantly larger than the flow would require but smaller
culverts can be more easily plugged and rose a maintenance problem.
As a final note, the borrow ditch on the uphill side of tte new
roadway should be carried downslope as far as necessary to avoid
Impacts to adjacent properties. Where appropriate an additional
culvert crossing to the south side of Ute Avenue may be needed.
I trust that this report will be adequate for County review
purposes, feel free to contact me if I may provide further
information or additional detail regarding design.
Respectfully submitted,
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
Yay w rHammond, P.E.
Principal -Aspen Office
JH/ja90203
DESIGN
� - .1 r
Z
um.wc
S CC z
0
=wI—
S - 5d
_om
▪ 0
CCm
MIMMI as 6/
— N
-m
mc
um.�m
vm
N�
.\e
Go
INN
ass• o
o
amm
• N
STRUCTURES, INC.
,2•'99/K
25 September 1990
Wedum Design Developmcnt
616 E. Hyman
Suite 102
Aspen, Colorado 81611
•
Attn: Randy Wedum -
Re: Gordon Miller
Building Envelope
•
Ger. tlemer.:
•
WRiam M. Newell. RE
hrdd•rn
Exhibit G
We have reviewed the proposed house to be located on the
Newfoundland Parcel, Aspen, Colorado. During our review and
design of structural framing we reviewed the requirements
for soil conditions and avalanche and debris flow agai:.st
the building.
We have designed concrete foundation/retaining walls to
resist the lateral forces imposed by the slope of the soil
against the building and the avalanche and det:is flow
forces. We have provided drawings showing the required
reinforcement of the proposed walls. We have also designed
the roof of the house to resist a 300 psf live load as
required for avalanche.
We feel that
constructed,
noted above.
the proposed building is capable of being
and that it will withstand the imposed loads
Please contact us if you have any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
DESIGN STRUCTURES, INC.
William H. Newell, P.E.
President
' WILLIAM H. NEWELL
1660 Sevrnlernll• Sure! • Suite 200 • Deriver, Colorado R0202 • 13031 623-4927 • FAX (3031 62345