HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.273523100018 (2007) DOCUMENT LAYOUT
THIS FILE MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN ALL OF THE INFORMATION
LISTED BELOW IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER
Summary Sheet
Resolution for the BOCC and /or P &Z
Ordinance for the BOCC and /or P &Z
Determination for the Hearing Officer
Administrative Determination
Staff Memo
Application
Public Notice, Acceptance Letter, Referral(s) Letter
Site Plan
Miscellaneous
Plat(s)
479477
11111111101111111111111111111111111 V
63/03/2003
DETERMINATION OF THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT OF PLTKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, APPROVING THE LARK FAMILY
INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD 1041 HAZARD REVIEW
Determination No. 54 -2002
RECITALS
I. The Lark Family Investment Company, LTD. (hereafter "Applicant ") has applied to the Pitkin
County Hearing Officer (hereafter "Hearing Officer ") for 1041 Hazard Review approval to establish
a building envelope around an existing single family residence and replace it with a new single
family residence.
2. The property is located at 1892 Castle Creek Road and is more specifically described in Exhibit
A.
3. The property is zoned AFR -10 and contains approximately 2 acres.
4. The Hearing Officer heard this application at a public hearing on November 26, 2002, at which
time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application.
5. The Hearing Officer finds that the building envelope avoids wildlife and significant riparian habitat
areas, avoids slopes in excess of 30 percent, and is located in a low to medium wildfire hazard area.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Hearing Officer that the
previously recorded Lark 1041 Hazard Review approvals, specifically being Hearing Officer Determination
No. 45 -2002 and Hearing Officer Determination No. 52 -2002, are hereby null, void, and of no effect.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Hearing Officer that
approval is hereby granted to the Lark Family Trust Company, LLC 1041 Hazard Review subject to the
following conditions, which shall run with the land and he binding on all successors in interest:
1. The Applicants shall adhere to all conditions and material representations made in the application
and public meetings except as amended herein.
000001 of tZ
•
Page Baring Officer Determination No. -2002 I VIII) V III
0111111111110111111 11 I II 03 9 0 0 3 :3:44P
SILVIA 2. Prior to submittal for any building permits, the Applicants shall record a 24 X 36 inch mylar 1041
Ilazard Review Site Plan in accordance with Section 5 -70 -040 of the Land Use Code.
Community Development shall approve the site plan prior to recordation. Upon approval by
Community Development, the site plan shall be submitted in digital format for integration in to
the County Geographic Information System (GIS) prior to submission ofa building permit.
3. A septic permit shall be obtained from and approved by the Environmental Health Department,
prior to issuance ofa building permit. The septic system shall be located within the building
envelope.
4. If the existing well on the property continues to be used, the Applicant shall provide documentation
ofa well permit, drilling records, bacteriology testing results, and at Individual Sewage Disposal
System Application to the Environmental Health Department.
5. A fireplace /woodstove permit shall be approved by the Environmental Health Department prior to
issuance ofa building permit.
6. The applicant shall comply with the folbwing landscaping and wildfire defensible space mitigation
standards:
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 ofa 30 foot perimeter around the structure.
C. For a distance of 15 feet around all structures establish and maintain vegetation at 6 inches
or less. Woody vegetation should not be planted and flammable material should not be
stored within this perimeter.
D. For a distance of 30 feet arounf all structures, maintain grass at 6 inches or less.
C. Spacing between clumps of brush and vegetation within the 30 foot perimeters shall be a
minimum of two times the height of the fuel. Maximum diameter of the clumps shall be
two times the height of the fuel. All measurements shall be from the edges of the crowns of
the fuel.
D. All branches from trees and hrush within the 30 foot perimeter shall be pruned to a height
of 10 feet above the ground and ladder fuels from around trees and hrush shall be removed.
E. Tree crown separation within the 30 foot perimeters shall have a minimum of 10 feet
between the edges of the crowns.
F. All branches which extend over the roof eaves shall he trimmed and all branches within 15
feet of the chimneys shall be removed.
G. The density of fuels within a 100 foot perimeter of the structure shall be reduced.
H. All deadfall within the 100 foot perimeter shall be removed.
J. The applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible space
vegetation requirements.
7. The applicant shall comply with the following additional wildfire mitigation standards:
000002
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINIIIIIIIIINIIIIIIIIil1111 llll11 0 7 0. 9 . 17 . 7 ,
03 . 3 ;44
Hearing Officer Determination No. S -2002 R 0.00 0 0.00
Page 3
A. Roofing: New roofs shall have a class A roof covering or a class A assembly roof system.
Wood shake /shingle roof coverings and flat roofs (up to a 3:12) pitch are prohibited.
B. Vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh with mesh %a inch maximum.
C. Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris.
D. Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash, and flammable debris.
E. All flammable materials shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away
from any structure.
F. Weeds and grasses within the 10 foot perimeter shall be maintained to a height not more
than 6 inches.
G. Firewood /wood piles shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away
from the structure.
H. Swimming pools shall be accessible to Fire Department vehicles.
f. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris.
.1. Wood fences shall not connect to the structure.
K. Any outbuildings or additional structures shall adhere to the same standards as structures.
L. Fuel tanks shall he installed underground with an approved container.
M. 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 any above
ground tank. Any wood enclosure around the tank shall he constructed with materials
approved for 2 hour fire- resistive construction on the exterior side of the walls.
N. Each structure shall have a minimum of one 10 pound approved ABC fire extinguisher
placed in a visible and accessible location.
O. Addresses shall be clearly marked with 2 inch non- combustible letters and shall be visible
and installed on a non - combustible post.
P. New utility lines shall be buried.
8. No development, including grading, excavation, fill placement, berming, landscaping, entry or
ranch gates, and vegetation removal or disturbance shall occur outside of the approved building
land /or] development envelopes unless otherwise specified in this document, such as necessary
wildfire mitigation. Construction, staging, parking, utility and driveway extension and
maintenance shall occur within approved building, or access driveway.
9. Prior to application for building permit the applicant shall provide for review to the County
Engineer a trip generation and construction trip generation study for any free market residential
structure. A tragic engineering consultant hired by the applicant and pro-approved by the County
Engineer shall develop this study.
1 0. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 022 -2000, the Applicants are subject to the Fair Share Requirements
and shall pay a road impact fee.
11. Prior to commencement of any earthmoving or construction activity, the Applicants shall stake
the corners of the building envelope and install construction fencing around the perimeter of the
building envelope. The fencing shall remain in place until issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
Ahsolutely no riparian (e.g. cottonwoods, alder, blue spruce) or wetland (e.g. willows, sedges,
rushes) vegetation shall be damaged or removed outside the building envelope.
000003
Hearing Officer Determination No. I I DA IIIIII IIIIII III I I I I I II V III VIII IIII III 0 0 g D 0 00 03: 4 4 P
-2002
Page 5
12. Wetland impacts of greater than 0.08 acres shall require notification to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) and application for a 404 Nationwide Permit. Verification of a USACE
determination should be required prior to issuance of a building permit.
13. A drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted and approved by the County Engineer
prior to building permit submission. Surface and ground water flows intercepted by roads, utility
trenches and other development improvements shall not be diverted away from existing wetlands.
14. Only plant species that are identified by the Pitkin County Revegetation Guide as being
appropriate for wetland or riparian areas, or native species found to occur on site but not listed in
the Pitkin County Revegetation Guide, may be introduced for the revegetation of any wetland or
riparian area. The planning or introduction of any other plant species shall be prohibited.
15. Floor area shall be limited to 5,750 square feet exempt from growth management or use of TDRs.
16. Statutory vested rights for the approval contained herein are granted pursuant to the Pitkin
County Land Use Code and Colorado Statutes, subject to the exceptions set forth in Pitkin
County Land Use Code, § 4 -140 and C.R.S., § 24 -68 -105. The statutory vested rights granted
herein shall expire on November 26, 2005.
000004
Hearing Officer Determination No. A -2002
Page 4
NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES
WEEKLY ON THE 26th DAY OF OCTOBER 2002.
APPROVED ON THE 26th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2002.
PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE
ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY ON - 1c.0 u,cum l'6 , 1.o03 .
ATTEST: HEARING OFFICER OF PITKIN
COUNTY, COLORADO
Jan s Taylor, ames R. True,
Administrative Assistant Hearing Officer
Date: 1bfu4.ti , 5 7 or - ,3
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
J CCU
Cindy Houben,
ounty Attorney Community Development Director
Case #14130 -02
PID# 273523100018 J I
IIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIII� 03/03/2003 9 03:44P
D 0.00
000005
EXHIBIT A
A tract of land situated in the North '/ Northeast 1 /4 of Section 23, Township 10 South,
Range 85 West of the 6 Principal Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado, Tying Westerly, of
and adjacent to the Bonanza Placer, described as follows:
Beginning at the Corner No. 5 of said Bonanza Placer;
thence North 28° 38' West, 174.00 feet along the line between Corners No. 4 and No. 5
of said Bonanza Placer;
thence West , 360.00 feet;
thence South 07° 24' West, 10.00 feet;
thence South 38° 43' East, 332.00 feet;
thence South 68° 05' East, 90.00 feet;
thence North 68° 22' East, 140.00 feet to a point on the Westerly line of said Bonanza
Placer;
thence North 13° 21' East, 101.00 feet along the Westerly line of said Bonanza Placer
to Corner No. 5 of said Bonanza Placer, the Point of Beginning.
77
n
m
I VI I I IIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIVIIIIIIVIIIIIIIIIII O :4131;93 D 0;:3:44P cn m N
l� wZ:
'Cr at
1
m
•
o
—
000006
w.
DETERMINATION OF THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT OF PTTKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, APPROVING THE LARK FAMILY
INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD 1041 HAZARD REVIEW
Determination No.SZ -2002
RECITALS
1. The Lark Family Investment Company, LTD. (hereafter "Applicant ") has applied to the Pitkin
County Hearing Officer (hereafter "Hearing Officer ") for 1041 Hazard Review approval to establish
a building envelope around an existing single family residence and replace it with a new single
family residence.
2. The property is located at 1892 Castle Creek Road and is more specifically described in Exhibit
A.
3. The property is zoned AFR -10 and contains approximately 2 acres.
4. The Hearing Officer heard this application at a public hearing on November 26, 2002, at which
time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application.
5. The Hearing Officer finds that the building envelope avoids wildlife and significant riparian habitat
areas, avoids slopes in excess of 30 percent, and is located in a lowto medium wildfire hazard area. to m
CO
in M r)
om
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Hearing Officer that approval is - o
N
hereby granted to the Lark Family Trust Company, LLC 1041 Hazard Review subject to the following 1 m
it a m
conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest: o
m
0
1. The Applicants shall adhere to all conditions and material representations made in the application
and public meetings except as amended herein.
0
U
mare
Z
0
O
U
Z
a
N
6
0
a
ea J
N
000007
Hearing Officer Determination No. 2002
Page 2
2. Prior to submittal for any building permits, the Applicants shall record a 24 X 36 inch mylar 1041
Hazard Review Site Plan in accordance with Section 5 -70 -040 of the Land Use Code.
Community Development shall approve the site plan prior to recordation. Upon approval by
Community Development, the site plan shall be submitted in digital format for integration in to
the County Geographic Information System (GIS) prior to submission of a building permit.
3. A septic permit shall be obtained from and approved by the Environmental Health Department,
prior to issuance of a building permit. The septic system shall be located within the building
envelope.
4. if the existing well on the property continues to be used, the Applicant shall provide documentation
of a well permit, drilling records, bacteriology testing results, and ai Individual Sewage Disposal
System Application to the Environmental Health Department.
5. A fireplace /woodstove permit shall be approved by the Environmental Health Department prior to
issuance of a building permit.
6. The applicant shall comply with the folbwing landscaping and wildfire defensible space mitigation m
standards:
10 O
m
D m O
A. Brush, debris, and non - ornamental vegetation shall be removed within a minimum 10 foot 0) m a
perimeter around the structure. N °
B. Vegetation shall be reduced to break up the vertical and horizontal continuity of the fuels a r
Ezt
minimum of a 30 foot perimeter around the structure. 0. m .
C. For a distance of 15 feet around all structures establish and maintain vegetation at 6 inches m
or less. Woody vegetation should not be planted and flammable material shoud not be rc
stored within this perimeter.
D. For a distance of 30 feet arounf all structures, maintain grass at 6 inches or less.
C. Spacing between clumps of brush and vegetation within the 30 foot perimeters shall be a
minimum of two times the height of the fuel. Maximum diameter of the clumps shall be
two times the height of the fuel. All measurements shall be from the edges of the crowns of z
the fuel.
D. All branches from trees and brush within the 30 foot perimeter shall be pruned to a height
of 10 feet above the ground and ladder fuels from around trees and brush shall be removed. n
E. Tree crown separation within the 30 foot perimeters shall have a minimum of 10 feet
- LO
between the edges of the crowns. - a
- 0
F. Al] branches which extend over the roof eaves shall be trimmed and all branches within 15 a
feet of the chimneys shall be removed.
G. The density of fuels within a 100 foot perimeter of the structure shall be reduced.
H. All deadfall within the 100 foot perimeter shall be removed.
J. The applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible space
vegetation requirements.
7. The applicant shall comply with the following additional wildfire mitigation standards:
000008
Hearing Officer Determination No. tL -2002
Page 3
A. Roofing: New roofs shall have a class A roof covering or a class A assembly roof system.
Wood shake /shingle roof coverings and flat roofs (up to a 3:12) pitch are prohibited.
B. Vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh with mesh '/< inch maximum.
C. Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris.
D. Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash, and flammable debris.
E. All flammable materials shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away
from any structure.
F. Weeds and grasses within the 10 foot perimeter shall be maintained to a height not more
than 6 inches.
G. Firewood /wood piles shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away
from the structure.
H. Swimming pools shall be accessible to Fire Department vehicles.
1. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris.
J. Wood fences shall not connect to the structure.
K. Any outbuildings or additional structures shall adhere to the same standards as structures. �o m
L. Fuel tanks shall be installed underground with an approved container. ` m m
M. Propane tanks shall be installed according to NFPA 48 standards and on a contour away " n o
from the structure with standard defensible space vegetation mitigation around any above a
ground tank. Any wood enclosure around the tank shall be constructed with materials ct n"
approved for 2 hour fire- resistive construction on the exterior side of the walls. �� m
N. Each structure shall have a minimum of one 10 pound approved ABC fire extinguisher
placed in a visible and accessible location.
O. Addresses shall be clearly marked with 2 inch non - combustible letters and shall be visible o
and installed on a non- combustible post.
P. New utility lines shall be buried. o
8. No development, including grading, excavation, fill placement, berming, landscaping, entry or
ranch gates, and vegetation removal or disturbance shall occur outside of the approved building �z
[and /or] development envelopes unless otherwise specified in this document, such as necessary
wildfire mitigation. Construction, staging, parking, utility and driveway extension and SINIMOM
maintenance shall occur within approved building, or access driveway.
Cr
0
9. Prior to application for building permit the applicant shall provide for review to the County ••■•
Engineer a trip generation and construction trip generation study for any free market residential
structure. A traffic- engineering consultant hired by the applicant and pre - approved by the County
Engineer shall develop this study.
10. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 022 -2000, the Applicants are subject to the Fair Share Requirements
and shall pay a road impact fee.
11. Prior to commencement of any earthmoving or construction activity, the Applicants shall stake
the corners of the building envelope and install construction fencing around the perimeter of the
building envelope. The fencing shall remain in place until issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
Absolutely no riparian (e.g. cottonwoods, alder, blue spruce) or wetland (e.g. willows, sedges,
rushes) vegetation shall be damaged or removed outside the building envelope.
000009
a <,y
Hearing Officer Determination No. j2 -2002
Page 5
12. Wetland impacts of greater than 0.08 acres shall require notification to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) and application for a 404 Nationwide Permit. Verification of a USACE
determination should be required prior to issuance of a building permit.
13. A drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted and approved by the County Engineer
prior to building permit submission. Surface and ground water flows intercepted by roads, utility
trenches and other development improvements shall not be diverted away from existing wetlands.
14. Only plant species that are identified by the Pitkin County Revegetation Guide as being
appropriate for wetland or riparian areas, or native species found to occur on site but not listed in
the Pitkin County Revegetation Guide, may be introduced for the revegetation of any wetland or
riparian area. The planning or introduction of any other plant species shall be prohibited.
15. Floor area shall be limited to 5,750 square feet exempt from growth management or use of TDRs.
16. Statutory vested rights for the approval contained herein are granted pursuant to the Pitkin
County Land Use Code and Colorado Statutes, subject to the exceptions set forth in Pitkin
County Land Use Code, § 4 -140 and C.R.S., § 24 -68 -105. The statutory vested rights granted
herein shall expire on November 26, 2005.
a
m
nm
Q)) ° �
V • N m
°
� ti
d m
_ u
•
Pletw
Z
0
000010
Hearing Officer Determination No. 5 -2002
Page 4
NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES
WEEKLY ON THE 26th DAY OF OCTOBER 2002.
APPROVED ON THE 26th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2002.
PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE
ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY ON I\ 103
ATTEST: HEARING OFFICER OF PITKIN
COUNTY, COLORADO
I R. — — -<
Sabel Ramirez, ames R. True, a
Administrative Assistant Hearing Officer
mm
ID
Date:
l/7/03 co tr.
!! cn mm
c N N ca
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: N ;; r.
r m-
� a
John EI Cindy Houben,
G • ttorney Community Development Director
Case #P0130 -02
PID# 273523100018 z
womPmw
• a
N
Q
0
Q
000011
EXHIBIT A
A tract of land situated in the North '/2 Northeast'/ of Section 23, Township 10 South,
Range 85 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado, lying Westerly, of
and adjacent to the Bonanza Placer, described as follows:
Beginning at the Corner No. 5 of said Bonanza Placer;
thence North 28° 38' West, 174.00 feet along the line between Corners No. 4 and No. 5
of said Bonanza Placer;
thence West , 360.00 feet;
thence South 07° 24' West, 10.00 feet;
thence South 38° 43' East, 332.00 feet;
thence South 68° 05' East, 90.00 feet;
thence North 68° 22' East, 140.00 feet to a point on the Westerly line of said Bonanza
Placer;
thence North 13° 21' East, 101.00 feet along the Westerly line of said Bonanza Placer
to Corner No. 5 of said Bonanza Placer, the Point of Beginning.
a
O
(I . nl CD
O m
tq
ti
r.
'tea ° Zs;
m
�m
� -o
8
U
�� o
w
000012
:e-
LARK FAMILY
INVESTMENT COMPANY, LTD.
APPLICATION FOR
1041 HAZARD REVIEW AND
GMQS EXEMPTION
SUBMITTED BY
ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES
BOX 3613
ASPEN, COLORADO 81612
920 -1125
AUGUST, 2002
( ? ( //Y / 11( 7 4(--*--
000013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
• I. INTRODUCTION 1
A. Application Request 1
B. Property Description 1
C. Proposed Building Envelope 2
�• II. GMQS EXEMPTION FOR DEMOLITION AND REPLACEMENT 4
III. 1041 HAZARD REVIEW 6
A. Wildfire Hazard Review 6
B. Floodplain Hazard Review 13
C. Wildlife Habitat Review 14
IV. CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION REVIEW 18
V. VESTED RIGHTS 19
VI. CONCLUSION 19
_ EXHIBITS
#1. Title Insurance Policy for Property
#2. Letter Authorizing Submission of Application
#3. Pre - Application Conference Summary
#4. Referral Letter from Colorado State Forest Service
#5. Engineering Report by Schmueser Gordon Meyer
#6. Floodplain Study by Schmueser Gordon Meyer
#7. List of Adjacent Owners to Property
MAPS/DRAWINGS
1041 Hazard Review Site Plan
Floodplain Map
000014
A I. INTRODUCTION
A. Application Request
This is an application to replace an existing residence located at 1892 Castle Creek Road
in unincorporated Pitkin County. The subject property is a metes and bounds parcel that
contains approximately 2.0 acres of land and is zoned AFR -10. Access to the property is
provided via an existing driveway that enters the property from Castle Creek Road, about
1/2 mile beyond the Aspen Music School.
The application is being submitted by the owner of the property, the Lark Family Investment
Company, Ltd. (hereinafter, "the applicant "). Proof that the applicant is the legal owner of
the subject property is provided in the title insurance policy, attached hereto as Exhibit #1.
The applicant is being represented by Alan Richman Planning Services for this application.
A letter from the applicant confirming this arrangement is attached as Exhibit #2.
A pre - application conference was held with a member of the Community Development
Department on June 12, 2002, to discuss the County's procedures for this type of land use
application (see Exhibit #3, Pre - Application Conference Summary). During this meeting
and in subsequent conversations, the staff verified that the following land development
approvals are required by the Pitkin County Land Use Code to accomplish this project:
GMQS Exemption to replace the existing residence, pursuant to Section 9 -110 -052 D. of the
Pitkin County Land Use Code;
1041 Hazard Review for development on a property that (a) is mapped as a low severity
wildfire hazard area; (b) contains areas within the floodplain of Castle Creek; and (c)
contains riparian habitat areas (although no wildlife habitat areas are designated for this
property on the County's maps), all pursuant to Section 3 -80 of the Pitkin County Land Use
Code; and
Vested Rights status for the subject development.
The applicant's responses to the relevant standards of the Land Use Code are provided
below. First, however, a brief summary of the existing conditions on this property is
presented, as background information to help in understanding this application.
B. Property Description
A survey of the property has been conducted while preparing the 1041 site plan. The survey
shows that the property is an irregularly shaped (although nearly triangular) parcel of land.
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 1
000015
The property's narrow, pointed corner is located near Castle Creek Road, and is the portion
PP
of the property crossed by an access easement connecting it to the County road. r
vs
The survey also shows the topography across most of the property. Topography has not
been provided fot extensive, undisturbed riparian area in the southern portion of the
property, because no development is planned for this natural area. •
The topography that has been provided (at 1' contours) illustrates that this is a relatively flat s
parcel of land. The only moderately steep part of the property is the embankment below r
the driveway, on the western side of the property. Since no development is proposed to s
occur in this area, detailed analysis of the slopes in this area has not been provided.
As the survey shows, most of the rest of the property is quite flat. The center of the lb
property, where the building envelope is proposed to be located, has a slope of well less
than 15 %.
s
Vegetation also varies throughout the property. The steeper portions of the property are
covered with relatively dense vegetation, including primarily Aspen trees. The flatter areas ■
near the center of the property are much more open, covered primarily by native grasses,
with Aspen and other trees beginning to reclaim the area. The area along the Creek is
riparian in character, including the undisturbed area, which is characterized by its high
quality, dense riparian vegetation. s
C. Proposed Building Envelope
s
The applicant's plans to develop the property are illustrated on the 1041 site plan. The 1041
site plan depicts the configuration of the proposed building envelope. n '
111
The building envelope has been drawn to ensure there will be a minimum 20' setback for
all development from the 100 year floodplain. The explanation for this setback is provided
in the response to the standards for floodplain review (see Section III B. of this application),
and is repeated below: ee
"The applicant has planned this property using the 100 year floodplain as the
"high water mark ", and has set the building envelope back from this line by
20', to comply with the standards of Section 3 -50 -040 of the Land Use Code.
In fact, this is a very conservative demarcation of the high water mark, as field
inspection indicates that the 100 year floodplain is several feet upland of the
high water mark. Nevertheless, since the 100 year floodplain line was defined
in a rigorous, technical manner, the applicant has chosen this more restrictive
line as the basis for the setback. This will create a more generous buffer than to
would otherwise be the case, and will allow more of the riparian corridor lb
along Castle Creek to become re- established."
FP
s
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 2 A
s
0
(zoo! c, ..
The building envelope has generally been limited to the previously- developed areas of the
property. It includes the area where the existing ISDS is located (and room for a new ISDS
to be installed), as well as the existing driveway. It excludes the natural, undisturbed areas,
particularly the high quality riparian habitat along Castle Creek. It also excludes the portion
of the property covered with dense Aspen trees, which also has important natural values.
The conformance of the proposed building envelope with the standards of the County's Land
Use Code is addressed in the sections that follow.
r
M
i
M
g
4-
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 3
w
000017
rr
PPP
II. GMQS EXEMPTION FOR DEMOLITION AND REPLACEMENT
Section 9- 110 -052 D. of the Land Use Code states that "The replacement of legally
se
established residential structures may be exempted from Growth Management ". The
applicant proposes to demolish the main residence, which is the only existing structure on
the property, and to replace it with a new residence. The standards applicable to the review
of this activity, and the applicant's responses to these standards, are as follows:
1. The replacement structure shall be limited to the floor area of the replaced structure, but
not the existing footprint. Provided that, even if the replacement unit would be larger
than the replaced structure, if the replacement structure is proposed in a Board approved
subdivision, on a parcel legally created and configured prior to June 12, 197$, or a thirty-
five or more acre parcel legally created prior to January 10, 2000 and located within the
Crystal River or Fryingpan areas, the applicant may be permitted to replace the replaced
structure with a single family dwelling unit up to 5,750 square feet of floor area as
allowed in Section 9 -110 -051.
Response: This parcel was legally created well before June 12, 1978. Therefore, this s
exemption permits the applicant to replace the existing residence with a new structure
containing up to 5,750 sq. ft. of floor area. The site plan illustrates that the applicant
proposes to develop a new residence, just upland from the existing residence. The new •
residence would contain up to 5,750 sq. ft. of floor area. Moving the footprint of the 6
residence will ensure it is located so as to comply with all applicable setback requirements.
Moving the residence will also create more of a buffer between the residence and Castle ■
Creek. These siting issues are further addressed in subsequent sections of this application. 1
2 A replacement unit shall be utilized for the same type of use (e.g., residential,
commercial, or tourist accommodation). ft
Response: No change of use is proposed. The new unit would continue to serve as the
main residence on the property.
ris
3. Only one replacement exemption per parcel as it was configured on June 12, 1978 or
approved by the Board through subdivision is permitted up to 5,750 square feet of floor
area as provided in Section 9 -110 -052 (D) (1). Additional legally created structures may
be replaced on the parcelllot, limited to the floor area and footprint of the replaced
structure, provided that through a one -step special review to the Board of County
Commissioners the footprint of the additional replacement structure(s) may be relocated
and additional floor area may be obtained through Growth Management allotments or
the use of transferable development rights.
•
Response: There is only one structure on the lot, which the applicant plans to replace with Oh
a new residence.
■
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 4
MIP
■
000018 lb
4. If the parcel is reconfigured and results in the creation of more than one parcel, the
original 'fathering parcel' which was legally configured as of June 12, 1978 shall retain
one Growth Management exemption as provided in Section 9 -110 -052 (D) (1), subject
p to the limitations of this section. The exemption shall be granted to the parcel which
seeks exemption first in time, or may be designated upon subdivision or division of the
original fathering parcel. Reconfiguration of the parcel through lot line adjustment shall
not affect the availability of the replacement unit exemption.
Response: No reconfiguration of the parcel has occurred, and none is planned.
5. The addition exemption of Section 9 -110 -052 (C) shall be prohibited for five (5) years
after the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the replacement unit, except for
additions which have received Growth Management allotments or additions utilizing
transferable development rights to obtain an exemption from Growth Management
pursuant to Section 3 -310.
Response: The applicant agrees to comply with this limitation.
6. Replacement units shall be required to obtain 1041 environmental hazard review and
approval if any portion of the building footprint is relocated outside of an approved
building envelope.
Response: There is no approved building envelope for this property. Therefore, Section III
of this application addresses the 1041 hazard review criteria, so a building envelope can be
established.
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 5
000019
PP
r
OP
III. 1041 HAZARD REVIEW r ,
The applicant proposes to establish a building envelope for the development contemplated n ,
by this application, and for other related development, including the replacement of the
existing septic system. The building envelope has been drawn to include all of the proposed
improvements on the property. The building envelope has been drawn to exclude the 100 PP
year floodplain area, and the associated riparian habitat. I•
A. Wildfire Hazard Review �r
s
During the pre - application conference with staff, the applicant was informed that the
County's wildfire hazard maps "rate this site as being within a low wildfire hazard area. The
applicant conducted a site visit with Vince Urbina of the Colorado State Forest Service on
July 15, 2002, to confirm this designation.
A letter from Mr. Urbina providing his comments is included in this application as Exhibit ■
#4. Based on his site visit, Mr. Urbina confirmed that the wildfire hazard rating for the
property is low /medium. As a result, the wildfire mitigation recommendations he makes for
development on the property are relatively standard. The applicant agrees to comply with
these recommendations, as specified in the responses below.
•
The review standards for development in wildfire hazard areas are found in Section 3 -80 -070
C. of the Code. Following are the applicant's response to these standards. s
1. Location
a. The building envelope shall not be located in draws, canyons or on slopes greater than
30 %.
■
Response: The building envelope is not located in a draw or a canyon. The entire
envelope is, in fact, located on a flat portion of the property. The only area of the property
that contains steeper slopes is located outside of the proposed building envelope. Pi
ti
2. Defensible Space
a. The area around the structure shall incorporate landscaping with wildfire defensible space r
considerations as follows.
(1) Brush, debris, and non - ornamental vegetation shall be removed within a minimum 10 Mb
foot perimeter around the structure.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
wr
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 6
00002
a
(2) Vegetation shall be reduced to break up the vertical and horizontal continuity of the fuels
a minimum of a 30 foot perimeter around a structure built on flat ground.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
(3) Spacing between clumps of brush and vegetation within the 30 foot perimeter shall be
a , a minimum of two times the height of the fuel. All measurements shall be from the
edges of the crowns of the fuel.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
(4) All branches from trees and brush within the 30 foot perimeter shall be pruned to a
height of 10 feet above the ground, and removal of ladder fuels from around trees and
brush.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
(5) Tree crown separation within the 30 foot perimeter shall have a minimum of 10 feet
between the edges of the crowns. This does not apply to mature stands of Aspen trees
where the above recommendations for removal of ladder fuels have been complied with.
In areas of Aspen re-generation, the spacing guidelines shall be followed.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
(6) All branches which extend over the roof eaves shall be trimmed and all branches within
15 feet of the chimneys shall be removed.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
(7) The density of fuels within a 100 foot perimeter of the structures shall be reduced where
natural reduction has not already occurred.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
(8) All deadfall within the 100 foot perimeter shall be removed.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
(9) The applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible space
vegetation requirements.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 7
ti
000021
PP
it
to
3. Structural Design and Construction Requirements
a. Roofing sup
Roofs shall have a Class A, non - combustible roof system. Wood shake /shingle roof
coverings are prohibited in all wildfire hazard areas. Roofs with less than a 3:12 pitch �.
are not permitted in 1041 Wildfire Areas unless they comply with the following: it
1) All roof coverings shall be non - combustible materials as defined in the Uniform .r
Building Code (UBC) 1997 Section 1504 and installed on a Class A roof -
assembly.
ow
2) All roof coverings shall have a surface that shall facilitate the natural process of
clearing the roof.
3) All roof designs shall facilitate the natural process of clearing the roof of debris. Ire
Protrusions above the roofline, such as parapets, shall be prohibited.
4) Roofs shall be installed as required by UBC 1997 Chapter 14 and shall have a
minimum slope of 1 :48.
Pt
5) All roof designs, coverings, or equivalent assemblies shall be specifically approved S
by the Fire Marshall prior to submittal of a building permit application.
■
Response: The applicant will comply with these requirements.
to
b. Vents
(1) Vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh 1/4 inch maximum. cor
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
Pr
4. Structural Design and Construction Options a
The Board may, in its discretion, approve a development which incorporates the following
architectural design standards in substitution for the Defensible Space requirements in this ■
section.
a. Projections it
(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.
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 8
t
0
000022
Response: The applicant will comply with the defensible space requirements and does not
propose to substitute these structural options for the defensible space requirements.
(2) For projections below the roof line (which include but are not limited to exterior
balconies, decks, porches, cantilevered floor projections, and bay windows) 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 of the wall and shall extend
from the top of grade to the underside of floor decking or walls of the projection.
r
An alternative construction method for such projections would require use of
noncombustible roof 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 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
b 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 of the wall. Window openings in walls below
projections shall be tempered glass. Doors shall be noncombustible or 1 314" solid wood.
Response: The applicant will comply with the defensible space requirements and does not
propose to substitute these structural options for the defensible space requirements.
b. Windows and Glass
(1) Glazed openings shall be provided with closable, solid, exterior non-flammable shutters
or shall be tempered glass.
Response: The applicant will comply with the defensible space requirements and does not
propose to substitute these structural options for the defensible space requirements.
c. Exterior Walls and Siding
(1) 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.
Response: The applicant will comply with the defensible space requirements and does not
propose to substitute these structural options for the defensible space requirements.
d. Foundations
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 9
- 000023
lb
lb
(1) Foundations, skirting and crawl space openings shall be fully enclosed and constructed OP
approved with materials 1
hour
walls and shall extend from the top of fire-resistive
grade to the und of the floor decking or
To walls. or
Response: The applicant will comply with the defensible space requirements and does not mg
propose to substitute these structural options for the defensible space requirements.
ob
e. Stilt Construction r:
(1) 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 ol
side of the walls and shall extend from the top of grade to the underside of the floor ma
decking or walls.
w
Response: The applicant will comply with the defensible space requirements and does not
propose to substitute these structural options for the defensible space requirements.
op
5. Maintenance re
a. Roofs and Gutters shall be kept clear of debris. VP
VP
b. Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash, and flammable materials.
IP
c. All flammable materials shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet lb
away from the structure. !
d. Weeds and grasses within the 10 foot perimeter shall be maintained to a height of not lb
more than 6 inches. V
Response: The applicant will comply with all of these requirements. eik
s
6. Miscellaneous r
a. Firewoodlwood piles shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of 15 feet away
from the structure. •
b. Swimming pools shall be accessible to Fire Department vehicles. v
•
c. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris.
d. Wood fences shall not connect to the structure. it
no
Is
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 10
IP
II
000024
it
e. Any outbuildings or additional structures shall adhere to the same standards as
structures.
f. Fuel tanks shall be installed underground with an approved container.
g. Propane tanks shall be installed according to NFPA 48 standards and on a contour
away from the structure with standard defensible space mitigation around any above-
"' ground tank. Any wood enclosure around the tank shall be constructed with materials
approved for 2 hour fire- resistive construction on the exterior of the walls.
h. Each structure shall have a minimum of one 10 pound ABC fire extinguisher.
i. 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.
Response: The applicant will comply with all of these requirements.
7. Access
•
a. Access roads shall be built to County standards; however, these standards may be
increased to mitigate wildfire hazards based on comments provide by the Colorado State
Forest Service, the Sheriff's Department, or local fire protection districts. Where feasible,
looped routes of accesslegress to the main arterylhighway shall be incorporated in the
project design. Where this is not feasible, the Board may approve vehicle turnaround
areas a maximum of 750 feet apart, installed between the road intersection and its
terminus. Turnaround areas shall be the same standard as cul -de -sac turnaround pads;
these may be incorporated in the proposed driveway entries.
Response: An Engineering Report prepared by Schmueser Gordon Meyer is attached as
Exhibit #6. It indicates that the existing driveway complies with County standards.
b. Dead -end streets (no cul -de -sacs) shall not be permitted.
Response: No new streets are proposed.
-
c. Cul -de -sac turnaround pads shall have a minimum of a 30 foot drivable surface inside
_ turning radius.
Response: No such improvements are planned.
d. The driveway and access roadway shall enter the roadway at a 90 degree angle for the
first 25 feet of the driveway.
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 11
000025
le
Response: The existing driveway complies with this requirement. rr
e. Fuel breaks shall be incorporated into the roadways of the subdivision for 100 feet on a
each side of the roadway. rr
Response: This is not a subdivision application. n '
rr
f. Access roads shall be built to County standards; however, these standards may be
increased to mitigate wildfire hazards based on comments provide by the Colorado State
Forest Service, the Shenff's f's Department, or local fire protection districts.
Response: The applicant will comply with reasonable requests made by these referral
agencies.
8. Water Supply PP
a. When access to a public or private water system is not available, or if it is necessary to
augment the fire protection water systems, private ponds may be used if approved by
Pitkin County and the local fire protection districts.
■e
Response: No ponds are proposed on this property. IS
b. Any fire department recommendation for individual structure water supply and storage Sr
shall be accessible to fire department vehicles from the exterior of the structure through lk
a Fire Department approved mechanism (such as a fire hydrant). The amount of
storage capacity shall be determined by the fire protection district, with a minimum of
1000 gallon storage capacity per structure.
Response: The applicant will comply with these requirements. �*
s
c. Residential structures located within areas identified as containing "C - Severe Hazard:
Trees", or "X - Severe Hazard: Brush" wildfire hazard shall be required to install in -house
sprinkler systems which meet the standards of the local fire protection district and the
Uniform Building Code.
•
Response: No such areas are located on this property. la
9. Utilities IP
s
a. Utility lines shall be buried.
Response: There is an existing overhead power line that runs along the northern edge of
,this property. It then crosses over Castle Creek, and runs along the Creek to serve a w
IS
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 12 w
a
000026
neighboring up- stream property. The applicant will install a buried line to serve the
proposed residence. However since the overhead line serves neighboring development, the
applicant should only be responsible for burying the line to serve the proposed residence,
and not for placing the entire overhead line underground.
B. Floodplain Hazard Review.
•
This section of Castle Creek was originally mapped by FEMA. That mapping was too
generalized for purposes of this site planning effort. Therefore, the applicant engaged
Schmueser Gordon Meyer (SGM) Inc. to perform a more detailed, site specific study of the
river hydrology. A copy of their study is attached as Exhibit #6. They have prepared a
revised map of the floodplain (included in this application), showing the house to be outside
of the floodplain. This more detailed, accurate floodplain determination has been depicted
on the 1041 site plan.
The review standards for development in floodplain hazard areas are found in Section 3 -80-
040 A. of the Code. Following are the applicant's response to these standards.
A. No development, use, fill construction, excavation, embankment, or alteration on or over
any portion of the floodplain shall be permitted which would result in any of the
following:
1. The storage or processing of materials that in times of flooding are buoyant, flammable,
explosive, or otherwise potentially injurious to human, animal or plant life.
4.
2. The disposal of garbage or other solid waste materials.
3. The human occupation of structures, either fixed or mobile, permanent or temporary.
4. Substantial solid debris being carried downstream by flood waters.
4.
5. An obstruction which would impair the flow or storage capacity of a floodplain so as to
cause foreseeable damage to others either within or outside of floodplain boundaries.
6. A substantial increase in sedimentation or erosion.
7. The infiltration of floodwaters into on -site water supply and wastewater disposal systems
which would impair their functioning or pollute the stream.
8. Damage to or destruction of aquatic ecosystems, including but not limited to, wetlands
and riparian habitat areas.
4.
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 13
4.
000027
0
s
Response: The proposed development will not cause any of the above - listed adverse
impacts. Instead, the building envelope has been drawn to ensure that the new development YY
on the property will be located further outside of the floodplain than is the existing
residence.
r
The principal that guided the creation of the proposed envelope was to ensure that the re-
development of the property would create a greater buffer from the floodplain than is
presently the case. As the floodplain map prepared by SGM, Inc. illustrates, the existing
residence is located immediately outside of the 100 year floodplain. Rather than attempt w
to re- create this pattern with the future development, the applicant has instead proposed a
building envelope that is set back 20' from the 100 year floodplain.
no
In effect, the applicant has planned this property using the 100 year floodplain as the "high
water mark ", and has set the building envelope back from this line by 20', to comply with
the standards of Section 3 -50 -040 of the Land Use Code. In fact, this is a very conservative
demarcation of the high water mark, as field inspection indicates that the 100 year floodplain
is several feet upland of the high water mark. Nevertheless, since the 100 year floodplain
line was defined in a rigorous, technical manner, the applicant has chosen this more
restrictive line as the basis for the setback. This will create a more generous buffer than
would otherwise be the case, and will allow more of the riparian corridor along Castle Creek
to become re- established.
rr
We would also point out that by confining development to the previously disturbed areas of
the property, the applicant has avoided all of the more sensitive, undisturbed wetlands and l�
riparian areas on the southern part of the property. ■
It should also be pointed out that at the present time, there is an older on -site wastewater s
disposal system serving the property, which is located upland from the main residence, but lir
less than 100' from Castle Creek. The applicant plans to remove this system and replace
it with a modern system that is in full compliance with current County Codes. The building
envelope has been drawn to include additional lands upland of the existing system, allowing
the ISDS to be relocated further away from Castle Creek. Moving this system in this
manner and replacing it with a modern system that will operate properly for many years to
come should help to ensure that the system does not introduce any pollution into the Creek.
•
C. Wildlife Habitat Review
s
The County's wildlife habitat maps do not designate any mule deer or elk habitat areas on
•
or adjacent to this property. During a site visit conducted with the County's Wildlife
Biologist, he concluded that there are areas of high quality riparian habitat along Castle
Creek as it passes through this property. Therefore, the applicant has provided responses
to the County's general land use standards for wildlife habitat areas, found in Section 3 -80-
080 of the Land Use Code.
us
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 14
r
s
000028 '�
A. General Standards
1. Commercial, industrial or high impact recreational development, open pit mineral
extraction, or construction of roads should avoid the habitat areas identified in this
section.
Response: The applicant does not plan on conducting any of the above activities.
2. Residential development shall be clustered outside of habitat areas to the maximum
extent possible to minimize impacts on wildlife.
Response: The edge of the existing residence is located immediately adjacent to the 100
year floodplain of Castle Creek. It is set in among the larger trees and other riparian
vegetation that characterizes this portion of Castle Creek.
The building envelope that the applicant has proposed will move the residence back from
the edge of the Creek, so it is set back 20' from the 100 year floodplain. This will limit
development to the filled upland area, and should allow for the banks of the Creek to be
reclaimed as native habitat. The setback will provide for an increased buffer between the
house and Castle Creek, allowing wildlife to move more easily through this valuable habitat.
3. The removal of vegetation shall be minimized. Disturbed areas shall be promptly
revegetated with beneficial browse species.
Response: The applicant will minimize the removal of vegetation to the maximum extent
that is feasible. Vegetation within the proposed principal building envelope is relatively
sparse, and will only be removed as necessary to build the proposed residence. The large
trees near the edge of the Creek have been identified on the site plan, and have been
excluded from the building envelope, so they are avoided by all development activities. A
relatively large cottonwood tree that is within the building envelope will probably have to
be removed during construction, but this is a tree planted by the applicant approximately
30 years ago, not an even older tree that was native to the site.
Native vegetation that is present outside of the building envelope will be preserved, except
for any vegetation that must be removed to comply with the County's wildfire hazard
mitigation standards or due to disease.
Given the high water table throughout the property, the riparian vegetation that was once
present throughout the property tends to recover and re- establish itself, as is evident in those
areas of the property that were previously disturbed but have since been left alone, and as
proven by the maturity of the previously- described cottonwood tree that was originally
planted by the applicant. The applicant will not disturb any vegetation outside of the
building envelope, which will preserve the existing high quality riparian areas, and will allow
"other areas to recover.
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 15
000029
rri
4. When existing vegetation must be altered, for an access road, utility line or similar uses,
an applicant will cooperate with the County and the Colorado Division of Wildlife to
devise a compensation plan acceptable to the County. Such compensation plan may
substitute (in a nearby area on the subject property) vegetation equal in type and quantity
to that being removed to mitigate effects on wildlife species.
Response: There is an existing driveway on the property, which will also be used for the •
new residence. Therefore, no significant disturbance is anticipated to provide access. The ttr
applicant will seek to place the underground utilities in the driveway, so further disturbance
of the property does not occur from that activity.
s
5. Food, cover, and water sources beneficial to wildlife shall be preserved. Mitigate
OP
development effects which would destroy or damage these. Give special consideration
to trees and shrubs with high wildlife food value, especially heavy seed, bevy and fruit OS
producing species.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
s
6. Wildlife food species and woody cover along fences should be encouraged as one way
of improving wildlife habitat.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
7. Waterholes, springs, seepage, marshes, ponds and other watering areas should be -
preserved. s
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement. OP
8. Endangered species habitat shall be protected. All disturbance to such critical habitat
shall be minimized.
Response: The applicant is not aware that any such habitat is present on the subject
property.
■
9. All golden eagle nest sites and bald eagle roost sites shall be protected. Provide a three -
hundred (300) yard buffer around nest sites. Protect all other raptor nest sites with one-
hundred
(100) yard buffers. •
Response: The applicant is not aware that any such habitat is present on the subject R
property. S
PP
10. Mesh or woven wire fences are prohibited.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement. w ,
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 16 00
000030
11. Wire fencing shall employ a three strand barbed or smooth wire fence with a 42 inch
maximum height above ground level and at least 12 inches between the top two strands.
Wood rail fencing shall employ three rails or less, be the round or split rail type, shall not
exceed 48 inches in height above ground level and 12 inches in width (top view) and
r shall have at least 18 inches between two of the rails.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
12. Edges (places where two habitat types meet) must be avoided by development and shall
be maintained wherever possible, since deer and many other species of wildlife utilize
edge areas. Vegetation disturbances on winter ranges should be minimized and all
disturbances revegetated with beneficial browse species.
tql
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement.
13. Tall, overly mature trees and standing dead trees should be retained whenever possible
as nesting habitat for woodpeckers and other tree nesting species, such as eagles and
hawks. Den trees in wooded areas which provide homes for birds, squirrels, and
raccoons should also be retained. Disturbance or destruction of wildlife den sites shall
be prohibited except in certain nuisance cases, such as skunks under homes.
Response: The applicant will comply with this requirement. As noted above, the large
trees along the edge of Castle Creek have been purposely excluded from the building
envelope.
•
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 17
000031
VI. CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION REVIEW as
a
Exhibit #3, the Pre - Application Conference Summary, requests that the applicant address
Section 3 -70, Water Resources, and Section 3 -110, Improvements and Services, of the Land
Use Code as part of this application. An Engineering Report, prepared by SGM, Inc., •
addressing the relevant issues, is attached as Exhibit #5.
A. Access. rr
Access to the property is obtained from an existing driveway that has direct access to Castle
Creek Road, a County public road. There is an easement in place providing the right for
the owner of the subject property to use the driveway.
According to the Engineering Report, the driveway appears to comply with all applicable
County standards and will not require any significant work at this time. A minor
improvement to an existing culvert will be made, as described in the Report.
B. Water Supply /Sewage Disposal. u ,
Water is provided via an existing well that was installed pursuant to a permit issued by the
State Engineer. The well is located immediately adjacent to the residence. It has been used
for many years, and appears to provide water of a quality and quantity that is sufficient to liY
meet Pitkin County requirements.
There is an existing "mound type" of on -site sewage disposal system on the property, located
near the residence. As stated in the Engineering Report, this system appears to be in
working order, with no signs of failure or evidence of past problems. However, because the ur
system is an older system, it will likely need to be replaced with a new system that complies di
with current County Codes.
The Engineering Report calculates the approximate size of the new absorption bed area to
be approximately 825 sq. ft. Such a system can clearly fit within the proposed building
envelope. As noted in the Report, County Codes require the system to be separated from OP
the well by at least 100'. This will likely require the system to be located further upland,
away from Castle Creek, which is beneficial from a water quality standpoint.
The need for this separation also explains why the building envelope has been drawn to di
within 10' of the northern property boundary. County Codes permit the ISDS to be this
close to the property line, but would require the new residence to be at least 20' from the OP
side property line.
VP
Site specific percolation testing and engineering for the wastewater disposal system will be
accomplished once there is an actual design for the planned residence.
w
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 18
a.
000032 ■
C. Utilities.
This property is served with all of the basic electric, telephone and other utilities. There is
an existing overhead power line that runs along the northern edge of this property. It then
.. crosses over Castle Creek, and runs along the Creek to serve a neighboring up- stream
property. The applicant will install a buried line to serve the proposed residence. However
since the overhead line serves neighboring development, the applicant should only be
responsible for burying the line to serve the proposed residence, and not for placing the
entire overhead line underground.
D. Drainage/Erosion Control/Sedimentation.
Because development will be largely confined to the previously disturbed portions of the
property, there will not be any significant re- grading activities or vegetation removal required
to accomplish the proposed development. The applicant will re- vegetate the areas where
the existing buildings will be removed, particularly the area along Castle Creek where the
existing residence and associated deck is located. These areas will be re- vegetated using
native species. The applicant will submit a landscaping plan showing the proposed re-
vegetation at the time an application for demolition and re- development is submitted.
The applicant will design the new structure to ensure there is positive drainage away from
it. The structure will also be designed to ensure there is on -site detention of flows from roof
or paved areas to prevent sediment from impacting area streams or water features.
Temporary erosion control measures will be used during construction, including silt fences,
hay bale sediment barriers, and temporary swales within the construction area.
VII. VESTED RIGHTS
Pursuant to Section 4 -140 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code, the applicant hereby
requests that this development be granted vested rights status.
VIII. CONCLUSION
. The applicant has responded to all applicable criteria of the Pitkin County Land Use Code,
pursuant to direction given during the pre - application conference. Sufficient evidence has
been provided of the project's compliance with said criteria, and commitments have been
made to insure that the proposed development will mitigate its development impacts. The
applicant will respond in a timely manner to requests by any reviewing agency for additional
information, or clarification of the statements made herein.
•
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd. 1041 Hazard Review and GMQS Exemption Application Page 19
9
000033
•
pow
INV
EXHIBITS
VON
•
ar
0000 J 4
06/04/02 09:05 FAX 801 585 9735 BIOLOGY U.OF UT X002/004
EXHIBIT #1
— q 7O 920 x/25
OWNER'S POLICY
SCHEDULE A
- Order No. 403479 -0 Insurance Amount $ 850,000.00
Policy No. 3 383694 Premium Amount $ 1,873.00
•
Date of Fblicy: December 27, 1993 at 4:28 FM
- 1. Name of Insured:
rY
LARK FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY, LTD., a Utah limited partnership
•
s
2: The estate or interest in the land which is covered by the policy is:
FEE SIMPLE
a
3. Title to the estate or interest in the land is vested in:
LARK FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY, LTD., a Utah limited partnership
led
4. The land referred to in this policy is located in the State of
Colorado, County of Pitkin , and is described as follows:
r
A tract of land situated in the North 1/2 Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, Township
10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado,
r lying Westerly of and adjacent to the Bonanza Placer, described as follows:
Begthning at Corner No. 5 of said Bonanza Pt arar;
thence North 28 °38' West, 174.00 feet along the line between Corners No. 4 and
a No. 5 of said Bonanza Plapar;
thence West, 360.00 feet;
trice South 07 °24' West, 10.00 feet;
r thence South 38 °43' East, 332.00 feet;
thence South 68 °05' East, 90.00 feet;
thence North 68 °22' East, 140.00 feet to a point on the Westerly line of said
Bonanza Placer;
thence North 13 °21' East, 101.00 feet along the Westerly line of said Bonanza
Placer to Corner No. 5 of said Bonanza Ptarar, the Point of Beginning.
Countersignature Authorized Officer or Agent
This Policy is invalid unless the cover sheet and Schedule B are attached.
ALTA Owner's Policy (10- 17 -92)
000035
.��.� -gym *...m.....a.r -,rrrrro n , TInM `G' IYWTDATN
06/04/02 09:06 FAX 801 585 9735 BIOLOGY U.OF UT a003/004 pp
w
1
•
0
SCHEDULE B Order No. 403479 -O
Policy No. J 383694
PART I j*
r
This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay
costs, attorneys' fees or a T m ses) which arise by mason by:
ar
1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of
any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by
the public records.
2. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims which are not shown by the public records a
but which could be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making irqui*y
of persons in possession thereof.
3. Easements, or claims of easements, or enaanbrances which are not shown by the
public record.
4. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortages in area, encroachments, or r
any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by
public records. it'
r
5. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore
or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public record. If
MI
6. Right of the Ptupslet:or of a Vein or Jrde to extract and remove his are therefrom,
should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted, as
reserved in United Statpa Patent recorded August 16, 1922, in Book 159 at Page
140.
7. Right of the Proprietor of a Vein or Lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom, 0
Should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted, as
reserved in United States Patent recorded June 1, 1928, in Book 55 at Page 588.
Ill
8. Easement and right of way to construct, operate and maintain telephone transnissioni
and /or distribution lines and systems, as granted by Karl G. Lark and Cynthia A.
Lark to The Mountain State Telephone and Telegraph Co. by Instrument recorded r
September 20, 1976, in Book 316 at Page 825.
r
9. Easement and right of way for fishing purposes, as reserved by Robert 0. Roy and
Catherine H. Roy in the Deed to Karl Gordon Lark and Cynthia Ann Lark recorded P
August 16, 1965, in Book 214 at Page 530, in which the specific location of said r
easement is not defined.
p
10. Any rights, interests or easements in favor of the State of Colorado, the United "
States of America, or the general public, which exist or are claimed to exist in,
- over, under and /or across the waters and present and past bed and banks of the
Castle Creek River. r
(Continued)
000036
ALTA Standard Policy, Western Region - Form No. 1402 -C (Rev. 9/87)
OP
FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY r
06/04/02 09:07 FAX 801 585 9735 BIOLOGY U.OF UT a004 /004
EXCEPTIONS (continued) Order No. 403479 -O
Policy No.J 383694
- 11. Any question as to the size or location of the subject property and as to
•
the encroachment of the subject proper to adjoining property.
12. Any and all unredeemed tax sales.
a
0002
FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
EXHIBIT #2
a
s
a
Ms. Tamara Pregl, Planner a
Pitkin County Community Development Department a
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
a
RE: LARK FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY, LTD. 1041 HAZARD REVIEW
w
Dear Ms. Pregl, •
I hereby authorize Alan Richman Planning Services to act as my designated representative
with respect to the land use application being submitted to your office for my property, a
located at 1892 Castle Creek Road. Mr. Richman is authorized to submit an application for
1041 review and growth management quota system exemption for the re- development of the
existing residence on the property. He is also authorized to represent me in meetings with
Pitkin County staff and the County's review bodies.
Should you have any need to contact me during the course of your review of this application,
please do so through Alan Richman Planning Services, whose address and telephone number
IP
are included in the land development application.
Sincerely,
s
Lark Family Investment Company, Ltd.
K. Gordon Lark
3605 Mill Circle
Salt Lake City, Utah 84109
801 -581 -6517
w
a
WI
rr
WS
000038 •
EXHIBIT #3
PITKIN COUNTY PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PROJECT: Lark Family Investment Company 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission
LOCATION: 1892 Castle Creek Road. (PID#2735- 231-00 -018)
APPLICANT: Lark Family Investment Company.
REPRESENTATIVE: Alan Richman PHONE/FAX: 920 - 1125/
DATE: June 12, 2002 PLANNER: Tamara Pregl, 920 -5103
Type of Application: 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission
Description of Project/Development: The Applicant is requesting approval to establish a building envelope for the
purpose of replacing the existing residence.
Areas in which the Applicant has been requested to respond, types of reports requested:
Land Use Code Sections to be addressed in letter of request (application):
Section 3-70: Water Resources
Section 3 - 80 Floodplain Hazard Area
Section 3 - 070: Wildfire (mapped low)
Section 3 - 080: Wildlife (no wildlife habitat mapped; riparian habitat)
Section 3 Improvements and Services
Staff will refer the application to the following agencies: Zoning, Aspen Fire Department, Environmental Health
Department, County Engineer/Floodplain Administrator, Castle/Maroon Creek Caucus, County Wildlife Biologist
Review by: Hearing Officer. Public Hearing? Yes. The applicant shall post a public notice sign on the property
at least 15 days prior to the hearing and shall mail notice to all adjacent property owners and mineral estate owners
at least 30 days prior to the hearing with the return address of the Community Development Department (copy of
notice to be obtained from the Community Development Department). The names and addresses shall be those on
the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than 60 days prior to the date of the public
hearing.
What fee is the applicant requested to submit: Total Deposit: $1,750 (make check payable to "P,tkfn County Treasurer')
„« • Planning Office (flat fee) $1,750;
• Referral Fees: Fees for the County Engineer and Environmental Health will be billed on the final bill at
a rate of $65/hour;
• Hearing Officer will be billed on the final bill at a rate of $135/hour.
Please submit: A list of adjacent property owners and mineral estate owners; plus 2 copies of the `Agreement To Pay'
form do not include with each packet copy).
Number of copies of the application and maps to be submitted: 8
For a complete application, please include the following in each packet:
1. Sununary letter explaining the request and addressing all Land Use Code standards listed above (in bold).
2. Consent from owner(s) to process application and authorizing the representative (if applicable).
3. Parcel description, including legal description.
4. Proof of ownership (from a title company or attorney licensed in the State of Colorado).
5. See attached "1041 Hazard Review Site Plan" requirements.
6. Copy of this pre-app form.
7. Copies of previous approvals.
.8. Prior to approval, the Applicant shall certify either through sworn affidavit or by an attomey licensed to practice law
in the State of Colorado that notice has been made to any mineral estate owners as required by C.RS. section 24-
65.5 -103. Notification shall be provided with the complete application indicating notification has been sent to
mineral estate owners.
000039
PP
EXHIBIT #4 t 01�y } 1 �
t �r
FOREST
SERVICE
July 25, 2002 00
State Services Building
- 222 S. 6th Street, Room 416 S
Alan Richman Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
Box 3613 Telephone: (970) 248 -7325
Aspen, CO 81612
Re: Lark 1041 Wildfire Hazard Review *
li
Dear Alan,
Please submit this letter with your application to Pitkin County. When I receive the Ar
referral application I will defer to the comments contained in this letter. lb
I visited the property located at 1892 Castle Creek Road with Alan Richman the owners
representative on July 15 There is an existing structure on the property with access
from the Castle Creek Road. As I understand it, this structure will need to be moved
from its present location along Castle Creek. The building envelope site is nearly level.
It contains large mature blue spruce, which are growing along Castle Creek, willow and it
grass vegetation. There are roads and parking areas within the building envelope as
well. I would rate the wildfire hazard as low to medium. w'
Is
My recommendations to establish a defensible space for a future home and mitigate the
existing hazard are as follows.
1. For a distance of 15 feet around all structures establish and maintain vegetation ur
at 6 inches or less. This can be accomplished with mowed grass, low growing
perennials or some type of hard scape (e.g., rock mulch, sidewalk). Woody P
vegetation should not be planted within this perimeter. In addition flammable l�
material (i.e., firewood) should not be stored here.
2. Beyond the 15 -foot perimeter and up to 30 feet from the structure keep grass it
mowed to a height of 6 inches or less. i
3. All conifers within 70 feet of the structure should have the lower limbs removed
up to 10 feet or half the total height of the tree to eliminate ladder fuels. Ladder •
fuels are defined as the lower branches of any woody plant that can carry a
ground fire into the crowns of a tree.
4. All deadfall within 100 feet of a structure should be removed.
Feel free to call me with any questions.
W$
Sincerely,
ea
Vince Urbina
- Assistant District Forester
M
r
s
000040
EXHIBIT #5
e SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER GLENWOOD SPRINGS ASPEN CRESTED BUTTE
I 1 8 W 6TH, SUITE 200 P O. BOX 2155 P 0. BOX 3088
E N G I N E E R S S S U R V E Y O R S GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81 601 ASPEN, CO 81512 CRESTED BUTTE, CO 81 224
970-945- 1004 970-925 -6727 970-349-5355
EX 970-945-5948 EX 970-925 -4157 Ex 970 - 349 -5358
August 26, 2002
Mr. Alan Richman
ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES
201 North Mill St., Suite 107
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: Lark Family Investment Parcel, Engineering Report
Dear Alan:
The purpose of this letter is to present a written preliminary level engineering analysis for
the above referenced property in conformance with Pitkin County Land Use Code. The
property is located in the NE' of the N %2 of Section 23, Township 10 South, Range 85
West of the 6 Principle Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado. The project consists of
evaluating the property with regards to utility infrastructure and 1041 environmental
hazard areas for application to Pitkin County for possible re- development. A new
building envelope will be defined with the possibility of demolition of the existing
dwelling.
At your request, I have commented on wastewater disposal, electric service, and
access. A floodplain study along Castle Creek was also prepared and has been
submitted in a separate report. My comments are based on our discussions,
conversations with representatives of the relevant utilities, a site survey conducted by
Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc., and several site visits to the property.
Wastewater Disposal
An Individual Sewage Disposal System (ISDS) of unknown size serves the existing
dwelling. It is assumed that the wastewater system is original to the property and has
not been altered or upgraded. A search for records through the Pitkin County
Environmental Health Department did not reveal documents for the system. However, it
is assumed that the system consists of a septic tank and absorption bed. From visual
inspection of the absorption mound and from conversations with the property caretaker,
the system appears to be in working order with no signs of failure or knowledge of any
existing or past problems. Given the age of the system and the lack of recorded
documents or permits, Pitkin County will require design and construction of a new
wastewater disposal system as part of a re- development plan.
Assuming a three - bedroom house with less than 6,000 square feet in livable space, the
size of a new septic tank and absorption bed system can be approximated. Sizing of the
absorption bed is dependent on soil percolation rates in the vicinity of the bed envelope.
Given the alluvial soils typical of this area, it is anticipated that percolation rates will be
on the order of 15 minutes per inch (mpi). Preliminary estimates indicate that a
residence of this size could be served by one 1,500 - gallon septic tank and an absorption
000041
August 26, 2002
Mr. Richman 6
Page two
bed with an area on the order of 825 square feet. Size reductions and other design
parameters may also be included depending on the type of system installed. It should
also be noted that if low percolation rates are encountered, a sand filter or lined
absorption bed might be required. 111
The present location of the absorption bed is adjacent to the gravel driveway tw
approximately 100 ft northwest of the existing dwelling. The limiting factor for design of
a new ISDS will be setback distances from the domestic well, dwelling, property line, and
watercourses. Currently, the absorption bed is inside of the 100 ft minimum separation i1
distance from the existing well required by Pitkin County. The limited size of this site
may require relocating the absorption bed area and /or the well. Relocation of the well is
possible. However, drill rig access to potential well sites should first be investigated. An
alternative site for the absorption bed may be in the northeast corner of the property
adjacent to the steep wooded slope. Limitations in this area are setback distances to the *M
property line and an intermittent drainage running through the property.
ti
Electric Service
0
The existing dwelling is currently served from overhead electric lines within the property l�
boundary. Mr. Jeff Franke, field engineer from Holy Cross Energy, confirmed that
primary service along the Castle Creek corridor currently runs up Castle Creek Road on •
overhead lines. Mr. Franke indicated that additional capacity is available for re-
development of the property and that a new residence could be served by either
overhead or buried service lines. TO
it
Access
Access to the existing dwelling is from a driveway leaving a common road that enters the
adjacent properties from an existing intersection on the east side of Castle Creek Road.
The common road approaching the driveway intersection is a gravel road approximately
12 feet wide at an approximately 10 percent slope. The road appears to be in good �►
condition and is used to access at least one additional residence. It is assumed that
access easements through the adjacent properties are located and recorded and would
be granted for re- development of the property in question. flt
Access from the common road is along a one -lane gravel driveway approximately 10 -12 I!
feet wide and 150 feet long from the property boundary to the existing dwelling. The
driveway is on a mild grade of 2 -3 percent and appears to be in good condition.
Drainage along the driveway appears to be adequate with no signs of erosion or poor
drainage. The driveway crosses a 30 -inch culvert at the property boundary, which
appears to be in good condition with the exception of mild erosion at the culvert entrance
and exit. RehlbAitatioct0 llA area motwastiotoot ofilerfinirmirMot ptaC fis
In summary, the driveway is in good condition and no significant changes or
rehabilitation is required.
w
1►
000042 ,►
August 26, 2002
Mr. Richman
Page three
Given the size of the parcel, it is anticipated that a new residence would be of equal or
slightly larger size than the existing dwelling. Additional trip generations are not
anticipated as a part of a re- development plan.
Please feel free to contact me if I can provide further information or detail regarding
these comments.
Sincerely,
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
Jason P. Ward
Project Engineer
2002- 211.001
Lark_AR2.doc
.4
+tl
000043
EXHIBIT #6
CASTLE CREEK FLOODPLAIN REPORT
wit
Prepared for a
Lark Family Investment Company, L td.
August, 2002 a
0
•
E l�
a i j
t
IP
Prepared By
s
SCHMUESER I GORDON I MEYER
118W. 6` Suite 200 #
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
(970) 945 -1004
00004.
a
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 STUDY AREA 1
2.1 Study Reach 1
2.2 Cross Sections 2
3.0 ANALYSIS 2
3.1 Hydrologic Analysis 2
3.2 Hydraulic Analysis 2
3.2.1 Assumptions 2
4.0 RESULTS 3
5.0 INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS 3
5.1 Other Observations 3
6.0 REFERENCES 4
.4
er
vd
11
000045
I0
1
0
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1— HEC -RAS Profile Summary Report 0
i
DRAWINGS
0
Existing Conditions Map, dated July 22, 2002
Floodplain Map, dated August 8, 2002 s
a
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A — Cross Sections at
•
Appendix B — Flood and Channel Profile
Appendix C — Project Data Detailed Report 0
i
a
0
a
N
A
Fs
Or
A
a
0
t
000046
u
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. (SGM) has been retained by Mr. K. Gordon Lark to
perform a floodplain study on property located in the NE '/ of the N 1/2 of Section 23,
Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6 Principal Meridian, Pitkin County,
Colorado. This parcel of land abuts Castle Creek approximately 2 %z miles upstream of
the confluence of Castle Creek with the Roaring Fork River.
The principle objective of the study was to determine the location of the floodplain
boundary in order to establish a new building envelope for possible re- development of
the property. A single -story dwelling currently exists on the property and its relationship
to the floodplain boundary was unknown.
Pitkin County Floodplain Regulations require that all new development is subject to
mapped floodplain hazard areas as determined by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency's Flood Rate Insurance Map (FEMA, 1987), or equivalent methods. Preliminary
research indicated that accurate floodplain information did not exist for the site and that it
is located outside of the detailed study area identified by FEMA.
2.0 STUDY AREA
For the current study, field survey data were collected in order to obtain current and
accurate cross section topography of Castle Creek and the adjacent floodplain area. The
datum used for the survey by SGM was based on a temporary benchmark with elevation
8139.2 feet mean sea level, located at the northwesterly angle point of the parcel.
2.1 Study Reach
The study reach used in this analysis of Castle Creek is approximately 350 feet in length
(river distance) beginning at a point approximately 280 feet upstream of the existing
dwelling. A significant left hand meander bend (looking downstream) defines the
- upstream portion of the reach followed by a relatively straight downstream section
flowing in a northwesterly direction adjacent to the existing dwelling. The reach is
confined on the right bank by avalanche and landslide deposits at the toe of the valley
side. Low -lying overbank floodplain areas define portions of the left bank with exception
of the raised platform around the existing building site. The average width of the main
channel is approximately 50 feet. Average channel slope over the entire study reach is
approximately two percent with a steeper portion in the center of the reach at
approximately three percent slope.
N
2002 -211 FP_REPORTdoc 1
000047
0
2.2 Cross Sections
A total of ten (10) cross sections were surveyed in the study reach. The cross sections we
were surveyed as straight lines normal to the direction of stream flow, beginning and M
ending at elevations sufficiently above the water level of the river at the time of survey.
The average distance between cross sections was approximately 40 feet. �►
a
The bed of the stream channel is composed mainly of gravel and cobble sized alluvium
with small rounded boulders ranging in size from six inches to one foot in diameter. A
right bank point bar in the upstream portion of the reach consists mainly of gravel and 11i
small cobbles. Discussions with the property caretaker indicated that this area contains
fill from historic dredging of the stream channel. Bank vegetation consists of areas of
dense willows, short grasses, and dense forest with coniferous trees up to 24 inches in as
diameter. No bridges or other major obstructions exist in the main channel of the study
reach. se
111
A map of the study reach showing the location of surveyed cross sections is shown in the
attached drawing entitled Floodplain Map.
3.0 ANALYSIS
th
3.1 Hydrologic Analysis
Floodplain hazard areas are defined by FEMA as areas inundated by the 100 -yr flood.
IIP
The peak discharge reported by FEMA for the 100 - year flood flow on Castle Creek at the
Ilb
confluence of Castle Creek and the Roaring Fork River is 1,300 cubic feet per second
(cfs). In the absence of more detailed hydrologic data, the FEMA value at this location w
was assumed for the analysis.
3.2 Hydraulic Analysis
Water surface elevations and other hydraulic characteristics for the base flood of Castle
Creek were computed with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers HEC -RAS backwater
lit
computer program (USACE, 2001).
tr
3.2.1 Assumptions
The following assumptions were made for input into HEC -RAS for the steady
flow analysis.
a. Cross section river stationing: Each cross section was assigned a river �r
station, numbered upstream to downstream in descending order. Note that
river stationing does not correspond to river distance.
Ili
(�
Q 2002 -211 FP_REPORLdoc 2 •
000048 +�
b. Channel Roughness Factor (Manning's n): Values of Manning's n for
the main channel and left and right overbanks were estimated from field
inspection, FEMA (1987) and Chow (1959).
• Right overbank for all cross sections:
n = 0.070
Left overbank for all cross sections:
n = 0.070
Main channel for all cross sections:
n = 0.045
e. Steady Flow Data:
Flow Rate = 1,300 cfs (FEMA, 1987)
Mixed Flow Regime
Downstream boundary condition:
Normal depth
Channel slope = 0.020 (from field survey)
Upstream boundary condition:
Critical depth
4.0 RESULTS
Results of the HEC -RAS analysis are summarized in Table 1. Cross sections showing
the resulting water surface are given as Appendix A and a plot of water surface and
channel profile is given as Appendix B.
5.0 INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS
The principle objective of this study was to determine the location of the floodplain
boundary of Castle Creek and its relation to the existing dwelling unit. A floodplain
boundary outline was developed on the Site Plan using the calculated water surface
elevations for each cross section and is shown on the attached drawing Floodplain Map.
Inspection of the floodplain map shows that the floodplain elevation in the proximity of
the existing dwelling unit (area between river stations 30 and 20) varies between
elevations 8116.5$ $ . ad 8115.61 ft over the length of the building. "fithisi
"; '? c tided tl t+themtiM1ng d*e g is: witliriti i imy toodpiaint
&Meiji to Creek.
5.1 Other Observations
The water surface elevation at river station 90 was calculated as 8121.41 ft, a height
above the left most ground surface elevation. In this case, the computer model assumed a
2002 -211 FP 3
000049
PP
lit
vertical end point in order to contain the flow and continue the computations. This
assumption obviously does not reflect actual field conditions. However, a sufficient
amount of the flow is contained in the main channel and an error at the edge of the cross
•
section should have little or no affect on the computed water surface elevation. Review
of the Floodplain Map shows topography lower than the computed water surface
elevation in the left overbank area of the upstream most cross section. It is possible that y �
shallow flooding could occur in this area during the 100 -year or greater flood event. Pit
Results in the downstream river stations 80 through 30, in the area of interest, show full
containment of the flood flow within the banks of Castle Creek. -
Beginning at approximately river station 40, the flood flow fills a side channel area
adjacent to the existing dwelling. Flooding in this area is shallow flooding separate from apt
the main flow and on the order of two to three feet deep. *
The cross section at river station 10 shows a computed water surface elevation above the et
right most ground surface elevation. Similar to the upstream most cross section where s
this occurred, this area is likely prone to shallow flooding in the right overbank. In this
location, Castle Creek pulls away from the valley side slope and it is evident that historic •
flooding has occurred in this low -lying area.
Critical and supercritical flow regime is encountered at river stations 90, 80, 70, 50 and 10
10 in the steeper sections of the study reach. Supercritical flow is generally characterized ri
as relatively shallow, high velocity flow that often occurs in steep slopes. Downstream of
station 50, the flow resumes a subcritical flow regime indicating that a hydraulic jump 00
would occur at this location during flood conditions. With respect to the area of interest r
in the study reach, this would have little or no consequence to the location of the
floodplain boundary. PP
Mt
6.0 REFERENCES A
Chow, V.T. (Chow, 1959). Open - Channel Hydraulics, McGraw -Hill Book Company,
Inc.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA, 1987). Flood Insurance Rate Map,
Pitkin County, Colorado and Incorporated Areas, Panel 154 of 325.
14
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE, 2001). HEC -RAS River Analysis System,
version 3.0.1, Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, California.
If
w
ri
2002 -211 FP_REPORTdoc 4
000050 �►
TABLE 1 - HEC -RAS Profile Summary Report
^ HEC -RAS Plan: Plan 02 River: Castle Creek Reach* Lark Profile: PF 1
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
+- Q Total W S. Elev Vel Chnl Vel Left Vel Right Vel Total Top Width Sta W S Lft Sta W.S. Rgt
Reach River Sta (cfs) (ft) (Ws) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ff/s) (ft) (ft) (ft)
-., Lark 90 1300 812141 9.4 1.63 3.51 7.75 77.88 0 95.68
Lark 80 1300 8119.34 11.25 5 66 2.59 9.4 82 74 20.37 103.11
a. Lark 70 1300 8118 92 8.75 4.18 4.18 7.26 88.85 35.64 124.49
Lark 60 1300 8118.25 7.55 3.22 2.07 6.37 86.6 9.15 95.75
Lark 50 1300 8117.24 8.75 3.15 0.73 7.62 83.86 12.86 96.72
Lark 40 1300 8116.99 6 94 2.58 3.22 5.45 99.47 12.69 161.82
Lark 30 1300 8116.58 7 26 3.43 1.36 6.32 110.48 28.11 138.6
ye
Lark 20 1300 8115.61 8.43 1.37 8.23 77.9 23 68 136.83
y Lark 10 1300 8115.02 8.23 2.43 1.33 7.31 111.53 13.34 142.67
Explanation of Columns:
"' (3) Total Flow in cross section
(4) Calculated water surface elevation
(5) Average velocity of flow in main channel
(6) Average velocity of flow in left overbank
-, (7) Average velocity of flow in right overbank
(8) Average velocity of flow in total cross section
(9) Top width of wetted cross section
(10) Left station where water intersects the ground
(11) Right station where water intersects the ground
000051 5
t
r
•
r
■
t
•
■
Ils
w
■
■
■
■
•
APPENDIX A
CROSS SECTION PLOTS
r
000052
•
A Lark Property / Castle Creek
River Station 90
8124
Legend
EG PF 1
8123
WS PF1
Crit PF 1
8122 Ground
•
Bank Sta
r 8121 ,
m
m
w 8120
8119
8118
cia
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Station (ft)
Lark Property / Castle Creek
River Station 80
8130
Legend
EG PF 1
8128
Crit PF 1
r
WS PF1
8126 Ground
Bank Sta
F 8124
co
0
0
s
w 8122
..r
8120
8118
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Station (ft)
000053
•
Vi
s
Lark Property/Castle Creek
I It
River Station 70
8130 Legend
fi►
EG PF 1
8128- WS PF 1 A
Cdt PF 1
8126 -
Ground
OP
•
Bank Sta
8124 -
r
c �
8122- ■
co
w
8120
8118-
1
8116-
llP
8114
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Station (ft)
OP
Lark Property / Castle Creek
River Station 60
iP
8130 Legend
EG PF 1
8128- WS PF 1
Cdt PF 1
8126 -
Ground
•
Bank Sta
8124 -
r
to 8122 -
d
w
8120
_
8118 -- -
A
8116- - - - it
MIP
8114- , IS
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Station (ft)
■
000054
Lark Property / Castle Creek
River Station 50
8128
Legend
8126- EG PF 1
WS PF 1
8124- Grit PF 1
Ground
•
8122_ Bank Sta
E
' c
9 8120 -
^Y
d
w
8118-
..
8116 -
8114-
+ 8112
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Station (ft)
Lark Property / Castle Creek
River Station 40
8120
Legend
8119 EG PF 1
WS PF 1
8118 Crit PF 1
Ground
`" 8117 Bank Sta
r
-a
m 8116
w
8115
8114
8113
8112
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Station (ft)
000055
Lark Property / Castle Creek
River Station 30 *'
8120 0
Legend
i
EG PF1
8119 WSPF1 •
Crit PF 1 ■t
8118
Ground
• e
Bank Sta
8117 at
° 8116
8115 •
8114
AP 8113
8112
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Station (ft)
Lark Property / Castle Creek
River Station 20
8120 Legend
EGPF1
WSPF1 /
8118 Crit PF 1 ki
Ground
• �r
Bank Sta
8116
6 -
c tf
co
a) AS
8114-
iP
SI
8112- p
kik
p
8110
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Station (ft) OP
gb
0000
r
Lark Property / Castle Creek
River Station 10
8118'
Legend
EGPF1
8117
WS PF1
Crit PF 1
8116 Ground
Bank Sta
E' 8115
c
0
d m
w 8114
8113
' 8112
8111
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Station (ft)
.r
w
000051
•
■
•
i
s
s
e
a
r
r
I
■
r
0
0
APPENDIX B
FLOOD AND CHANNEL PROFILE
s
•
000058
C , a. a , a c
CO ti 0
W e:-)
a -10
n
4
0
- • n
•
•
•
-10
� N
(!)
U o
N 8
co
0 9
N
a
0 0
U
CL a
- 1- 2
r (�
•
J
•
•
0
.s
O
N
•
•
00 M
0 i O
.ri W m 043
070 CO
(i) uonenal3
000059
•
•
•
•
ts
ea
OP
s
la
•
op
s
wo
s
a
1111
APPENDIX C
PROJECT DATA DETAILED REPORT
0
s
0
000060 •
HEC -RAS Version 3.0.1 Mar 2001
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers
Hydrologic Engineering Center
609 Second Street, Suite D
Davis, California 95616 -4687
(916) 756 -1104
X X XXXXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX
X X X X X X X X X X
.,. X X X X X X X X X
XXXXXXX XXXX X XXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXX
X X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X X X
X X XXXXXX XXXX X X X X XXXXX
************************************************ * ** + +. + «* * * * * * * **** ** ** * * ** ** **
PROJECT DATA
Project Title: Lark Property / Castle Creek
Project File : Larkl.prj
Run Date and Time: 8/12/2002 9:39:27 AM
Project in English units
Project Description:
Castle Creek 100 yr
PLAN DATA
Plan Title: Plan 02
Plan File : h: \PROJECTS\ Lark(2002 - 211.001) \HEC \Larkl.p02
Geometry Title: July 22, 2002
Geometry File : h: \PROJECTS\ Lark(2002 - 211.001) \HEC \Larkl.g01
Flow Title : July 22, 2002
Flow File : h: \PROJECTS\ Lark (2002 - 211.001) \HEC \Lark1.f01
Plan Summary Information:
Number of: Cross Sections = 9 Mulitple Openings = 0
Culverts = 0 Inline Weirs = 0
Bridges = 0
Computational Information
Water surface calculation tolerance = 0.01
Critical depth calculaton tolerance = 0.01
" Maximum number of interations = 20
Maximum difference tolerance = 0.3
Flow tolerance factor = 0.001
Computation Options
000061
OP
II
Critical depth computed only where necessary
Conveyance Calculation Method: At breaks in n values only MI
Friction Slope Method: Average Conveyance
Computational Flow Regime: Mixed Flow f
II
************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
INN
FLOW DATA AM
Flow Title: July 22, 2002 DO
Flow File : h: \PROJECTS \Lark(2002 - 211.001) \HEC \Lark1.f0
as
Flow Data (cfs)
* River Reach RS * PF 1 * It
* Castle Creek Lark 90 * 1300 *
****************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** OD
PO
Boundary Conditions
************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
* River Reach Profile * Upstream i
Downstream *
************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** .
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
* Castle Creek Lark PF 1 * Critical II
Normal S = .0209 *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ■
************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
MP
GEOMETRY DATA it
Geometry Title: July 22, 2002 OP
Geometry File : h:\ PROJECTS\ Lark (2002 - 211.001) \HEC \Larkl.g0
MI
CROSS SECTION RIVER: Castle Creek
REACH: Lark RS: 90 OP
Oh
INPUT
Description: River Station 90 I
Station Elevation Data num= 14
Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev MI
************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
0 8120.39 23.33 8122.55 30.46 8121.06 34.71 8118.43 41.41 8117.6 $
49.58 8117.27 60.69 8118.17 62.79 8118.29 66.55 8119.3 67.95 8119.51 lb
76.97 8120.04 86.62 8119.48 102.93 8122.95 103.77 8123.01
OP
Manning's n Values num= 3
Sta n Val Sta n Val Sta n Val 6
***************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
0 .07 30.46 .045 67.95 .07 ■
s
Bank Sta: Left Right Lengths: Left Channel Right Coeff Contr.
Expan. p
IS
R
000062 +I
30.46 67.95 39.65 61.16 70.95 .1 .3
CROSS SECTION RIVER: Castle Creek
° REACH: Lark RS: 80
INPUT
Description: River Station 80
Station Elevation Data num= 22
.. Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev
***** * *** ** ** * ** **************************..**** * * **x...* * * ** * * *** * * * * * * * * * * * **
0 8121.06 5 8121.48 8.22 8121.33 14.96 8122.42 16.74 8121.56
19.51 8120.33 21.37 8118.2 27.94 8117.55 40.93 8117.76 53.56 8116.99
# 55.38 8116.87 55.86 8116.91 67.77 8116.69 70.67 8116.64 70.97 8116.63
81.45 8117.53 82.57 8117.65 84.77 8118.83 102.71 8118.89 102.96 8118.9
105.99 8127.81 106.36 8128.08
.
Manning's n Values num= 3
Sta n Val Sta n Val Sta n Val
0 .07 40.93 .045 84.77 .07
"-' Bank Sta: Left Right Lengths: Left Channel Right Coeff Contr.
Expan.
40.93 84.77 23.82 33.46 37.51 .1 .3
4. CROSS SECTION RIVER: Castle Creek
�+ REACH: Lark RS: 70
INPUT
Description: River Station 70
Station Elevation Data num= 25
Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev
** *** * *** ** * * ** ** * * * * * ** * ***** *** ** * * ** * * ** ** *** * * * * ** ** >. « : + *e.. * * ** *** * * **
.... 0 8120.1 24.59 8120.68 27.37 8120.87 30.36 8120.71 36.85 8118.51
39.03 8117.67 39.19 8117.68 42.72 8117.22 51.25 8116.92 54.31 8117.32
55.31 8117.34 62.72 8117.55 67.18 8117.08 67.67 8117.17 80.22 8116.63
82.22 8116.45 84.02 8116.42 98.54 8115.79 99.06 8115.83 104.1 8116.31
"" 113.82 8117.16 122.06 8117.09 134.28 8126.28 136.79 8128.32 137.31 8128.74
Manning's n Values num= 3
,,, Sta n Val Sta n Val Sta n Val
- 0 .07 62.72 .045 113.82 .07
,.. Bank Sta: Left Right Lengths: Left Channel Right Coeff Contr.
Expan.
- 62.72 113.82 28.63 40.36 46.01 .1 .3
r
CROSS SECTION RIVER: Castle Creek
REACH: Lark RS: 60
. INPUT
pescription: River Station 60
Station Elevation Data num= 29
Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev
0 8120.65 1.78 8120.73 4.33 8120.85 5.02 8120.86 5.74 8120.53
-
- 000063
■
ill
00
10.77 8117.17 12.52 8116.02 12.53 8116.02 21.68 8116.96 21.96 8117
22.19 8117.02 32.32 8116.24 32.63 8116.24 32.92 8116.25 41.49 8117 a
48.45 8116.27 49.36 8116.18 49.64 8116.15 56.74 8115.38 73.9 8114.5
73.93 8114.5 73.94 8114.5 87.76 8114.97 92.59 8116.4 93.75 8117.05 lb
98.29 8119.77 102.12 8122.21 102.4 8122.44 110.24 8129.08 r
Manning's n Values num= 3 SO
Sta n Val Sta n Val Sta n Val
**....:+*.. x• frx**.::e** • + *+fxa **: +:t * +fr * * *.*x +ffrf. a
0 .07 41.49 .045 92.59 .07
s
Bank Sta: Left Right Lengths: Left Channel Right Coeff Contr. Oli
Expan.
41.49 92.59 31.1 44.37 52.14 .1 .3
s
CROSS SECTION RIVER: Castle Creek a
REACH: Lark RS: 50
W
INPUT li
Description: River Station 50
Station Elevation Data num= 33
Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev i
* * * ** * ** * *** *** ** * *** * * ** *********************** * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * *** * * ** * * **••*
lb
0 8119.48 7.95 8119.43 8.02 8119.46 8.31 8119.46 13.06 8117.14
15.07 8115.79 16.14 8115.91 16.17 8115.92 27.29 8116.09 27.86 8116.13
OP
28.28 8116.1 34.55 8116.03 41.74 8116.35 42.33 8116.4 42.72 8116.35
57.67 8114.89 63.5 8114.21 63.66 8114.19 63.95 8114.18 68.2 8113.76 II
74.2 8112.78 77.22 8112.95 83.51 8114.17 83.63 8114.31 84.94 8114.15
92.58 8116.02 93.24 8116.99 97.74 8117.31 98.04 8117.45 103.12 8118.84 W
122.72 8122.48 134.29 8126.76 136.28 8126.22 s
Manning's n Values num= 3
OP
Sta n Val Sta n Val Sta n Val
***************** * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * *** * * * * * * * ** 11
0 .07 42.72 .045 93.24 .07
W
Bank Sta: Left Right Lengths: Left Channel Right Coeff Contr.
lb
Expan.
42.72 93.24 34.81 32.11 33.35 .1 .3
CROSS SECTION RIVER: Castle Creek r
REACH: Lark RS: 40
sr
INPUT
Description: River Station 40
Station Elevation Data num= 39
Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev A
* * * * •*• * ** * ****** * * * * *•e mfr******••*************** * * *** * * ***** * * * ** * * ** *** ** *****
lb
0 8118.93 4.36 8118.26 14.4 8116.73 15.62 8117.14 16.43 8117.58
21.85 8117.87 36.7 8118.06 38.8 8118.14 41.25 8117.36 47.11 8117.13
OP
54.8 8116.41 57.13 8115.05 64.03 8114.79 64.61 8114.81 68.43 8114.97
72.82 8115.66 79.81 8114.82 79.95 8114.83 80.04 8114.81 82.09 8114.6 r
90.04 8113.78 90.53 8113.73 90.72 8113.71 95.66 8112.99 106.1 8112.26
106.73 8112.14 114.59 8113.5 115.12 8113.53 115.69 8113.64 117.44 8115.61 0
119.18 8115.39 123.19 8114.15 127.45 8113.89 133.45 8114.68 138.17 8115.49 0
145.08 8117.4 147.23 8117.95 161.4 8116.87 169.45 8119.2
0
0
oOOQ'4
Manning's n Values num= 3
Sta n Val Sta n Val Sta n Val
************<>«* * * * * * * * * * * * ** ** ** * ** * * * * ** * ****
0 .07 72.82 .045 117.44 .07
Bank Sta: Left Right Lengths: Left Channel Right Coeff Contr.
Expan.
72.82 117.44 23.66 23.88 27.63 .1 .3
CROSS SECTION RIVER: Castle Creek
REACH: Lark RS: 30
INPUT
Description: River Station 30
Station Elevation Data num= 38
+ Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev
0 8117.83 1.24 8117.78 6.95 8118.32 9 8118.57 10.81 8119.12
13.39 8117.91 14.85 8117.5 15.66 8117.28 15.92 8117.32 24.49 8117.69
26.15 8117.47 30.44 8115.52 33.62 8114.39 35.09 8114 35.56 8114.05
40.12 8114.33 46.01 8113.37 46.96 8113.27 54.85 8112.43 56.65 8112.34
67.9 8112.07 68.22 8112.11 73.08 8113.51 75 8113.66 76.15 8113.78
76.95 8115.31 89.65 8114.31 90.16 8114.52 92.03 8115.57 97.58 8116.46
99.05 8115.64 99.08 8116.15 108 8115.9 112.4 8116.09 116.83 8116.5
-- 120.87 8116.34 134.92 8115.84 152.92 8119.45
Manning's n Values num= 3
Sta n Val Sta n Val Sta n Val
************************************************
0 .07 40.12 .045 97.58 .07
Bank Sta: Left Right Lengths: Left Channel Right Coeff Contr.
Expan.
r 40.12 97.58 42.5 39.32 35.65 .1 .3
CROSS SECTION RIVER: Castle Creek
4-
REACH: Lark RS: 20
INPUT
Description: River Station 20
Station Elevation Data num= 32
Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev
0 8119.36 9.78 8118.96 11.02 8118.89 12.63 8118.72 19.53 8118.26
21.3 8117.57 23.27 8115.97 24.02 8115.3 24.23 8115.18 24.24 8115.18
24.4 8115.18 24.47 8115.16 32.6 8113.15 32.71 8113.12 38.93 8111.96
39.46 8111.98 51.42 8111.79 51.8 8111.8 61.17 8112.87 76.99 8114.07
- 85.61 8114.96 85.67 8115.02 87.09 8115.61 88.26 8116.09 88.39 8116.17
88.48 8116.12 90.19 8116.16 112.27 8116.26 115.31 8116.05 128.63 8115.21
134.35 8115.11 143.65 8116.97
Manning's n Values num= 3
Sta n Val Sta n Val Sta n Val
0 .07 19.53 .045 88.48 .07
000065
w
ill
w
Bank Sta: Left Right Lengths: Left Channel Right Coeff Contr.
Og
Expan.
19.53 88.48 32.49 34.18 29.13 .1 .3
ND
CROSS SECTION RIVER: Castle Creek •
REACH: Lark RS: 10
IP
INPUT
Mk
Description: River Station 10
Station Elevation Data num= 35
Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev Sta Elev OP
************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * **
lik
0 8117.55 1.63 8117.2 1.7 8117.63 2.58 8117.5 3.8 8116.5
10.62 8115.42 10.78 8115.27 12.75 8115.27 12.91 8115.25 14.56 8114.36
OP
14.71 8114.25 30.32 8114.1 31.17 8114.11 37 8112.89 37.86 8112.68
42.82 8111.5 43.69 8111.34 52.91 8111.71 54.46 8111.69 64.08 8112.07 a
65.3 8112.21 70.79 8112.86 86.23 8112.75 86.85 8112.79 87.2 8112.83
88.89 8114.6 89.11 8114.69 92.43 8114.61 101.6 8115.06 113.69 8115.39
113.78 8115.33 122.47 8114.77 140.16 8114.5 142.55 8114.46 142.67 8114.48
VP
Manning's n Values num= 3
Sta n Val Sta n Val Sta n Val w
***************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** lit
0 .07 31.17 .045 89.11 .07
A
Bank Sta: Left Right Coeff Contr. Expan.
31.17 89.11 .1 .3
************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** 1.
6
SUMMARY OF MANNING'S N VALUES
w
River:Castle Creek
********************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Ili
* Reach * River Sta. * nl * n2 * n3 *
********************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** A
*Lark * 90 * .07* .045* .07* 41
*Lark * 80 * .07* .045* .07*
*Lark * 70 * .07* .045* .07*
se
*Lark * 60 * .07* .045* .07*
*Lark * 50 * .07* .045* .07* MI
*Lark * 40 * .07* .045* .07*
*Lark * 30 * .07* .045* .07* la
*Lark * 20 * .07* .045* .07* -
*Lark * 10 * .07* .045* .07*
********************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
w
************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** s
SUMMARY OF REACH LENGTHS ■"
is
River: Castle Creek
* Reach * River Sta. * Left * Channel * Right * OP
********************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ■
*Lark * 90 * 39.65* 61.16* 70.95*
*Lark * 80 * 23.82* 33.46* 37.51* •
it
it
000066 Iii
J
*Lark * 70 * 28.63* 40.36* 46.01*
*Lark * 60 * 31.1* 44.37* 52.14*
*Lark * 50 * 34.81* 32.11* 33.35*
*Lark * 40 * 23.66* 23.88* 27.63*
*Lark * 30 * 42.5* 39.32* 35.65*
"" *Lark * 20 * 32.49* 34.18* 29.13*
*Lark * 10 * * * *
M
************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY OF CONTRACTION AND EXPANSION COEFFICIENTS
..4 River: Castle Creek
************************ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
" * Reach * River Sta. * Contr. * Expan. *
************************ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
*Lark * 90 * .1* .3*
-
*Lark * 80 * .1* .3*
, *Lark * 70 * .1* .3*
*Lark * 60 * .1* .3*
*Lark * 50 * .1* .3*
*Lark * 40 * .1* .3*
*Lark * 30 * .1* .3*
*Lark * 20 * .1* .3*
*Lark * 10 * .1* .3*
- Profile Output Table - WS Table
************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
-+ ************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
* Reach * River Sta * Q Total *W.S. Elev * Vel Chnl * Vel Left *Vel
n Right *Vel Total *Top Width *Sta W.S. Lft *Sta W.S. Rgt *
-. * * * (cfs) * (ft) * (ft /s) * (ft /s) *
(ft /s) * (ft /s) * (ft) * (ft) * (ft) *
************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
.4 * Lark * 90 * 1300.00 * 8121.41 * 9.40 * 1.63 *
3.51 * 7.75 * 77.88 * 0.00 * 95.68 *
* Lark * 80 * 1300.00 * 8119.34 * 11.25 * 5.66 *
."
2.59 * 9.40 * 82.74 * 20.37 * 103.11 *
* Lark * 70 * 1300.00 * 8118.92 * 8.75 * 4.18 *
4.18 * 7.26 * 88.85 * 35.64 * 124.49 *
-
* Lark * 60 * 1300.00 * 8118.25 * 7.55 * 3.22 *
2.07 * 6.37 * 86.60 * 9.15 * 95.75 *
* Lark * 50 * 1300.00 * 8117.24 * 8.75 * 3.15 *
0.73 * 7.62 * 83.86 * 12.86 * 96.72 *
* Lark * 40 * 1300.00 * 8116.99 * 6.94 * 2.58 *
'4 3.22 * 5.45 * 99.47 * 12.69 * 161.82 *
* Lark * 30 * 1300.00 * 8116.58 * 7.26 * 3.43 *
1.36 * 6.32 * 110.48 * 28.11 * 138.60 *
„ * Lark * 20 * 1300.00 * 8115.61 * 8.43 * *
1.37 * 8.23 * 77.90 * 23.68 * 136.83 *
-. * Lark * 10 * 1300.00 * 8115.02 * 8.23 * 2.43 *
1.33 * 7.31 * 111.53 * 13.34 * 142.67 *
************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
=mg 00"61
140
■►
b
•
ERRORS WARNINGS AND NOTES
Errors Warnings and Notes for Plan : Plan 02
River: Castle Creek Reach: Lark RS: 90 Profile: PF 1 wit
Warning:The energy equation could not be balanced within the specified
number of iterations. The program selected the water i
surface that had the least amount of error between computed and
OP
assumed values.
Warning:Divided flow computed for this cross - section. i
Warning:The cross - section end points had to be extended vertically for the
computed water surface. 1a
Warning:The energy loss was greater than 1.0 ft (0.3 m). between the
current and previous cross section. This may indicate
the need for additional cross sections.
Warning:During the standard step iterations, when the assumed water surface Or
was set equal to critical depth, the calculated rp
water surface came back below critical depth. This indicates that
there is not a valid subcritical answer. The
program defaulted to critical depth.
River: Castle Creek Reach: Lark RS: 80 Profile: PF 1
Warning:The conveyance ratio (upstream conveyance divided by downstream
conveyance) is less than 0.7 or greater than 1.4.
This may indicate the need for additional cross sections. lb
Warning:The energy loss was greater than 1.0 ft (0.3 m). between the
current and previous cross section. This may indicate •
the need for additional cross sections.
River: Castle Creek Reach: Lark RS: 70 Profile: PF 1 S
Warning:The energy equation could not be balanced within the specified
number of iterations. The program selected the water
surface that had the least amount of error between computed and
assumed values.
Warning:During the standard step iterations, when the assumed water surface
was set equal to critical depth, the calculated
water surface came back below critical depth. This indicates that
there is not a valid subcritical answer. The
program defaulted to critical depth. /r
River: Castle Creek Reach: Lark RS: 60 Profile: PF 1
Note: Hydraulic jump has occurred between this cross section and the
previous upstream section.
River: Castle Creek Reach: Lark RS: 50 Profile: PF 1
Warning:The energy equation could not be balanced within the specified
number of iterations. The program selected the water
surface that had the least amount of error between computed and w
assumed values.
Warning:The conveyance ratio (upstream conveyance divided by downstream
conveyance) is less than 0.7 or greater than 1.4.
This may indicate the need for additional cross sections. S
Warning:During the standard step iterations, when the assumed water surface
was set equal to critical depth, the calculated
water surface came back below critical depth. This indicates that
there is not a valid subcritical answer. The
program defaulted to critical depth. •
River: Castle Creek Reach: Lark RS: 40 Profile: PF 1
Warning:Divided flow computed for this cross - section. S
t
000108
River: Castle Creek Reach: Lark RS: 20 Profile: PF 1
Warning:Divided flow computed for this cross- section.
River: Castle Creek Reach: Lark RS: 10 Profile: PF 1
Warning:Divided flow computed for this cross - section.
Warning:Slope too steep for slope area to converge during supercritical
flow calculations (normal depth is below critical
depth). Water surface set to critical depth.
4
n
4
4
000069
mo
r>r
EXHIBIT #7
LIST OF ADJACENT OWNERS TO PROPERTY
OBTAINED FROM COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE
Irwin Molasky
c/o Assante
10100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 1300
Los Angeles, California 90067
0
Mervyn Adelson Trust �r
10100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 1300
Los Angeles, California 90067
Robert J. Rafelson
RJR Trust
P.O. Box 691070
Los Angeles, California 90069 -9070
s
Castle Creek LLC
100 Wilshire Blvd., 8th Floor
Santa Monica, California 90401 -1110 s
i
Judy K. Hyde
4030 Baronne Way
Memphis, Tennessee 38117 -2908
OP
John C. Bishop Family Trust
1942 E. Cameley Circle
Sandy, Utah 84093
Cynthia Lark
3605 Mill Circle �s
Salt Lake City, Utah 84109 ■
s
E
OW
w
s
000070 or
twg
ONO
DRAWINGS
Ir bat
a000
Imo' v . M . IA' r" r€ • R 'h € • a e 1 n w A -"I
.x a 4
b. We Y4 S
16 {r 3 G ♦ E A 4 -S Ct n k I Y • 4 a i . 4 ♦ w
w J .J
eltmtltovr- trrl[.e *.\'.a_ W Ar.e ^. is ny rav rawrr rowz n•t�,y mm rnrar 1
•
mulli
L/
ka
' i O
; S b' S• ;IN/ Y1 0 h
$qN 3 0 o a Ap
../
lit " a' 'A t
9
o
,°;% ..,Q
O
i
!ii � [�� y
p S S 4:„.41,*. i
Z 4 QA /
�' N _
m n N 19 C_\ ro /r__ ,, z
n $ on \ , /' g
i�om� v * 8
2 n ? a' 3 r10.3 4 1 m
3 n >nmC 3'' $ 4- poi' i
� m R - a y vi $ ° mss 1 --I p u
n o o'.ml ! 1
p � a 66 pNn�J 3 0 1 � c
10' TO
hr
o 0 44 1 ar
U�Q N Q r O I� 1
1 Z n rY 1 1
N
(..4 <
Nr Z
b ml �� ' 1 1 all
m 73 h / ✓ / / / + '� . 1 1 AAA
N�
1p
/
/
g
/
2
4 ..,- 8.
oe
,k i I
'V 2rn - I ;
4 O /".
N g H AA lb
sGj /
0
a It
O ;
Se CO c
� ti
C3
r r C b
/
N
ti T A�jt ;mil
1
b
/ 5
$ 3 �,i�'0 ti
00 w A_ till
C
9
�o L
p tit? y ��$$ : "-4.14,. r � . � v1 T �j cz
■y�i `<g rT ,� O " Y I ® 9a 4 \ O
. I
�
Iv
ye
d i l ij 4 8 lit
A t 8. t„ 't..‘,, . y � b �.I
1 II..
n � v � Y , , r , 0
3388 3 k ; Z ' b
�1 f 9T yy
y? xy A 6 •
Ili( P A I 4 68 �" cr
t
If
li o
ik k
R
z; :1 b. 3 l - 1 ai d ; i
/
r IPI—
ks
F -, at 1 m
S,8 $ .
R €a
Asti S Is
g
A l
• q
Q neE E
R$1'' i1 L b tk
• U
a ` a fi .a It 1 2
A `611.§
h
RE e F 4�
N
o a k '� &W 2 ° NE ^_ a se
J ; q Pp u
M 0 0l J
c ' i �h \ Su g ..
b
„Pp \ \ I
R's \ . � 1
o O
N �i3 1
b m I / 8,
\ f` GQ o,"G \ /
cf N 0'� f. - \ I /
•�i3 n 5.3 54 \ - PP \ 1 /
\ �\ 1 1 I /
\ \ 1 I / &
\ ( \ \ \ \ 1 1
- / ' 6
E I 1 �� ;
p?- of■ / ' \ P \ a BO - I / / r,y bN
\ \ .
CO
•
\ b \ 0. SS
N
•
n
i l
P6 _ mm
W q
r
N
W vinM
DyNyf
r, 0 � ernn 1
co.. Z
0 % oak-.
ONUla°0, Q
Q'OO
�O
w . W c$ OY Y
P WS 2 Po
P I =bo�U
m \ =3 otud
1 7 Ummn % °
(n�U�iQU
4 ' o
6 P P y •
ie
Ux r
N
NI •
1112 t
dr I
ll ♦y -., . 11
a tine
ifiltini
/
•
eW ✓inn nor ow x , w ow", +dmy mu ray or w P■r deoornoulv wwli.r- awlmorl>
000070
o •
aq ;o a,c ,,
k , °F ; L
ti y � ..tn e t tg i a qy b.
! iiii.4 S.
4
O Vz F 6t 1 s
k L.) Em C/) q: ' 1 4.4 • 1 tEt I/E V w we < a 2-0L s d 4 * NV �r _1
W g C! W 2 B O i 7 1; y
q ill _ p # t .x -. _
�Yiw' Zk' F • Lei
, y��y+p}`y al c} O k t W1' w°t i 2c1% i
en car)
..4 de- iiiiiirvcr> (h9 IC 1 s
w O °
M -
W
En
3.
HP" 5 C\-1'
q
S go
v
Li ot
Qin �� -
Wes/ / y I / \ \\ \ \ \ 14 i
§ R __„,/ 6 . „,
„, „ \-\\ �
/ 2
k 61
u C N ! /
o /.
W 1 , /0P
1
its J
N Fi
w
A
LO nnen
1 y Vpgw
N 010 m
h � 1 m $ '. t C$aTO
1 i F c v, a$o
�j $ °1a a Wcl^r,o3
S .L ��O ♦U
o __ i X 7 1 ` F .R m 0 4
1 pppp S ° U mE °go
8 ' ° d C $ U1;(TR
/ °OS $n 4 3
(/ ohU ti 0 S _
/ :§g1 p ` ° n
R n 4
'S / ^4F 8
t i 1 -t. i. .g
y _ Y 90 a '
a "e ei he A
o- `.... _/: E 4.$ e . .
`
ter' � 4 F > it' kb )11
° 2 Zit'', N 'I " 111
Q
7 t e
jill
• Per wr.wvw we awl AS Al .14 ws 4+/ CO
0
CD
0
CD
ASPEN/PIT`„N COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT4+EPARTMENT
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 920 -5090 FAX# (970) 920 -5439
September 11, 2002
Alan Richman
Alan Richman Planning Services
P.O. Box 3613
Aspen, CO 81612
Re: Lark Family Investment Company 1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission
(PID# 2735- 231 -00 -018 Case# P130 -02)
Dear Alan,
The Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined
that this application is incomplete. After a more detailed review of the submittal information, additional
information specific to the application is requested at this time in order to adequately review and process
the application. Please read the attached letter as to what is needed in order for this application to
proceed and be reviewed on the date below.
However, we have scheduled this application for review at a public hearing by the Pitkin County Hearing
Officer on Tuesday, November 26, 2002, at a meeting to begin at 3:00 p.m. in the Courthouse Conference
Room, 506 East Main Street, Aspen, Colorado. Should this date be inconvenient for you please contact me
within 3 working days of the date of this letter. After that the agenda date will be considered final and
changes to the schedule or tabling of the application will only be allowed for unavoidable technical
problems. The Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining
to the application is available at the Planning Office.
Please note that it is your responsibility to post a public notice sign on the property at least fifteen days
prior to the hearing (and remove it within one week after) and to mail notice to all adjacent property
owners at least 30 days prior to the hearing with the return address of the Community Development
Department (copy of notice to be obtained from the Community Development Department). The names
and addresses shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than 60
days prior to the date of the public hearing. Prior to Hearing Officer approval the applicant shall
certify, either through sworn affidavit or by an attorney licensed to practice in the State of
Colorado that notice has been made to any municipal estate owners as required by C.R.S. Section
24- 65.5 -103. Please submit the enclosed Affidavit of Notice by Posting & Mailing as proof of compliance
with the Code at the hearing.
If you have any questions, please call Brian McNellis, the planner assigned to your case, at 920 -5092.
Sinc rely,
Isabel Calderon
Administrative Assistant
Enclosure
000074
Wednesday, December 12, 2001
ASPEN / PITKIN
C H11\111E1 11 DE \ELOPAI[NT EIEPART\IENT
Dear Applicant and Applicant Representatives:
The Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development Department, Planning Divisions are
modifying the submittal requirements for land use applications. We are working towards
requiring fewer paper copies of applications. While we cannot totally convert to digital
applications at this time, our hope is to eventually significantly reduce your need to
provide as many hard copies of the applications as possible. We will accept digital
format along with the hard copies immediately, if you choose to start now. Effective
March 4, 2002, we will require an electronic version of your application, as part of the
new submission requirements. Please become familiar with the new requirements as set
forth below:
1. During your pre - application conference, the planner will advise you of the
required number of paper copies.
2. In addition to the paper copies, all text documents must be submitted in digital
format. Acceptable digital formats are: text (.txt), Microsoft Word (.doc), Word
Perfect (.wpd), and Rich Text Format (.rtf).
3. The Plats will be required in digital format at final approval prior to final
recordation. Acceptable image file types are .jpg, .bmp and. tiff.
If you have any questions regarding the technical details of your digital submittals, please
contact Kathy Lowry, Computer Application Specialist, at kathyl(a,ci.aspen.co.us or
970.920.5484.
Sincerely,
Cindy Houben Julie Ann Woods
Pitkin County City of Aspen •
Community Development Director Community Development
Director
000075 130 Sou I GAI FNA STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 -1975 PHONE 970 920 5090 FA1 970 920 5439
['nnmd on Rear led Paper
ASPEN/PITKIN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone (970) 920 -5090 FAX (970) 920 -5439
MEMORANDUM
TO: County Zoning
Aspen Fire Department
County Environmental Health
County Engineer/Floodplain Administrator
Castle/Maroon Creek Caucus
County Wildlife Biologist
FROM: Brian McNellis, Community Development Department
RE: Lark Family Investment Company 1041 Hazard Review & Conceptual Submission
(PID# 2735- 231 -00 -018 Case# P130 -02)
DATE: September 11, 2002
Attached for your review and comments are materials for an application submitted by Lark Family
Investment Company. The Pitkin County Hearing Officer will review the application on Tuesday,
November 26, 2002.
Please return your comments to me by Friday, October 4, 2002.
PLEASE RETURN APPLICATION MATERIALS TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IF YOU
HAVE NO FURTHER NEED OF THEM.
Thank you.
000076
PITKIN COUNTY &OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTtEPARTMENT
AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FEES
PITKIN COUNTY (hereinafter COUNTY) and l-. At<K k' , .Je 1� - e CoA— am 1 -Q
(hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. APPLICANT has submitted to COUNTY an application for la M \ t-+M -o
(hereinafter, THE PROJECT).
2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that Pitkin County Ordinance No. 058 -2001 establishes a
fee structure for Planning applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a
determination of application completeness.
3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed
project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the
application. APPLICANT and COUNTY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties for APPLICANT to
make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT.
APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments
upon notification by the COUNTY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. COUNTY agrees it will be
benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT's application.
4. COUNTY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for COUNTY staff to complete
processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and /or Board of County
Commissioners to enable the Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners to make legally
required findings for project approval, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision.
5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the COUNTY's waiver of its right to
collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit
in the amount of $ 11 S o which is for hours of staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial
deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to COUNTY to reimburse the COUNTY for the
processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall
be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs
shall be grounds for suspension of processing.
PITKIN COUNTY APPLICANT
La��FwM.� vtA -L4Q
Cindy Houben Print Name O C �k
Community Development Director �C
Signature
Date: I
Mailing Address:
— s- " ^ •l1. C,L icc le
Sa1-F Liv-k c4 u1+1 S tto
Effective 3/1/02
000071
0 0
The following guidelines shall be used for the administration of the fee structure set forth above:
1. If an application involiks multiple reviews, the Applicant shall be charged the highest flat fee
or deposit listed above.
2. Applications or services not listed will be charged at an hourly rate of $210 and a deposit of
$210 shall be submitted with the application.
3. All deposit based land use applications shall be submitted with a signed Agreement for
Payment of Development Application Fees. Applicants will be billed at the hourly rate when
charges exceed the deposit.
4. A subdivision final plat will not be recorded until all fees have been paid.
5. The Community Development Department, County Engineer, Environmental Health, RFTA
and other County staff shall keep an accurate record of the actual time required for the
processing of the land use application and additional billing shall be made commensurate
with the additional costs incurred by the County when the processing of an application by the
Community Development Department takes more time than is covered by the deposit. In the
event the processing of an application by the Community Development Department takes
less time than provided for in subsection A, the Community Development Department shall
refund the unused portion of the deposit.
6. Additional billings shall be based solely on processing time spent by members of the
Community Development or its designee in the processing of an application.
7. Additional billing shall be computed at the rate of $210 per hour of additional Community
Development Department staff time required. Refunds of unused hours shall be made at the
rate of $210 per hour.
8. The Community Development Department Director shall establish appropriate guidelines for
the collection of Additional Billings as required.
9. This fee structure shall be reviewed annually as part of the County budget hearing process.
10. The Community Development Department shall identify, prior to or at the time of
submission of a land use application, whether an application is to be referred to Engineering,
Environmental Health, Wildlife Officer, Housing Office or RFTA, or whether a County
Clerk Administrative Fee is required. The Community Development Department shall also
identify whether an application constitutes a minor or a major referral, based on the number
of hours which will be required to review the application, and charge the applicant for each
referral accordingly.
11. In the event that staff determines that special expertise is required to assist the Community
Development Department in the review of a permit application such costs will be borne by
the applicant.
Effective 3/1/02
C00078
PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
2002 PLANNING APPLICATION FEES
Flat fees and deposits for the processing of land use applications shall be as follows:
LAND USE APPLICATION FLAT FEE
1041 Hazard Review
• Administrative Review $750
• Hearing Officer Review $1,750
• Takings $750
Lot Line Adjustment $1,000
Minor Amendment to a Development Permit $750
Minor Plat Amendment $750
Scenic Overlay Review /Ridgeline Review $1,000
Temporary Use /Special Event Permit $460
Caretaker Dwelling Unit $1,000
Special Review
• Administrative or Hearing Officer Review $1,000
• BOCC Review $2,500
Rezoning $2,500
Major Plat Amendment $1,000
DEPOSIT
Subdivision
• Conceptual Submission $2,500
• Detailed Submission $2,500
• Final Plat Billed hourly
GMQS Competition for Additional Floor Area OR New Unit $2,500
Planning & Zoning Staff Hourly Rate $210
Hearing Officer Hourly Rate $135
Engineer, Environmental Health & RFTA Land Use Referrals — $65
Hourly Rate
Housing Officer Referrals
• Major $320.00
• Minor $160.00
County Clerk Administrative Fee
• Major $600.00
• Minor $300.00
• Insignificant $110.00
Effective 3/1/02
000019
PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FEE POLICY
f
Pitkin County, Pursuant to Board of County Commissioners Ordinances No. 058 -2001 has
established a fee structure for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is
collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted. Referral fees for
other County departments reviewing the application will also be collected when necessary. One
check including the deposit for Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each
land use application, made payable to the Pitkin County Treasurer. Applications will not be
accepted for processing without the required application fee.
A flat fee is collected by Community Development for approvals that normally take a predictable
amount of staff time to process. The fee is not refundable.
A deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff review is required,
as hours are likely to vary substantially from one application to another. Actual staff time spent
will be charged against the deposit. After the deposit has been expended, the applicant will be
billed monthly based on actual staff hours. Current billings must be paid within 30 days or
processing of the application will be suspended. If an applicant has previously failed to pay
application fees as required, no new or additional applications will be accepted for processing
until the outstanding fees are paid. Outstanding balances must be paid before a Land Use
Takings Determination is heard before the Board of County Commissioners. In no case will
Building Permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. After
the final action on the project, any remaining balance from the deposit will be refunded to the
applicant.
Applications which require a deposit must include an Agreement for Payment of Development
Application Fees. The Agreement establishes the applicant as being responsible for payment of
all costs associated with processing the application. The Agreement must be signed by the party
responsible for payment and submitted with the application in order for it to be accepted.
The complete fee schedule for land use applications is attached.
Effective 3/1/02
000000
1
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I ARTMENT
130 South Galena Stree
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 920 -5090
Pitkin County
Land Use:
172 Board of Adjustment
159 County Land Use Code
173 Deposit
174 Flat Fee /75 crd
162 Zoning and Sign
169 Public Notice
160 Planning Enforcement
Referral Fees:
RB115 Access Permit
LUCO1 County Clerk
193 County Engineer
194 Environmental Health
198 Housing
190 Land Management
196 Wildlife Officer
Building Fees:
170 Board of Appeals
135 Building Code Sales
105 Building Permit
100 Contractor License
120 Electrical Permit
195 Energy Code Review
115 Mechanical Permit
150 Plan Check
110 Plumbing Permit
130 Reinspection
151 Aspen Sanitation
152 AVFD Fire Marshal
Other Fees:
155 Use Tax
1 65 Copy
Performance Deposit
tt 185 Park Dedication
186 Parking Cash in Lieu
IS GIS Requirements
• RB116 Road Impact Fees
B1202 Road Impact Fee
B1203 School Impact Fee
000081 /
Ton y , ld 176O C
/T/
NAME'
ADDRESS /PROJECT.
/.
PHONE:
CHECK# - e^� p
( CASE /PERMIT #: (60 Or # OF COPIES: Q
DATE: INITIAL: ----
m
ON O*N
04v4
-�
``�i .dl la ku
r,. Y f,
� r. ry� , may,: 7} r T7-
JV�T� ��V ! f f) '' .! ' r 1
'il1f ���J�. 7f � f !l ! 1`�Jii -2/ �1N� f , •�` �) 1 3€`! Ali ;I f..
!
/7 1 /011-
/V
lip"^�'/� 3 /° �
F- APPROI L OCA , IOA,' AND
' SJYE OF EX/T'AiC, JRCii^'P iI0F1 t'.SE✓
_
ra9 € 6e
tr!,
=
Vrr
r ,
t'
i
i
r1
Mims" P040 WN
I _
r'
LARK PAIRCEL, Z,s
I
SCALE,` 1"-- 20,
i9
�a
E .a. �
r r �
C.J .iC'C� y
d0 C..,''rZ 7
--
..i PIY�Y/.c t .i '" ,1`..17
'l
i�✓Y�J
�.NZ
61 �.1
r
y
J
;. vC'Qlico a;rear
ti0 d /air .ih,u,"
- OP 9.0
a10 , ! a �' { ilia l q f
as ! yu,%s ccyr- o,f�
a:;..'7c'
l.i~ea �AYJ�'
—
,,,. ..rr
0'. E ii LOOEPIA/N
,atnc,
(�..e.
1, i�� (, date(7i /"i�lqusf
_,. tt�%t cele L.a%�
a,r l;y/ .jrj_„ergtrt?erf.7
Com-arsy w
J
2. t?orl' ate %or the 400—year {load is ,300 c'
as �u -, the
Federa Lmergenc/
Alo!?tzgemer=t Agenc;, 'g8%
eievalr'or, in fhe
iczard
a .
a.
s '
J'
_a
P ,D0, M Y
Abffim
—
Acror&m !O CQ/L ad LOW, ,y6G MUsf
+ T 3�(. } 1 C t _ t
i
r e "� e V
rm'ertce at?v legal a t;bn bast'd ,iaan nny
Vao0) Spr —,GS,
,-.
��G,orcd0 �' t�i.}"�
'
t 's su y wr<"rrrr tfiree years ager
deieri. in P/e�t.
1 `' A J`.
Qp
FAX (97C" 0✓ 4 F,Q.�',FCJ
1Gi �.r3F J'$.�aVe,. SC,Cfi - ..
ay 4,y r_ga: atter, b.-asel U ,Y 6ttecf
iv J`F L
be ramrnencea mere trar)ON
'�• '
--
.;
, l,
J' 'silYYI -..._ ll?e- 6% tfte tCrHr,,rnitOn show
..
..+, _
,. �
1
Lark .Farce.
1041 hazard Review Site Flan
�I z-a� z3�'na-c�m� Ct�t�a oz�j
.oL Z43 t 1 1F9' .0 EIV SE d1 PLA/.v
%U iff
/ry.
Ili 1C Jo SO 7d .
kNCfZ....i
ems' 5
i9
�b d .e'Sq_
E .a. �
r r �
C.J .iC'C� y
d0 C..,''rZ 7
--
..i PIY�Y/.c t .i '" ,1`..17
�C
i�✓Y�J
�.NZ
61 �.1
PrcL
ICT Y2IP
NOT Tn V I,A I E
he ebV aCKr, OW/"dg--5 hr l :",e Os ?" 41'fGr^ied `'V O,tkb?
cO41 F^, O��- eos ?'gneX sie✓,t^m1f
of t+ ! ulo GrO,Jer ,. 0,7y hrp,,Ovemer:ts Crd i,,e ase a -74:f occu.C�ncy th6z-ett?`
- -- -
Lork -Of!r; CSrf rs _
EARt. JG Orf""PCE P, 75 APtPPOV,4.� .
(h,'S L!rx -cm1;y' i,'.1Vestrneny Co-npory Ltd '041 Hczcf6J Review Site P'Ot"
hos &er revievvcd by the Hea 7°
day er.►20-G2, subject :c {`cer De:;,,r; SEae
c£
RE.OROI.Nv CERTlr:'CA f=
i
This Lark tarry i^;-,eri ves.
r r �
C.J .iC'C� y
1`i t1
r�slr,`azcre
,.evr"r
3"ie r;'or,
i)OS lJF, e!} OCCeJ�teCl for t(!ir J1`.},oJ ,^_ i�eJ?^�1'' Y %E" .7T
Pit✓ r,' L`@Jritj; G:31O/CUO or. GA'7COV
64 Xk
l f I J
^—---
! Cr-ecorgerZ n
e
78
���(� [ � Il lei 1��� I�lil► � f�l Illll l'I SI I � �
01,127/2003 ea 44r
SILVIA DAVIS P? -%IN COUNTY CC R 11.00 0 0,00
Si to'1Cat
No 2002-211
�.` JPW
—9'02
OF
�.. r< r C✓iS�G � � ��
s _
Pt a �3i-vv
p �3b
(,' SQ X130