HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.273706307001 (2011)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 copies (11x1')
RECEPTION #: 585692, 01106/2012 at
11:56:35 AM,
1 OF 7, R $0.00 Doc Code ADMIN
DECISION
Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OF
PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, APPROVING THE 979 ASPEN LLC ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
AND SITE PLAN REVIEW AND GMQS EXEMPTIONS
Administrative Decision No.,�_-2012
RECITALS
1) 979 Aspen LLC (hereafter "Applicant') has applied to the Community Development Director of
Pitkin County (hereafter "Director ") to establish an Activity Envelope and obtain Site Plan review
approval to replace the existing single - family residence with a new residence.
2) The property is located at 979 Red Mountain Road, and is described as Lot 2, Randall Subdivision.
3) The lot contains 42,637 square feet and is a conforming size lot in the R -30 zone district.
4) The BOCC approved the Randall Subdivision in 1972; the plat was recorded in Plat Book 4 at Page
256 and an amended plat was recorded in Plat Book 37 at Page 40.
5) The existing single family residence was constructed in 1975.
6) The Director finds that the request complies with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code
( "Code "), as follows:
A) The lot is within a subdivision approved by the Board of County Commissioners, and, therefore,
is exempt from growth management for up to 5,750 square feet of floor area, pursuant to Sec. 6-
30-100(b) of the Code.
B) The lot is within the Aspen Urban Growth Boundary, and, therefore, use of two TDRs to develop
up to the final maximum gross floor area of 10,293 square feet is permitted without special
review, pursuant to Sec. 6- 30- 50(b)(1) of the Code.
C) The wildfire hazard is rated as severe, and can be mitigated pursuant to the provisions of Sec. 7-20 -
60(c) of the Code.
D) The activity envelope primarily contains slopes of less than 30 %. Slopes in excess of 30% within
the envelope are man -made, as a result of the development of the original residence and driveway
and of Red Mountain and Wrights Road, or are anomalies in an otherwise continuous slope of
less than 30 %. The Code permits development in these areas of slopes in excess of 30 %,
pursuant to Sec. 70- 20- 20(c)(3).
E) A Utilities Envelope encroaches on slopes in excess of 30% to accommodate existing utility lines
that extend to the property from Wrights Road.
F) The parcel is not within any mapped mule deer or elk habitat; the redevelopment of the site will have
minimal additional impacts on wildlife.
G) The parcel is within the mapped Scenic View Protection Area. The site is visible from certain
points along Highway 82; however, the existing residence is barely discernible given the distance,
topography, intervening structures and dense vegetation. The visibility of the proposed residence
will be similar to or less than that of the existing residence, due to the design of the residence and
the planting of numerous trees and shrubs on the front side of the property, where the existing
driveway is located.
H) The relocation of the driveway to the east will improve sight distances and the driveway has been
designed to provide adequate access for emergency vehicles.
Administrative Decision No. CR--2012
Page 2
1) The structural retaining walls on the uphill side of the driveway will serve to increase the stability
of the steep fill slope below Wrights Road and will also create a fire break above the residence.
APPROVED by the Director, subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be
binding on all successors in interest:
1. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made in the application and shall consider those
representations to be conditions of approval, unless amended by other conditions.
2. Prior to submission of any future building permit applications, the Applicant shall be required to
submit for approval by the County Attorney and Community Development a Site Plan with an
Activity Envelope in accordance with Land Use Code Section 2- 30 -20(g) and Application Manual
Section 2.1.12. The above referenced approvals shall be a condition precedent to finalization and
recordation of them.
3. The lot is exempt from the Growth Management up to 5,750 square feet of gross floor area. To develop
in excess of 5,750 and up to 10,293 square feet of gross floor area, the Applicant shall surrender two
TDR Certificates at building permit application and a copy of the deed(s) evidencing the Applicant's
acquisition of the Certificate(s).
4. Prior to issuance of building permit application for the residence, the Applicant shall:
A. Submit a drainage and erosion control plan for review and approval by Planning/Zoning. If the
development disturbs one (1) acre or more, the Applicant shall apply for and obtain a State
Stormwater Permit. All historic and natural drainage patterns shall be maintained.
B. Submit a large scale construction management plan for review and approval by Planning/Zoning.
C. Obtain a County access /driveway permit. The driveway shall have a minimum width of 16 feet
(to the first auto -court, by the front door, as approved by the Fire Marshal; a lesser width is
acceptable from this point to the garage). The turning radii at the entrance to Red Mountain Road
shall be 29 feet on each side of the driveway and any culvert areas beneath the driveway entrance
shall have the capacity to support 54,000 pounds on two axles. Stamped engineered drawings
demonstrating compliance with the applicable standards shall be submitted with the permit
application.
D. Complete a fireplace /woodstove registration form with the Community Development
Department, if necessary.
E. Pay the applicable road and employee housing impact fees.
F. Submit a tree mitigation plan and a landscape plan.
G. Submit a detailed revegetation plan for disturbed areas with appropriate seed mixes. The plan shall
specifically address the revegetation of steep slopes.
H. Submit a lighting plan.
5. Following construction and prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the residence, the
Applicant shall submit a letter from a wildfire expert approving the as- built/installed wildfire
mitigation.
6. Areas disturbed by construction shall be re- vegetated within one growing season of the project's
completion.
7. No development in excess of 30" above or below natural grade shall occur within the setbacks of the
parcel, with the exception of driveways and associated retaining walls of up to 6' above or below
Administrative Decision No. Z -2012
Page 3
natural grade and fencing. Landscaping in the form of berms within the setbacks shall not exceed
four feet from the most restrictive grade. Any development located within setbacks mandated by
County zoning regulations that does not comply with these restrictions shall require a variance from
the Board of Adjustment. Approval of an activity envelope within such setbacks does not assure
approval of a variance.
8. The Applicant shall comply with all standards for development within Scenic View Protection Areas
as represented in the application and approved in this Decision. The exterior of the residence shall
utilize indigenous earth tone materials or colors and the roofs shall have a non - reflective color or
composition. Reflective roof materials shall not be used unless the materials are treated prior to
installation to eliminate reflectivity, with the exception of materials associated with solar or
photovoltaic equipment. Driveway lighting is prohibited and all other lighting shall comply with the
lighting code.
9. Retaining walls shall be faced with stone or earth - colored materials similar to the surrounding natural
landscape. Retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height shall be supported by appropriate
engineering. A retaining wall shall not exceed 7 feet in height. Terracing shall be limited to 2 tiers.
The width of the terrace between any two 4 foot high vertical retaining walls shall be at least 3 feet.
If the retaining walls are higher than 4 feet, then the width of the terrace between the retaining walls
shall be at least 5 feet. Terraces created between retaining walls shall be permanently landscaped or
revegetated with native vegetation.
10. The Applicant shall comply with the following standards for Development in a Severe Wildfire
Hazard Area:
A. Defensible Space: The area around all buildings /structures, limited by property boundaries that
may limit a property owner's ability to comply with this section, shall incorporate landscaping
with wildfire defensible space considerations as follows (note: actual vegetation manipulation to
meet these conditions may not be necessary where the natural vegetation patterns have already
fulfilled these conditions):
1) For a distance of 15 feet around the proposed residence and beyond the further most projection
of combustible construction, the area shall be of primarily noncombustible hardscape surfaces,
low growing perennials, flowerbeds, cut grass and deciduous, well- trimmed and irrigated plants.
Woody vegetation shall not be planted within this area. The owner may retain trees near the
residence, if the 15 foot perimeter is extended outward from the furthest growth expected from
the mature tree(s).
2) Beyond the 15 foot perimeter and up to 45 feet around the proposed residence (or to the property
line where less than 45 feet), maintain natural and/or irrigated grass at less than 6 inches and thin
existing trees and brush into individuals or clusters. Oak and serviceberry should be thinned and
clustered. Limbs of trees in this area shall be pruned to one -half the height of the tree, one -third
the height of the tree for any conifer, or 10 feet above ground, whichever is less. No brush or
shrubs which when mature will be tall enough to act as ladder fuel shall be maintained within
this area. Clusters of bushes or shrubs should be separated from each other and from those
beyond the 45 foot perimeter by a distance of 2 '/ times the height of the mature vegetation. The
diameter of a cluster should be limited to 2 '/ times the height of the mature vegetation. As an
example: If the expected mature height of the vegetation is 10 feet, then the diameter of the
cluster should be no greater than 25 feet and the distance between clusters should be greater than
25 feet. Ideally the plant material growing between trees and clusters of bushes or shrubs is
grass maintained at 6 inches or less.
Administrative Decision No. 0, -2012
Page 4
3) Within the 15 -45 foot perimeter, thin and remove lower branches of brush or shrubs within
clusters or individual plants to eliminate ladder fuel. Most of the shrubs that will be cut are
vigorous sprouting plants. With the approval of Pitkin County and the property owner, the cut
ends may be treated with a product named Garlon or an equivalent by a person licensed to
apply herbicides so as to prevent regeneration. Cut material shall be either removed or chipped
and spread.
4) Remove or chip all standing dead and deadfall on the property. The area below Wrights Road
has a considerable amount of standing dead and deadfall and the removal of this coupled with
the thinning of live growth should provide for healthier growth and better slope stability.
5) The applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible space
vegetation requirements.
B. Roofing Materials: Class A covering or Class A assembly as defined by the currently adopted
Building Code. No wood shakes or shingles. All other adopted Building Code compliant
methods and materials permitted. Roofs with less than a 3:12 pitch are not permitted unless they
comply with the following:
1) All roof coverings shall be constructed of non - combustible materials and installed on a Class
A roof assembly.
2) All roof coverings shall have a surface that shall facilitate the natural process of clearing roof
debris.
3) Protrusions above the roofline, such as parapets, shall be prohibited, unless specifically
approved by the Fire Marshal.
4) Roofs shall be installed as required by the adopted Building Code and shall have a minimum
pitch of 1:48.
5) All roof designs, coverings, or equivalent assemblies shall be specifically approved by the
Fire Marshal prior to submittal of a building permit application.
C. Roof Venting:
1) Soffit venting shall be located in the outer 1 /3` portion of the overhang.
2) Attic, soffit and other roof venting shall be of non - corrosive metal mesh with maximum '' /4
openings.
D. Projections at the Roofline, including Soffits, Rafters, Porch or Deck Roofs, Fascias, or Other:
One hour rated material or any material underlain by 5/8" Type X gypboard or equal, or "Type
IV" Heavy Timber materials, per the currently adopted building code. Projections shall be
constructed so that they do not trap, hold or retain leaves or debris that may be ignited by burning
brands carried by air currents from any fire in the area.
E. Decks, Decking, Cantilevered Floors, or Other Projections Below the Roofline:
1) Construction with noncombustible or one (1) hour rated material, or material with flame
spread <25 (tested to ASTM E84 and listed for exterior use), or
2) Conventionally framed deck with waterproof surface and underside protected with 5/8" Type
X gypboard or equal (decking as "I" above), or
3) "Type IV" Heavy Timber materials: joist and beams minimum 6 "x10 ", columns minimum
8 "x8 ", decking minimum 4" in depth, or decking as "1" above; or equivalent log
construction, or
Administrative Decision No. 0� -2012
Page 5
4) Areas below projections shall be protected from accumulation of vegetative materials by
placement of a vegetative barrier covered with rocks or gravel or shall be concrete or stone.
There shall be no storage of combustible materials under projections. Walls under
projections shall be constructed of materials approved for one hour fire resistive construction
on the exterior side of the wall.
F. Railings: Railings must be constructed of noncombustible or "Type IV" Heavy Timber materials.
G. Exterior of the Structure, Including All Walls:
1) One (1) hour fire resistive rated materials from ground level to roofline, or
2) 5/8" gypboard underlying combustible materials, or
3) Cement stucco, minimum 3 /4" thickness.
4) Glazed openings shall be provided with closing, solid, exterior non - flammable shutters or
shall be or tempered glass; and
5) Doors to be tempered glass, metal, or wood P - thick minimum.
H. Foundations: Foundations, skirting, and crawl space openings shall be fully enclosed and
constructed with materials approved for one (1) hour fire- resistive construction on the exterior
side of the walls and shall extend from the top of grade to the underside of the floor decking or
walls.
1. Maintenance and Miscellaneous Requirements
1) Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris.
2) Any outbuilding shall adhere to the same wildfire requirements.
3) Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash and flammable debris.
4) All flammable materials shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of fifteen (15) feet
away from any structure.
5) Weeds and grasses within a fifteen (15) foot perimeter and under trees, bushes and brush
shall be maintained to a height not more than six (6) inches.
6) Firewood /wood piles shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of fifteen (15) feet
away from the structure.
7) Non saltwater swimming pools shall be accessible by the local fire district.
8) Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris.
9) Wood fences shall not connect to other structures.
10) Fuel tanks shall be installed underground with an approved container.
11) Propane tanks shall be buried, if possible, or installed according to NFPA 58 standards and on
a contour away from the structure with standard defensible space vegetation mitigation
around any aboveground tank. Any wood enclosure around the tank shall be constructed with
materials approved for two (2) hour fire- resistive construction on the exterior side of the
walls.
12) Each structure shall have a minimum of one ten (10) pound ABC fire extinguisher.
13) Addresses shall be clearly marked with two (2) inch non - combustible letters and shall be
visible at the primary point of access from the public or common access road and installed on
a non - combustible post.
14) Utilities shall be extended underground.
11. The Applicant shall comply with the applicable codes and requirements of the Aspen Fire Protection
District, including but not limited to access, turning around of fire apparatus and water supply (20,000
Administrative Decision No. A -2012
Page 6
gallon water supply or confirmation of the nearest fire hydrant). The Applicant shall install an automatic
fire suppression system in all buildings that shall be approved by the Fire Marshal.
12. The Applicant shall comply with the following conditions regarding wildlife:
A. Manipulation of vegetation outside of the activity envelope is prohibited, except as necessary to
comply with the wildfire hazard mitigation measures.
B. Fruit bearing trees and shrubs shall be prohibited.
C. Trash/garbage shall be kept in an approved bear resistant container or enclosure as required by
the County's Wildlife Protection Ordinance.
D. Construction workers shall be prohibited from bringing dogs on -site.
E. All outside doors shall utilize only solid round handled door knobs unless another type is required by
the applicable building code for disabled accessibility purposes.
F. Bird feeders, including hummingbird feeders, shall be hung away from any deck or window, and
shall be at least 10' from the ground suspended between 2 trees or posts. All seed feeders shall
include a seed catchment pan to catch discarded seeds. Bird feeders should be removed from April
through November.
G. Composting shall be restricted to yard waste.
H. Fencing shall comply with the following, except for fencing immediately adjacent to the
buildings to contain pets or livestock:
1) Wood 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 shall have at
least 18 inches between two of the rails.
2) Wire fencing shall consist of no more than 3 strands of smooth wire and shall not exceed 42
inches in height.
3) Mesh or woven wire fences are prohibited, except when used for protection around isolated
trees or clumps of trees.
13. No development shall occur outside of the approved activity envelope, with the exception of
vegetation removal necessary to comply with the wildfire mitigation measures described above.
14. Prior to commencement of any earthmoving or other construction activity, the Applicant shall stake
the corners of the activity envelope and install construction fencing around the construction site
within the perimeter of the envelope. The fencing shall remain in place until issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy.
15. No calculations for height, bulk, setback, size, floor area, or any other building and zoning requirements
have been conducted. These requirements will be considered at the time of building permit. Any
structures represented in the application may not be permitted under building and zoning regulations.
16. Failure to comply with the conditions of this approval may result in revocation of this approval, or
any subsequent permit(s) or approval(s) related to this property, or vested rights associated with this
property.
17. 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, § 2 -20 -170 and C.R.S., § 24 -68 -105. The statutory vested rights granted herein shall expire on
`� n,�
9 , 2015.
Administrative Decision No. -� -2012
Page 7
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY on the
6' day of November, 2011.
APPROVED by the Director, this / A day of ' an 'Q , 2012.
PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS in the
Aspen Times Weekly on the � day of74nua , 2012.
Cindy ouben,
Community Development Director
PID #273706307001
P082 -11
(Lot 2, Ra ru�Subd- vVW&w)
AN APPLICArION FOR:
S17T PLAIN REVIEW AND
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE APPROVAL;
AND, GMQS EXEMPTIONS
SUBMITTED BY
HAAS LAND MANN,INO, LCC
201 N. MILL SVR£ET, Surd 108
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
(970) 925 -7819
fo w(970) 925 -7395
mJ Wt4@s0prck. voet
O ctober, 2011
u 0 C C C i C & PID No. 2737- 063 -07 -001
AN APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW
AND ACTIVITY ENVELOPE APPROVAL,
AND GMQS EXEMPTIONS
FOR
979 RED MOUNTAIN ROAD
(LOT 2, RANDALL SUBDIVISION)
Submitted by:
979 Aspen LLC
2950 E. Broad Street, 2nd Floor
Columbus, OH 43209
Prepared by:
HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC
Planning Consultant
201 North Mill Street, Suite 108
Aspen, CO 81611
Phone: (970) 925 -7819
Fax: (970) 925-7395
Email: mhaas ®sopris.net
PID No. 2737-063-07-001
/A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION .............................................. ..............................1
• Vicinity Map ........................................... ..............................I
II. THE NEIGHBORHOOD & SUBJECT PROPERTY (Existing Conditions) .......3
III. THE PROPOSAL .............................................. ..............................6
IV. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS .................................. ..............................9
A. Site Plan and Activity Envelope Review ................ ..............................9
B. Rural Character, Environmental Protection, and
Natural Resources .......................................... .............................11
1.
Site Preparation and Grading ........................ ..............................1
l
2.
Steep and Potentially Unstable Slopes .............. .............................12
3.
Water Courses and Drainage ........................... .............................13
4.
Floodplain Hazards ...................................... .............................14
5.
Geologic Hazards ....................................... .............................14
6.
Wildfire Hazards ........................................ .............................14
7.
Wildlife Habitat Areas ................................. .............................15
8.
Scenic View Protection ............................... .............................17
9.
Landscaping and Vegetation Protection ............. .............................21
10 .
Lighting ................................................. .............................21
C. Approvals for the Replacement Home and TDR Receiver Site .....................21
1.
Transfer of Development Rights ...................... .............................21
2.
GMQS Exemption for Development Utilizing TDR ...........................
23
3.
GMQS Exemption for Replacement .................. .............................23
D. Roads, Driveways and Parking ............................ .............................24
E. Public Services and Utilities ............................... .............................24
PID No. 2737-063-07-001
0'00002
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1:
Proof of Ownership
Exhibit 2:
Letter of authorization for Haas Land Planning to represent the applicant
Exhibit 3:
Pre - Application Conference Summary
Exhibit 4:
Wildfire Hazard Review by Art Hougland of Hougland & Associates
Exhibit 5:
Letter from Sopris Engineering, LLC addressing Steep Slopes
Exhibit 6:
HP Geotech Subsoil Study
Exhibit 7:
Drainage and Erosion Control Report by Sopris Engineering, LLC
Exhibit 8:
FAR Calculations of the Existing Home from Poss Architecture and
Planning
Exhibit 9:
Executed Agreement to Pay Form
Exhibit 10:
Affected Property Owners' Mailing Addresses of Record
MAPS /GRAPHICS*
Introduction
On Page 1:
• Vicinity Map
Existing Conditions
Between Pages 4 -5:
• Copy of the Randall Subdivision First Amended Plat (Book 37, Page 40)
• Topographical Survey Map
The Proposal
Between Pages 8 -9:
• Proposed Activity Envelope and Site Plan/Landscape Plan (3 Sheets)
Review Requirements
Between Pages 11 -12
• Tree Removal and Protection Plan
Between Pages 20 -21
• Photographic Scenic View Studies
• Architectural Elevations (3 Sheets)
PID No. 2737-063-07-001
000003
I. INTRODUCTION
This application requests approvals for:
Site Plan Review and Activity Envelope approval for the replacement of the existing
residence; and,
GMQS Exemptions for: a) the replacement of the existing home; and b) use of TDR.
The subject property is located at 979 Red Mountain Road and is legally described as Lot
2, Randall Subdivision, with a Parcel Identification Number of 2737 - 063 -07 -001 The
property is zoned R -30 and is located within the designated Urban Growth Boundary
(UGB) around the City of Aspen. Its general location relative to the surrounding area is
depicted on the Vicinity Map below.
.r �•� ", w �r e � i ����a� � `'
Vicinity Map - 979 Red Mountain Road
This application is submitted pursuant to the following sections of the Pitkin County
Land Use Code (the Code): 2- 30- 20(g), Activity Envelope and Site Plan Criteria for
Approval; Section 6- 30 -50, GMQS Exemption for Development Using TDR; 6 -30 -110,
GMQS Exemption for Remodeling and Replacement; 7- 10 -50, Site Plan and Activity
Envelope; 7 -20, Rural Character, Environmental Protection, and Natural Hazards; 7 -30,
Roads, Driveways and Parking; and, 7 -50, Public Services and Utilities.
The application is submitted by 979 Aspen LLC (hereinafter "the applicant "), owner of
the subject property, and divided into four sections. This Section I is a brief introduction
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737- 063 -07 -001)
000004
to the application, while Section II furnishes an overview of the neighborhood and
subject property (existing conditions). The proposed development is detailed in Section
III, while Section IV identifies the relevant review criteria of the Code and provides
responses demonstrating compliance and/or consistency with each standard, as
applicable. For the reviewer's convenience, all pertinent supporting documents are
provided in the various exhibits to the application, including the following:
• Exhibit 1: Proof of the applicant's ownership (Title Policy);
• Exhibit 2: Authorization for Haas Land Planning, LLC, (HLP) and Aidlin Darling
Design (AD) to represent the property owner for this application;
• Exhibit 3: The pre - application conference summary;
• Exhibit 4: A wildfire review assessment prepared by Art Hougland of Hougland
& Associates (H &A);
• Exhibit 5: Letter from Sopris Engineering, LLC (SOPRIS) regarding slopes;
• Exhibit 6: HP Geotech Subsoil Study;
• Exhibit 7: Preliminary Drainage Report from SOPRIS;
• Exhibit 8: FAR Calculations of the Existing Home from Poss Architecture and
Planning;
• Exhibit 9: An executed application fee agreement; and
• Exhibit 10: A list of adjacent property owners with their mailing addresses of
record.
While the applicant has attempted to address all relevant provisions of the Code and
provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evaluation, questions may arise which
require further information and/or clarification. Upon request, Haas Land Planning will
provide such additional information as may be required in the course of the review.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001)
000005
II. THE NEIGHBORHOOD & SUBJECT PROPERTY (Existing Conditions)
The subject property is Lot 2, Randall Subdivision, according to the First Amended Plat
thereof recorded in Plat Book 37 at Page 40. The address is 979 Red Mountain Road,
and its general location relative to the surrounding environs is depicted on the Vicinity
Map provided in Section I, above. It is a 42,637 square foot lot (coincidentally, 0.979
acre) located in the R -30 zone district and within the designated Urban Growth Boundary
(UGB) around the City of Aspen. The Parcel Identification Number is 2737 - 063 -07 -001.
The Randall Subdivision was approved by the Pitkin County Board of County
Commissioners (BOCC) on May 22, 1972 and its plat was recorded on June 16, 1972 in
Plat Book 4 at Page 256. The recorded plat contained a thirty (30) foot road and utility
easement (fifteen (15) feet on each side of the common lot line). In 1994, the Pitkin
County Community Development Director approved a minor plat amendment for the
purpose of reflecting the vacation of the private road easement identified and dedicated
on the original plat without affecting the utility easement; the amended plat (the First
Amended Plat of the Randall Subdivision) was recorded on May 30, 1995 in Book 37 at
Page 40. As a condition of the minor plat amendment approval, a Mutual Reciprocal
Release of Private Road Easement was recorded on February 10, 1995 (Book 773 at Page
683).
According to the Improvement Survey, the property has an area of 42,637 square feet
(0.979 acre). It is essentially triangular in shape, fronting on Red Mountain Road and
backing up to Wrights Road. The property slopes from Wrights Road down toward Red
Mountain Road. Existing improvements include a three level, single - family residence
with 4,987 square feet of floor area and another 527 square feet of attached garage space
(as determined by Poss Architecture + Planning, see Exhibit 8). Vehicular access to the
residence is gained via a concrete driveway from Red Mountain Road.
Most of the previously developed portion of the property contains slopes of between 0%
and 30 %. There are no mapped or otherwise regulated wildlife habitat types affecting the
property. From a wildfire hazards standpoint, Mr. Art Hougland of Hougland &
Associates (H &A), visited the subject property and found the wildfire hazard rating to be
"Severe," which is consistent with the surrounding area containing most of the homes on
Red Mountain, due to slopes and continuous brushy fuels.
If this property and the surrounding area were in their undeveloped and natural condition,
the continuous slope would be less than 30 %, with scattered anomalous areas exceeding
30 %. As the letter from Sopris Engineering LLC (SOPRIS; see Exhibit 5) demonstrates,
prior to the construction of this home and the adjacent roads, the entire parcel would not
have had any slope areas greater than 30 %. This conclusion is consistent with the 2008
subsoil study prepared by HP Geotech which found about 4 -8 feet of variable fill material
overlaying the natural, indigenous soils (see Exhibit 6). Based upon the historic
topography (from 1958), all of the slopes in excess of 30% are the result of man-made
activities or are minor anomalies in an otherwise continuous slope of less than 30 %.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737- 063 -07 -001) Page
juc,1G6
The development activities associated with construction of the existing residence and the
adjacent roads resulted in a substantial amount of fill material that was dumped onto the
property. The most obvious location of dumped fill material is found along the
north/northeast sides of the property, immediately below Wrights Road. The fill material
was never properly compacted nor was its placement at all engineered. Consequent
slopes, while somewhat densely revegetated, remain unstable and future development
affecting these and the areas below must include actions to remove the fill material and
stabilize the remaining slopes (see Exhibits 5, 6 and 7).
The property is also encumbered by the Protective Covenants for Randall Subdivision
(recorded June 16, 1972 in Book 264 at Page 516, as Reception Number 152211). Each
of the two lots in the Randall Subdivision are restricted in use to one single - family
dwelling of not less than 800 square feet in area, plus a private garage for not more than
three (3) cars. The properties may be used only for residential purposes and cannot be re-
subdivided or conveyed in anything less than their full dimensions as shown on the plat.
All utility lines must be buried, and the covenants prohibit metal roofs, towers, and
exposed or outside radio, television or other electronic antennae.
The dimensional requirements of the R -30 zone district, as applicable to Lot 2 of the
Randall Subdivision and its net area of 42,637 square feet (0.979 acre) are as follows:
• Minimum Lot Area = 30,000 square feet
• Minimum Lot Area per Principal Use or Dwelling Unit = 30,000 square feet
• Minimum Usable Open Space per Dwelling Unit = 6,600 square feet
• Minimum Lot Width = 100 feet
• Minimum Setback from Collector Street (Red Mountain Road) = 50 feet for
buildings, and 25 feet for outside uses
• Minimum Front Yard Setback = 30 feet (this is superseded by the collector
street setback.)
• Minimum Side Yard Setback = 15 feet (Per the Randall Subdivision
covenants the minimum side yard setback that adjoins Lot 1 is 20 feet)
• Minimum Rear Yard Setback = 30 feet
• Maximum Height (principal Structure) = 28 feet
• Maximum Height (Accessory Structures) = 20 feet
• Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) = 0.13 (0.13 x 42,637sf = 5,543 square
feet)
• Gross Floor Area Exempt from Growth Management (without GMQS
Allocation or TDR; a/k/a Base Maximum) = 5,750 square feet
The subject lot meets the minimum lot area, minimum lot area per dwelling unit, and
minimum lot width requirements, making it a conforming lot of record. The existing
structure is also in conformance with zoning requirements.
As noted above, the allowable FAR is 5,543 square feet, the Base Maximum Floor Area
is 5,750 square feet, and the Final Maximum Size /Area is 10,293 square feet, as
calculated below. Being located within the UGB and subject to a Floor Area Ratio, the
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001)
U G, 19 07
.4
v
LOT i
"
-- R ED
1 \
6_,
i
LOT
f
�L.
J 'K
'J
F �
MO UNT
-�\ 0 9 k
FIRST PI.A'1' ()I?
R.11\ DA I L SI1liI)Ij \T
SITI'ATED IN SECTIM 6, To NV -NSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST
OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL. MERIDI4_N, I - ITKIN COLNTT, COLORADO.
CERT OF OWNERSH
w10r 25 %�fRL+J�'N +i.R'w a^S!.C•NC ^- L'6�'1M'
.MIDJ'Y��"T" -F SIt ?Nt y'9 Lei
Z ' V � -W.•J �E� RACK e�C� XF'J�L ✓f T -1
.At•A GYG£.. F.SPC6J]. °J S' YNC - 'JA :JM
1m"L�*•�Y9n Jc'uLry. Z��i�a4
avxa r,.,n
weh
COUNTY OF..IN/v_JeeF .....j 5 �
'lam ?sti C Y�L ' t_ _ t•+yfe - u -
GRLVN n >. OM'NtIe GV mss. 4rG+._. �.7 vttQ•
Non
^ H.: F12]' M"pfD vl.Tb f�EN�
AN.t _*,Obl6 F'N/.L ° }- -!ThG ei^GLL '.IAOrv.tGn
"" f•`t ^ ne
�:l.b 1 1T !%A IT
'}+C
% 'K1T'G5�05'1C 'avnTF Wn�GV NaT� s FVfK:
G:!!?S 4'Ury - •+E :,i. a' i.6! AIM - 4 .T uY
SL'RDIV'ISION EXEMPTION ♦ IIS i
=: S AI».�l•L\ V:N.'TCh' ^OR �LtYjl I.nT
'-� e.°L� nre, ¢p br'T`e r xw �M�' .•vnn:T-
�I t
�+L's:,Y�
9�
SURVEYOR'S ERTI F7EATE
..alt'J �.K'J -ElFSi :SFT M " °.Ry(
•�Yl.fJC- ^Lf Y M W -. � Ypv_:.N YNt 'NE•IAZL
.NOOe v' Maaxw
ATM at'ee • Rexr
BE4 0RDI. A_�C ___ __
T 6 °IeT /u:1C�D.m NTQ• RaN2a <_ �:tJ', 3C
ahU crcc�pra Oa lSRi -.^W: .. _ro0.
Nuxs. L ^
:1J4�! K 2 �•�
Alpine Surveys, Inc,
Post Of110 8a tlb � ;p,.� �� E1YMty ^ItKT.0
TXb
30 e>e FIRST AMENDED PLAT OF
RA LL .SUBDIVISION
Y T
T
v
`r .
�L.
J 'K
'J
F �
MO UNT
-�\ 0 9 k
FIRST PI.A'1' ()I?
R.11\ DA I L SI1liI)Ij \T
SITI'ATED IN SECTIM 6, To NV -NSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST
OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL. MERIDI4_N, I - ITKIN COLNTT, COLORADO.
CERT OF OWNERSH
w10r 25 %�fRL+J�'N +i.R'w a^S!.C•NC ^- L'6�'1M'
.MIDJ'Y��"T" -F SIt ?Nt y'9 Lei
Z ' V � -W.•J �E� RACK e�C� XF'J�L ✓f T -1
.At•A GYG£.. F.SPC6J]. °J S' YNC - 'JA :JM
1m"L�*•�Y9n Jc'uLry. Z��i�a4
avxa r,.,n
weh
COUNTY OF..IN/v_JeeF .....j 5 �
'lam ?sti C Y�L ' t_ _ t•+yfe - u -
GRLVN n >. OM'NtIe GV mss. 4rG+._. �.7 vttQ•
Non
^ H.: F12]' M"pfD vl.Tb f�EN�
AN.t _*,Obl6 F'N/.L ° }- -!ThG ei^GLL '.IAOrv.tGn
"" f•`t ^ ne
�:l.b 1 1T !%A IT
'}+C
% 'K1T'G5�05'1C 'avnTF Wn�GV NaT� s FVfK:
G:!!?S 4'Ury - •+E :,i. a' i.6! AIM - 4 .T uY
SL'RDIV'ISION EXEMPTION ♦ IIS i
=: S AI».�l•L\ V:N.'TCh' ^OR �LtYjl I.nT
'-� e.°L� nre, ¢p br'T`e r xw �M�' .•vnn:T-
�I t
�+L's:,Y�
9�
SURVEYOR'S ERTI F7EATE
..alt'J �.K'J -ElFSi :SFT M " °.Ry(
•�Yl.fJC- ^Lf Y M W -. � Ypv_:.N YNt 'NE•IAZL
.NOOe v' Maaxw
ATM at'ee • Rexr
BE4 0RDI. A_�C ___ __
T 6 °IeT /u:1C�D.m NTQ• RaN2a <_ �:tJ', 3C
ahU crcc�pra Oa lSRi -.^W: .. _ro0.
Nuxs. L ^
:1J4�! K 2 �•�
Alpine Surveys, Inc,
Post Of110 8a tlb � ;p,.� �� E1YMty ^ItKT.0
TXb
30 e>e FIRST AMENDED PLAT OF
RA LL .SUBDIVISION
1.
�m
mumuwesa
eauaaulsmw
MM 11
SNOW 095
N
^m
of
0
Z
E
aata -sa y
a
s�
000009
ALU .1h� M a uP LOT 2, RANDALL SUBDIVISION
A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SWY4 OF SECTION 6
Lilt, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE 6th P.M.
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
SHEET OF
0
fount Ps Rfa4q
•7
s
eaa.n.Mee•
GRAPHIC SCALE
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
( IN
l -20
l vh =LI R
MM 11
SNOW 095
N
^m
of
0
Z
E
aata -sa y
a
s�
000009
ALU .1h� M a uP LOT 2, RANDALL SUBDIVISION
A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SWY4 OF SECTION 6
Lilt, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE 6th P.M.
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
SHEET OF
0
fount Ps Rfa4q
•7
s
SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC
CIVIL CONSULTANTS
502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623
(970) 704-0311 SOPRISENG@SOPRISENG.COM
}
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Wt 2, Randall
\
Plataf
Mat First Randall
-•
t `
"�
re o.
corded May s Reception No
corded May 30,1995 as Rewlrtion N. 381726
_
SLOPE LEGEND
Countyol PltWn
Color
Range Beg. Range End
- o
9
0.00 15.00
15.00 30.00
state of Colorado
t
\S
a II� ^
,:
,'
■
30.00 45.00
..
•• 4 . LOT 2
■
45.00 100.00
42,636 A. R
-
`,;
0.979 acres
NOTES
.
Mor
1) Date of SUney: June 2011.
EX BLD`
?yG.-
2,603s4R
O.MO
w
2) Date of Preparation: dune - Iuiy 2011.
1p,
v
b
3) Basis of reading: A hawing olN tthwhomm found and rebar
I
¢
tic cap m
L5, monue the Southwest land
the co e aLo
the found lon g5 rebarbar and cap I m
theft ndplastic cap onumenling hee w gi wash,fLlt' angle
1u'
I V
point along the Southerly boundary tin lin e a of Lot as shown
'. •. 4a
N33
•
i�
want xEeax n
Pmmcom
4) Plot Randall the e
gasp yurvftand r 972,
\
u "
\
a75
'29000 o
county and ecorder 16th of J nas
in Plat Page
R 16th n Bok4,a Page
�.
4s
2556, The Ame nded tat of Randall SU don as recorded In
In at the
Office
26,nty
andallbdivkbny,
b J E•
Clerk and Recorder on of Ma IM, Bo
y, 1995, In Plat gook 32, at Page
F7
documents ts
40, as NO 381126, various dts of record, and the found monuments, as
40, a s 0. Couny urlous
shown.
t
51 This survey does not constitute a tide search by Sopds Engineering, UC (SE) t0
oat emine ownership or easements of record. Foralllnformatbnregarding
_
easements, rights of way and /or title of record, SE relied upon the above described
l
Plan described In note 4 and me title commitment prepared by land Title
Guarantee Company Order No 462003958 -2 with an effective data of May 5, 2011.
\,✓�
'.
Bash of elevation. The 1998 C ity Aspen Drexel Barrel datum, Is
of control which
based based an an elevation of 7720 (N 1NAV0398B) on tole MISS station ' &159'. This
MOUNTa
established asdebenchmarE elevaUonof8ll9 .2'onlheftund"mbarmdpiSame
g
cap LS 89184 monumenting me Southwest boundarycomerof Lot 2, asshown.
x
wmwnm
7.) Contour Interval: One (1) foot
xd oo F
v
.tzysl 'L
&MAS eAa
}� B LA
\\
\w _
p SErgE"Ag8PN5ilC
t wynes6W(w)
'S 091
5 o LS e910e
\
\t
E; I'y 1,5.1Wg3
.
y
m
9 7. 39 . a
w1lybTa85 SiAiFMFxy
e
I. Marks 9edkr, do hereby SM. 09 ON surrey wes Mw red by Scom EMmeriry
ar
° ..
•,,:
UX br le Rr%spulcbikn,aM Net R is 4ue aM wrmclro me Sew Cr my
mmrkaeeandbeffiI
MUNpa5R
bed
\.
MsrF S. aeGkr LS No. ]ffi!3
SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC
CIVIL CONSULTANTS
502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623
(970) 704-0311 SOPRISENG@SOPRISENG.COM
}
subject lot is allowed codified exemptions from certain portions of a building which
might otherwise be counted as floor area, including "roof and deck overhangs," "decks,
balconies, stairways and similar features," "crawl spaces," "attic," "below grade spaces
for principal single - family and duplex residences" and, "garages and carports." These
exemptions allow for up to 4,000 square feet of exempt below grade space and up to 750
square feet of exempt garage space. Therefore, the Final Maximum Size /Area is 10,293sf
(5,543sf + 4,750sf of exempt space). Since 207sf of the exempt space can be built
without GMQS allocation or use of TDR (5,750sf - 5,543sf = 207sf), that leaves 4,543
square feet that can only be developed with a GMQS allocation or use of TDR. As
permitted, the applicant will utilize two (2) TDR to develop the property to its Final
Maximum Size /Area.
The existing home resides at a substantial distance and is barely visible from State
Highway 82 (SH 82). Given its location and lack of visibility it presents significantly
less visual impacts than is common with the surrounding homes on Red Mountain.
Generally speaking, the neighborhood in which the subject property is located (Red
Mountain) is substantially built out. Homes exist on almost all of the adjacent residential
parcels. Most lots in the area are developed with homes ranging from large to very large
in size. Homes in the area tend to be perched on the hillside to take advantage of the
views.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001) Page 5
, u n o
III. THE PROPOSAL
This application requests approvals for:
• Site Plan Review and Activity Envelope approval for the replacement of the existing
residence; and,
• GMQS Exemptions for: a) the replacement of the existing home, and b) use of TDR.
The development proposed with this Site Plan application includes the replacement of the
existing residence with a new home that will utilize up to two (2) TDR for development
of its allowed final maximum size /area. No additional approvals are necessary for use of
TDR for additional floor area up to the final maximum size permitted on a lot such as the
subject property since it is located inside the UGB and subject to a floor area ratio (per
Section 6- 30- 50(b)(1) of the Code).
The subject property has one GMQS exempt initial development right for up to 5,750
square feet of residential floor area by virtue of the lot having been legally created before
June 12, 1978 (per Section 6- 30- 100(a) of the Code) and being located within a BOCC-
approved subdivision (per Section 6- 30- 100(b) of the Code). The subject property is part
of the BOCC- approved Randall Subdivision, the plat for which was recorded on June 16,
1972.
Once the requested approvals are granted, the applicant will purchase the needed TDR
from an accommodating preservation site(s). In effect, the trade -off for allowing the
additional floor area on the subject parcel will be the sterilization and preservation of land
either in the ecologically sensitive Rural/Remote zone district or from land that has been
deemed too constrained for acceptable development.
The architects of Aidlin Darling Design designed this home with the intent of creating an
organic, low - profile structure that appears to have grown from the ground up. The home
will be built into and following the contours of the topography with the walls serving
retaining purposes, and will appear to be only one story as viewed from Wrights Road.
The home will be situated almost exclusively on previously disturbed areas of the
property. The applicant is proposing to relocate the driveway access further east on Red
Mountain Road in order to better facilitate safety for this property and for others who use
Red Mountain Road. The proposed driveway will be located closer to the intersection
with Wrights Road (but more than 60 feet away, as required by City of Aspen
engineering standards) in order to improve sight distances to and from the driveway. The
uphill side of the driveway will include traditional, engineered retaining walls and
landscape boulder walls, all of which will serve to not only facilitate access but also to
stabilize the uphill fill material slopes below Wrights Road. The driveway will also serve
as a fire break from the densely vegetated, steep fill slopes above while allowing for
improved subsurface drainage around the house. The driveway design has been reviewed
with the Aspen Fire Marshal and satisfies associated requirements.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737- 063 -07 -001) Page 6
uiG011
The boundaries of the Activity Envelope and the proposed development activities
contemplated therein will combine to ensure a minimal impact development with
complete mitigation of potential hazards. This property is located in an existing,
recognized, and fully developed subdivision surrounded on all sides by large homes.
Furthermore, the property has been developed for over 35 years. Due to the shape of the
lot, the required setbacks (including the 50 foot setback from Red Mountain Road), and
existing vegetation and slopes, the proposed location for the Activity Envelope is the best
and only location for development of the property.
As it exists today, the previously developed portion of the property contains slopes with
grades of between 0% and 30 %. There are some small discontinuous slopes in excess of
30% around the home. Between the home and Wrights Road above, there are slopes
ranging from 30% to 45 %, as well as slopes in excess of 45% adjacent to Wrights Road.
Although the proposed development (new home and driveway) sits on/crosses slopes in
excess of 30 %, these slopes are man-made and/or minor anomalies, as discussed below.
If this property and the surrounding area were in their undeveloped and natural condition,
the continuous slope would be less than 30 %, with scattered anomalous areas exceeding
30 %. As the letter from SOPRIS (Exhibit 5) demonstrates, prior to the construction of the
existing home and the adjacent roads, the entire parcel would not have had any slope
areas greater than 30 %. This conclusion was reached by SOPRIS and is consistent with
the 2008 subsoil study prepared by HP Geotech (included herewith as Exhibit 6), which
found about 4 -8 feet of variable fill material overlays the natural, indigenous soils. Based
upon the historic topography and the analysis provided by SOPRIS, all of the slopes in
excess of 30% are considered man-made minor anomalies.
The proposed driveway location will cross one slope area in excess of 30 %, directly
adjacent to the intersection with Red Mountain Road; this slope is believed to have
resulted from Red Mountain Road's development. The letter from SOPRIS (attached as
Exhibit 5) goes on to state that, "the development of the proposed residence and driveway
will improve the existing site condition by installing structural retaining walls on the
uphill side of the driveway, adjacent to the existing steep fill areas. The man-made minor
slope anomalies and fill material associated with the existing home will be removed,
regraded and improved as part of the new house construction, grading and properly
engineered retaining walls."
As mentioned in the Existing Conditions section of this application, the entire Red
Mountain neighborhood is considered to have a "Severe" wildfire hazard due to the
slopes and the dense oak brush vegetation. Consequently, there is a need to remove some
of the existing brush and ground cover which could further decrease slope stability on the
uphill side of the property and for the ground on which Wrights Road sits. The applicant
would like to preserve as much vegetation as possible so as to have as little impact to the
slope stability as practicable. As the SOPRIS letter (Exhibit 5) points out, the retaining
walls on the uphill side of the driveway will not only improve slope stability, but they
will also create a defensible space/break that aids with fire mitigation. Having this fire
mitigation as hardscape improvements reduces the amount of site disturbance and allows
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737- 063 -07 -001)
UunI.2
for more of the existing vegetation to remain in place on the steep fill slope above.
Additionally, this will significantly reduce the erosion and sediment runoff potential as
compared with the removal of more vegetation.
The existing driveway location and configuration does not allow for proper emergency
vehicle ingress and egress. Furthermore, due to its location and limited sight distances, it
is unsafe for those entering or leaving the property. The applicant has met with the Fire
Marshall and discussed the location and configuration of the proposed driveway. The
proposed driveway location and design provides improved sight distances (and, thus,
safety) as well as adequate fire protection access. In addition, the new driveway access,
with its properly engineered foundation and retaining walls, will actually serve to
increase the slope stability on the site and for the fill holding up Wrights Road.
It is noted that the Activity Envelope includes two small areas with 45% slopes but the
associated Site Plan does not include any permanent development on these slopes. As the
slope analyses indicate, these 45% slopes are not natural but, instead, resulted from
construction of Wrights Road. At any rate, the proposed driveway and retaining
structures will be located downhill of these fill slopes but their inclusion in the Activity
Envelope is merely due to the fact that construction and installation of said retaining
walls will require some disturbance beyond the walls themselves and of the immediately
adjacent fill material. As noted on the proposed Site Plan, "Any disturbance during
construction within the 45% slope areas shall be regraded to pre - construction conditions."
Similarly, a thirty (30) foot wide "Utilities Envelope" is included on the Site Plan. This
Utilities Envelope will merely allow the connection of underground utilities from the
existing transformer and pedestals located on the other /north side of Wrights Road to the
new residence. Any areas disturbed by such utility extensions /installations will be re-
graded to pre - construction conditions.
The proposed Landscape Plan is consistent with surrounding properties. Although
certain trees and shrubs will need to be removed and/or thinned for wildfire mitigation,
the applicant will be planting many trees and shrubs native to the area between the house
and Red Mountain Road, where the existing driveway improvements are now located.
These native plantings will help to screen the home from view. A final tree removal and
mitigation plan will be provided for approval with the building permit application.
Section 7 -20 -120 of the Code establishes Scenic View Protection areas that are proximate
to and most visible from specific roads in the County, including State Highway 82 (SH
82). The standards of Section 7 -20 -120 are designed to minimize the visual impact of
new development, including replacements of existing structures. Scenic Review for the
development of this new single - family residence is required to take place during this Site
Plan Review, although the applicant has found that the home resides at a substantial
distance and is barely, if at all, visible from SH 82. Nevertheless, in the ensuing section
of this application, the applicant will address the review standards for Scenic View
Protection. Additionally, the home will be built into the topography and will appear to be
only one story as viewed from Wrights Road.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001)
u X913
979 RED MOUNTAIN ROAD, ACTIVITY ENVELOPE & SITE PLAN
GRAPHICSIl
w
(Ite FEET)
it- MR
0
TELEPHONE PEOPSIN
p
FIECfXKMETFR
D
R
®
SME
SEWER MAtIHOIF
pq
WATER yRLVE
O
UGMPOIE
x(
fn HYDRANT
•
MONUMENT
UNDERGROUNDTELIE NONE
—
UNDERGROUNDCABIE
—sea—
UNDERGROUNDELECIRIC
SANOARYSEWER
It
UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
EXOTINGCONTOURB133
-- yEI3 - --
EMISTINGCOMOUR8133
PROPOS OU0.RE33
NDPE CU IVERi
—a _q
OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND DISCLAIMER
Applicant acknowledges that he /she has been informed by Milan
County of the existence of environmental hmard areas that might
affect the praperty, any improvements, and the use and oecupancy
thereof. The provisions of the Pitkin County Regulations do not in any
way assure or Imply that areas outside of designated hared areas will
be free from hazards, or that approved mhille lon measures will
guarantee the safety of any property.
Owner, 979 Aspen, LLC
as
LOT 2, RANDALL SUBDIVISION, A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SW Y4 OF SECTION 6
TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE 6th P.M.
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
P.I.D. NO. 2737-063-07-001
P�
SHE ET 10F3
SHEETINDEK
SHEET 3 - SITE PLAN
SHEET2 LANDSCAPE
SHEET3. SLOPEANALYSES
SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC
CIVIL CONSULTANTS
502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623
(970) 704 -0311
NOTES
1) Date of SurNe i June 2011.
3) Basis of Bearing: A bearing of N 79'20'00" W from the found 95
rebar and plastic cap LS. #9184 monumemina the Southwest
boundary corner of Lot 2 and the found #5 rebar and plasm, up LS.
N9184 manumenting Me westerly angle point along the Southerp
boundary line of lot 2, as shown.
Subdivision as recorded In the Mile of Me PRkln Coun
Recorder on the 30th of May, 1995, in Plat lack 37, at
Rat No. 381726, various documents of retard, and the
monuments, as shown.
6) Basis of elevation: The 1998 City of Aspen Drexel Barrel control
datum, which is based on an elevation of A20.88' (NAVD 1988) an
the RIGS station - S-159'. This established ache berMSmark
elevation of 8119.2' on the found 05 rebar and plus[, cep L.S. #9184
monumenting the Southwest boundary comer of Lot; as shown.
7) Contour Interval: One (1) foot
8) Wild @e Hazard Rating, severe
9) Entire Property Is Landscape Envelope Per Site/lanexatee Plan (Sheet
2 hereofl, as may be limited by setback requirements.
I
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
gy p.
Lott'
Randall Subdivision Recording to the plat Thereof filed June 16, 1972
In Plat Not 2 at Page 256 and First Amended Plat of Randall
SubdNlsbn,
mounted May 30,1995 In Plat Book 37 at Page 40
Countyd Min
State of Colorado
This 979 Rod Mountain Mad, Poly" Envelope & Site Plan Is hereby
approved Mh_dayd 2011, subject to terms
and conditions of Administrable Decision No. __Recorded as
Reception No.
Cindy Houther, Community Development Director
CLERK & RECORDERACCEPTANCE
no 979 Red Mountain Road, Activity Envelope & Site Plan has been
accepted for filing In the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin
County, Colorado, this_ day of 2011,
In Plat Rook at Page as Reception
No,
Clerk and Recorder /Deputy
L I 1
/
_ \N -
K
}i t
COMMON NAME qCf
pmm is
F'�1 Aapm 54
TS
LANDSCAPE ZONE 1
Imdaepc Zsac t is the zone ayvm[mml
c .ccue u[ Fmidmvm M75 feC
m [wer TM WildE[e Mitlg.dmgsp+¢
cut mm Inwgnvdssgpme uccuud ml Lmgwt
u Bass, and dmdmus McLt�ld ivignlnt
pimn
LANDSCAPE ZONE 2
All dfsweMd. wWdu nflmixepe Z Isbdi
M uWed v.rn of flat, M If (2tlbs /vve) xhh
da.pee(es Indib®(be ..
COMMON NAME aX).L (2iY.
Aqu
A. Sr
!nc
Peswm.1riaida
Is°b
(:crmium (:.cyivrum
M, nsanaaemi.
10
fan
Lupin.+ SP.
lA6
Mnnvde y7,,
fan
Penssemnn SP
IS%
� .Olom�i.fF
/ r
/
r —
A
W
ivwaQ — —
r
/
/
aonvlm
�P j /li�w 1
J
Site Notes
1. Vegetation shall be pruned and managed as
recommended In the Wildfire Hazard Mitigation
report filed with the Site Plan Review application.
2. Landscape items shown are plelhnlnary and
subject to change In response to conditions of
approval or further refinement prior to buWing
Permit application.
- - 7 � -
PROPOSED TREE REPLACEMENT
IIF1190FA � FuryW aJYs
pI A,SPFT PgKu CdJb
t7i h9FFA �P.qJ ®em6Na
,.,Mvcs �
(r)i lmuc F.. Rsu F
,S9nk.F . Pui suuuu
iTLV. (toil- t' =]U"
a•cv (flaa�+m
YT CLL (Ai1f'n 11T
A'LV. reif =Y/
Torv. =Ion•
IEfb 6'G4 P1i6�)T
Itp ^LV. 1yiTneT
IEpa•CV. (giPeY
tt2V.e 1M'
tt)L11.CY1 M A-MS
LAND SCAPE PLANTING NOTES
1. EevetlnodmFn[plmc.al vmmamddmM
appmvW by she Iansiuepc Atcir¢aw [be field
PA- muuWlad[m. [amisey+eArtNtc[iacem < s
the rigMm Wlust}:Im[ m u.a4�oum iv fold.
2 YetifY pima <nune and slave (mmgea
(j..nddc4 pmvWW u Owma h,6mmd:v, mIY.
If qumddca no plm[ list Ji6v fn ®g[q+Mc
mdicWms, risen gaphies dWlpmna.
a. <::mvee AeIneilun udaty xnieex
fnr uulih' Invaom vd Wadfiemn
A. Pevfnrm crwd v i, IM md
us u
usde[pgnund ulifides ui�h emc van if rccesc.sy,
by bhisl. 1 ar.t, Maa fWl uspa lWiq
f rids sa
wh amidum
+ 1m[I.vpgemudlidcs ,W M upil[ed hvsmdlealYVm eapmum Ilr
SMTCeet IbA lice[ ewe ceiwmmfiddnl gnic
vs Macm d
fi Pmvnie matching 6mm4 end ve fmplm[
meaeiuls vifiia each spwnmd vu skdFaem
re thu dr.uinga
T. Pauvc n<svly PIavIW tttmmly m[ti[ Iry
Lm[Iscepe.laM
fl. Iavdxapc AaMac[mrcvrwplmt ..
umume nA by pM,m,gcePha pain mdipyjngm
9. stoppingof ebut1up
<:u[ and aemrce buaWp f[nm "T t /2nlz:i,mJl.
la. \'<rify Mcadms ntpeiuvmtdeeimF ^'vin'°
inwaW umiec rnhu 4ccdms, ifmypm n(Itlh
plm errant M tdinwed dne mva [naw:na5
act Lavduepe Amto[ect bx immlclvvs pda
mmmvem4gvmk
North
SCALE 1 " =10' -0"
x'P
0
L
O
O
C
CL
�11
•
1�
IM
C �
G
3
IY
a
d
CL
M
N
J d
r
000015
of 192'
regarding easements, rights of way and /or title of record, SE called upon \ \\ S station 5359 . This established a site benchmark elevation 81 . on
the above described Plats dexdbed In note 3and me title m
le romlhm Southwest boundary comer of tat 2, as shown.
nt \ \\ the found 45 dbar and plastic rap LS. 49184 monumenting Me
` \\\ prepared by land TRIP Guarantee Company Order No 062o03958d with \ \
\�\ 7a -_' an effect ve date of MaY 5, 3011. \ \ \\ \ \ \\ \ �`, \ \ `\- 1� \ ^�B5j4� 5) Contour Interval. One (1) fact
\ \P 5) Basis of elevation The 1998 City of Aspen Draael Bartel control datein,
which Is based on an elevation of 7720.88'tNAVD 19881 on the NGS \ 6) The subject property was included on the refocused! mn Falcon Air Map
��\ ♦O `\ \ topographic mapping. The map contouring(NGVD 1929 datum) Indicated \\
station 'S-159'. This established a site benchmark elevation of 8119.2' on
i that the ships, prior to development gurtall, was uniform with
\\ \ \ c plastic up L5. 119184 mdnumen[ing the \ \ \\ \�� \\ Sou the boundary ar comer of LO[2, as shown. - { rcontours paralleling r/entlingleat w
wrn I dlrenlon.The southwesterly hwestewesterl 2y 2/3 3 of of the the present day y si slle w ay u disturbed! by
6) Contour Interval: (D foot. I Me construction of the ealsWg structure, driveway and debar
\
I Improvements. by This map presentsare development
t
B \ 7.' l cre slope ating thep elevations (undistur Wound) al ng the field point
noted and ti ht slope point ( vations(untl dgrountll along along
R
\ \� I Red Mountain Road(NAVO88 e parson). elevations (undisturbed! ground)abng
¢tl ouain Road (NA�O80 tltum).
•\ \ y
\ \\ � \i \ ♦ \♦
�\ \\ \
\
\ i
I % ] 1� / ] -�.� `` \ \`�•. GRAPHI[SCALE
j IN aF+ M R `
SLOPE CONDITIONS CURRENT % ; ;] % \�, \\ \ \ SLOPE CONDITIONS PRIOR TO DEVELOPEMENT
SLOPE LEGEND SLOPE LEGEND m
Color Range Beg. Range End Percent SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC Color Range Beg. Range End Percent
'0 C
0.00 15.00 21.1 0.00 15.00 28.0
CIVIL CONSULTANTS
1 71 U P1 15.00 313.00 32.9 15.00 30.00 49.3
s 30.00 45.00 245 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 ■ 30.00 45.00 7.7
m o use mm .
a. .scomwc rowmw mwaa 1usv ■ 45.00 -- 21.5 CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 IN 45.00 15.0
Rod"" wnw wam naer nuies
(970) 704 -0311
979 RED MOUNTAIN ROAD, SLOPE ANALYSES
LOT 2, RANDALL SUBDIVISION, A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SWY4 OF SECTION 6
TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE 6th P.M.
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
a P
P.I.D. NO. 2737 -063 -07 -001
a S
SHEET 3OF3 x
xoTEs
NOTES 1
11 once of Survey: June and September, 2011.
p Oate of Survey: June 2031. 2
2) Date of Preparation: September, 2011.
y ' 2
2) Date o /Pmpaatbn: October 2011 3
3) Bashof Survey: The 1958 Falcon Air Maps To m
pographic apof Aspen,
Colorado and Vicinity prepared for gullies and Merrick, Engineers; The Plat
\ 3
3)Basisof Survey: The Plat of Randall Subdivisio u l
lan n
♦ B
0 the Plildn County Clerk and Recorder c n the 16th of June, 297Z In Hnc +
First Amended Par of Randall Subdivision as recorded in the Office of the
\ r
recorded in the Off. of the Pitkm County Clerk and Recorder on Me Rath P
Pilot County Clerk and Recorder on the 30th of may, INS, in Plat Book
of May, 1995, in Plat Book 37, at Page 4Q as R
found monuments, as shown.
,
�`\\ \� ♦♦ 0
01 survey does no e
41 Basic of elevation: The 19980ty of Moen Drexel Barrel control datum.
�\ \ (
easements of
which I
regarding easements, rights of way and /or title of record, SE called upon \ \\ S station 5359 . This established a site benchmark elevation 81 . on
the above described Plats dexdbed In note 3and me title m
le romlhm Southwest boundary comer of tat 2, as shown.
nt \ \\ the found 45 dbar and plastic rap LS. 49184 monumenting Me
` \\\ prepared by land TRIP Guarantee Company Order No 062o03958d with \ \
\�\ 7a -_' an effect ve date of MaY 5, 3011. \ \ \\ \ \ \\ \ �`, \ \ `\- 1� \ ^�B5j4� 5) Contour Interval. One (1) fact
\ \P 5) Basis of elevation The 1998 City of Aspen Draael Bartel control datein,
which Is based on an elevation of 7720.88'tNAVD 19881 on the NGS \ 6) The subject property was included on the refocused! mn Falcon Air Map
��\ ♦O `\ \ topographic mapping. The map contouring(NGVD 1929 datum) Indicated \\
station 'S-159'. This established a site benchmark elevation of 8119.2' on
i that the ships, prior to development gurtall, was uniform with
\\ \ \ c plastic up L5. 119184 mdnumen[ing the \ \ \\ \�� \\ Sou the boundary ar comer of LO[2, as shown. - { rcontours paralleling r/entlingleat w
wrn I dlrenlon.The southwesterly hwestewesterl 2y 2/3 3 of of the the present day y si slle w ay u disturbed! by
6) Contour Interval: (D foot. I Me construction of the ealsWg structure, driveway and debar
\
I Improvements. by This map presentsare development
t
B \ 7.' l cre slope ating thep elevations (undistur Wound) al ng the field point
noted and ti ht slope point ( vations(untl dgrountll along along
R
\ \� I Red Mountain Road(NAVO88 e parson). elevations (undisturbed! ground)abng
¢tl ouain Road (NA�O80 tltum).
•\ \ y
\ \\ � \i \ ♦ \♦
�\ \\ \
\
\ i
I % ] 1� / ] -�.� `` \ \`�•. GRAPHI[SCALE
j IN aF+ M R `
SLOPE CONDITIONS CURRENT % ; ;] % \�, \\ \ \ SLOPE CONDITIONS PRIOR TO DEVELOPEMENT
SLOPE LEGEND SLOPE LEGEND m
Color Range Beg. Range End Percent SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC Color Range Beg. Range End Percent
'0 C
0.00 15.00 21.1 0.00 15.00 28.0
CIVIL CONSULTANTS
1 71 U P1 15.00 313.00 32.9 15.00 30.00 49.3
s 30.00 45.00 245 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 ■ 30.00 45.00 7.7
m o use mm .
a. .scomwc rowmw mwaa 1usv ■ 45.00 -- 21.5 CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 IN 45.00 15.0
Rod"" wnw wam naer nuies
(970) 704 -0311
•\ \ y
\ \\ � \i \ ♦ \♦
�\ \\ \
\
\ i
I % ] 1� / ] -�.� `` \ \`�•. GRAPHI[SCALE
j IN aF+ M R `
SLOPE CONDITIONS CURRENT % ; ;] % \�, \\ \ \ SLOPE CONDITIONS PRIOR TO DEVELOPEMENT
SLOPE LEGEND SLOPE LEGEND m
Color Range Beg. Range End Percent SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC Color Range Beg. Range End Percent
'0 C
0.00 15.00 21.1 0.00 15.00 28.0
CIVIL CONSULTANTS
1 71 U P1 15.00 313.00 32.9 15.00 30.00 49.3
s 30.00 45.00 245 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 ■ 30.00 45.00 7.7
m o use mm .
a. .scomwc rowmw mwaa 1usv ■ 45.00 -- 21.5 CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 IN 45.00 15.0
Rod"" wnw wam naer nuies
(970) 704 -0311
IV. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS
The relevant review standards of the Code are addressed in this section of the application
and in the following order:
A) Site Plan and Activity Envelope ( §2- 30- 20(g)(2) and (3); and, §7- 10 -50);
B) Rural Character, Environmental Protection, and Natural Hazards ( §7 -20):
1. Site Preparation and Grading ( §7- 20 -10);
2. Steep and Potentially Unstable Slopes ( §7- 20 -20);
3. Water Course and Drainage ( §7- 20 -30);
4. Floodplain Hazards ( §7- 20 -40);
5. Geologic Hazards ( §7- 20 -50);
6. Wildfire Hazard ( §7- 20 -60);
7. Wildlife Habitat Areas ( §7- 20 -70);
8. Scenic View Protection Areas (§7-20-120(d));
9. Landscaping and Vegetation Protection ( §7 -20 -130); and
10. Lighting ( §7 -20 -140)
C) Approval for the Replacement Home and Recognition of the Property as a TDR
Receiver Site:
1. Transfer of Development Rights ( §6 -70);
2. Growth Management Exemption for Development Utilizing TDR ( §6- 30 -50); and
3. Growth Management Exemption for Replacement ( §6 -30 -110);
D) Roads, Driveways, and Parking ( §7 -30); and
E) Public Service and Utilities ( §7 -50).
A. Site Plan and Activity Envelope (Sections 2- 30- 20(¢)(2)&(3) & 7- 10 -50)
The applicant is seeking Site Plan Review and Activity Envelope approvals for the
replacement of the existing home and accessory uses /structures, as well as the proposed
new driveway, landscaping and hazard mitigation measures (see Section III., The
Proposal, above).
Section 2- 30- 20(g)(2) of the Code provides the criteria for approval of a Site Plan as
follows:
A Site Plan shall be approved if it complies with (a) all applicable
provisions of this Land Use Code, (b) any Activity Envelope previously
approved for the property pursuant to Section 7- 10 -50, and (c) all prior
development approvals applicable to the subject property. Where the
property contains Constrained Areas, the Community Development
Department staff shall follow those Priorities for Locating New Activity or
Development listed in Section 7- 10 -60. 1f an Activity Envelope has not
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737-063-07-001)
uU[,��,7
been previously established for the property pursuant to Section 7- 10 -50,
one shall be established as part of the Site Plan Review process.
The proposed Site Plan and Activity Envelope comply with all applicable provisions of
the Code, as demonstrated throughout this application. The general location and
configuration of the proposed Activity Envelope encompasses primarily previously
disturbed portions of the property. All natural and continuous slopes with a grade of 30%
or greater are being avoided as demonstrated by the proposed Site Plan and Activity
Envelope (the anomalous and man-made slopes greater than 30% that are in the Activity
Envelope are discussed below and in Exhibit 5). The only other constraint affecting the
subject property and surrounding area results from the severe wildfire hazard rating.
The proposed Site Plan and Activity Envelope are fully consistent with the priorities for
locating new activities and development. (See also Section III., The Proposal, above.)
More specifically, the proposal follows and adheres to the standards and criteria of Code
Section 7- 10 -50, which require the avoidance of. areas of statewide interest; steep and
potentially unstable slopes; water courses, drainage channels and areas subject to erosion;
floodplain hazard areas; geologic hazard areas; wildfire hazard areas; wildlife habitat
areas; river and stream corridors and wetlands; irrigated lands for food or crop
production; historic preservation areas; and archaeological resource areas.
In general, this application involves development in a BOCC- approved subdivision
residing in an area characterized by large homes and outbuildings in landscaped settings.
This lot is already developed, and this proposal seeks to minimize impacts on
surrounding properties, maximize compliance with the requirements of the development
standards in Chapter 7 of the Code, and maximize compliance with the Comprehensive
Plan goals and objectives (see also Section "IV.B." of this application, below). All
"Constrained Areas" on the subject property are being avoided to the extent practicable,
but where avoidance is not practicable due to physical constraints or balancing of
concerns, complete mitigation is provided.
Mr. Art Hougland of Hougland & Associates (H &A) has reviewed and evaluated wildfire
hazards affecting the subject property. The findings and recommendations of H &A
diverge slightly from those prescribed in the Code so as to be better tailored to the
specific site and the particulars of the proposed development. H &A's recommendations
are discussed below and will be followed. There are no known geologic hazards, and the
property is not affected by any specifically regulated wildlife habitat or any floodplains.
The property is also free of historic preservation and archaeological resource areas.
There are no irrigated lands for food or crop production.
After the Activity Envelope and Site Plan are approved, all applicable local, state and
federal permits will be obtained prior to any clearing, grading, grubbing, or earthmoving
that exceeds fifty (50) cubic yards or changes the natural drainage of the site. Also, the
natural grade, topography, vegetation and drainage of areas outside the defined areas will
not be disturbed, except as specifically permitted by the Land Use Code and any
associated approvals. Prior to any development activity on the parcel, the boundaries of
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737- 063 -07 -001) Page 10
uut 111.8
the Activity Envelope will be identified with construction fencing, and such fencing will
remain in place until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued.
B. Rural Character, Environmental Protection, and Natural Hazards (Section 7 -20)
1. Site Preparation and Grading, Section 7 -20 -10
The proposed Site Plan and Activity Envelope, coupled with the Preliminary Drainage
and Erosion Control Report/Plan (see Exhibit 7), combine to ensure consistency with the
requirements of Section 7- 20 -10.
In accordance with Section 7- 20- 10(a), Grading and Fill Placement, all grading and fill
placement shall take place within the defined Activity Envelope. Also, all grading and
fill placement exceeding 50 cubic yards is preliminarily indicated on the Site Plan and
will be further detailed at the time of building permit.
Pursuant to Section 7- 20- 10(b), Clearing, Grubbing and Vegetation Removal, all clearing
or grubbing of land, or removal of vegetation shall take place within the approved
Activity Envelope, except as may be required for wildfire mitigation and/or the removal
of noxious weeds, which may occur outside of the Activity Envelope. The Site Plan and
Landscape Plan attached hereto combine to document compliance with the requirements
of this Section and Section 7 -20 -130.
Section 7- 20 -10(c) governs tree removal and mitigation. The applicant understands that
each tree with six (6) inches or larger diameter at breast height (D.B.H.) that is removed
within the Activity Envelope shall be replaced with one (1) or more trees with total
D.B.H. at least equal to the caliper(s) of the tree(s) removed, unless the tree(s) are
diseased, or required to be removed for wildfire hazard mitigation pursuant to the
provisions of Section 7- 20 -60. All revegetation shall also comply with the Pitkin County
Revegetation Guidelines. A proposed Tree Removal and Protection Plan is attached
hereto for preliminary review, but final review of all tree removals and mitigation will
occur prior to building permit issuance.
The proposed landscaping is consistent with that found on surrounding properties.
Although certain trees and shrubs will need to be removed and/or thinned for wildfire
mitigation (as discussed above), the applicant will be planting many trees and shrubs
native to the area between the house and Red Mountain Road, where the existing
driveway improvements are now located. These native plantings will help to screen the
home from view. The applicant understands that any trees planted to comply with
mitigation requirements must survive for at least one (1) year after installation or will
need to be replaced.
The applicant will use care to protect the natural terrain and other features of the
landscape within the Activity Envelope, per Section 7- 20 -10(d) of the Code.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001) Page 11
uU0111.9
---
-- —
i i ------ - - - - -- - - - - -- _ ---- --
/
\ — i— -- 8140 - --
i V 1 0 -1 4 2 -AS T 1
� /
/
0�
14 i �i 1 ��
/rte
i
TREE REMOVAL LEGEND
C(1NIFl+R 9n0M.RITItIVND
N
G E
'd3 Dt ®uousroeeaawv®
� ��
AIMD BEI'RUT[CITD
® =DD YwFasroaz\wrv
d
S IP SAINPRd
aaC{
O6
TREE MITIGATION TABLE
I
1. Pmt
1. General Contractor to install construction
s rne®s�uca
fencing at the drip -line of the trees to remain to
d
S IP SAINPRd
a
under the trees.
4 Ir comma
Refer to Civil Engineering plans for limits of
s Ircosnnra
A
to tree protection.
6 I]'ISIMP01
2. Existing vegetation to remain shall be pruned
rn
t. IY[DmP01
Hazard Mitigation report filed with the Site Plan
s IPCOeimea
Review application.
> =
3. Landscape Items shown are preliminary and
O y
E 2
subject to change in response to conditions of
4 ICIWJUWD6
approval or further refinement prior to building
la le•DeuouDta
y O
�
IL S'D6 ®DDUS trtiO016' mw+m+1em
O
li SD&MUOM "our lun.+n!m i..
O
North
V
I1 IPOMWn
J
14 PEON
IS D•tlNln'fi0.
Q
I6 6'<OND•0t
In
Ih IPRRIPIX
Q
M PD0®IgY6
PROPOSED TREE
REPLACEMENT
taea
SIZR GiWPaRDiCNaS
�AVHi.lypiM.umJKb
zW. IA.r =IP
Is�nseWa.prumW.
ss ^az le.zr =IZS•
(�
(ry.1SP&V.Ppb.Ya4b
IM q.r.a
y-+
(DSP6D@.Ka Wp.
(61]PIIULE. Rn MnA
Meem. 131iP v3P
war (N.T =IT
O
N13MRl�.Rm MWn
e®r= (*.r =w
9p1'N. =la•
\crcu rwlnmtmc \mss =ar
LL
ti
rn
Notes:
1. General Contractor to install construction
fencing at the drip -line of the trees to remain to
d
protect against activity or storage of materials
a
under the trees.
Refer to Civil Engineering plans for limits of
disturbance and construction fencing in addition
A
to tree protection.
m
2. Existing vegetation to remain shall be pruned
rn
and managed as recommended in the Wildfire
Hazard Mitigation report filed with the Site Plan
=
f6 O
Review application.
> =
3. Landscape Items shown are preliminary and
O y
E 2
subject to change in response to conditions of
approval or further refinement prior to building
permit application.
y O
F N d
North
O
SCALE 1" 10' -W
J
0000201
2. Steep and Potentially Unstable Slopes, Section 7 -20 -20
Section 7 -20 -20 of the Code provides standards for the review of development proposed
on steep and potentially unstable slopes. Subsection (d) thereof states that development
is permitted on slopes with less than a thirty (30) percent gradient.
Most of the proposed Activity Envelope contains slopes of less than thirty (30) percent.
If this property and the surrounding area were in their undeveloped and natural condition,
the continuous slope would be less than 30 %, with scattered anomalous areas exceeding
30 %. As the letter from SOPRIS (Exhibit 5) demonstrates, prior to the construction of
the existing home and the adjacent roads, the entire parcel would not have had any slope
areas greater than 30 %. This conclusion was reached by SOPRIS and is consistent with
the 2008 subsoil study prepared by HP Geotech (Exhibit 6 hereof), which found about 4-
8 feet of variable fill material overlays the natural, indigenous soils.
Based upon the historic topography and the analysis provided by SOPRIS, all of the
slopes in excess of 30% are considered man-made and/or minor anomalies. The
proposed driveway location will cross one slope area in excess of 30 %, directly adjacent
to the intersection with Red Mountain Road; this slope is believed to be a result of Red
Mountain Road's development.
The letter from SOPRIS goes on to state that, the development of the proposed residence
and driveway will improve the existing site condition by installing structural retaining
walls on the uphill side of the driveway, adjacent to the existing steep fill areas. The
man-made minor slope anomalies and fill material associated with the existing home will
be removed, regraded and improved as part of the new house construction, grading and
properly engineered retaining walls. The chosen activity envelope is the best available
area for development, with the overwhelming majority of the envelope encompassing
previously disturbed areas. The new driveway access, with its properly engineered
foundation and retaining walls, will actually serve to increase the slope stability on the
site and for the fill holding up Wrights Road.
It is noted that the Activity Envelope includes two small areas with 45% slopes but the
associated Site Plan does not include any permanent development on these slopes. As the
slope analyses indicate, these 45% slopes are not natural but, instead, resulted from
construction of Wrights Road. At any rate, the proposed driveway and retaining
structures will be located downhill of these fill slopes but their inclusion in the Activity
Envelope is merely due to the fact that construction and installation of said retaining
walls will require some disturbance beyond the walls themselves and of the immediately
adjacent fill material. As noted on the proposed Site Plan, "Any disturbance during
construction within the 45% slope areas shall be regraded to pre - construction conditions."
The Code states that extensions of public utilities shall take place within a defined
Activity Envelope which may include separate designated areas, different from those
portions of the Activity Envelope designated for primary structures, accessory structures,
or driveways. Accordingly, a thirty (30) foot wide "Utilities Envelope" is included on the
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001) Page
UJ021
Site Plan. While this Utilities Envelope encroaches on the steeply sloped fill material
present on the property, it will merely allow the connection of underground utilities from
the existing transformers and pedestals located on the other /north side of Wrights Road to
the new residence. Any areas disturbed by such utility extensions /installations will be re-
graded to pre - construction conditions.
3. Water Courses and Drainage, Section 7 -20 -30
At the time of building permit application, the proposed development will demonstrate
maintenance of historic drainage patterns to reasonably preserve the natural patterns of
the site and prevent property damage. The flow of natural water courses will not be
impeded, and adequate drainage will be provided for all low points. On -site treatment of
storm water will be designed to detain and allow infiltration of runoff prior to discharge
to any water body. The recommendations and designs contemplated in the conceptual
drainage and erosion control plan prepared by Sopris Engineering (attached to this
application as Exhibit 7) will be further studied and detailed prior to building permit
application, and the results of the study will be followed.
All erosion related impacts associated with development of the property will be
minimized and addressed as part of the building permit application. Erosion control will
be accomplished by removal of fill material, minimizing disturbance to natural vegetation
and soil cover, ensuring that all cuts and fills are adequately designed and revegetated,
proper engineering of retaining structures, backfill and drainage, and providing
provisions for protection of vegetation from fire.
Runoff volumes and peaks within the development site, and in areas affected by runoff
from the development site, will not exceed the runoff levels attributable to the
undeveloped site as determined by a professional engineer licensed in the State of
Colorado. The drainage related improvements discussed in the previous paragraph will
also aid in minimizing erosion. The development will not affect irrigation of any
agricultural lands, and it will not adversely affect the exercise of any existing and decreed
irrigation water right. Flood irrigation is not and will not be practiced on the subject
property. Basements and soil absorption on -site wastewater treatment systems will be
placed in locations where they will not be impacted by seepage from irrigation ditches.
Sedimentation controls will be implemented before and throughout development, and
there will be no run -off into any water body, wetlands, or riparian area.
Finally, use and development of the property will comply with all state and federal
statutes and regulations concerning the protection and enhancement of water quality, and
will be consistent with maintenance of the Stream Classifications for the Roaring Fork
River watershed, as identified in Section 208 of the Roaring Fork Watershed
Management Plan, while emphasizing efficient use of water. This development shall not
result in the introduction of any contaminants to groundwater, or interfere with any
recharge area or aquifer. No building shall be constructed immediately downhill of a
ditch unless the ditch is placed in a culvert, lined, or otherwise treated to avoid leakage of
water downhill towards the building.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737- 063 -07 -001)
Liu 0122
4. Floodplain Hazards, Section 7 -20 -40
Section 7 -20 -40 of the Code provides that all activity and development is prohibited
within the 100 -year floodplain, subject to certain exceptions. This property is not within
the 100 -year floodplain hazard area, nor is it located twenty (20) horizontal or five (5)
vertical feet from the existing high water line on any river, stream, material drainage
channel, or any other flood hazard area. Therefore, this section is not applicable.
5. Geologic Hazards, Section 7 -20 -50
Section 7 -20 -50 of the Code identifies development standards applicable to specific
geologic hazards, including avalanche areas, landslide areas, rock fall areas, alluvial fans,
talus slopes, Mancos shale, faults, expansive soil and rock, and ground subsistence. None
of these geologic hazards are known to exist on or otherwise affect the property.
6. Wildfire Hazards, Section 7 -20 -60
In October of 2011, Mr. Art Hougland of Hougland & Associates (H &A) visited the
subject property and found the wildfire hazard rating to be "Severe Hazard" due to steep
slopes as well as the type and continuity of the vegetation on the property (see Exhibit 4).
This is consistent with the fact that most of the Red Mountain neighborhood is considered
to have a Severe Wildfire Hazard. H &A explains that the shape of the property results in
short distances to property lines at streets and to the adjacent property to the west. The
H &A report states that, since Red Mountain Road is down slope of the property, it helps
to break the continuity of the vegetation. The steeper slopes being situated above the
home and below Wrights Road is noted as also being helpful.
Section 7- 20 -60(d) of the Code states that, "development is prohibited within or
immediately adjacent to any Severe Wildfire Hazard area, unless it is determined that:
(1) there is no alternative development area on the property that is free of C- Severe
Hazard: Trees" or X- Severe Hazard: Brush" wildfire hazards... " The entire subject
property and surrounding area has a severe wildfire hazard rating, as noted by H &A. As
a County - approved wildfire expert, H &A is authorized by the Code to recommend that
mitigation be provided through any combination of the structural design and construction
techniques and the defensible space techniques indentified in Section 7- 20 -60. As code
Section 7- 20 -60(c) provides, these Code - prescribed techniques "may be varied upon
recommendation by the wildfire expert." Accordingly, the findings and
recommendations of H &A diverge slightly from those prescribed in the Code so as to be
better tailored to the specific site and the particulars of the proposed development.
H &A's specific mitigation recommendations for the development are contained in the
letter provided herewith as Exhibit 4. The wildfire mitigation recommendations outlined
by H &A should be incorporated as conditions of this application's approval and will be
followed by the applicant.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737- 063 -07 -001) Page 14
Li, 2 3
7. Wildlife Habitat Areas, Section 7 -20 -70
There are no active, field- verified bighorn sheep, elk or mule deer winter range, severe
winter range, winter concentration areas, migration corridors, or production areas that
occur on or adjacent to the property. No legally protected, sensitive, or economically
important wildlife species will be affected by the proposed development. Likewise, no
habitat for plant or animal species listed as threatened or endangered by the United States
Fish and Wildlife Service will be affected by the proposed development. Additionally,
no habitat for plant or animal species listed by the State of Colorado as rare, threatened,
endangered or of State special concern will be affected.
Since the property is not affected by any specifically regulated habitat types, this portion
of this application responds only to the general standards of Section 7- 20- 70(c). The
review standards of Section 7- 20 -70(c) are provided below in italicized text, with each
standard immediately followed by a response.
1. When existing native vegetation must be altered within the Activity Envelope,
the applicant may be required to prepare a habitat mitigation plan acceptable to the
County. Such mitigation 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. Should there be no opportunity on the property for habitat mitigation or
restoration, off -site mitigation benefiting the same species may be required, or financial
mitigation may be paid into a County habitat mitigation fund should such a fund be
established in the future.
Native vegetation will be preserved to the maximum extent practicable, except where
necessary to manage weeds, reduce wildfire hazards or to accommodate construction
activities. Landscaping will be restricted to the Activity Envelope. Any vegetation
damaged or removed during construction will be revegetated using native species. In the
unlikely event that the County and the DOW feel that financial mitigation would be
warranted or appropriate, the applicant agrees to cooperate.
2. Manipulation of vegetation outside of the Activity Envelope is prohibited.
With the exceptions of wildfire hazard mitigation and weed management, there will be no
manipulation of any vegetation outside of the Activity Envelope.
3. Mesh or woven wire fences are prohibited outside the Activity Envelope.
4. Wood rail fencing shall employ three (3) rails or less, be the round or split rail
type, shall not exceed fifty four (54) inches in height above ground level, and twelve (12)
inches in width (top view), and shall have at least eighteen (18) inches between the lower
two (2) rails.
5. Wire fencing must be three (3) strands or less. The top wire should be a twelve -
point-five (12.5) gauge twisted barbless type at a maximum height of forty-two (42)
inches. The middle strands (which may be barbed) should be located a minimum twelve
{{''��97))9gqRed Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001) Page 15
lC IL4
U
(12) inches apart and from the top wire preventing entanglement when mule deer jump
over. The bottom strand should be sixteen (16) inches from the ground.
Any fences deemed necessary will meet or exceed Pitkin County and CDOW wildlife
standards.
6 Tall overly mature trees and standing dead trees (snags) should be retained at
the rate of two (2) to five (S) per acre whenever possible as nesting and perching habitat.
This standard is understood by the applicant, and will be followed to the extent possible
in light of wildfire and other hazard mitigation requirements.
7. In areas of high black bear activity, fruit bearing trees and shrubs shall be
prohibited within the Activity Envelope. This does not include pre- existing native trees
and shrubs.
No fruit bearing trees and shrubs will be included in the landscaping.
8. Development shall be clustered to the maximum extent possible to minimize
impact on wildlife.
All development will occur in the approved Activity Envelope only. All development is
clustered to the maximum extent possible on the previously disturbed areas of the
property.
9. Access shall be provided to the Colorado Division of Wildlife for trapping,
tagging, studying, or otherwise managing wildlife.
Access will be provided to CDOW with reasonable notice given to the applicant.
10. Trashlgarbage shall be kept in an approved bear resistant container or
enclosure.
All refuse containers will meet or exceed the Wildlife Proof Refuse Container/Dumpster
Enclosure Standards described in Pitkin County Ordinance Number 010 -2001 and
amendments thereto.
11, Bird feeders, including hummingbird feeders, shall be hung away from any
deck or window, and be at least ten (10) feet from the ground suspended between two (2)
trees or posts. All seed feeders shall include a seed catchment pan to catch discarded
seed.
This standard will be followed.
12. Horse grains, pellets, and cookies shall be stored in bear resistant containers.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737- 063 -07 -001) Page 16
111
0 15
Any and all of the above mentioned items will be stored indoors or in bear resistant
containers.
13. Pet food shall not be left outside.
Pet food will not be left outside, and pets will not be fed outside.
8. Scenic View Protection, Section 7- 20- 120(d)
In order to preserve the character of Pitkin County, careful attention must be paid to the
visible impacts of all proposed development. Section 7 -20 -120 of the Code establishes
Scenic View Protection areas that are proximate to and most visible from specific roads
in the County, including State Highway 82 (SH 82). The standards of Section 7 -20 -120
are designed to minimize the visual impact of new development, including replacements
of existing structures. Although, due to distance, topography, intervening structures and
dense vegetation, the subject property is barely discernable with the naked eye as viewed
from SH 82, the applicant is still demonstrating compliance below with the standards of
Section 7- 20- 120(d).
Aidlin Darling Design's intention was to create an organic, low - profile structure that
appears to have grown from the ground up. The home, as proposed, will be built into and
follow the contours of the topography while its uphill walls serve retaining purposes.
The house will maintain just a one story appearance as viewed from Wrights Road. With
natural materials and colors used on the exteriors of the home, the structure will blend
into the landscape, further reducing its visibility.
The architects have prepared photographs showing the screening and visibility of the
existing home as well as photographic simulations depicting the view of the proposed
home from SH 82. As the provided materials show, the replacement home, just as the
existing home, will be barely visible from anywhere along SH 82 as viewed with the
naked eye. The home will not be located on the highest or most visible portion of the site
and will not project above a ridgeline. The Red Mountain ridgeline is actually several
hundred feet above the proposed home and the subject property, as a whole.
There is no way to completely eliminate visibility of the proposed development from SH
82, although any visibility from SH 82 will be from limited vantage points, at a
substantial distance, and greatly obscured by intervening development, topography and/or
dense vegetation. Any visual impact will be similar to, or less than, that associated with
the existing home, which is negligible to begin with.
The Scenic Review criteria of Code Section 7- 20- 120(d) are provided below in italicized
print and each is followed by a response demonstrating compliance and/or consistency
therewith, as applicable.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001)
0 UGl 26
(1) The proposed development shall utilize existing topography and natural
vegetation, such as ridges, hills, and existing trees, to screen buildings to the maximum
extent practicable when viewed from those right -of -way listed in subsection (b) above.
The existing topography and vegetation already provide nearly complete screening of the
existing home and will continue to do the same. The existing ridges, hills and stands of
trees, along with distance and intervening structures provide screening for this
development. The visibility of this home from SH 82 will be similar to or less than that
of the existing home, which is almost completely obscured and/or obstructed by buildings
along Main Street and seen only from a substantial distance. As mentioned above, the
home will be built into the slopes and along the contours, appearing as if it grew up from
the ground. Additionally, the applicant is proposing to plant numerous trees and shrubs
on the front side of the property, where the existing driveway is located, and this will
further screen the new home from both SH 82 and Red Mountain Road.
(2) The proposed development shall avoid the location of structures within the
Scenic View Protection Areas, and shall avoid the location of structures within any
Viewplane identified in the State Highway 82 Corridor Master Plan and Down Valley
Comprehensive Plan if possible. If location outside the Scenic View Protection Area and
defined Viewplanes is not practicable, then the proposed development shall not be
located on the highest ground or most visible portion of any site as viewed from those
corridors listed in subsection (b) above.
There is no way for this development to completely avoid the Scenic View Protection
Area. However, the development proposed is mostly located on previously disturbed
portions of the property and will not be located on the highest ground.
(3) The proposed development's height and bulk shall be designed to avoid, to the
maximum extent practicable, the visibility of buildings from those corridors listed in
subsection (b) above. This may include, but shall not be limited to, breaking the mass of
the building down into a series of smaller forms, articulation of the building facades to
avoid a wall or row effect, and staggering roof ines to avoid a long unbroken plane.
Although the home will be visible from limited and distant vantage points along SH 82, it
will be in character with the existing home and other homes on Red Mountain. The
architect's design intent was to create an organic, low - profile structure that appears to
have grown from the ground up. The home will be built into the topography and will
appear to be only one story as viewed from Wrights Road.
(4) The proposed structure shall be placed so it does not project above a ridgeline
such that a structure silhouettes against the sky when viewed from those corridors listed
in subsection (b), unless there are no alternate building sites on the lot or parcel.
The proposed structure will not project above a ridgeline as there are no ridgelines on or
otherwise affecting the subject property. The Red Mountain ridgeline is several hundred
feet above the proposed home and subject property.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737- 063 -07 -001) Page 18
ilU �2l
(5) The proposed development shall be designed to complement the natural
topography of the land through the use of techniques such as earth - sheltered design, the
use of natural materials and coloring, the use of low-reflectance materials, or clustering
of structures on the least visible portions of the site. When a building is proposed near a
ridgeline, then its form (particularly its roof form) shall replicate, parallel, or
complement the natural form of the ridgeline so that it appears to be an element of the
natural ridgeline.
The applicant intends to utilize earth -tone colors and non - reflective materials for the new
home, which will replace the building currently on the site. The architects have designed
this home to be a low- profile structure that follows the contours of the site's topography.
(6) The proposed development shall preserve natural vegetation and avoid
development within irrigated meadows, to the maximum extent practicable.
Except for that required to be removed for wildfire mitigation purposes, the natural
vegetation will be preserved to the extent practicable. There are no irrigated meadows
associated with this property.
(7) The proposed development shall install utilities in locations and through
procedures that minimize visual impacts to the maximum extent practicable.
All utilities will be installed underground and in locations that minimize visual impacts.
(8) All satellite dishes in the proposed development shall be located to minimize
visibility from those rights -of -way listed in subsection (b), and shall use earth tone colors
andlor screening to minimize their visual impact.
Any satellite dishes will use earth tone colors and /or be screened so as to minimize
visibility from SH 82.
(9) The proposed development shall not use earth moving and berms as the
primary means of compliance with these regulations, but earth moving may be utilized in
conjunction with other techniques to comply with standards in this section. Where earth
moving techniques are necessary, man -made forms should be undulating and natural in
appearance.
Due to the surrounding topography, earth- moving and/or berms do not provide a viable
means of screening for the proposed home and will not be used, nor is such necessary.
(10) In the Rural Areas only, development shall be located so that activities and
development occur in at least one of the locations specified in subsection (/) as they may
apply to the particular property.
This standard actually refers to subsection (e) and is addressed below
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001)
11, If' 11JR
(11) EARTH TONE MATERIALS
The exterior of all development, except development located and designed in the
form of a ranch compound, shall be built or painted with indigenous earth tone materials
or colors. The exterior of a ranch compound should be built or painted with indigenous
earth tone materials, or shall be painted or stained using local, traditional ranch colors,
which shall include shades of red, brown, or white. Paints or stains that simulate
weathered barn wood also shall be permitted.
Earth tones and indigenous materials will be used where and to the extent possible. The
designs proposed are in harmony with this standard.
(12) ROOFS
All roofs shall have a non - reflective color or composition. Reflective roof
materials shall not be used unless the materials are treated prior to installation to
eliminate reflection, with the exception of materials associated with solar or photovoltaic
equipment.
All roofs will have a non - reflective color or composition. If necessary, roofing materials
will be treated to ensure non - reflectivity.
(13) REVEGETATION OF DISTURBED AREAS
Lands disturbed by earth moving or berms should be revegetated using native
species that are already growing on or near the site. Topsoil shall be stockpiled and
placed on disturbed areas. Irrigation shall be provided to the revegetated areas if it is
necessary to ensure survival ofplanted native species.
All disturbed areas will be revegetated. Also, see the response to standard (6) above.
(14) DRIVEWAYS AVOID DIVIDING MEADOWS AND PASTURES
To the maximum extent practicable, roads and driveways shall be located to skirt
the edge of and avoid dividing meadows and pastures and to avoid major road cuts.
Roads and driveways should take advantage of the screening potential of natural
topography and existing vegetation. Existing roads and driveways shall be used where
practical. To enhance screening, a row of trees may be planted along the roads or
driveways. To the maximum extent practicable, roads and driveways located around the
edge of or in meadows shall be laid out with soft, curving edges and shall avoid straight
line corridors that are incongruous with the natural setting.
Although this application requests a relocation of the existing driveway, no meadows or
pastures will be divided. The relocation of the driveway will provide enhanced slope
stability and make for safer ingress and egress, which will not only benefit this property,
but will also make it safer for other drivers on Red Mountain Road. The enhanced slope
stability resulting from the new driveway and its engineered retaining walls will also
benefit users of Wrights Road while helping to enhance the wildfire defensible space
around the home itself.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001) Page
PROJECT SITE:_
979 RED MOUNTAIN ROAD
aG� Q
a �
'P
oP �sR
Die t yi B6 a o
0 Dr
% n o t Rd
0
d
n
CO RdaS e x
v
it. r `
"°u9hby Ln
r
a
0 -ke, S h E Mafr°m
E Rcds Rd
Q ,a
u c
Co Rd 20P
m Spruce St
rt
Cl.
�
one St
N
�e
st
ay Bay &
h Hotel Jerol n
F 0.cpzn
Paepcke 1w 8 E
kYrb anA,, Park Ma°'3t 82
;4 Ocera Harvz c EkO PkrngA v ,
x
O
' �
d
C�
V'ib� U
Q'
Q4eg�
S�
CONTEXT MM / 1
e m ® U
NO VISIBLE BUILDING
FROM SCENT(
NO VISIBLE BUILDING
FRO
GRAPHICALLY ENHANCED PHO TOGRAPHS ! • 1
CONDITION PHOTOS
/ r
UUCA30
A: FROM HWY 82 AT NORTH MILL STREET
B: FROM HWY 82 BETWEEN K MILL ST AND GALENA ST.
A FROM HWY e2AT NORTH MIL STREET
B. FROM HWY 02 BETWEEN N. M21 ST AND GALENA ST.
0.o°ry�
Pti -A
Z
�
N
it
arl C1
d
0
9�
°
� mu9g7 � St
h
4�
wFranct5 St
S
it. r `
"°u9hby Ln
r
a
0 -ke, S h E Mafr°m
E Rcds Rd
Q ,a
u c
Co Rd 20P
m Spruce St
rt
Cl.
�
one St
N
�e
st
ay Bay &
h Hotel Jerol n
F 0.cpzn
Paepcke 1w 8 E
kYrb anA,, Park Ma°'3t 82
;4 Ocera Harvz c EkO PkrngA v ,
x
O
' �
d
C�
V'ib� U
Q'
Q4eg�
S�
CONTEXT MM / 1
e m ® U
NO VISIBLE BUILDING
FROM SCENT(
NO VISIBLE BUILDING
FRO
GRAPHICALLY ENHANCED PHO TOGRAPHS ! • 1
CONDITION PHOTOS
/ r
UUCA30
A: FROM HWY 82 AT NORTH MILL STREET
B: FROM HWY 82 BETWEEN K MILL ST AND GALENA ST.
A FROM HWY e2AT NORTH MIL STREET
B. FROM HWY 02 BETWEEN N. M21 ST AND GALENA ST.
99MMOUNTAIN
V
VARNATEO METAE'A" I'- -
IIOIOIIItFNAl1011
Q
0 f f RI
STONE VENEER WALL
RMN
STAINED WOOD SIDWG. FIRE
m
RATED AS REDO
INFEGRAE COLOR RDARD
✓IR
FORMED CONCRETE WALL
r
M
iBf.IBWM
NMM
f f
S" P
STONE VENEER WALL
STAJNED WOOD NWNG, HK
RATED AS REO'D
j
STAN TO MATCC?
STAENED WOODYRMiG. HRE
mlmEOlsoww
V94 W NF1
N!
RMN
m
w
AMR!
✓IR
r
M
iBf.IBWM
NMM
_
• J .
ppon31
zw
«Yw1Y.FRR,Y�E,R
.w u MlYT
asnRws r
R.sn.xw N..
STONE VENEER WA
VERTICAL WOOD SCREEN.
M , MIN TO NLATCH SIDING
4.
1
r
STONE V R WALL " 1
BONN FORME AETE _ - : ...7 r
_ uND
Z r LLJ>t
SOUTH ELEVATION
00032
` d ` 1I�E4� �iyii�i■
(I
- n W�F®tl0{�l61111
LJ �—` me�Y�OU�IW
1
PAnNATED METAL FASCIA p� O
_ PIASTER WALL
STARTED WOOD SIDNG. FRS
MUD AS REO'0 rt
VERMAL WOOD SCREFN.
�- STNNTOMAICHSIDNG L7ACRAA� YM
S B fORMEDCONC�IE
ST EVENEER WAIL
1� � ! 1
STAINED WOOD SIgN4 FIRE
MTEDASRE
STONE VENEER WALL
A0.3
SCENIC VIEW
EXHIBITS
r ,
,
r
RSnNAiED METAL FASCIA °
° -
—
PNNTFDALOM.GLAiMG -
- —
SYSTEM, wmR
SOUTH ELEVATION
00032
` d ` 1I�E4� �iyii�i■
(I
- n W�F®tl0{�l61111
LJ �—` me�Y�OU�IW
1
PAnNATED METAL FASCIA p� O
_ PIASTER WALL
STARTED WOOD SIDNG. FRS
MUD AS REO'0 rt
VERMAL WOOD SCREFN.
�- STNNTOMAICHSIDNG L7ACRAA� YM
S B fORMEDCONC�IE
ST EVENEER WAIL
1� � ! 1
STAINED WOOD SIgN4 FIRE
MTEDASRE
STONE VENEER WALL
A0.3
SCENIC VIEW
EXHIBITS
f
.1591. Sb3 pw
000n33
f4 TED METAL FASCIA
STAINED WOOD SIDING. FIRE
LrAno ASSEMBLY AS RED -
PAINED ALUM. GIALNG
SYSTEM, TYPICAL
r�
e r r R,
t � i
PAnNAJFD METH.
FASCIA ..
� ,
ST YENEE0. WALL
S TAR VED A WOOD DOOR. FIRE
RATED AS REO'D
I � 1
i CONCRETE WALL
.5_ A- -V'
9M FED MOUNW N
we
Awl,
�
nr
IIII\wt
m
Ni
MLOI®
IIIIIIIIIIIIE
rE61EYp9�
OAp
mm
rr
>. _
9. Landscaping and Vegetation Protection, Section 7 -20 -130
The proposed Landscape Plan (Sheet 2 of the Site Plan) complies with the Pitkin County
Landscape Guidelines and the Roadway Landscaping Guidelines contained in the Pitkin
County Asset Management Plan. The landscape plan preserves existing vegetation (other
than that required to be removed for wildfire mitigation) to the extent practicable, ensures
that man made improvements are screened from view, and preserves the rural character
of the County. The proposed landscaping is also consistent with that of surrounding
properties.
In addition to the general requirements of Code Section 7 -20 -130, the applicant
understands that, in the Urban Area, landscaping must be installed to screen satellite
dishes and other telecommunications equipment when located within two hundred (200)
feet of adjacent public roads and visible from such roads. These additional provisions are
and will continue to be followed through the use indigenous species of shrubs and trees,
and the clustering of such shrubs and trees into groupings similar to those naturally
occurring on the property and in the surrounding environs.
10. Lighting, Section 7 -20 -140
The standards of Code Section 7 -20 -140 are applicable to all exterior lighting in Pitkin
County. No lighting will be installed that violates the standards of said Section. All
exterior lighting will be designed so that the bulb is not directly visible from adjacent and
neighboring properties or from SH 82. A detailed Lighting Plan will be provided at the
time of building permit application.
C. Apnroval for the Replacement of the Primary Residence and Recoenition of
the Property as a TDR Receiver Site
The subject property maintains one GMQS exempt initial development right for up to
5,750 square feet of residential floor area by virtue of the lot having been legally created
before June 12, 1978 (per Section 6- 30- 100(a) of the Code) and being located within a
BOCC- approved subdivision (per Section 6- 30- 100(b) of the Code). The subject
property is part of the BOCC - approved Randall Subdivision, the plat for which was
recorded on June 16, 1972.
The proposed replacement of the primary residence will result in a total of not more than
10,293 square feet, as previously discussed. The applicant is now seeking approval to
establish the subject property as a receiver site for two (2) transferable development
rights (TDR) for the additional floor area. Special Review is not needed for this lot
within the UGB pursuant to Section 6- 30- 50(b)(1).
1. Transfer of Development Rights, Section 6 -70
The applicant will utilize up to two (2) TDR in order to develop a replacement home with
a final maximum size of 10,293 square feet on the property. The provisions of Section 6-
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737- 063 -07 -001) Page 21
U�L;734
70 of the Code address the use of TDR. With regard to the establishment of a TDR
receiver site, the Code requires a finding of consistency with the standards and criteria of
Sections 6- 70 -20(b) and 6- 70- 40(b). Section 3- 50 -10(c) of the Code governs TDR in the
R -30 zone district and states that,
TDRs may be purchased and used in the R -30 zone district for the purpose
of increasing the maximum size of an existing dwelling within the limits on
final maximum gross floor area established in Table 5. 1, pursuant to
Sections 6 -70 and 2- 40 -30, and as set forth in Table 2 -1.
Section 6- 70 -20(b) of the Code defines eligible "Receiving Sites" as:
Where the owner of a lot or parcel in the RS -35, RS -30, RS -20, AR -10,
AR -2, R -30, R -15, R -15A, or R -6 zone districts desires to build a house
larger than the base maximum house size permissible under Table 5 -1, a
TDR may be used to increase the permitted floor area up to the final
maximum size specified in Table 5 -1.
The subject property is eligible for development larger than the base maximum house
size permissible under Table 5 -1 with TDR as it is located within the UGB and in the R-
30 Zone District, which contains a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) restriction. Table 5 -1 of the
Code lists the maximum permitted FAR in the R -30 zone as .13 multiplied by the size of
the lot (approximately 42,645 square feet) for a total of 5,543 square feet of allowable
Floor Area. Additionally, 4,750 square feet of exempt space is allowed on the property
for a total of 10,293 square feet (final maximum size). The applicant will purchase up to
two (2) TDR from permitted "Sending Sites." It is understood that each TDR used will
be worth 2,500 square feet of floor area. The use of two (2) TDR would allow the
applicant to build 5,543 square feet of floor area plus 4,750 square feet of exempt space.
In other words, although 5,000 square feet of allowable floor area would be removed
from a sending site(s), as much as 447 square feet of that total would be sterilized from
that site while going unused on this site.
Finally, Section 6- 70 -40(b) of the Code outlines the criteria for receiving sites and states
that, "TDR from any Sending Site in the County may be used on any Receiving Site in the
County, except as limited by Table 6 -12 and the provisions of this section. " TDR may be
used to increase base maximum floor area, "regardless of the number of TDRs
purchased, no structure on any Receiving Site shall be permitted to exceed the maximum
size for structures in the zone district shown in Table 5 -1. " The Section goes on to state
that, "Additional floor area shall not be available to any Receiving Site where the
underlying zone district contains a floor area ratio restriction that would not permit the
square footage of floor area sought, or where a prior development approval limited the
square footage allowed, and there was no provision for the use of TDRs to exceed the
allowed square footage. " As mentioned above, the R -30 zone district does contain a
floor area ratio restriction that is being followed by the applicant in determining the final
maximum size. No prior development approvals applicable to the proposed receiver site
limit its ability to use TDR.
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001)
2. GMQS Exemption for Development Using TDR, Section 6 -30 -50
TDR may provide an exemption from GMQS if they comply with the standards of
Section 6 -30 -50 of the Code. Additional floor area (up to the maximum permitted by
Table 5 -1) on lots or parcels within the UGB may be exempted from GMQS through the
use of TDR. Accordingly, this application is exempt from growth management for
development utilizing two (2) TDR.
3. GMQS Exemption for Replacement, Section 6 -30 -110
Section 6 -30 -110 governs the creation of a GMQS exemption for replacement of a
structure as follows:
(1) The applicant shall demonstrate that the structure proposed for remodel or
replacement was legally created by producing a valid copy of the building permit for the
structure.
The building permit for the existing single - family residence is on file with the Pitkin
County Building Department, address 979 Red Mountain Road.
(2) The remodeling, replacement, or addition to a non - conforming structure shall
comply with the standards ofSec.9 -40 as applicable
Neither the existing residence nor the proposed replacement home is or will be a non-
conforming structure.
(3) The use of the structure shall not be changed as part of the exemption for the
remodel or replacement.
There is no change proposed to the use of the structure. It will remain a single - family
residence.
(4) The remodeling or replacement shall occur on the same lot or parcel on which
the existing structure is located, but shall not be limited to the same footprint as the
structure being remodeled or replaced.
The replacement will occur on the same lot on which the existing structure is located.
Subsection (c) of 6 -30 -110 goes on to state that,
The replacement of legally established residential floor area... on a lot or
parcel legally created prior to June 12, 1978... may be exempted from Growth
Management, subject to the following:
(1) REPLACEMENT SIZE LIMITED
(a) If the total size of the structure(s) on the lot or parcel is less than or
equal to the base maximum size permitted by Table 5 -1, then the
existing structure(s) can be replaced and can be expanded, up to a
uill.�l.�i�
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001)
total of the base maximum size permitted by Table 5 -1 on the lot or
parcel.
(b) If the total size of the structure (s) on the lot or parcel is more than the
base maximum size permitted by Table 5 -1, then the existing
structure(s) may be replaced, but these structures may not be
expanded without obtaining either a GMQS allotment or transferable
development rights.
(c) Demolished square footage of structures not attached to the principal
dwelling unit may not be combined with the replacement square
footage of the principal dwelling unit to develop a replacement
dwelling unit that is larger than the existing unit, except that up to
seven hundred fifty (750) square feet of detached garage area may be
replaced with the same number ofsquare feet in an attached garage.
The total size of the existing structure on the lot is less than the base maximum size of
5,750 square feet permitted by Table 5.1. However, the final maximum size with GMQS
allocation or TDR for this property is 10,293 square feet which will be accomplished
through the use of two (2) TDR.
D. Roads. Driveways, and Parkins
All new road and driveway construction must receive a development permit from the
County Engineer and Community Development Director. Within the Aspen UGB, roads
and driveways must be designed and constructed in compliance with the standards and
specifications of the City of Aspen. All off - street parking spaces must conform to the
standards of Section 7- 30- 20(b). The applicant agrees to comply with all of the above
standards as applicable. The minimum number of off - street parking spaces for the
proposed development will need to be determined by the Community Development
Director during building permit review since more than five (5) bedrooms may be
included in the proposed home.
E. Public Service and Utilities
All development must comply with the provisions of Code Section 7 -50 regarding the
design and installation and/or extension of public services and utilities. The Code states
that extensions of public utilities shall take place within a defined Activity Envelope
which may include separate designated areas, different from those portions of the
Activity Envelope designated for primary structures, accessory structures, or driveways.
Additionally, disturbed areas are required to be revegetated. These standards will be
followed by the applicant, as shown and noted on the proposed Site Plan. Electrical,
telephone and cable lines already exist on the property and serve the existing home; these
lines will be upgraded/replaced as necessary and at the applicant's cost.
Water will be supplied by the existing City of Aspen lines on the property and solid waste
management will be provided by connection with existing Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
District (ACSD) facilities.
out-, K3 f
979 Red Mountain Road (Parcel No. 2737 - 063 -07 -001) Page 24
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1: Proof of Ownership
Exhibit 2: Letter of Authorization for Haas Land Planning, LLC to
represent the applicant
Exhibit 3: Pre - Application Conference Summary
Exhibit 4: Wildfire Hazard Review by Art Hougland of Hougland &
Associates
Exhibit 5: Letter from Sopris Engineering, LLC addressing Steep Slopes
Exhibit 6: HP Geotech Subsoil Study
Exhibit 7: Drainage & Erosion Control Report by Sopris Engineering,
LLC
Exhibit 8: FAR Calculations of the Existing Home from Poss
Architecture and Planning
Exhibit 9: Executed Agreement to Pay Form
Exhibit 10: Affected Property Owners' Mailing Addresses of Record
PID No. 2737-063-07-001
Form AO /ORT
Our Order No. Q62003958 Schedule A
Property Address: 979 RED MOUNTAIN ROAD ASPEN CO 81611
1. Policy Date: May 13, 2011 at RECEPTION NO. 579878
2. Name of Insured:
979 ASPEN, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
Amount
3. The estate or interest in the Land described or referred to in this Schedule and which is covered by this policy is:
A Fee Simple
4. Tide to the estate or interest covered by this policy at the date hereof is vested in:
979 ASPEN, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
5. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows:
LOT 2
RANDALL SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF FILED JUNE 16, 1972 IN PLAT
BOOK 4 AT PAGE 256 AND FIRST AMENDED PLAT OF RANDALL SUBDIVISION RECORDED MAY
30, 1995 IN PLAT BOOK 37 AT PAGE 40.
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO.
This Policy valid only if Schedule B is attached.
LTG Policy No. LTFI621'
Land Tide Guarantee Company
ti � i Representing Old Republic National Tide Insurance Company
Form
Our Order No. Q62003958
LTG Policy No. LTFI62003958
Schedule B
This policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following:
1. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an
inspection of the Land of that may asserted by persons in possession of the Land.
2. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records.
3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and
inspection of the Land would disclose, and which are not shown by the Public Records.
4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and
not shown by the Public Records.
5 (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions In patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c)
water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the
Public Records.
6. 2011 TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS NOT YET DUE OR PAYABLE.
7. RIGHT OF PROPRIETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORE
THEREFROM SHOULD THE SAME BE FOUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES
AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED APRIL 25, 1906, IN BOOK 55 AT
PAGE 152.
8. RESTRICTIONS, BUT OMITTING ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, BASED
UPON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, FAMILIAL STATUS,
MARITAL STATUS, DISABILITY, HANDICAP, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, OR SOURCE
OF INCOME, AS SET FORTH IN APPLICABLE STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS, EXCEPT TO THE
EXTENT THAT SAID COVENANT OR RESTRICTION IS PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW,
AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED AUGUST 03, 1961, IN BOOK 194 AT PAGE
555.
9. RESTRICTIONS, BUT OMITTING ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, BASED
UPON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, FAMILIAL STATUS,
MARITAL STATUS, DISABILITY, HANDICAP, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, OR SOURCE
OF INCOME, AS SET FORTH IN APPLICABLE STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS, EXCEPT TO THE
EXTENT THAT SAID COVENANT OR RESTRICTION IS PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW,
AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED MARCH 31, 1966, IN BOOK 219 AT PAGE
576.
10. RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, WHICH DO NOT CONTAIN A FORFEITURE OR REVERTER
CLAUSE, BUT OMITTING ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, BASED UPON
RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, FAMILIAL STATUS, MARITAL
uuL J
LTG Policy No. LTFI62003958
Our Order No. Q62003958
Schedule B
STATUS, DISABILITY, HANDICAP, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, OR SOURCE OF
INCOME, AS SET FORTH IN APPLICABLE STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS, EXCEPT TO THE
EXTENT THAT SAID COVENANT OR RESTRICTION IS PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW,
AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED JUNE 16, 1972, IN BOOK 264 AT PAGE
516.
11. EASEMENTS, CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON
THE PLAT OF RANDALL SUBDIVISION RECORDED JUNE 16, 1972 IN PLAT BOOK 4 AT
PAGE 256, AND FIRST AMENDMENT RECORDED MAY 30, 1995 IN PLAT BOOK 37 AT
PAGE 40.
12. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF MUTUAL RECIPROCAL RELEASE OF PRIVATE
ROAD EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED FEBRUARY 10, 1995 IN BOOK 773 AT PAGE
683.
ITEM NOS. 1 THROUGH 3 AND 5(A) AND 5(B) OF THE STANDARD EXCEPTIONS ARE
HEREBY DELETED.
ITEM NO. 4 OF THE STANDARD EXCEPTIONS IS DELETED AS TO ANY LIENS RESULTING
FROM WORK OR MATERIAL CONTRACTED FOR OR FURNISHED AT THE REQUEST OF
JEFFREY S. QUICKSILVER.
OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY FOR
ANY LIENS ARISING FROM WORK OR MATERIAL FURNISHED AT THE REQUEST OF 979
ASPEN, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY.
uu(,`14.1
Pitkin County Community Development Dept.
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611 -1975
RE: Lot 2, Randall Subdivision (979 Red Mountain Road, PID# 2737 - 063 -07 -001)
Application for: Site Plan Review and Amended Activity Envelope
Approval; and GMQS Exemptions
To whom it may concern:
As owner of Lot 2, Randall Subdivision, I hereby authorize Haas Land Planning,
LLC (HLP) and Aidlin Darling Design (AD) to act as our designated and
authorized representatives for the approvals captioned above. HLP and AD are
authorized to submit an application for the approvals listed above and any
incidental approvals associated therewith. HLP and AD are also authorized to
represent us in meetings with Pitkin County staff, the Hearing Officer, the
Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Board of County Commissioners.
Should you have any need to contact me during the course of your review,
please do so through Haas Land Planning, LLC, whose address and telephone
number are included in the application.
Yours truly,
979 Asp LC
William anager
2950 E. Broad Street, 2nd Floor
Columbus, OH 43209
UU1.:g42
PITKIN COUNTY PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
EXHIBIT
1 �-
PLANNER: Suzanne Wolff
PHONE: (970) 920 -5093
DATE: 9/26/11
E -MAIL: suzannewCcDco.oitkin.co.us
LOCATION: 979 Red Mountain Road; Lot 2, Randall Subdivision PID# 273706307001
APPLICANT: 979 Aspen LLC
REPRESENTATIVE: Mitch Haas
EMAIL: mhaas @sopris.net
Type of Application: Site Plan Review
Description of Project/Development: The Applicant proposes to obtain Site Plan review approval to
replace a single family residence.
Land Use Code Sections to be addressed in letter of request ( aoolication):
• 2- 30- 20(g): Site Plan Criteria for Approval
• 6 -30 -110: GMQS Exemption for Replacement
• 7 -10 -50 & 60: Site Plan
• 7- 20 -10: Site Preparation and Grading
• 7- 20 -20: Steep and Potentially Unstable Slopes
• 7- 20 -30: Water Courses and Drainage
• 7- 20 -60: Wildfire Hazard Areas
• 7 -20 -120: Scenic View Protection Areas (as viewed from Highway 82)
• 7 -20 -130: Landscaping and Vegetation Protection
• 7 -30: Roads, Driveways and Parking
• 7 -50: Public Services and Utilities
Review by: Community Development Director
Public Hearing: NO. However, notice is required via posting, mailing and publication. The
Applicant shall post a public notice sign on the property at least 15 days prior to the date specified for
the Administrative Decision pursuant to Sec. 2- 20- 100(a)(3) of the Land Use Code. In addition, the
Applicant shall mail notice (by certified mail) to all owners within 300' of the property and mineral estate
owners with the return address of the Community Development Department (form 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 appear no more than 60 days prior to the date of
the public hearing. A property owner receiving the public notice shall have 2 weeks from the date the
notice was postmarked to submit comments or objections to the Community Development Department.
Staff will refer the application to the following agencies: Planning /Zoning, Aspen Fire, Aspen Water,
ACSD
FEES: $3,199 (make check payable to " Pitkin County Treasurer ")
• $2,496 Planning Office flat fee (non - refundable; based on 8 hours of staff time. If staff review time
exceeds 9.6 hours, the Applicant will be charged for additional time above 8 hours at a rate of
$312 /hour)
■ $624 Planning /Zoning
• $54 Public Notice Fee
• $25 Clerk Technology Fee
t,uC943
To apply, submit 1 copy of the following information:
1. Summary letter explaining the request, providing background on prior approvals and permits, and
addressing compliance with the Code sections listed above;
2. 24" by 36" and 11" x 17" Site Plan as designated in Section 2.1.12 of the Pitkin County Land Use
Application Manual;
3. Technical Reports as designated in Section 2.1.12 of the Application Manual (as applicable)
4. Engineering report addressing road design, water supply, wastewater disposal and other utilities
and public services.
5. Disclosure and proof of ownership of the property, consisting of a current certificate from a title
insurance company or attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Colorado, listing the names of
all owners of the property and all mortgagees, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and
agreements affecting use and development of the parcel and proof of the owner's right to use the
land for the purposes identified in the development application.
6. Street address (if any) and parcel description, including legal description, and 8 -1/2 "x 11" vicinity map
locating the subject property within Pitkin County;
7. Consent from the owner of the property for the representative to process the application and
represent the owner;
8. List of all property owners within 300' and mineral estate owners (1 copy).
9. Total fee for review of the application;
10. Signed fee agreement (form attached);
11. Copy of this preapp form
NOTES
➢ PLEASE SUBMIT ONE UNBOUND AND ONE -SIDED COPY OF YOUR COMPLETE APPLICATION.
THE PARCEL ID # SHOULD BE INCLUDED ON ALL DOCUMENTS INCLUDED IN YOUR
APPLICATION.
➢ ALL MAPS SHALL BE FOLDED.
➢ This pre- application conference summary is advisory in nature and not binding on the County. The
information provided in this summary is based on current zoning standards and staffs
interpretations based upon representations of the applicant. Additional information may be
required upon a complete review of the application.
➢ Applicant will be responsible for mailed and posted notice. Public Notice requirements are
described in Section 2- 20-100 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. A signed, notarized copy
of the affidavit confirming notice must be received from Applicant prior to approval.
uu (.�44
HQUGLAMU & Assoc =ATVs
CONSOLTIND ON WILDPIRS 11131111 MITIIATION
ME PROTECTION AND BUILDING & FIRS CODES
October 7, 2011
Mr. Mitch Haas
Haas Land Planning, LLC
201 North Mill Street, Suite 108
Aspen, CO 81611
970 925 -7819
EXHIBIT
7—
Subject: Wildfire Hazard Mitigation for property located at 979 Red Mountain
Road, Pitkin County, Colorado.
Dear Mr. Haas,
Thanks for meeting with me on site at this property on Wednesday October 5'
and for providing me with information regarding the proposed house. I remained on site
for a time to take photos, measure slopes and evaluate the wildfire hazard conditions. I
will qualify my observations as those of conditions as they now exist.
I'm sure that you are aware that the type of vegetation, the continuity of
vegetation and the steep slopes on Red Mountain result in most of the sites in the area
being classified as a Severe Wildfire Hazard. This is true of this property as well. The
shape of the property results in short distances to property lines at streets and to the
adjacent property to the west. This somewhat limits the ability of this property owner to
manage the vegetation since this management can only be done on their own property. It
is helpful that Red Mountain Road is down slope of the property and helps to break the
continuity of the vegetation in this area. It is also helpful that the steeper slope (40 % +) is
above the proposed house and below Wright Road.
The vegetation is mostly a mix of oak up to 15 -feet in height, service bevy of 10-
12- feet in height, mature conifer, cottonwood, and aspen, other native brush to 5 -feet in
height and native grass to 4 -feet in height. The vegetation around the existing house has
been maintained to a degree, however there is a considerable amount of deadfall,
standing dead and dead growth on living trees on the property and this should be
managed as described in my recommendations below. I recognize that the demolition of
the existing house and the relocation of the driveway to the north side of the proposed
house and the construction of the new house will cause the removal of much of the
vegetation in this area.
17 OAMES DRIVE, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 61601
llli'04J PEONS (970) 364.1331 I PAZ (970) 314.1331 liresale @sspris.nef
Vegetation Management and Modification Recommended:
I. For a distance of 15 -feet around the proposed house and beyond the furthermost
projection of combustible construction the area should be of primarily
noncombustible hard scape surfaces, low growing perennials, flowerbeds, cut grass
and deciduous, well - trimmed and irrigated plants. Woody vegetation should not be
planted within this area. Firewood or other combustible materials should not be
stored within this area. If the owner would like to retain any of the trees near the
house, this may be done if the 15 -foot area is extended outward from the furthest
growth expected from the mature tree(s). In other words, these trees should have
defensible space as the house does.
2. Beyond the 15 -foot area and up to 45 -feet (or to the property line where less than 45-
feet), maintain natural and/or irrigated grass at less than 6- inches and thin existing
trees and brush into individuals or clusters. Oak and service berry should be thinned
and clustered. Limbs of trees in this area should be pruned to one -half the height of
the tree, one -third the height of the tree for any conifer, or 10 -feet above ground,
whichever is less. No brush or shrubs which, when mature, will be tall enough to act
as ladder fuel should be provided or maintained around the trees in this betweenl5
and 45 foot (or less if a property line is encountered) perimeter. Clusters of bushes or
shrubs should be separated from each other and from those beyond the 45 -foot area
by a distance of 2 %2 times the height of the mature vegetation. The diameter of a
cluster should be limited to 2 % times the height of the mature vegetation. As an
example: If the expected mature height of the vegetation is 10 feet then the diameter
of the cluster should be no greater than 25 feet and the distance between clusters
should be greater than 25 feet. Ideally the plant material growing between trees and
clusters of bushes or shrubs is grass maintained at 6- inches or less.
Thin and remove lower branches of brush or shrubs within clusters or individual
plants to eliminate ladder fuel. Most of the shrubs that will be cut are vigorous
sprouting plants and with the approval of Pitkin County and the property owner the
cut ends may be treated with a product named Garlon® or an equivalent by a person
licensed to apply herbicides so as to prevent regeneration. Cut materials should be
either removed or chipped and spread.
3. Remove or chip all standing dead and deadfall on the property. The area below
Wright Road has a considerable amount of standing dead and deadfall and the
removal of this coupled with the thinning of live growth should provide for healthier
growth and better slope stability.
ou046
New Construction:
I recommend that the design, materials and construction of buildings conform to the
design features and materials required by Pitkin County for safe construction in a severe
wildfire hazard area as restated below:
Pitkin County has adopted Structural Design and Construction Requirements. The
following are paraphrased from the Pitkin County Land Use Code, Chapter 7, Section 7-
20-60, Wildfire Hazards, and may not contain the exact language but it is intended to be
consistent with the intent and purpose of the Pitkin County Requirements.
Projections:
Eves and other projections should be kept to a minimum on the down slope side and on
cross slope sides and should not have ventilation openings unless the design and
configuration of the openings are specifically approved by Pitkin County. Projections
may include, but are not limited to eaves; cornices; soffits; roofs over open decks,
cantilevered floors; bay windows; decks or balconies. Projections may cause heat traps
and any to be included in the construction should be protected as follows:
Any projection including guardrails should be constructed with materials approved for
one -how fire- resistive construction or Type IV Heavy Timber construction materials per
the currently adopted building code. Projections should be constructed so that they do
not trap, hold or retain leaves or debris that may be ignited by burning brands carried by
air currents from any fire in the area.
An alternative construction for projections may be permitted provided they are
constructed of non- combustible building materials or materials with a flame spread
rating of less than twenty five (<25 tested to ASTM E84) and listed for exterior use.
Areas below such projections must be void of vegetation or other combustible materials.
The areas below these projections shall be protected from accumulation of vegetative
materials by placement of a vegetative barrier covered with rocks or gravel or shall be
concrete or stone. There shall be no storage of combustible materials under projections.
The walls under these projections shall be constructed of materials approved for one -how
fire - resistive construction on the exterior side of the wall. Window openings in walls
below projections shall be tempered glass. Doors shall be noncombustible or one and
three- fourths inch (1 '/,') solid wood.
Windows and Glass:
Glazed openings shall be provided with closing, solid, exterior non - flammable shutters or
shall be of tempered glass.
Exterior Walls and Siding:
Siding and exterior wall construction shall have a minimum of one -how fire- resistive
rating ground level to roofline, 5/8" gypboard underlying combustible materials or
cement stucco with a minimum thickness of % ". Exterior doors shall be noncombustible
or one and three - fourths inch (1 % ') solid wood.
uuL' 9 41
Foundation:
Foundations, skirting and crawl -space openings shall be fully enclosed and constructed
with materials approved for one -hour fire - resistive construction on the exterior side of the
walls and shall extend from the top of grade to the underside of the floor decking or
walls.
Roofs:
Roofs shall be constructed with a Class A roof assembly as defined in the 2003
International Building Code (IBC) Section 1505.2. Wood shake/shingle roof coverings
are prohibited in all wildfire hazard areas. Roofs with less than a 3:12 pitch are not
permitted in wildfire areas unless they comply with the following:
1. All roof coverings shall be listed for installation as a part of the Class A roof
assembly.
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.
Protrusions above the roofline, such as parapets, shall be prohibited.
4. Roofs shall be installed as required by the adopted building code and shall have a
minimum slope of 1:48.
5. All roof designs, coverings or equivalent assemblies shall be specifically
approved by the Fire Marshal prior to submittal of a building permit application.
6. Vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh, with mesh one-fourth -
inch ( ") maximum.
Maintenance:
1. Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris.
2. Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash and flammable materials and debris.
3. All flammable materials shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of
fifteen -feet (15') from any structure.
4. Weeds and grass within the fifteen -foot (15') perimeter and under trees, bushes
and brush shall be maintained at a height of not more than six - inches (6').
Miscellaneous:
1. Firewood/woodpiles shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of fifteen -
feet (15') from any structure.
2. Non - saltwater Swimming pools shall be accessible to the Fire Department.
3. Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris.
4. Wood fences shall not connect to structures.
5. Any outbuildings or additional structures shall adhere to the same standards
described herein.
6. Each structure shall have a minimum of on one ten -pound (10#) Class ABC fire
extinguisher.
7. Addresses shall be clearly marked with two -inch (2 ") noncombustible letters and
shall be visible at the primary point of access from the public or common access
road and installed on a noncombustible post.
Uwion43
I also recommend review and consideration of a publication titled "Firewise Construction
Design and Materials" available from the Colorado State Forest Service.
If you have comments, questions or require additional information please contact me.
Sincerely,
Art Hougland
NOTICE: This Wildfire Hazard Mitigation Analysis along with observations and
recommendations is intended to be an aid to the owner, architect and vegetation
management and/or landscape design and implementation professionals in the
development of defensible space and of fire wise construction documents. The review of
the existing wildfire hazard potential on this property and the observations and
recommendations for the mitigation of these hazards does not constitute an acceptance of
any responsibility by Hougland & Associates for errors, omissions or discrepancies. The
behavior of wildfire is acknowledged to be capricious in nature. Hougland & Associates
does not proclaim that circumstances, including improper maintenance, may not arise that
would permit wildfire to overwhelm the mitigation measures recommended or
implemented. Observations and recommendations are intended to be collaborative with
wildfire hazard mitigation guidelines of the Colorado State Forest Service and of other
nationally recognized standards and are intended to be constructive and in support of the
owners interest and safety.
5
juC er, � {
� ,4
ki
979 Aspen, LLC
c/o Mitch Haas
Haas Land Planning, LLC
201 N Mill St. Suite 108
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: 979 Red Mountain Road Residence — Steep Slope Letter
Sopris Engineering, LLC Job No. 11096.02
Dear Mitch,
Sopris Engineering, LLC (SE) has prepared the following Letter Regarding Slopes to address the single
family home proposed at 979 Red Mountain Road. The site is located north of Red Mountain Road and
southwest of Wrights Road, in the SW ' / 4 of section 6 of TI OS, R84W in Pitkin County, Colorado. The
proposed site includes a new single family home which will require demolition of the existing structure
onsite.
Existing Conditions:
The site existing topography, buildings, driveways, and other improvements are shown on the Improvement
Survey Plat/Topographical Map prepared by SE dated June 2011. The existing site generally slopes from
northeast to southwest at a moderately steep grade which varies across the site. Per this survey, several
areas onsite have slopes greater than 30 %. However these steep slope areas are manmade, and are a result
of the onsite construction of the existing single family home and the existing roads adjacent to the lot.
In order to confirm that the existing slopes areas greater than 30% are manmade, SE prepared a
Development/Historic Topograhic Exhibit Map dated September 2011, which is attached hereto. The basis
of this survey data is the 1958 Falcon Air Maps Topographic map of Aspen, Colorado and Vicinity
prepared for Bugas and Merrick, Engineers; and the Plat and First Amended Plat of Randall Subdivision.
A description of the development of the exhibit map follows, as described in the exhibit notes on the
Historic Topographic Map.
"(Note 8- Exhibit Notes) The subject property was included on the referenced Falcon Air Map topographic
mapping. The map contouring (NGVD 1929 datum) indicated that the slope, prior to development,
generally was uniform with contours paralleling Wrights Road descending in a southwesterly direction.
The southwesterly 213 of the present day site was disturbed by the construction of the existing structure,
driveway and other improvements. This map represents a recreation ofpre - development conditions by
creating the pre- development contouring from the field located catch slope point elevations (undisturbed
ground) along Wrights Road and the daylight slope point elevations (undisturbed ground) along Red
Mountain Road (NA VD 88 datum). "
Development within Steep Slope Areas:
The proposed site development includes a new single family home and demolition of the existing structure
and related improvements. Per the historic topography from 1958, none of the area within the development
setback is in slope areas greater than 30 %. The steep slope areas onsite in 1958 are a result of the pre-
existing road construction adjacent to the site. Prior to this road construction we would expect that the
entire parcel would not have had any slope areas greater than 30 %.
502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704 -0311• Fax (970) 704 -0313
SOPRIS ENGINEERING • LLC civil consultants
UlJC 95J
SE #. 11096.02 — Steep Slope Letter
09/21/2011
Page 2
The Conclusions arrived at above are consistent with the 2008 Subsoil Study prepared by HP Geotech,
which found about 4 -8 feet of variable fill material overlaying the natural indigenous soils.
Per Section 7- 20- 20(c)(3) of the Pitkin County Development standards, related to Steep and Potentially
Unstable Slopes, exceptions for development within 30 % -45% slope areas may be granted in manmade
"Minor Slope Anomaly" areas. Based on the historic topography, the steep slope areas are all minor
manmade areas. The proposed site driveway will cross one minor slope area greater than 30% directly
adjacent to the intersection with Red Mountain Road. The rest of the proposed improvements will not
disturb the steep slope areas, including the steep downhill fill slope of Wright Road. Structural retaining
walls will be installed as necessary adjacent to these steep slope areas to avoid encroachment.
The location of the proposed residence and site driveway will improve the existing site condition.
Structural retaining walls will be used on the uphill side of the driveway adjacent to the existing steep fill
areas. The existing manmade minor slope anomalies and fill material related to the existing house will be
removed, regraded, and improved with the proposed house grading and properly engineered retaining walls.
The retaining wall on the uphill side of the driveway will also create a defensible space /break for fire
mitigation. Having this fire mitigation as hardscape improvements, reduces the amount of site disturbance
and allows more of the existing vegetation to remain in place on the steep fill slope above. This
significantly reduces the erosion and sediment runoff potential possible from fire mitigation measures
which require removal of existing vegetation.
Conclusions:
Based on our site inspections and review of the existing, historic, and proposed site conditions, it is our
opinion that the proposed development onsite will decrease the probability of slope instability onsite. All
Geotechnical Engineer's recommendations related to site grading, construction excavation shoring,
retaining walls, sub - surface drains, etc shall be followed. A Geotechnical Engineer shall be onsite to
inspect the site during construction to ensure slope stability.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please call.
Sincerely,
SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC
502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704 -0311• Fax (970) 704 -0313
Sepois ENGINEERING • LLC civil consultants
0LJCgbi
c
c
v
t\i
s=
a a�
0
r
O
o x�
N
c v0
m
T
— CD
<
T1 m
�v 0
9
O OZ
DZ
z
T �
V1
Z ,
S� C
m� �D
O
�ZD-4
s
D^
Z m
ova G)O
r°
�M M2
ro
V1 _
O
T
�x
mm
O O \
o
OrnO
<o
O m
�m,�
s
_
3 ° z
O
m
Z
° o
awn
uN$�
a� 2 a "� � AB n �'�8m � S < g o V = i S 6a p ✓ {� �o Yl�i
o 3 a g 9a'�9z G „ sas „F& EUK e m °.2 „l' o -. r ✓ f '��r
$ m . °$°3g
5' m
yin . G [u” 2a nS°nn °3 3
I p mo as "s�
M �., p tn
- vn_5
9m=p d} .F2 d3 s £ i�Zi x
m� i, j °v� --•¢ t
s �p� 1. _ Am $e�� ZU, A�'�3 � &� '0'0 9 H Z
mO = v z ,Z
G qi? �5 s? u;,
22
�omNZ �e a " ? °za =A S gSFffiFm» s&�8 5 g ' r
AO . ° a ail g ��23'o34 �a ow °Q MC -
ZWW Qq ;o g9v£vi �ap wn 8 E2R 1;3
Il r i n Os �$ 6 °NWC�nni £i°
p n
& .
?s5 rs $sae d5v
a -
�a /7
G= :�rtech
HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL
EXHIBIT
III- Ivv ntL- I'.,u'I,,t , ��,•n�d,r
(iI,nm. hprlllo' l ,L,cnb
Ch gym. 7 ,'145.7'1y;.
p.,� `iLll'45-S454
rn,.ul hp_cm�i- 51�,;r�ncii, u�in
SUBSOIL STUDY
FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED RESIDENCE
979 RED MOUNTAIN ROAD
PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
JOB NO. 107 0906
JANUARY 10, 2008
PREPARED FOR:
JEFF AND ASHLEY QUICKSILVER
189 EAST LAKE SHORE DRIVE #IIE
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60611
u C q 5 3
u jcnb�
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY .........................................
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ...................................................
SITE CONDITIONS..
FIELD EXPLORATION .............................................................
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...................................................
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS ................................
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ..............................................
FOUNDATIONS.....................................................................
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS ..........................
FLOOR SLABS .......................................................................
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM .......................................................
SITE GRADING..
SURFACE DRAINAGE ..........................................................
LIMITATIONS ...........................................................................
FIGURE I - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
TABLE 1- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
.......I ................... .
........................... .
................... . 2
................... . 2-
sle
Mle
.............. . 4-
.............. . 4-
........... --5-
.............. . 6
.............. . 6-
.............. . 7-
.............. . 8-
........................... . 8-
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of subsoil study for a proposed residence to be located at
979 Red Mountain Road, Pitkin County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1.
The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation design.
The study was conducted in accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering
services to Quicksilver c/o Poss Architecture + Planning dated December 5, 2007.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain
information on the subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the
field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification and other
engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing
were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable
pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report summarizes the data obtained
during this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other
geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the
subsurface conditions encountered.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The existing residence is a two story structure with a walkout basement and will be razed
as part of the new development. The design of the new residence was preliminary at the
time of our study but will generally occupy the same building area. Grading for the new
structure will be relatively extensive with assumed cut depths into the hillside up to about
15 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of
construction.
If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described
above, we should be notified to re- evaluate the recommendations contained in this report.
Job No. 107 0906 G0�9&ech
C!
6i ;?J
-2-
SITE CONDITIONS
The site is located on the north side of Red Mountain Road and southwest from Wrights
Road. The existing single family residence on the lot is accessed from Red Mountain
Road and has a wrap- around driveway along the south and west sides. The lot has been
developed by fairly extensive cut and fill grading with retaining walls on the uphill side
and fill slopes on the downhill side. Natural slopes on the lot are down to the southwest
and vary from about 50 to 60 percent on the north side to typically 15 to 30 percent in the
remaining part of the lot. A drainage ditch between Red Mountain Road and the
residence also runs down to the west. The existing residence has cuts into the hillside of
up to about 12 feet. Numerous cobbles and boulders are visible on the ground surface
and have been used in existing retaining structures on site. Native grass, brush and
scattered pines (about 30 feet tall) exist on site with some landscaped vegetation.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on December 19, 2007. Two
exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the
subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4 inch diameter continuous flight
augers powered by a track- mounted CME 55 LC /300 drill rig. The borings were logged
by a representative of Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical, lnc.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 2 inch I.D, spoon sampler. The sampler was
driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140 pound hammer falling 30
inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method
D -1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or
consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration
resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples
were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing.
Job No. 107 0906
- Y M
-3-
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2.
The subsoils consist of about 4 to 8 feet of variable fill materials overlying medium
dense, clayey silty sand to sandy clays and silts. Relatively dense, slightly clayey silty
sandy gravel and cobbles with possible boulders were encountered below depths of 11
and 13% feet. Drilling in the dense granular soils with auger equipment was difficult due
to the cobbles and boulders and drilling refusal was encountered in the deposit. It is
possible that Boring 1 refused in cemented sandstone/siltstone bedrock based on our
experience in the area.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural
moisture content and density and percent passing the No. 200 seive (silt and clay
fraction). The test results are summarized in Table 1.
Free water was encountered in Boring 1 at the time of drilling at 20 feet, and again at 14%
feet when checked 22 days later. The upper soils were slightly moist to moist.
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS
Spread footings placed on the natural soils can be used for support of the building with a
relatively low risk of settlement and distress. Compacting the bearing soils and designing
the foundation to resist differential movements can be used to help reduce the risk. The
existing fill should be completely removed from beneath the proposed building and other
settlement sensitive areas. The proposed building site is not exposed to potential snow
avalanche, rockfall or debris flow hazards, but the potential for construction related slope,
instability should be considered for steep slopes on north part of the lot.
Job No. 107 0906 G&ReCh
I uI 1f
-4-
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the
nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread
footings bearing on the natural granular soils.
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread
footing foundation system
1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soils should be
designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 ps£ Based on
experience, we expect settlement of footings designed and constructed as
discussed in this section will be about I inch or less.
2) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous
walls and 2 feet for isolated pads.
3) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided
with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection.
Placement of foundations at least 36 inches below exterior grade is
typically used in this area.
4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span
local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12
feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be
designed to resist lateral earth pressures as discussed in the "Foundation
and Retaining Walls" section of this report.
5) All existing fill, debris and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed
and the footing bearing level extended down to the relatively dense natural
granular soils. The exposed soils in footing area should then be moistened
and compacted. If water seepage is encountered, the footing areas should
be dewatered before concrete placement.
6) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing
excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions.
Job No. 107 0906 G459tGCh
0 L) C' ,,j
-5-
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS
Foundation walls and retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be
expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral
earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 50 pcf
for backfill consisting of the on -site granular soils. Cantilevered retaining structures
which are separate from the residence and can be expected to deflect sufficiently to
mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth
pressure computed. on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 40 pcf for
backfill consisting of the on -site granular soils.
All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and
surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and
equipment. The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the
walls and a horizontal backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward
sloping backfill surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or
retaining structure. An underdrain should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure
buildup behind walls.
Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum
standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Backfill in pavement and
walkway areas should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor
density. Care should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment
near the wall, since this could cause excessive lateral pressure on the wall. Some
settlement of deep foundation wall backfill should be expected, even if the material is
placed correctly, and could result in distress to facilities constructed on the backfill.
The lateral resistance of foundation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of the
sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure
against the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be
Job No. 107 0906 C&ReCh
UllL�qt) )
calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.45. Passive pressure of compacted
backfill against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit
weight of 375 pcf. The coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended
above assume ultimate soil strength Suitable factors of safety should be included in the
design to limit the strain which will occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case
of passive resistance. Fill placed against the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads
should be a granular material compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor
density at a moisture content near optimum.
FLOOR SLABS
The natural on -site soils below any existing fill and debris, are suitable to support lightly
loaded slab -on -grade construction. To reduce the effects of some differential movement,
floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints
which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to
reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab
reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended
slab use. A minimum 4 inch layer of free - draining gravel should be placed beneath
basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2 inch
aggregate with at least 50% retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No.
200 sieve.
All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95% of
maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum Required fill can
consist of the on -site granular soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock.
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although free water was encountered in Boring 1 below proposed footing depths, it has
been our experience in mountainous areas that the water level can rise and local perched
groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen
ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below -grade
Job No. 107 0906 -
-7-
construction, such as retaining walls, crawlspace and basement areas, be protected from
wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system
The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill
surrounded above the invert level with free - draining granular material. The drain should
be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish
grade and sloped at a minimum 1 % to a suitable gravity outlet. Free - draining granular
material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2% passing the No. 200
sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The
drain gravel backfill should beat least 1 %x feet deep.
SITE GRADING
Excavation for the new residence will be relatively extensive and there is a risk of
construction induced slope instability. We assume that the cuts will be sloped back or
shored to maintain stability. Fills should be limited to about 8 to 10 feet deep, especially
at the downhill side of the residence where the slope steepens. Embankment fills should
be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density near optimum
moisture content. Prior to fill placement, the subgrade should be carefully prepared by
removing all old fill, vegetation and topsoil and compacting to at least 95% of the
maximum standard Proctor density. The fill should be benched into the slopes that
exceed 20% grade.
Permanent unretained cut and fill slopes should be graded at 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or
flatter and protected against erosion by revegetation or other means. The risk of slope
instability will be increased if seepage is encountered in cuts and flatter slopes may be
necessary. If seepage is encountered in permanent cuts, an investigation should be
conducted to determine if the seepage will adversely affect the cut stability. This office
should review site grading plans for the project prior to construction.
Job No. 107 0906
UL11. 9
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and
maintained at all times after the residence has been completed:
1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be
avoided during construction.
2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and
compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density in
pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard
Proctor density in landscape areas.
3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be
sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We
recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved
areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in paved areas.
Free - draining wall backfill should be capped with at least 2 feet of the on-
site finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all
backfill.
LIMITATIONS
This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either
express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are
based upon the data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled at the locations
indicated on Figure 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area.
Our services do not include determining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or
other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If the client is
concerned about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be
consulted. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface
conditions identified at the exploratory borings and variations in the subsurface
Job No. 107 0906 G93te chl
uuCr162
conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions
encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we
should be notified so that re- evaluation of the recommendations may be made.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We
are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the
project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during
construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to
verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design
changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations
presented herein. We recommend on -site observation of excavations and foundation
bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical
engineer.
Respectfully Submitted,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHMCAL, INC.
Scott W. Richards, E.I.
Reviewed by:
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
SWR/vad
cc: Poss Architecture + Planning — Attn: Sam Kachmar
Job No. 107 0906 tech
L,(iC�16
APPROXIMATE SCALE
1 = 60
M
V
3
a
m PMNY
n
M
�
z �
t
XISTING
RESIDENC
�.
0 BE
3
BORING 2
BORING 1
0
• %' a
REp
t
UNT
%V RO
Uuc. 6
H
1070906
TLOCATION OF
EXPLORATORY BORINGS
Figure 1
H wor th— P°wlok� Geo techn k°I
BORING 1
ELEV.= 8118.5'
BORING 2
ELEV.= 8116'
8100 8100
0
57/12
WC =67
-� DD =124
8095 8095
Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 3.
U -jcn65
H
1070906 � HBPWORTfPAWLAK h LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 2
GFATFCHNICAL
8120
GROUND
8115
8120
FLOOR OF EXISTING RESIDENCE = 8119'
20/12 8115
9/12
8110
23 8110
WC =10.9
DD =114
tL
- 200 =32
L-
0
19/12
0
.@
.,p
WC =16.2
'•
_
W
8105
D0=100 81051
w
22
;
30/1 - 200 =53
8100 8100
0
57/12
WC =67
-� DD =124
8095 8095
Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Figure 3.
U -jcn65
H
1070906 � HBPWORTfPAWLAK h LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 2
GFATFCHNICAL
LEGEND:
® FILL; clayey silty sand with scattered gravels, medium dense, moist, dark brown to black.
SAND (SM); clayey, silty with gravel and possible cobbles, medium dense, moist, brown, zones of sandy silt
and clay.
® GRAVEL AND COBBLES (GM); slightly clayey, silty, sandy, possible boulders, dense, moist to wet, brown
to red, angular sandstone rocks, possible bedrock at depth.
Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2 -inch I.D. California liner sample.
20/12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 20 blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were
required to drive the California sampler 12 inches.
0, 22
Free water level in boring and number of days following drilling measurement was taken.
--0 Depth at which boring had caved following drilling.
T Practical drilling refusal. Where shown above bottom of log, indicates that multiple attempts were
made to advance the boring.
NOTES:
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on December 19, 2007 with 4 -inch diameter continuous flight power auger.
2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan
provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory borings were obtained by interpolation between contours shown on the site plan provided
and checked by instrument level.
4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the
method used.
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between
material types and transitions may be gradual.
6. Water level readings shown on the logs were made at the time and under the conditions indicated. Fluctuations in
water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Water Content ( %)
DD = Dry Density (pcf)
-200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
iJtJL 1E�o
1070906
LEGEND AND NOTES I Figure 3
to
CD
k §
/ �
} �
S �
)
Ne (
\ \2
�k}
§ {
) k
? 3
Liu [8bf
g
k
-
�2
R ,
� &»
Odg
� ƒ
B
§\� �
o r
§*
§
§
( CY ®
§) /K
%
Q
§§/
E
ED k/
(0z
a
@
§k§ ■
]
)
/
�
979 Aspen, LLC
c/o Mitch Haas
Haas Land Planning, LLC
201 N Mill St. Suite 108
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: 979 Red Mountain Road Residence — Preliminary Drainage Report
Sopris Engineering, LLC Job No. 11096.02
Dear Mitch,
Sopris Engineering, LLC (SE) has prepared the following Drainage Report to quantify the existing drainage
conditions and to address the proposed drainage for the residence at 979 Red Mountain Road (site).
The site is located north of Red Mountain Road and southwest of Wrights Road, in the SW '/a of section 6
of T10S, R84W in Pitkin County, Colorado. The proposed site includes; anew single family home which
will require demolition of the existing structure onsite, a 16' wide driveway, outdoor patio, pool, and
courtyard areas, water, sanitary sewer and shallow utility services to the site, and site landscape features.
Existing Conditions
The site existing topography, buildings, driveways, and other improvements are shown on the Improvement
Survey Plat/Topographical Map prepared by SE dated June 2011. The existing site generally slopes from
northeast to southwest at a moderately steep grade which varies across the site. The site consists of an
existing single family home with related landscape and driveway improvements and native oak and aspen
vegetation on the hillside.
Drainage
Pitkin County Code requires that developed runoff volumes and peaks should not exceed that of the
undeveloped site. The code also requires that historic drainage paths are maintained and that best
management practices are used to treat stormwater onsite.
Analysis Methods & Assumptions
Onsite and offsite drainage areas were analyzed using the Modified Rational Method for the 25 year —1
hour storm event. The time of concentration was assumed to be 10 minutes for all of the drainage sub
basins. The drainage basins were delineated using the onsite existing conditions survey, aerial imagery, and
USGS Quad maps, and the proposed site conditions.
The Rational Hydrologic Method (see Equation 1) was used to estimate peak runoff rates for the 25 -year
storm events.
Equation 1: Q = C* 1 * A
Q = Runoff Flow Rate (cfs)
C = Runoff Coefficient
1 = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr)
A= Area of Basin (acres)
502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704 -0311• Fax (970) 704 -0313
Sums ENGINEERING 9 LLC civil consultants
uLiC163
The rational method volume equation was used to calculate the volume of runoff.
Equation 2: Vr = C *(P /12) *A
Where P = (I *Storm duration)
SE #. 11096.02
10/18/2011
Page 2
Precipitation data for the site was taken from the IDF curve developed for the City of Aspen, Colorado. The
area rainfall distribution is the SCS Type II for the 24 -hr storm. Drainage basin soil information was
obtained from the Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) soil survey. Refer to Appendix A' for
Drainage calculations and soil information and sheet Exhibit 1 — Drainage Basin Map for sub basin
configurations.
Offsite Drainage
The offsite drainage conditions were analyzed in order to understand the peak storm water flow rates
affecting the site.
Offsite basin one (OS -01) is a small portion of Red Mountain delineated on the USGS quad map as storm
water runoff that flowed across the site. Also identified on the quad map is an irrigation ditch, a flat
irrigated bench area and several roads that cross the hillside above the site. All of these manmade
structures will act to attenuate and divert storm water runoff around the site. Wrights Road just above the
site acts as a final flow diversion for any offsite storm water runoff that would enter the site.
Based on the offsite conditions no offsite drainage will adversely impact the site. Any offsite stormwater
flow that does enter the site, will be diverted by the uphill structural and boulder retaining walls around the
proposed structure. OS -01 is summarized in Table I below.
Table 1— Offsite Draina a Basin Summai
OFFSITE
BASIN
Area
(ac)
Weighted
C
Intensity
in /hr
Qe
(cfs)
OS01
23.83
0.28
1.4
1 9.36
Existing Onsite Drainage
The existing site storm water runoff generally sheet flows to the south - southwest to the lowpoint at the
southwest comer of the site. This existing basin outflows to the south in the drainage swale along Red
Mountain Road. The existing onsite basin is summarized in Table 2 below.
Table 2 — Exist in Onsite Draina a Basin SF x-V
EXISTING
BASIN
Area
(ac)
Weighted C
9
Intensity
(in /hr)
Qe
Er
(ac -ft)
EX01
0.98
0.30
1.4
00.034
Developed Onsite Drainage
The developed site will maintain the existing drainage patterns and provide the pre -post detention required
to meet the existing stormwater peak runoff rates. The site runoff from the driveway, auto court areas, and
the building, will be collected in surface drainage swales, and in piped systems where necessary, and will
flow to a small detention structure near the southwest comer of the site. The detention structure will have a
drywell or a outlet structure that will detain and release the stormwater at a controlled rate.
The culvert for the proposed driveway has been sized to pass the 25 -year 1 hour storm event. To improve
storm hydraulics, the culvert will be constructed with flared end sections. Riprap protection will be sized to
prevent erosion at the culvert inlets and outlets. Table 3 summarizes the developed onsite drainage basins
LIUC� Ib )
SE #. 11096.02
10/18/2011
Page 3
below, and Table 4 summarizes the detention summary. Drainage calculations are included in Appendix A
of this report.
Table 3 — Developed Onsite Drainage Basin Summar
SUB-
AREA
Area
(ac)
Weighted C
Intensity
(in / hr)
Qd (cfs)
&ft)
(ac -ft)
DE01A
0.98
0.52
1.4
0.71
0.059
Table 4 — Developed Detention C aleulatian
SUB-
AREA
Qd -Qe
Req.
Storage -Vs
ac -ft
Req.
Storage -Vs
cu -ft
Detention Provided (C.F.)
Drywell
Basin
Total
DE01
0.30
0.025
1,077
235
1 900
1 1,135
S FORAGE VOLUME Vs = (De -Vr) - (Ex -Vr)
Construction Erosion control
Temporary erosion control will be installed and used until revegetation and other permanent erosions
control measures are in place. Silt fencing will be installed at the toe of the downstream edge of
disturbance for all construction areas onsite. Straw check dams and/or straw waddles will be installed in
the roadside ditches, and at the culvert and ditch outflow points until erosion matting and riprap protection
has been installed.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please call.
Sincerely,
SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC
Uul . ('.;
SE #. 11096.02
10/18/2011
Page 4
APPENDIX A - DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS
Uul. 1
\
\)
§)
UOCAt2
\!!
[
)\
\
Co
§
]
w 4 )
UOCAt2
clw*OL- (oLB) -WA i I I wijj 9NSAwNiv4m d
pies -voe lapel
ers�e oo'arvrvame- - dVW NISV9 39VNIVz10• L 11MHX]
J3#11S NIVW ZOS
w
J
Q
U
2
IL
0
Slm% mmal i I OOV OIGO'ALNnOO Mwd Q
i7'I '�HI2T33HI9N;�7 SI2id0,�'' ova Ae N 191A .. 3ON301S38 OVON NIV1Nnow OA8 6L6 < o
.L2.8Y.901
N
m
a
c
0
U
c
s
a
0
c
m
a
m
m
C7
m
rn
m
W
OJ
m l/1
a
v
m�
`
or
UM
yo
�K
Em
c
m
n
0
U'
l
om
0
_T
.Vt 164.90E
N'
oocn74
aL .et.wl
Q
0
ZQ
W+ .iWffl
O O
N�
`r
�a
om
�a
O
vo
�d
N v
M
ao
�U
c
m
Z
N ry
0
NO
y L
a: Z
M N
M O
ZU
m
c
U
a
m
d
Ot
m
w �
O J
N m
a❑
o U
mK
0
o F
U2
m ❑
W
Y
E!
N v
6
T
d
a
0
U'
0
U
.
0
N d y w d m W N Q L i
d w U U d U Z m d W r d 2.
crnE
O o E
N n o
0 x v N � L ZT� U r « «�
E mmet w Nd❑ z U o v EN
Q « °° u O N O Z ¢ m
y ¢ T i U N« m L N N CZ'1 fn 4 O G c 1 y y
� � 9 wE m ° �n ❑ E c w °}tm¢a
LL O c 0; O ; °' i° O E T m m
.�, 0 'm L ° d o.N o o 0 y c n d m E n
Z n o o y � w m t a c d o d .0 n d
d a o c, ndv ° v m `° v wO nu�od naLE
Q E d�dd n a� yam' 4L) y j 15
ui i. E E O m m= E o rn d D
d _ oo L'H c'3 0. T m m ia❑ ° m o
2 'o cmt-o oc may v ¢a m °v o,n
U) d`CU ?.E _�yd jc yet C'
m Ed mm vet ° 'oc o� Z-d¢ m <a
(q ° w 2 E « m m E ._ o. w T 'C - Z o.
m d m m w c� u' d m o n o N > co N" v d n g m
L cA m odo d omo m LEmE
f- 3
W E n w a E v1 3 U � « a) U' C/3 ❑ I - 0 0 "6
N
a
W
0 Q > W m
Z g c U
W V W
E
FQ
y
u @ rc
a¢
.4 m d 3 H
�a
N O
N
� d
OI
O m
�a
T
d
Z
d O
° d
ur
0
❑ n
m o
3�
m
c
0
m
Z
U
N >
d �
y C
°
d r
� N
r c
m O
2 U
C
�l
ULiC J
Hydrologic Soil Group – Aspen- Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle,
Garfield, and Pitkin Counties
979 RED MTN ROAD SOILS
Hydrologic Soil Group
Hydrologic Soil Group — Summary by Map Unit — Aspen - Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin
Counties (CO655)
Map unit symbol
Map unit name
Rating
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
12
Arle -Ansad -Rock outcrop complex,
D
10.9
43.4 %'
12 to 50 percent slopes
14
Callings - Yellack complex, 25 to 65
C
9.0
35.8%
percent slopes
66
Jerry- Milledake foams, 6 to 25 percent
c
4.8
19.0%
slopes
67
Jerry- Millerlake hams, 25 to 45
C
0.5
1.9%
percent slopes
Totals for Area of Interest
25.1
100.0%
Description
Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are
assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the
soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation
from long - duration storms.
The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and
three dual classes (AID, B /D, and CID). The groups are defined as follows:
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly
wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or
gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission.
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These
consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained
soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils
have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist
chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or
soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water
transmission.
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell
potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer
at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material.
These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission.
If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (AID, B /D, or CID), the first letter is
for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their
natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes.
USO4 Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10117!2011
210— Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 4
0UCrl i u
Hydrologic Soil Group — Aspen- Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle,
Garfield, and Pitkin Counties
979 RED MTN ROAD SOILS
Rating Options
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified
Tie -break Rule: Higher
Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10/1712011
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 4
u uC'l 1 l
•
fwa � l
y
H�
a
C7
Z
Z
Z
d
W
F-
U
W
H_
U
K
N
N
O
d
LJ L19 (d
W -
o
��
u0
d
LL
L
2
O
f'
MIJ
F
z
N
y
ry
N
N
N
OLL
H
�
H
n
p
n
fwa � l
y
H�
a
C7
Z
Z
Z
d
W
F-
U
W
H_
U
K
N
N
O
d
LJ L19 (d
W
LL
d
LL
LL
W
I1� US
F
WF j(
Y
LLa
MIJ
F
4 J
Y
N
y
ry
N
N
N
OLL
fwa � l
y
H�
a
C7
Z
Z
Z
d
W
F-
U
W
H_
U
K
N
N
O
d
LJ L19 (d
EXHIBIT
PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTME
AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FEES
PITKIN COUNTY (hereinafter COUNTY) and 979 Asoen. LLC (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS
FOLLOWS:
APPLICANT has submitted to COUNTY an application for Site Plan Review and Amended
---A _ _ ., t. a,.a cnanc rxomnNnns (hereinafter. THE PROJECT).
2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that Pitkin County Ordinance No. 30 -2009 establishes a
fee structure for land use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a
determination of application completeness. The fee structure is based on the County's policy that development
shall pay, in full, the cost of development review in Pitkin County. Fees have been set to be consistent and fair
to the public and to reflect the expense incurred in providing such services to the public.
3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed
project, it may not be possible at the time of application to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in
processing the application. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree fees charged for the processing of land use
applications shall accumulate if an application includes more than one type of land use review.
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 a base fee in the
amount of S 3.199* which is for 8* hours of staff time, and if actual time spent by staff to process the
application exceeds the average number of hours by more than 20 %, then the COUNTY will bill the
APPLICANT quarterly for the additional time spent. 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:
Cindy Houben
Community Development Director
979 Asp n, LL
William Guth, Manager
2950 E. Broad Street, 2 nd Floor
Columbus, OH 43209
*Includes Planning Office flat fee: $2,496 (non - refundable; based on 8 hours of staff time). Also included: Planning and Zoning Referral
Fee of $624, Public Notice fee of $54; and, Clerk Technology fee of $25.
ii0(•1 1 7
APOs WITHIN 300' OF 979 RED MOUNTAIN ROAD
SHER JOYCE B TRUSTEE
JOYCE B SHER
PO BOX 4898
ASPEN, CO 81612
STEEL ROBERT K
71 MAYFAIR LN
GREENWICH, CT 06831
HOCKADAY IRVINE O
C/O 10 HOCKADAY JR
2600 GRAND AVE STE 450
KANSAS CITY, MO 64108
PAYNE LORI A
336 PEBBLE ACRES
ST LOUIS, MO 63141
LEWIS KENNETH D & DONNA C
7517 MORROWCROFT FARMS LN
CHARLOTTE, NC 28211
CUNNIFFE CHARLES L
610 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
1347 RED MOUNTAIN ROAD LLC
301 COMMERCE ST #1830
FT WORTH, TX 76102
OCH DANIEL 25 YEAR TRUST
ATTN: STEVEN PEARLMAN
10 BANK STREET ST 1220
WHITE PLAINS, NY 10606
LOWDER CHARLOTTE G
451 PINEDALE DR
AUBURN, AL 36830
EXHIBIT
WILMERDING MARILYN H Q/P
RESID TRUST
52 RIVER GLN
CARBONDALE, CO 81623 -8897
KAHN FARRELL
PO BOX 7665
ASPEN, CO 81612
FRIEDBERG BARRY S
134 E 71ST ST
NEW YORK, NY 10021 -5011
BASS SID R
C/O DORSEY CROUSE
201 MAIN ST #2700
FORT WORTH, TX 76102
REDS ROAD LLC
201 MAIN ST 42600
FORT WORTH, TX 76102
IRVINE LLC
715 W. MAIN ST. #201
ASPEN, CO 81611
JANE OCH
11 DOLMA
SCARSDALE, NY 10563
Udt.`1uu
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to the general public that on January 4, 2012, the Pitkin
County Community Development Director granted approval for the 979 Aspen LLC Site
Plan Review (Case P082 -11; Deter. #001 - 2012). The property is located at 979 Red
Mountain Road and is legally described as Lot 2, Randall Subdivision. The State Parcel
Identification Number for the property is 2737 - 063 -07 -001. This site - specific
development plan grants a vested property right pursuant to Title 24, Article 68, Colorado
Revised Statutes.
S /Cindy Houben
Community Development Director
Pitkin County, Colorado
Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on JANUARY 12, 2012.
IJI
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: 979 Aspen LLC Site Plan Review (Case P082 -11)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that an application has been submitted by 979 Aspen
LLC (2950 East Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43209) requesting Site Plan Review
approval to replace a single family residence. The property is located at 979 Red
Mountain Road and is legally described as Lot 2, Randall Subdivision. The State Parcel
Identification Number for the property is 2737 - 063 -07 -001. The application is available
for public inspection in the Pitkin County Community Development Department, City
Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 81611. For further information, contact Suzanne
Wolff at (970) 920 -5093.
Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on November 6, 2011.
Attention All Property Owners within 300' of the subject Property
A property owner receiving this public notice who wishes to submit comments or an
objection shall submit those to the Pitkin County Community Development, 130 South
Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611, by December 6, 2011. If any objections to the
development application are received the Community Development Department shall
continue the application to a public hearing before the Hearing Officer.
http : / /www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals /0 /does/ county/ Com% 2 ODev /Planning/Land_Us
ns/P082_1 l_app.pdf
County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE &
} ss. MAILING PURSUANT TO
State of Colorado } PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE
CODE SECTION 2 -20 -100
1, 1 1 1 «(mil (S , being or representing an
Applicant to the Pitkin County Development Department, personally certify that I have complied with
the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 2 -20 -100 of the Pitkin County Land Use Regulations
in the following manner:
1. By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first - class, postage prepaid U.S. Mail at
least 30 days prior to the public hearing to all owners of property within 300' to the subject property,
1 the attache I' t, on the _%ay of Mod. , 2011 (which is days prior to the et WA oFMtc.
iA of 1;� . The names and addresses of the adjacent property owners shall be
those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than 60 days prior to the
public hearing.
2Jbe y mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first- class, postage prepaid U.S. Mail at
ast 30 days prior to the public hearing to the owner s) of the mi. eral estate underneath the subject
roperty, as indicated on the attached list, on the Aday of Al 201L (which is _days prior
I the public hearing date of � . The names and addresses of the mineral estate owners shall
those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than 60 days prior to
he public hearing.
3. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest
public way) on the day of & , / anpt, 2011, which is at least fifteen (15) days prior to the
public hearing. A photograph of the posted sign is attached he _
M ITU 131 of
Applicant's name TV POW UL
(Attach photograph here)
CHRISTINE
SOSONKO
* cm*wn 156 07=15
Signature
Signed before me this 3e day of N oyemW
2011 by
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My commission expires: 01I7S 1261!
Ch;t,stivie Sosonko
Notary Public
Notary Public's Signature
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: 979 Aspen LLC Site Plan Review (Case P082 -11)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that an application has been submitted by 979 Aspen
LLC (2950 East Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43209) requesting Site Plan Review
approval to replace a single family residence. The property is located at 979 Red
Mountain Road and is legally described as Lot 2, Randall Subdivision. The State Parcel
Identification Number for the property is 2737 - 063 -07 -001. The application is available
for public inspection in the Pitkin County Community Development Department, City
Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 81611. For further information, contact Suzanne
Wolff at (970) 920 -5093.
Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on November 6, 2011.
Attention All Property Owners within 300' of the subject property
A property owner receiving this public notice who wishes to submit comments or an
objection shall submit those to the Pitkin County Community Development, 130 South
Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611, by December 6, 2011. If any objections to the
development application are received the Community Development Department shall
continue the application to a public hearing before the Hearing Officer.
http:// www .aspenpitkin.comIPortals /0 /docsl county/ Com% 20Dev IPlanningiLand_Use_Applicatio
ns/P082_11_app.pdf
L.
APOs WITHIN 300' OF 979 RED MOUNTAIN ROAD
SHER JOYCE B TRUSTEE
JOYCE B SHER
PO BOX 4898
ASPEN, CO 81612
STEEL ROBERT K
71 MAYFAIR LN
GREENWICH, CT 06831
HOCKADAY IRVINE 0
C/O 10 HOCKADAY JR
2600 GRAND AVE STE 450
KANSAS CITY, MO 64108
PAYNE LORI A
336 PEBBLE ACRES
ST LOUIS, MO 63141
LEWIS KENNETH D & DONNA C
7517 MORROWCROFT FARMS LN
CHARLOTTE, NC 28211
CUNNIFFE CHARLES L
610 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
1347 RED MOUNTAIN ROAD LLC
301 COMMERCE ST 41830
FT WORTH, TX 76102
OCH DANIEL 25 YEAR TRUST
ATTN: STEVEN PEARLMAN
10 BANK STREET ST 1220
WHITE PLAINS, NY 10606
LOWDER CHARLOTTE G
451 PINEDALE DR
AUBURN, AL 36830
WILMERDING MARILYN H Q/P
RESID TRUST
52 RIVER GLN
CARBONDALE, CO 81623 -8897
KAHN FARRELL
PO BOX 7665
ASPEN, CO 81612
FRIEDBERG BARRY S
134 E 71ST ST
NEW YORK, NY 10021 -5011
BASS SID R
C/O DORSEY CROUSE
201 MAIN ST #2700
FORT WORTH, TX 76102
REDS ROAD LLC
201 MAIN ST #2600
FORT WORTH, TX 76102
IRVINE LLC
715 W. MAIN ST. #201
ASPEN, CO 81611
JANE OCH
11 DOLMA
SCARSDALE, NY 10563
3
py!/
tt
S .a�
f
:Y
PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 920 -5526 FAX# (970) 920 -5439
October 26, 2011
Mitch Haas
201 North Mill Street, Suite 9108
Aspen, CO 81611
mhaas@sopris.net
Re: 979 Aspen LLC Site Plan Review
(PID #2737 - 063 -07 -001; Case# P082 -11)
Dear Mr. Haas:
The Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined
that this application is complete. After a more detailed review of the submittal information, additional
information specific to the application may be requested in order to adequately review and process the
application. The planner in charge of the review will request the information from you directly.
Please note that it is your responsibility to mail notice by U.S. Mail to all property owners within 300'
of the subject property with the return address of the Community Development Department (copy of
notice will be mailed to you by the Community Development Department) by November 6, 2011. 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 mailing. Please submit the enclosed Affidavit of Notice by Mailing
and a photograph of the posted sign as proof of compliance with the Code. A property owner
receiving the public notice who wishes to submit comments or objections to the Community
Development by 6` day of December, 2011. If any objections to the development application are
received by this date, the Community Development Department shall continue the application to a public
hearing before the Board of County Commissioners.
2 . By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest
public way) on the 21" day of November, 2011, which is at least fifteen (15) days prior to December
6, 2011. This must be submitted prior to any approvals being granted.
If you have questions, please call Suzanne Wolff, the planner assigned to your case, at 920 -5093.
Sincerely,
Bonnie Waechtler
Administrative Assistant
Encl: Affidavit Code Section 2 -20 -100
PITKIN COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 920 -5526 FAX# (970) 920 -5439
MEMORANDUM
To: Aspen Fire Protection
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
Pitkin County Planning/Zoning
Aspen Water
FROM: Suzanne Wolff, Community Development Department
Suzanne.wolffi2(co.pitkin.co.us
Re: 979 Aspen LLC Site Plan Review
(PID 2737 - 063 -07 -001; Case P082 -11)
DATE: October 26, 2011
Attached for your review and comments are materials for an application submitted by
979 Aspen LLC. The Pitkin County Community Development Director will review the
application.
Please return your comments to me by Tuesday, December 6, 2011.
http: / /www.aspenpitkin.com/ Portals /0 /docs /county /Com %20Dev /Plannin r/L Land Use Ap
plications/P082 11 app.pdf
If you require a paper copy of this application contact Bonnie Waechtler at
bonnie .waechtler�co.pitkin.co.us or 920 -5109.
Thank you.
PITKIN COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 920 -5526 FAX# (970) 920 -5439
u L*ra 7:LA11)u 1
To: Suzanne Wolff
FROM: Susan Pearson, Zoning Officer, Revegetation Specialist
Re: 979 Red Mountain Road — Lot 2, Randall Subdivision
DATE: December 6, 2011
After reviewing the application I propose the following conditions:
A detailed drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted with each
development permit. If the total development disturbs one (1) acre or more a State
Stormwater Permit shall be applied for and obtained. All historic and natural
drainage patterns shall be maintained. Stormwater shall be detained onsite and
allow infiltration of runoff prior to discharge.
➢ A detailed revegetation plan will be required. The plan shall speak specifically to
the revegetation of steep slopes. Plan shall be reviewed and approved by Pitkin
County Community Development.
➢ A tree mitigation plan shall be submitted for the removal of any trees larger than
six (6) inch DBH.
➢ The applicant shall submit a detailed Construction Management Plan with each
development permit that addresses all phases of construction.
➢ The applicant shall provide adequate engineering of any retaining walls over four
(4) feet in height and /or any improvements to walls over four (4) feet in height. All
retaining walls shall be a maximum of seven (7) feet tall. The applicant shall also
provide adequate engineering for any soil nail retaining walls, or the like, that will
act as temporary shoring of large cuts in the hillside.
➢ The applicant shall obtain an approved Access Permit for any major improvements
to existing access road. The application shall include:
• Compliance with the current Asset Management Plan,
• All utilities shall be located within the existing driveway,
• Compliance with all requirements of the Aspen Fire Department, and
• Details on all turn- arounds and parking locations.
/ of Z
Comments:
Although called out as anomalies, the proposed development does not avoid the
disturbance of steep slopes. In order to build the home and improvements as proposed
several unstable and steep slopes are to be disturbed, this in itself is not a problem;
however, the county would like to see special attention paid to these areas in terms of
compaction and revegetation. IE: plant both grasses and shrubs or trees AND use erosion
control blankets for the revegetation of these and all other steep areas.
This office concurs: the relocation of the access is determined to improve sight distances
for entrance and egress to the property. The fire marshal requires that the driveway be
more than 16 feet in width, that the turning radii at the entrance to Red Mountain Road be
29 feet on each side of the driveway and that any culvert areas beneath the entrance have
the capacity to support 54,000 lbs on two axels. The applicant shall demonstrate that they
are able to accommodate these requirements while meeting the requirements of section 7-
20-20 (5) of the Land Use Code. At submittal of Building Permit the applicant shall
submit stamped engineered drawings demonstrating that they meet the requirements stated
above with cross sections included in the drawing set.
This is a HIGH wildfire area — post construction and prior to the issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy the applicant must submit a letter from a wildfire expert, approving the
wildfire mitigation on the property.
This property is in a scenic view protection area. When softening and screening this
development the species planted must be native and match the surrounding area in size and
species.
At Building Permit submittal, the applicant must submit a large scale Construction
Management Plan that implements any and all necessary Best Management Practices for
erosion control during construction. Please don't forget to address: the entrance to Red
Mountain Road as no soils or contaminants are permitted to leave the construction site.
L
Memo
To: Suzanne Wolff, Community Development Department
From: Ed Van Walraven, Fire Marshal
CC:
Date: December 6, 2011
Re: 979 Aspen LLC; PID 2737 - 063 -07 -001; Case P082 -11
Suzanne,
This project shall meet all of the codes and requirements of the Aspen Fire Protection District.
This includes but is not limited to Fire Department Access (International Fire Code 2003
Edition Section 503), Turning around of fire apparatus (IFC Section 503.2.5), Where required
an approved fire sprinkler system shall be provided (IFC as amended Section 903), Water
supply, a minimum of 20,000 gallons shall be provided (IFC Section 508), a detailed wildfire
mitigation plans for both landscaping and structural standpoints shall be submitted.
Confirmation of the nearest fire hydrant shall be provided to mitigate the 20,000 gallon water
supply requirement.
It is noted that several of the above issues have been addressed in the application.
Please have the applicant contact the Fire Marshal's Office for specifications on the above
requirements.
Thank you,
xi
/O-r/
PITKIN C�„JNTY COMMUNITY DEVELCDAENT
Permit Receipt
RECEIPT NUMBER 00031613
Name: 979 Aspen LLC Date:10/21/2011
Project Address: 979 RED MOUNTAIN RD
Type: check # 5050
Permit Number Fee Description
Amount
0082.2011. PLAN
PP- Flat Fee
0082.2011.PLAN
PP- Clerk Tech Fee
0082.2011.PLAN
PP- Public Notice Fee
0082.2011.PLAN
PP- Planning Eng Referral Fee
2,496.00
25.00
54.00
624.00
Total: 3,199.00