HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.291112400025 (3)Davis Horn•
PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING
November 15, 2011
Michael Kraemer
Pitkin County Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Joachim and Susan Diedrich Property at 7200 Castle Creek Road
(The Henshall Lode): Activity Envelope & Site Plan Review
(PID # 2911- 124- 00 -025)
Dear Mike:
Davis Horn Incorporated represents Joachim and Susan Diedrich (applicant) in this request for
land use approvals for 7200 Castle Creek Road, also known as the Henshall Lode. The applicant
is requesting Activity Envelope and Site Plan Review and other related land use approvals to
construct an addition to an existing single family dwelling unit, improve the access driveway and
provide mitigation for the avalanche hazard impacting the site. Attachment 1 is a Vicinity Map
which shows the location of the 8.98 +/- acre property.
This land use application includes the following sections.
• Background;
• Site Description;
• Project Description;
• Land Use Approvals; and
• Summary.
17T�:ZlI��I11ii[I
The most recent land use approval for the subject property was in 1987 when 1041 Site Plan
Review approval was granted subject to four conditions which are found on the recorded 1041
Review Plat of the Henshall Lode. This Plat was recorded at Deed Book 20, Page 4 and is found
in Attachment 2 to this application. The four conditions of approval noted on the Plat are:
The rear wall of the proposed single family house should serve as a retaining wall for the
slope behind the structure. The wall should be designed by a Structural Engineer at least
three feet above finished grade. The wall should be designed in order to retain snow in the
event of a snow slide.
2. Prior to construction a soils engineer should be retained to analyze soils on the site and
prepare a design for a perimeter drain and the proper parameters for the foundation. The
ALICE DAVIS AICP f GLENN HORN AICP
215 SOUTH MONARCH ST. •
SUITE 104 • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 • 970/925 -6587 • FAX: 970/925 -5180
O MOl
^
9
/
adovisOrof.net ghorn @rof.net
soils analysis should specifically address the effects of the old mine on the type of
foundation to be constructed.
3. The driveway must be constructed consistent with County driveway standards.
4. The applicant will be required to construct a retaining wall on the uphill side of the
driveway consisting of either boulders, railroad ties or a comparable material.
The property was developed with a single family dwelling unit in 1988 pursuant to this approval.
The lower level of the home experienced a flood with significant damage and is now is in a state
of disrepair. The applicant intends to restore the existing space and add a 2000 square foot
addition, including a new two car garage.
Please also refer to Attachment 3 which contains approval documents from the 1987 land use
approval. This packet includes previous reports and studies of the site by various experts.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The site contains 8.98 acres and is located in the AR -10 zone district. It is improved with a home
of approximately 2,000 square feet, although over half that space has been demolished and is
unfinished due to the impacts a flood.
Attachment 4 is an Existing Conditions Map and Slope Analysis. The Map shows the topography
within the proposed Activity Envelope in the categories required by the Code, lands 0 to 15% in
grade, 15 to 30% in grade, 30% to 45% in grade and lands with grades over 45 %. The house is
located on a level bench.
The first 350 lineal feet (approximately) of the driveway accessing the house is not on the subject
property but is on US Forest Service, White River National Forest lands. There is an access
easement permitting the use of these federal lands for the lower portion of the driveway. See
Attachment 5 for a copy of this easement with the Forest Service.
The uphill (east) side of the lower portion of the driveway crossing Forest Service land is
somewhat unstable due to a failing cut which encroaches onto steep slopes. This is not
considered by the experts to be a true hazard, but the unstable slopes do need periodic
maintenance, a situation which would be greatly improved by minor mitigation recommended by
the geologist who studied the site.
Attachment 6 is a 2005 digital orthophoto of the site prepared by the Aspen /Pitkin GIS
Department. The existing home and driveway and their relation to Castle Creek and Little Annie
Roads are shown on this GIS photo. The subject property at Castle Creek Road is at an elevation
of approximately 8,970 feet and rises to around 9,070 at the top, north side of the proposed
Activity Envelope. There is a fairly mature aspen forest above the existing house up to around
9,200 and then sagebrush cover above the aspen forest up to around 9,400 feet in elevation.
2
00000.2
The house is not easily visible from Castle Creek Road approaching the property from the Aspen
side traveling toward Ashcroft. The more visible aspect of the house from Castle Creek Road is
from vehicles traveling down Castle Creek Road from Ashcroft at one short vantage point where
the house is visible at the end of the driveway for about 1/8 of a mile. The curve in the Road,
topography and existing vegetation buffers the views from most points along Castle Creek Road.
The home is relatively small, but otherwise typical of homes in this rural Castle Creek setting.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting land use approvals to accomplish the following:
o Develop a 2,000 square foot addition to the existing house including a two car
garage;
o Widening the existing driveway to 16 feet and extending the driveway
approximately 100 feet to improve the intersection of the driveway with Castle
Creek Road;
o The installation of avalanche mitigation as recommended by Art I. Mears, P.E.
Avalanche- Control Engineer;
o Mitigation for the steep slopes including
• potentially unstable slopes at the driveway entrance on Forest Service lands
• slopes where the avalanche mitigation and addition is to occur; and
• crossing slopes to replace the existing pipe line which connects the existing
waste water disposal system to the home
• slope mitigation on Forest Service land on the lower section of driveway.
The avalanche and slope mitigation are pursuant to the recommendations of several experts and
are based upon numerous reports and recommendations of previous studies and two current
studies of the subject property. Please refer to the two current studies found in Attachment 7, an
November 15, 2011 Geology Report on the subject property by Nicholas Lampiris, PhD
Consulting Geologist and Attachment 8, a July 9, 2011 avalanche exposure and mitigation
feasibility report by Arthur I. Mears, Avalanche Control Engineer.
The proposed expansion is to include a 2,000 square foot addition (including a one car garage and
one car carport) generally located above and below the existing deck that extends out from the
existing house to the east, toward the driveway. The garage and carport will be to the east of the
house. A drawing of the proposed driveway improvements is presented in Attachment 9 and
visual simulations of the proposed improvements from Castle Creek Road are found in
Attachment 10.
LAND USE APPROVALS
The following sections address the land use reviews identified in the pre- application conference
summary sheet which appears as Attachment 11. The applicant is seeking the following land use
approvals:
• Activity Envelope and Site Plan Criteria for Approval (Section 2 -30 -20 g);
• Activity Envelope and Site Plan (Section 7 -10 -50 & 60);
• Site Preparation and Grading (Section 7- 20 -10);
• Steep and Potentially Unstable Slopes (Section 7- 20 -20):
• Water Courses and Drainage (Section 7- 20 -30);
• Geologic Hazards (Section 7- 20 -50(a) Avalanche);
• Geologic Hazards (Section 7- 20 -50(e) Talus Slope);
• Wildfire Hazard — Mapped in a Low Wildfire Hazard Area (Section 7- 20 -60);
• Landscaping and Vegetation Protection (Section 7 -20 -130);
• Standards for Scenic View Protection Areas (Section 7 -20 -120 (d);
The following sections of the land use application demonstrate compliance with the preceding
Land Use Code standards.
Activity Envelope Criteria for Approval
Section 2- 30- 20(g)(3)
An application for designation of an Activity Envelope shall be approved if it complies with the
standards and criteria established in Sec. 7- 10 -50. If the applicant chooses to apply for definition
of an Activity Envelope separately from approval of a Site Plan , the Activity Envelope shall be
designed to accommodate the largest home and related septic field possible on the site pursuant
to Table 5 -1 after the use of TDRs or a GMQS allocation to increase house size. The definition of
an Activity Envelope based on a maximum house size and septic field shall not create any
presumption that a Site Plan for a house at the same size can or will be approved pursuant to this
Land Use Code. The applicant may specify that the Activity Envelope is being created for a house
smaller than the maximum allowed under Table 5 -1, and in that event the Activity Envelope will be
designed to accommodate a house and septic field of that size. Where the property contains
Constrained Area s, the Community Development Department staff shall follow those Priorities for
Locating New Activity or Development listed in Sec. 7- 10 -60. Actual siting of the septic field shall
require final approval pursuant to the Environmental Health and Natural Resources On -Site
Wastewater Treatment System regulations.
The proposed Activity Envelope is depicted on Attachment 12. The Activity Envelope has been
designed to avoid constrained areas to the maximum extent possible. Constrained areas include a
Blue Zone Avalanche Hazard and steep and potentially unstable slopes. There are areas with
slopes in excess of 30 percent within the Activity Envelope, but development in this area is
necessary to accomplish the mitigation required by the Avalanche - Control Engineer.
al
UIaiJ�IU��
Site Plan and Activity Envelope
Section 7 -10 -50 & 60
The intent of this Chapter 7 is to allow activities and development to take place where they comply
with the provisions of this Land Use Code and with the Pitkin County Comprehensive Plan for the
area. Compliance will generally involve avoidance of "Constrained Areas" through the
identification of an "Activity Envelope," as well as approval of a Site Plan. For purposes of Chapter
7, "Constrained Areas" include all areas included in each of the following categories, as defined
and regulated by this Land Use Code: (i) Areas of Statewide Interest listed in C.R.S. 24- 65.1.101 et.
seq.), (ii) steep and potentially unstable slopes, (iii) water courses, drainage channels, and areas
subject to erosion, (iv) floodplain hazard areas, (v) geological hazard areas, (vi) severe or low to
moderate wildfire hazard areas, (vii) wildlife habitat areas, (viii) river and stream corridors and
wetlands (ix) irrigated lands for food or crop production, (x) historic preservation areas, and (xi)
archeological resource areas.
The Site Plan process incorporates an "Activity Envelope" approach in which the County staff
works with the applicant to determine which portions of the site (if any) would permit the proposed
activity or development to be conducted in compliance with this Land Use Code and in conformity
with the Comprehensive Plan for the area. In general, this process will involve both a
determination of (i) which portions of the site are not available for development because of the
existence of Constrained Areas, and (ii) of the remaining portions of the site, which areas would
accommodate the activity or development so as to minimize impacts on surrounding properties,
maximize compliance with the requirements of the development standards in this Chapter 7, and
maximize compliance with the Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives.
In general, the defined Activity Envelope for development of primary uses shall be large enough to
accommodate the proposed principal use of the property and traditional permitted accessory
structures, infrastructure (roads and septic systems), and uses, but should not be significantly
larger than the area needed for such structures. In the case of a site with few Constrained Areas,
the defined Activity Envelope may include more than one potential building site for a new single
family home. The defined Activity Envelope may include non- contiguous areas (including separate
areas for septic fields, landscaping, driveways to public roads, mitigation measures required in
connection with any provision of this Chapter 7, and/or areas to be disturbed only during
construction on the property — including staging areas and materials storage areas). Construction
of trails will not require an Activity Envelope analysis except as required by Sec. 7- 20 -50.
Clearing, grading, grubbing, earthmoving that exceeds fifty (50) cubic yards, or changes in the
natural drainage of the site shall occur only after an Activity Envelope has been defined and all
applicable local, state and federal permits have been obtained. In addition, Site Plan Approval is
required if these activities will occur on a property within a Scenic View Protection Area.
Activity Envelope and Site Plan Review for a Stream Restoration Project shall adhere to all
development standards in 7 -20-40 and 7 -20.80 and shall be reviewed by the BOCC as set forth in
Table 2 -1.
Once an Activity Envelope has been defined, the natural grade, topography, vegetation and
drainage of areas outside the defined areas shall not be disturbed except as specifically permitted
in this Land Use Code. Prior to any development activity on the parcel, the boundaries of the
Activity Envelope shall be identified with construction fencing, and such fencing shall remain in
place until development has been completed.
While it is preferable to obtain approval of an Activity Envelope as part of the Site Plan approval
process, applicants who are not prepared to submit a Site Plan for a specific structure may request
approval of an Activity Envelope separately. Prior to the issuance of a Development Permit, the
applicant shall be required to apply for and obtain approval of a Site Plan confirming that the
Jial0J
proposed development is consistent with the defined Activity Envelope and with other standards in
this Land Use Code not considered at the time the Activity Envelope was defined.
The standards in this Chapter 7 shall be used (1) to identify the Activity Envelope on a property, (ii)
to review and approve the Site Plan for proposed development, and (iii) to regulate development
within the Activity Envelope pursuant to the Site Plan. Development Standards in this Chapter 7
which are to be reviewed as part of Activity Envelope and Site Plan review are set forth in Table 7 -1
below.
(July, 2006,
This section of the Land Use Code explains the Site Plan and Activity Envelope review and
approval process. The applicant has followed the process outlined in this section of the Code to
prepare the Activity Envelope Plan given in Attachment 12. The key site planning considerations
on the subject site are avoiding constrained areas as much as possible and developing an Activity
Envelope which is compatible with neighboring properties and consistent with the Pitkin County
Master Plan Overview and the Maroon /Castle Creek Master Plan. The proposed Activity
Envelope and Site Plan is the product of these considerations. The Activity Envelope proposed is
as small as possible given the constraints of the site and the area necessary to accomplish
appropriate mitigation of the avalanche hazard and the potentially unstable slopes. The existing
home was built in 1987 pursuant to a less restrictive, previous Land Use Code. The mitigation
proposed at this time will create a much safer site for the residents and visitors to the site.
Site Preparation and Grading:
Section 7 -20 -10
(a) Grading and Fill Placement
Grading and filling on a site shall take place only within a defined Activity Envelope . All grading
and fill placement that exceeds fifty (50) cubic yards shall be indicated on the Site Plan .
The applicant will comply with this Code standard.
(b) Clearing, Grubbing, and Vegetation Removal
Clearing or grubbing of land, or removal of vegetation shall take place only within an approved
Activity Envelope , except removal of noxious weeds may occur outside of an Activity Envelope.
Each Site Plan shall document compliance with the requirements of this Sec. 7- 20 -10(b) and Sec.
7.20.130.
Clearing, grubbing and vegetation removal shall be limited to the Activity Envelope as depicted
on Attachment 12. Site disturbance will be minimal.
(c) Tree Removal and Mitigation
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, to the maximum extent practicable. Any tree that (i) is diseased,
or (ii) is required to be removed pursuant to the provisions of Sec. 7- 20 -60, as those requirements
may be varied by a wildfire expert approved by the County, may be removed and no replacement
shall be required. All revegetation shall also comply with the Pitkin County Revegetation
Guidelines. Required replacement trees that do not survive for at least one (1) year after
installation shall be replaced at the owner's expense, and the County may require financial security
for such replacement pursuant to Sec. 7- 20.130(b)(7).
tiUi I ilb6
Tree removal will be limited to the Activity Envelope and should be minimal. It is anticipated
that only two trees will be removed and these will be replaced in an area nearby which will screen
the proposed Geobrugg avalanche fence. In the event any tree six inches or larger diameter at
breast height (D.B.H.) are removed, they will be replaced with one or more trees with a total
D.B.H. at least equal to the caliper of the tree (s) removed.
(d) Protection of Natural Terrain
The County Engineer or Community Development Director shall suggest and may require design
and construction techniques that lessen or mitigate any physical and visual damage caused by the
proposed activity or development to Constrained Area s or to the natural terrain, stream
vegetation, and other natural features of the landscape within the Activity Envelope . Techniques
shall include, but are not limited to:
(1) REVEGETATION
Revegetation and reforestation utilizing native or similar horticultural material, to be
completed during the first planting season after construction; where vegetation is
removed, it shall be replaced with vegetation that will reach similar density and height
to that removed within two (2) years following conclusion of construction.
(2) TOPSOIL
Removing and saving topsoil prior to any grading or excavating and replacement for
revegetation.
(3) WEED PREVENTION
Weed prevention, thistle management, and prohibition of non - native plants, which may
include reducing animal damage to vegetation cover, as determined by the United
States Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey.
(4) UTILITY INSTALLATION
Locating and installing utilities in a manner minimizing damage to the natural
environment and scenic quality.
(5) EROSION, SEDIMENTATION, AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
(a) Land uses shall:
1. Not cause erosion problems and, if practicable, retain all soil on site;
2. Minimize disturbance of natural vegetation and soil cover;
3. Ensure that all cuts and fills are adequately designed and vegetated to control
erosion as well as stability of the slope area;
4. Ensure that natural drainage patterns are preserved and protected from increased
water flows that subject existing channels and adjacent areas to increased
erosion; and
5. Preserve natural vegetation and soil cover within those buffer distances adjacent to
rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs and wetlands /riparian areas established in Sec.
7- 20 -80.
(b) Mitigation measures identified in an approved erosion, sedimentation, or stormwater
management plan shall remain in place until revegetation is viable.
The applicant will comply with these standards. Site disturbance will be limited to the Activity
Envelope which includes the area in front of the existing house toward the driveway where the
addition is proposed, the Geobrugg avalanche fence uphill of the existing house, the line
connecting the WWDS on the southeast comer of the site to the site, the uphill side of the lower
portion of the driveway (a trench and Jerseys barriers) and the widening of the driveway to 16 feet
in width. All the proposed improvements related to mitigation have no impact on surrounding
neighbors or uses and will only serve to make the property safer from potential avalanche hazards
and potentially unstable slopes. The home addition and WWDS line replacement will have
minimal impact as well.
Steep and Potentially Unstable Slopes
Section 7 -20 -20
Consulting Geologist Nick Lampiris has addressed the steep and potentially unstable slopes
hazard on the site in his report in Attachment 7. In addition to Lampiris' previous August 20,
1987 geology report on the property for the 1987 land use review and approval, he also studied all
other available reports including studies by Art Mears, a geotechnical report by Chen and
Associates and a letter from Forest Service addressing only the steep cut at the driveway entrance.
There are three steep slope issues discussed in Lampiris' current, November 15, 2011 report:
(1) the area around the proposed avalanche fence will be 30 to 45% in grade;
(2) the replacement of the existing pipe line connecting the waste water disposal
system to the house will cross slopes in excess of 30 %; and
(3) the talus slopes above the lower driveway.
These three issues related to steep and potentially unstable slopes in Lampiris' report are
discussed below followed by the specific standards of Section 7- 20 -20. The standards are
addressed and compliance with the Code standards is shown.
Avalanche Mitigation Fence
The avalanche mitigation fence will be constructed on slopes between 30% and 45 %. There is no
other possible location for this fence. The hazard itself dictates the location required for the
mitigation. Lampiris notes that once the avalanche mitigation is in place, the slope will be
restored with a resulting trench up slope to catch whatever snow may reach the mitigation fence.
Lampiris then states that:
"Based upon my site observations and conversations with the general contractor and the
excavator, it should be possible to construct the avalanche mitigation device on the slope to
the northeast of the house without destabilizing slopes which are greater than 30 %."
Later in his report, Lampiris states that this issue has been adequately addressed for purposes of
adhering to the Land Use Code.
Line Connecting the Waste Water Disposal System to the House
t _1i �Lru
The applicant proposes to replace the existing pipe line connecting the existing waste water
disposal system on the southwest corner of the property to the existing house. This pipe will be
buried in a trench which will cross slopes greater than 30 %. Lampiris has addressed this
connection as follows:
"This pipe will be buried in a trench cut to a depth of about 4 or 5 feet and will be less
than 18 inches in width across a slope greater than 30 %. As it will be rapidly back - filled
after the pipe is laid, this should not negatively affect the stability of the slopes in that
vicinity. Water should not be allowed to collect in this trench during the emplacement as
this could negatively affect stability."
Later in his report, Lampiris states that this issue has been adequately addressed for the purposes
of adhering to the Land Use Code.
Driveway Improvements
After reviewing recommendations from the Forest Service on the lower section of the driveway
with talus slope above, Lampiris states:
"I concur with the Forest Service conclusions to leave the slope in its natural state, as the
sloughing will be minor and infrequent. During spring run -off occasional clearing of
sloughed material will be needed. If the owner places Jersey barriers at the base of this slope
along the driveway, this will minimize material reaching the driveway. This will improve
safety to this part of the driveway and Castle Creek Road. Any modification of the driveway
that does not entail cutting into the slope complies with Section 7 -20 -20 c 4 of the Code"
The proposed improvements to the driveway have been designed to comply with the requirements
of the Code. Later in his report, Lampiris states that this issue has been adequately addressed for
purposes of adhering to the Land Use Code.
Section 7 -20 -20 Steep and Potentially Unstable Slopes
The following provisions shall apply whenever steep slopes or potentially unstable slopes occur
within the Activity Envelope, but do not apply when the Activity Envelope have been defined to
avoid such areas.
(a) Slope Delineation
Slopes shall be delineated within the Activity Envelope with two (2) foot contour intervals. Slopes
between each two (2) foot contour in each of the following categories shall be designated by a
distinct graphic pattern.
(1) Slopes that are fifteen (15) percent or greater, but less than thirty (30) percent;
(2) Slopes that are thirty (30) percent or greater, but less than forty -five (45) percent;
(3) Slopes that are forty -five (45) percent or greater.
Refer to Attachment 3, the Existing Conditions Map and Slopes Analysis. Slope Delineation on
the Map depicts slopes in the categories identified in this section. As the proposed mitigation is
for potential avalanche hazard and potentially unstable slopes, areas of land with grades just over
30% must be disturbed to accomplish the necessary mitigation. The home addition is proposed
for the most level portion of the site, a bench which was created with the original construction of
the home in 1987.
Forty -five (45) Percent or Greater Gradient
Development is prohibited on slopes with a slope gradient equal to or exceeding forty -five (45)
percent, except:
(4) Where:
The lot is in a legally platted subdivision, recorded prior to 1972, and
There is no alternative building site that avoids areas of slope exceeding forty-five (45)
percent, and
An engineer or geologist licensed in the State of Colorado demonstrates that the site can
be engineered so that there is no hazard posed by the location of development on such
slopes, and
The proposed development complies with all standards in subsection (c)(1) below
applicable to slopes of thirty (30) percent or greater; and
(5) As provided in subsections (c)(3) or (c)(4) below.
(b) Thirty (30) Percent or Greater Gradient
Development is prohibited on slopes with a slope gradient of thirty (30) percent or more, except as
follows:
(1) NO ALTERNATIVE BUILDING SITE
If there is no alternative building site available on the parcel with slopes of less than thirty (30)
percent, development (but not roads or driveways) may be approved by the Community
Development Department through the Site Plan process subject to the following development
standards:
An engineer or geologist licensed in the State of Colorado shall be required to demonstrate
that the site can be engineered so that there is no hazard posed by the location of
development on such slopes.
To the extent possible, the development shall be designed so as to: avoid adding water to
the site that would cause decreased stability; avoid removing the toe of the slope without
adequate mechanical support; avoid increasing the weight load on top of the slope; re-
contour disturbed slopes so that they can be re- vegetated; avoid steepening of existing
slopes.
Any development approved pursuant to this section shall be conditioned upon compliance
with the engineer or geologist's recommended mitigation measures.
Following Site Plan review, and prior to the application for a Building Permit, a precise
engineer or geologist approved mitigation plan shall be submitted by the applicant that
shows the area of disturbed slope, any re- grading required and the exact size and location
of all mitigation devices. The mitigation measures must be determined by the Community
Development Department to be the least visually and ecologically obtrusive alternatives.
(2) PARCELS WITH SOME AREAS OF LESS THAN THIRTY (30) PERCENT SLOPES
If a parcel contains areas with less than thirty (30) percent slopes that are accessible by a
road or driveway that meets the requirements of this Land Use Code, but such areas (after
exclusion of Constrained Areas) are not large enough to develop the floor area permitted
10
f.tjl,41�(
by underlying zoning, then areas containing slopes of less than thirty (30) percent must be
utilized to develop as much of the floor area as can feasibly be accommodated. Areas
containing slopes of thirty (30) percent or greater (but not exceeding forty -five (45) percent)
may then be used for development of the remainder of the permitted floor area. The
resulting area specified for development should define a contiguous area with slopes of
less than thirty (30) percent to the maximum extent practicable.
Development on slopes equal to or exceeding thirty (30) percent (but less than or equal to
forty -five (45) percent) shall be subject to the development standards in Sec. 7-20 -
20(c)(1)(a) through (d)., and shall minimize disruption of natural terrain as viewed from any
of those roads identified in Sec. 7- 20- 120(b).
(3) MINOR SLOPE ANOMALY
Through the Site Plan process, exceptions for minor changes in slope- development may be
permitted on lands that have a slope equal to or in excess of thirty (30) percent when the
slope is due to the presence of a minor natural or minor man-made change in the gradient
of a continuous slope, provided that an engineer or geologist licensed in the State of
Colorado demonstrates that the slope's ground surface is not prone to instability or failure
and that the proposed development will not cause greater instability or increase the
potential for slope failure.
Please refer to the reports from Nick Lampiris, Consulting Geologist and Arthur I. Mears,
Avalanche Control Engineer in Attachments 7 and 8. These experts have determined that the
constraints have been adequately addressed for purposes of adhering to the Land Use Code
requirements. There is no alternative location for the avalanche and slope mitigation as the
locations are dictated by the location of the hazard. The replacement of the pipe line to the waste
water disposal system will cross slopes between 30 to 34% in grade, but will be completely
quickly and the slope will be re- stabilized as soon as practical.
(c) Less Than Thirty (30) Percent Gradient
Development is permitted on slopes with less than a thirty (30) percent gradient.
(d) Additional Standards
All activity and development on slopes with a gradient of thirty (30) percent or greater shall comply
with the following standards. '
(1) DENSITY SLOPE REDUCTION
If more than thirty (30) percent of the total land area of parcel is encumbered with slopes of forty-
five (45) percent or greater, the maximum permitted density of development on the parcel shall be
reduced pursuant to Sec. 5- 10 -20.
This standard is not applicable as no density reduction is necessary. An addition to an existing
house, driveway improvements, avalanche and slope mitigation are proposed.
(2) LIMITS ON CHANGING NATURAL GRADE
The original, natural grade of areas within the Activity Envelope shall not be raised or
lowered more than four (4) feet at any point for construction of any structure or
improvement, except:
11
606 it
(a) The site's original grade may be raised or lowered a maximum of seven (7) feet if
retaining walls are used to reduce the steepness of man -made slopes, provided that
the retaining walls comply with the requirements set forth in this section.
(b) As necessary to construct a driveway from the street to a garage or parking area,
grade changes or retaining walls up to seven (7) feet may be allowed.
All proposed development will be designed to comply with this standard.
(3) GRADING FOR ACCESSORY BUILDING PADS DISCOURAGED
Separate building pads for accessory buildings and structures other than garages, such as tennis
courts, swimming pools, outbuildings, and similar facilities, shall be discouraged except where the
natural slope is twenty (20) percent or less.
Accessory building pads are not proposed.
(4) LIMITS ON GRADED, EXCAVATED, OR FILLED MAN -MADE SLOPES
(a) Where grading, excavation, or filling is necessary, grading, excavation, or filling to create
slopes of twenty -five (25) percent or less is strongly encouraged.
(b) Graded or filled man -made slopes shall not exceed a slope of fifty (50) percent.
(c) Cut man -made surfaces or slopes shall not exceed a slope of fifty (50) percent unless
a soils engineering or a geotechnical report is furnished stating that the site has been
investigated and that in the opinion of a qualified professional a cut at a steeper slope
will be stable and not create a hazard to public or private property.
(d) All cut, filled, and graded slopes shall be recontoured to the natural, varied contour
of the surrounding terrain.
The applicant will comply with these standards.
(5) GUIDELINES FOR RETAINING WALLS
(a) Use of retaining walls is encouraged to reduce the steepness of man -made slopes and to
provide planting pockets conducive to revegetation. Retaining walls may be permitted to
support steep slopes but should not exceed four (4) feet in height from the finished grade,
except for (i) a structure's foundation wall, or (ii) as necessary to construct a driveway
from the street to a garage or parking area, or (iii) as otherwise expressly allowed by this
Land Use Code.
(b) A retaining wall should not exceed seven (7) feet in height. Retaining walls greater than
four (4) feet in height shall be supported by appropriate engineering and reviewed and
approved by the County Engineer.
(c) Terracing should be limited to two (2) tiers. The width of the terrace between any two four
(4) foot vertical retaining walls should be at least three (3) feet. Retaining walls higher than
four (4) feet should be separated from any other retaining wall by a minimum of five (5)
horizontal feet. Terraces created between retaining walls shall be permanently landscaped
or revegetated with native vegetation.
12
U .; , a C_
(d) Retaining walls used to support existing road cuts may exceed (a), (b), and (c) of these
guidelines.
There is an existing retaining wall located east of the house just west of the proposed Geobrugg
fence. The new garage and carport will be constructed adjacent to the existing retaining wall.
The wall will not be disturbed. A portion of the existing boulder retaining wall located south of
the house will be shifted slightly to the east.
(6) STANDARDS FOR RETAINING WALLS
(a) Retaining walls shall be faced with stone or earth - colored materials similar to the
surrounding natural landscape.
(b) All retaining walls shall comply with the adopted building code, except that when any
provision of this section conflicts with any provision set forth in the adopted building code,
the more restrictive provision shall apply.
The applicant will comply with this standard, when applicable. All materials used will be natural
or earth colored to blend with the surrounding natural landscape. The proposed Jersey barriers
will be earth colored and will blend with the surrounding natural landscape as well.
(7) DETENTIONISTORMWATER FACILITIES
Where detention basins and other storm and erosion control facilities may be required, any
negative visual and aesthetic impacts on the natural landscape and topography shall be minimized
to the maximum extent practicable.
No detention basins or storm and erosion control facilities are required. This standard is not
applicable.
(8) UTILITY CUTS
Utility cuts on any slope with a gradient of fifteen (15) percent or greater shall be reviewed through
the Site Plan process.
No public utilities cuts are proposed or necessary. The improvements to the WWDS will comply.
(9) REVEGETATION REQUIRED
Any slope exposed or created in new development shall be landscaped or revegetated pursuant to
the standards and provisions set forth in Sec. 7 -20 -130 as well as the revegetation standards in the
Pitkin County Revegetation Guide, the Pitkin County Landscaping Guidelines maintained by the
Pitkin County Public Works Department, and the Roadway Landscaping Guidelines included in the
Pitkin County Asset Management Plan, as applicable. In the event those documents contain
inconsistent requirements with regard to a particular area of land, the stricter provision shall
govern.
The applicant will comply with this Code standard.
13
RU x„11.3
Water Courses and Drainage
Section 7 -20 -30
This section demonstrates compliance with the Land Use Code standards for Water Courses and
Drainage.
(a) Applicability
The water resources standards in this Sec. 7 -20 -30 are applicable to all development.
(b) Encroachment or Channeling
Encroachment or channeling activities in a river, stream (including intermittent streams), pond, wet
meadow, or wetland are also subject to the requirements of Secs. 7 -20-40 and 7 -20 -80 of this Land
Use Code, as well as all other applicable state and federal statutes and regulations (including, but
not limited to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permitting requirements of Section 404 of the
Federal Clean Water Act).
The applicant is not proposing to alter any rivers, streams, ponds, wet meadows or wetlands on
the site or in the site vicinity.
(C) Drainage
(1) GENERAL
Activities and development shall provide for:
Maintenance of historical flow patterns and runoff amounts to reasonably preserve the natural
character of an area and prevent property damage attributable to runoff rate and velocity
increases, diversions, unplanned ponding and/or stormwater runoff;
The unimpeded flow of natural water courses and ditches;
Adequate drainage for all low points;
A drainage system designed to account for an entire drainage basin capable of
accommodating runoff from a proposed development and, where applicable, the runoff from
areas adjacent and upstream;
Maintenance of drainage systems; and
On -site treatment of stormwater by use of best management practices designed to detain and
allow infiltration of runoff prior to discharge to any water body.
(10) Runoff Volumes
Runoff volumes and peaks within a development site and in areas affected by runoff from a
development site shall not exceed the runoff levels attributable to the undeveloped site as
determined by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado.
This standard is not applicable to the site.
14
(e) Groundwater
Activities and development shall not result in the introduction of any contaminants to groundwater,
or interfere with any recharge area or aquifer.
The applicant will comply with this Land Use Code standard.
(f) Irrigated Areas
Activities and development shall:
(1) Not adversely affect the adequacy of water supplies available for the irrigation of
agricultural lands; and
(2) Not adversely affect the exercise of any existing and decreed irrigation water right.
There are no portions of the property which are or ever have been irrigated. Water rights and
irrigation will not be affected by the proposed development.
(g) Irrigation Ditches
Activities and development shall:
(1) ACCESS
Provide for access to irrigation ditches by ditch owners and to the public if a ditch is to be, or is
part of the Pitkin County Open Space and Trails System or other public property.
(2) PREVENTING LEAKAGE
Ensure that no building shall be constructed immediately downhill of a ditch unless the ditch can
be placed in a culvert, lined, or otherwise treated to avoid leakage of water downhill towards the
building.
(3) AVOID FLOODING
Design land uses to avoid flooding problems from flood irrigation.
(4) AVOID SEEPAGE
Place basements and soil absorption on -site wastewater treatment systems in locations where
they will not be impacted by flood irrigation or seepage from irrigation ditches.
There are no irrigation ditches on the property and no irrigation ditches will be affected by the
proposed plan.
(h) Sedimentation
Activities and development shall:
(1) CONTROL DURING CONSTRUCTION
Provide adequate sedimentation control throughout all phases of development.
(2) SEDIMENTATION
Retain sediment produced by soil disturbances on site where the disturbance occurs and prohibit
run -off into any water body, wetlands, or riparian area.
(3) REVEGETATION
Revegetate clearing and grading as soon as possible, but in no event longer than one growing
season after conclusion of development on a site.
15
The applicant will comply with these standards when applicable.
(i) Water Quality
(1) All land uses shall comply with those setbacks required by Sec. 7 -20 -80 and those
setbacks required by Table 5 -1.
(2) Activities and development shall comply with all state and federal statutes and
regulations concerning the protection and enhancement of water quality (including but
not limited to the requirements of all state and federal permitting programs).
(3) Activities and development shall 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, and shall comply with state regulations
pertaining to maintenance of those classifications.
The applicant shall comply with these standards.
Q) Efficient Water Use
Activities and development shall emphasize the most efficient use of water, including, to the extent
permissible under law, the re- cycling and reuse of water.
The applicant will comply with these standards when applicable.
Geologic Hazards
Section 7 -20 -50
The geologic constraints on the subject site are potential avalanche hazard (Section 7- 20 -50(a)
and talus slopes (Section 7- 20- 50(e). These have been addressed in reports from an Avalanche -
Control Engineer Arthur 1. Mears and Consulting Geologist Nicholas Lampiris. Their reports are
found in Attachments 7 and 8 to this application.
This section demonstrates compliance first with Section 7 -20 -50 (a) of the Code, regarding
avalanche hazard, then Section 7- 20- 50(e), Talus Slopes. Standards appear in bold followed by
the applicant's responses.
Section 7- 20 -50(a)
Avalanche Areas
Restrictions on activities or development in avalanche areas are set forth in subsections (1) and (2)
below. In the event that an application is denied because there is no hazard -free area on a site, or
because the proposed activity or development does not comply with the restrictions in this
section, and an appeal is later granted pursuant to Sec. 2- 20.180 or relief is granted pursuant to
Sec. 2 -40 -90 or Sec. 2 -40 -130, the proposed activity or development shall incorporate hazard
mitigation according to the standards in subsection (3) below.
HIGH HAZARD AVALANCHE ZONE
Development is prohibited within High Hazard Avalanche Zones.
Developed within a high hazard avalanche zone is not proposed.
16
MODERATE HAZARD AVALANCHE ZONE
Development within a Moderate Hazard Avalanche Zone may only be permitted under the following
circumstances:
If an entire property is affected by the Moderate Hazard Avalanche Zone, development may be
permitted if the hazard can be adequately mitigated to ensure public safety pursuant to the
standards in subsection (3) below.
In the event that development outside of the Moderate Hazard Avalanche Zone will result in
significant incursions into or impacts on Constrained Areas, the County may, in its discretion,
approve such development with adequate mitigation measures to assure the safety of the
occupants of the property.
If the County finds that other hazards present on a property outweigh the risks associated with
development in the Moderate Hazard Avalanche Zone, the County may, in its discretion, grant
approval to such project subject to compliance with the mitigation measures specified in
subsection (3) below.
MITIGATION STANDARDS
Development shall be restricted to the least hazardous area of a project site.
If structural avalanche defenses are required to protect people or structures, they shall be
designed by a certified professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado to withstand
avalanche impact forces.
Clear- cutting or other large scale removal of vegetation, particularly within avalanche path
starting zones, shall be prohibited.
Extractive operations are prohibited within avalanche hazard zones during the winter unless
there is an approved program of avalanche control and defense measures.
Utility lines or pipes crossing avalanche hazard zones shall be buried. Surface pipes, poles or
towers for suspended transmission lines in avalanche hazard zones shall be protected by
utilizing avalanche diversion methods or protection structures.
Roads intended for winter use shall avoid avalanche hazard areas. If the County finds that it is
not possible to construct a road that avoids high or moderate avalanche hazard areas, then
the County may approve a road subject to site specific mitigation methods. Roads that must
cross hazardous areas shall be designed to limit exposure and utilize avalanche control
practices to reduce the danger along exposed road segments. Where the main access road to
a proposed development is crossed by an avalanche path, a secondary access may be
required.
Warning signs shall be placed along commonly traveled winter roads and trails that cross
avalanche hazard zones.
Property owners who develop in avalanche areas or obtain driveway access through
avalanche areas shall bear the costs of any avalanche control measures that may be required
to mitigate the hazard.
Attachment 8 is a July 9, 2011 and a July 8, 2008 report from Arthur I. Mears, P. E. Avalanche
Control Engineer, on avalanche exposure and mitigation on the subject property. As mentioned
previously, Mears' report finds that based upon avalanche - dynamics calculations, the house is
located in the moderate (blue) avalanche hazard zone. The Pitkin County Land Use Code defines
the blue avalanche hazard zone as:
17
"An area within which avalanches will occur at return periods in excess of thirty
(30) years and/or will have impact pressures of less than six hundred thirty (630)
pounds per square foot. Avalanche frequency and impact pressures decrease
toward the outer limits of this zone. When large avalanches occur and run to the
outer boundaries of this zone, they can be very destructive in spite of their reduced
probability and pressures. The Avalanche Moderate Hazard Zone is also known as
the Blue Zone. "
Pursuant to the Code, development may be permitted in this zone but structural protection is
required to protect buildings and other structures used by people. The recommendations for
structural protection will be met with the proposed installation of the avalanche mitigation
fencing. Although the proposed avalanche fence is located in an area with slopes between 30 to
45 %, there is no other possible location for this avalanche protection. The location of the
avalanche hazard dictates the location of the mitigation. Steep slopes are addressed elsewhere in
this application.
Mears' avalanche report discusses the terrain on and near the subject site, the avalanche potential,
vegetation, forest indicators and avalanche frequency, avalanche dynamics and structural
defenses. He also addresses the avalanche hazard on the driveway access. His recommendations
will be followed and the mitigation will comply with this standard.
Section 7- 20 -50(e) Talus Slopes
Section 7- 20 -50(e) addresses talus slopes as a geologic hazard. The Code states that
" In the event there is not an adequate hazard free area on a site, activities and development
associated with residential, commercial, industrial and high impact recreational activity
may be permitted on talus slope only if design and construction stabilization and
maintenance measures approved by a qualified professional geologist or engineer and the
County are utilized and
(1) Developments are designed to withstand downslope movement;
(2) Foundations and utilities in talus slope areas are buried below the active surface;
(3) Site disturbance in talus slope is minimized to avoid inducing slope instability; and
(4) The toe of a talus slope is not removed without providing adequate mechanical support.
The talus slope impacting the subject site is above the lower section of the existing driveway.
This section of the driveway is not on the subject site, but is on Forest Service property and there
is an easement to access the subject property across this Forest Service land. As discussed
previously, after reviewing recommendations from the Forest Service on the slope above the
driveway, Consulting Geologist Nicholas Lampiris states:
"I concur with the Forest Service conclusions to leave the slope in its natural state, as the
sloughing will be minor and infrequent. During spring run -off occasional clearing of
sloughed material will be needed. If the owner places jersey barriers at the base of this slope
along the driveway, this will minimize material reaching the driveway. This will improve
safety to this part of the driveway and Castle Creek Road. Any modification of the driveway
18
U?Ji i1v
that does not entail cutting into the talus slope complies with Section 7- 20- 20.c.4 of the Code
which addresses steep and potentially unstable slopes pertaining to existing roads and
driveways."
Lampiris also states that the issue has been adequately addressed for purposes of adhering to the
Land Use Code.
The applicant is proposing to widen the driveway to 16 feet and to extend the driveway to correct
a difficult angle of the driveway's intersection with Castle Creek Road. The short extension will
improve the turning radius onto the driveway from Castle Creek Road. These improvements will
better meet the requirements for fire access and will improve safety along the driveway. Pursuant
to recommendations in Nicholas Lampiris' geologic report, the applicant will dig a trench along
the lower section of the driveway and place Jersey barriers in the trench to catch material before it
gets to the driveway. These improvements will also increase safety along the lower driveway and
will mitigate the potentially unstable slopes there which have been determined to not be a true
hazard, but which require periodic maintenance.
The applicant will comply with this standard.
Wildfire Hazard
Section 7 -20 -60
The subject site is mapped as being within a low wildfire hazard area. The applicant agrees to
comply with the numerous applicable requirements of the Code regarding low wildfire hazard.
Development within Scenic View Protection Areas
Section 7 -20 -120 (d)
The subject site is located off Castle Creek Road, the Scenic View Corridor applicable to
development of the subject property. Attachment 10 provides visual simulations of the house with
the proposed addition as seen from various sections of Castle Creek Road. Earth tone colors and
materials will be used and the house with the addition will blend in well with the surrounding
landscape. The proposed improvements will not significantly increase the visual impacts beyond
those that currently exist with the existing home and driveway.
The proposed addition is to be located above and below the existing large deck which extends out
to the east of the existing home toward the driveway. It will not be very visible from most
vantage points along Castle Creek Road, but will be most visible from one short segment of
Castle Creek Road as vehicles approach the property from the east, up valley side of the property.
This more visible location looks up the driveway toward the house as vehicles travel toward town.
The view is appropriate and typical for the area and is compatible with the rural character of the
Castle Creek Valley.
19
U_ ( "
The avalanche and slope mitigation will make the house safer for residents and visitors to the
house. The earth tones colors and materials used will minimize the limited visual impacts of
these improvements. Therefore, visual impacts of the mitigation from the Castle Creek Road
corridor will be insignificant.
The following standards for development within Scenic View Protection Areas have been
considered. The proposed location of the addition does not create substantial visual impacts and
the location is the most appropriate on the site considering the slope and avalanche constraints.
The location of the avalanche and slope mitigation is dictated by the constraints, but visual
impacts of the mitigation should be minimal. Earth tones colors and materials will be used for all
improvements.
(d) Standards for Development Within Scenic View Protection Areas
All non - exempt development located within a mapped Scenic View Protection Area shall comply
with the following standards.
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.
Existing topography and natural vegetation is used to the maximum extent practicable.
Attachment 10 includes visual simulations of the house with the addition and mitigation
improvements as seen from Castle Creek Road. The curve of Castle Creek Road and the existing
topography screen many of the views toward the house from the 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.
The structure and proposed improvements are not located within a designated Scenic View Plane.
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 fagades to avoid a wall or
row effect, and staggering rooflines to avoid a long unbroken plane.
The proposed development has been designed to avoid the visibility from Castle Creek Road. It
is one of the least impactive portions of the site and the visual impacts are not significant. The
view toward a moderately sized home in this rural location is appropriate and compatible. The
location allows the existing vegetation and topography to buffer many of the views from Castle
Creek Road. The mass of the home is broken up with the design of the addition. The intent of
this standard will be met.
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.
20
The proposed addition will not break a ridgeline.
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 proposed improvements have been designed to complement the natural topography of the
land and the suggested techniques will be used, when applicable. Earth tone colors and natural
materials are proposed. Please refer to the visual simulations in Attachment 10.
6. The proposed development shall preserve natural vegetation and avoid development within
irrigated meadows, to the maximum extent practicable.
The Site Plan in Attachment 12 gives the proposed landscape plan for the site. Only two trees
will be removed to make way for the avalanche mitigation and those will be replaced in a more
appropriate location which better buffers the views of the house and avalanche fencing from
Castle Creek Road. Re- vegetation will occur as soon as practical with the County approved
mountain native grass mix. The proposed development will comply with this standard.
7. The proposed development shall install utilities in locations and through procedures that
minimize visual impacts to the maximum extent practicable.
The applicant will comply with this standard.
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 and /or
screening to minimize their visual impact.
There is an existing satellite dish, but no new dish is proposed. Any dish will be of earth colored
tones which will minimize the visual impact of the dish.
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.
The applicant will comply with this standard
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 (f) as they may apply to the
particular property.
This standard is not applicable to the subject site because it is a small site with very limited
options for expansion due to the constraints of the site. The level bench where the existing house
and deck are located is the most logical, appropriate area for area for the proposed expansion.
The intent of these guidelines has been met. Since the site is already developed with a house, this
has minimal applicability.
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
21
include shades of red, brown, or white. Paints or stains that simulate weathered barn wood
also shall be permitted.
The applicant will use earth tone materials to the maximum extent possible.
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.
The applicant will comply with this standard.
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 of planted
native species.
The applicant will comply with this standard.
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.
This standard is not applicable to the site as the driveway has been in place since the Henshall
Lode was mined. The proposed extension to the driveway and widening of the driveway to 16
feet in width has been recommended by the Fire Marshall to better meet the requirements for fire
protection access.
Landscaping and Vegetation Protection
Section 7 -20 -130
All development in Pitkin County shall comply with the Pitkin County Landscape Guidelines and
portions of development adjacent to public roads shall comply with the Roadway Landscaping
Guidelines contained in the Pitkin County Asset Management Plan. In case of conflict between the
provisions of these two documents and the standards below, the guideline documents shall apply.
(k) Purpose
These regulations are intended to preserve existing vegetation on development sites to the
maximum extent consistent with the permitted development, and to ensure that specific types of
man made improvements are screened from view in order to preserve the rural character of the
22
County, and to prevent the use of landscaping in ways that would compromise the rural character
of the County.
(1) General Provisions
(1) PROTECTION OF NATURAL VEGETATION
In order to protect the rural character of Pitkin County, natural vegetation should be preserved to
the maximum extent practicable, and any installed landscaping shall use the species plant
materials naturally occurring on the site or on neighboring properties (except for flower gardens).
Restrictions on removal of natural vegetation, and requirements for revegetation, are set forth in
other portions of this Chapter 7.
The applicant will preserve natural vegetation to the maximum extent possible. Refer to the
Existing Conditions Map in Attachment 3 to see the existing vegetation and the Activity Envelope
Site Plan in Attachment 12 for the proposed landscape plan. A few trees are proposed between
the avalanche fence and the house. These trees will buffer views from Castle Creek Road.
(2) CONFORMANCE WITH WILDFIRE REGULATIONS
In the event the provisions of this Sec. 7 -20 -130 conflict with any provisions of Sec. 7.20 -60, as
those requirements may be varied by a wildfire expert approved by the County, the provisions of
Sec. 7 -20 -60 shall govern.
The applicant will comply with this Code standard
(3) BERMS
Berms may be incorporated into any required landscaping, buffering, or screening area, provided
that the County determines, during the development approval process, that the proposed berms
will not cause drainage or erosion problems. No installed berm shall have a slope of greater than
four -to one (4:1), nor a height greater than four (4) feet above grade.
[ Berms are not proposed.
(4) LANDSCAPE ENCLOSURES
Landscaping shall not be used to mark or enclose the boundary of a parcel, or to privatize an
otherwise public viewplane. Use of indigenous shrubs or trees to enclose a portion of the property
immediately surrounding a dwelling, barn, and /or accessory buildings (as opposed to the entire
property or a large area of the property) are permitted if made to resemble similar windbreaks
located near older properties in Rural Areas of the County.
Proposed landscaping is depicted on the Site Plan in Attachment 12. Landscaping proposed is
minimal and will maintain the rural character of the surrounding area. The landscape plan
complies with this standard.
(5) VISIBILITY CLEARANCE
All landscaping shall be installed and maintained so that it does not interfere with the ability of
drivers to see nearby traffic at the intersection of any driveway with a public road, or at the
intersection of two public roads.
The applicant will comply with this Code standard. No landscaping is existing or proposed
anywhere near an area which might interfere with traffic and visibility. The driveway is being
23
l lJ
extended to eliminate a difficult turning radius, proving better access for fire protection vehicles
and residents.
(6) UTILITY EASEMENTS
Whenever the provisions of this Sec. 7 -20 -130 would require the installation of trees or shrubs over
or on utility easements, where branches or roots might interfere with utility lines or pipes, the
required location for such trees and shrubs shall be modified to require installation at the closest
location that would avoid potential conflicts with utilities and would enable the trees and shrubs to
serve the same landscaping purpose.
The applicant is not proposing new utility easements. The replacement of an existing pipe line
connecting the waste water disposal system to the house is proposed as the existing line is failing.
This line is within the proposed Activity Envelope.
(7) FINANCIAL SECURITY
The Community Development Department may require financial security in a form acceptable to
the County Attorney to ensure completion of installation of all required landscaping and /or
successful establishment of plants.
Landscaping required and proposed is minimal and does not warrant a financial security to insure
completion. This is not applicable.
(8) MAINTENANCE
All plants shall be maintained continually in a healthy condition in accordance with generally
accepted professional horticultural standards and practices. Within areas required to be
landscaped with installed plant materials, plants that die or are unhealthy shall be replaced.
Landscape areas shall remain free of weeds, litter, junk, rubbish and other nuisances and
obstructions.
The applicant will comply with this standard
(m) Required Landscaping in Rural Areas
In the Rural Area:
(1) Landscaping is required for the following purposes: (i) to screen satellite dishes and other
telecommunications equipment when located within five hundred (500) feet of adjacent public
roads and visible from such roads, and (ii) to screen parking areas and service areas when
viewed from adjacent public roads, (iii) where necessary to comply with the standards of Secs.
7.20 -70, 7.20 -80, or 7 -20 -120, and (iv) to revegetate disturbed areas.
The applicant will comply with this Code standard as applicable.
(2) Landscape treatments shall cluster shrubs and trees into groupings similar to those naturally
occurring on the site or neighboring sites, shall use indigenous species of shrubs and trees,
and shall not be installed in regularly spaced lines or rows, unless more specific provisions of
Secs. 7- 20 -70, 7- 20 -80, or 7 -20 -120 require a different treatment.
There is minimal landscaping necessary or proposed, but all landscaping will comply with this
standard, when applicable.
Vested Property Rights
24
Section 2 -20 -170
The applicant is seeking a Vested Property Right for the subject site. According to Section 2 -20-
170 (b) (d) an Activity Envelope approved pursuant to Section 2- 30- 20(g)(3) constitutes a Site
Specific Development Plan. If the Activity Envelope is approved it shall be vested for a term of
three years.
Summary
This land use application has addressed the Land Use Code standards identified by the Pitkin
County Community Development Department in the Pre - Application Conference Summary Sheet
in Attachment 11. The following is a summary of the Attachments to this land use application.
I. Vicinity Map
2. 1041 Hazard Plat for the Henshall Lode recorded in 1987 at Book 20 page 4.
3. 1987 Document layout for previous land use approval for subject property;
4. Existing Conditions Map and Slope Analysis;
5. Easement from Forest Service allowing access to Site across Forest Service Property;
6. Digital Ortho Photograph of Subject Site from County GIS;
7. October 26, 2011 Geology Report from Consulting Geologist Nicholas Lampiris, PhD;
8. Avalanche Report from Arthur I. Mears, P.E. Avalanche- Control Engineer;
9. Drawing of the Diedrich Driveway on US Forest Service Lands;
10. Visual Simulations of the proposed improvements for Castle Creek Road;
11. Pre - application Conference Summary;
12. Proposed Activity Envelope Site Plan for the Diedrich Property;
13. Letter Authorizing Application Submission
14. Signed Fee Agreement
15. Property Owners Within 300 feet of the Subject Property for Public Notice Purposes; and
25
U i_J" Y J
16. Proof of Ownership.
Please contact me if we can provide any additional information or to clarify anything.
Sincerely,
DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED
HORN AICP
W:
o'
. I
J I'C • I ( 'i
_ v 1
mI.IY 1% • ��I
_ —{ I - R - SCI /`_'_
I Ip Iles
": {:1. ; ?.Greg• \ � r!
s ;. qz° •.00 c 3 Otay.
E .�
a le
+
n obey .11 iIF'\ I R 1 I
s Park PORPHYRY ML 4
lissaial
1: ' A4 1 l✓ 0 1 8 p�d9` I u I u
r MN I. = dl I I
i
s6
Wllndy A if l3
Crek
ATTACHMENT 1 _
Ile
Slap I * JJ , •C Map I x
-
54 m
a v
9z r
G C'ol • Ixlutdo
• c I :¢ I zR Creek - xa I n
+ - --
p Cozy ` vIa Gul
ix I Pomt SardY `\ Ga I M�f
fiBld a 14 (\ n� O¢ �\ 3NiU' /tl/ WO 1092 "K oU 1.
i b __ • !f lage r 1.:47• „ _'— _.4jrF: -_ C - --
PE�IAcx
\ l Mamlf
„ . . .. `�! so \_ __/ _•� 3z1 R.,;
pe
/ 4 Bes `` • ASPEN /: - --
\} WA (Lake /1' 70/ � a ,.:
0 6 r"GriWN `yNr I✓
a I v m 1B 1;i `� r/ v zx i cize / F Q Il l ; RAI 8025 I¢ II es 11 N C
A
-s �; 1 I / ..- urnL::. <�.:.:'i:`.�1 -' 'JK I` •' � "4 I sr NI o 1 - � l ��: 1E _
E C: Wn a
. G� I� _ yl o�l NTI If arre
z lakes�"/•zi'':: Z
\, z:; 3 xz...;k'.::..<f/O e z
1, xz I lE r
.CIA ( I; u mo o\ r I_ri 4d " ` ,� _`} �u I
Baldy WARREN
Mtn Jl , z)I
131551 81 ( SILVER BAR I /° I T Y '�. I •�...._ . 1195E
.}. _ —_ _ _
Loge Pk p G 1` IFFICULT
Mln 1� i' 'SILVERS LL 1 U
I tt 1 3a Ba
I I �c I , € u6rsl
An - //` I 3x Ir RM 41472
13142 34 zr a¢ 3z [iz� sl� L J/ o '
t I s: i::} 3 '
,• �``:-
Im I g I — II Y •i:, - t Ta➢errs La k¢ ,
"a.
Y -_' •1'q -�-7a Hi hland -- ,+:. �• - - -I -<'•[i
SILVER Q 3..
\r I aUCKSKI -j.!
. MAROON Y . ?:`
-17J)0 T RA/LHE
�O
J ,¢ a•S': 1 u I- r I 1
zg 13
3 !^ - -I j
d l s ` q \ Jlow uWi!!nw I Ij 12;n I �I t'ti p f I I
'r. CfV ass
'II
xr o c� / Passl Lukrl . ?%I ___ -___ - -
_s MAROON +>" y I I I/,
- ' ktt3`him
1kJJ,,A.AKF_ CG u
zo I ^ I \ �- i, hftiruon 3a ail 17 .¢ ,y l F . q <•`, I 1 �'`i. - I ('% j..
C - ISLuke 1C
�O
O 12662 1
Is
1 ! I --- �r 1 ---- I ---- I -- I - Ilsls /'y iF % ?.S. I _�' _I_ n
c — urrr 5°
I I I I I /'.. I
0\ S ukel.' z3
I C /IS zo :, / I 3• I f A >
-z a I S L 1 eqq v I 2n 91 I/ I I 0 zo( zz 1 13
14o14p /A
I I -- --- - / - - -- - - -- �° - 1
MaroowY s Pyramid /
1 .L' Pk
&i Bells TZ 1401BH I 12169
• .n I I I \ I1. I i3 I 2.
• xv Or •a3. n I �( .s / I I I C\ I I Vi11 as t '14 :.. zx i zn BrYm
4", n I r _I _ ' Ha�Ztlen Pk <L -'`'•. P 3 ,.McArthur
n135 1 / eaun .,Mtn I
� - s — t I I o� Amerlmnl .y Ctl >'I
I I /^ Hunter 1 hake/ Aa16
Air I r - M- 3•• - 12139 --
/ Frigid e/ 11 �., 5 , / I 1ft'. tt 1 • <� \\''X'. I
/ <I n 3x .: Pk i� ,9 3n I 3¢ ��..•.
/� ,n IO I 13497 I I Electric I an �inl't' Hill
12\Pass ' I i n _ ♦ ..
1 - - I Pass __ I ,. e r
\� I 1 / I I F I I 1 - 4 -_ - 11 A-hrroft e
B tn_A eW -{- -("- - s 1
'Mir. -f-� l''
I lO ,\y -_ / I 3 z - I �:::`.• - I - _
I /t _,ZI West - I- _ - -1 - - A ' - 1 � • r Cathedrald I ''1 I _G ♦1
1� - - -i- M s I 7O i,L Kes13516, SI " Pk 117947- -
�'7
CudieJrob
I• e _ n I z (/� - 0 x
, I I 11 In 1 Lud.• 1 • r'...< ✓ : G
-PIK . lr- -'T'9� I G, ! MoMmumi {• MaMmW Q, 1 e 1 I � 'rn Inr Pn ss
Pesk
peak -* / I Basm.,] ..1.' I 1
? ium. 1 V . ti _ - - _ _ _ _ .;•,_ 41734!_ _ _.:: .
At 3 I 1316n Eabt ", Tay /nr
I I /Conundrum i�F:�::: i:•• a -1 'I - k• "'..:.-
JL .�:Belleviev/ / f M I I I / /nf JPn Cas110 `. , I `�'' L I
I v n / In 14765 /. 4 ( J'
} _ ` \ uef /I A4p� \l
$$$ELL
V
C
H
w s
s
I INCH. f0 FW.T
1 .4
A ea
aa:.. W. i MO. Y. .Yaa IMM Y MI MMadM 0 li ad 1.
IW a}iaPW. Ya ®. U1RUM�aaUUN VMIII ®�iOlm
IU.aaM ®PUNS ®. -
1041 REVIEW PLAT
_- ._
..R 1
HENSHALL LODE
M. S. 6 933
898 ±ACI
+oGa ,c c.w
D �\ Ouhpw4
O � NKbpt
_ CAP,.
� \
G �
�'.
`VC" D.
4
R \ \h•
`� anra
a�
OF THE HENSHALL LODE Sock 20
\
A' It
�
N A
/ V
1
1
N I
LEGEND 81 NOTES
• FOUN0 - 4 RCY,R .1 eMp I IT
uRLUa NOTRO
p POwcR Pu.c
M NL' 1N ( ) M0.0 ROM wR
tM• •r VOVCY NOT°1 T
SVIkV CY 00.,CN ra_O w�Tn
FOV NJ MONV MCro Yq.
COR9 L.. "P.M. OJT NOT
Fri LO .-OC 0.Tt O
USp3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION
S.acr�i v
AO
P6RMIT LONGO TFIg M6NSNAlI LOC6 M.D.
P00. ACOC81 GaBQ S V R
�N 11, 16 RBCW
CC (
P M SVPN OCO) PrT,L�N
COUNTT, COLOpg00,
1. Th. roar Va
ll of too prow••• Ringl. -fully pads• •nould
kura• A r•talnlnq Vall foc Ne low Mhi A CC. A—'-
TPA wall Nlould Oa d••1 IIM B9 A at�N .;" DMinur
at laK Co. Ed" eARI ti.i.had gI".. The wall aboold to
Laalgnad in order to satin anew in ANA avant of a anw-
aun..
i. Prlat to PonatTRALI.I. • oil. Engle «c aNCala M iat.I.
to ..I,. soil. Ad the alto am 'Cond. • da.lEd for a
w[i..c•[ drain am N• Ptapac wruatara for tea foen-
eatlR. TNO AR YH1YS1. lwaG wrael0•lly •lCnaa
the
•ff•et. Of An. .14 aln. .n tL. tyw AT fawdation to PA
Conatroetod.
]. rN• drivavay gnat to .rnattactod .analounc with County
erlvaray •taMacdo.
E. ]T• awliunt 111 .. required t. tCAPA • tainioa
the Y Il an CAP W A ' 11 aide f t ddN
vay Satim .r
.Itnv Cauldac•, r•iL.A At.. or • .doparall• PIAPAJal.
CERTIFICATION
f..1. Y..10. Eunry ,IMT TO, PLA Is N.Y.0 a.
Iflp / tlR4 Y a 9YPMT HAS L10EP NY fVEAUVEN CUPAA
MANTI( Ll 19li
)
APPROVAL J!J..(`/ 0
1 041 MAZZA40 REVIEW BY / 1 ° ^'�
DATE• 111 193-7
WAIVER
APPLICANT •CKNOWLE]OES THAT NE /SHE HAS BEEN
INFORMED 01 PITRIN COUNTY OF THE EAI STANCE OF
'1041 NAZ ARO AREAS' THAT MIGHT AFFECT THE
PROPERTY ANY IMPROVEMENTS, AND THE USE AND
OCCUPANCY THEREOF
ACOUTEp FOR "UNE 1. M YFEICE P CLFR m M,COROEN qE psR1N
EWIIEY, SIM[ OF [ROMpO. M�O'GZa�.N.. LNIE�� PW l..
' IEYT IN RM aOM�yl1i PNOE� MCVi1W .4
'
CLEAR NM MCpIRN ,
PREPARED AVG. 13, 1997 .You to eta
:11, S`IAYfY ftOYHii. M.
N N ln..o.� la Y. as
�� Ml�as.fA
?ay1. 4
MACHMENTZ.
UIJ0,928
�SLM
'eCMI NI'
If . aev
1—c
P1
R. P. P r5.
ra d' Naa•.
N
q
q _r: RD RaO NAp
N
�B
T
a
•! 5
PI?
It
YiC
�i
A
D.
V
I
r_
�iJ
N
..A
N
aa:.. W. i MO. Y. .Yaa IMM Y MI MMadM 0 li ad 1.
IW a}iaPW. Ya ®. U1RUM�aaUUN VMIII ®�iOlm
IU.aaM ®PUNS ®. -
1041 REVIEW PLAT
_- ._
..R 1
HENSHALL LODE
M. S. 6 933
898 ±ACI
+oGa ,c c.w
D �\ Ouhpw4
O � NKbpt
_ CAP,.
� \
G �
�'.
`VC" D.
4
R \ \h•
`� anra
a�
OF THE HENSHALL LODE Sock 20
\
A' It
�
N A
/ V
1
1
N I
LEGEND 81 NOTES
• FOUN0 - 4 RCY,R .1 eMp I IT
uRLUa NOTRO
p POwcR Pu.c
M NL' 1N ( ) M0.0 ROM wR
tM• •r VOVCY NOT°1 T
SVIkV CY 00.,CN ra_O w�Tn
FOV NJ MONV MCro Yq.
COR9 L.. "P.M. OJT NOT
Fri LO .-OC 0.Tt O
USp3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION
S.acr�i v
AO
P6RMIT LONGO TFIg M6NSNAlI LOC6 M.D.
P00. ACOC81 GaBQ S V R
�N 11, 16 RBCW
CC (
P M SVPN OCO) PrT,L�N
COUNTT, COLOpg00,
1. Th. roar Va
ll of too prow••• Ringl. -fully pads• •nould
kura• A r•talnlnq Vall foc Ne low Mhi A CC. A—'-
TPA wall Nlould Oa d••1 IIM B9 A at�N .;" DMinur
at laK Co. Ed" eARI ti.i.had gI".. The wall aboold to
Laalgnad in order to satin anew in ANA avant of a anw-
aun..
i. Prlat to PonatTRALI.I. • oil. Engle «c aNCala M iat.I.
to ..I,. soil. Ad the alto am 'Cond. • da.lEd for a
w[i..c•[ drain am N• Ptapac wruatara for tea foen-
eatlR. TNO AR YH1YS1. lwaG wrael0•lly •lCnaa
the
•ff•et. Of An. .14 aln. .n tL. tyw AT fawdation to PA
Conatroetod.
]. rN• drivavay gnat to .rnattactod .analounc with County
erlvaray •taMacdo.
E. ]T• awliunt 111 .. required t. tCAPA • tainioa
the Y Il an CAP W A ' 11 aide f t ddN
vay Satim .r
.Itnv Cauldac•, r•iL.A At.. or • .doparall• PIAPAJal.
CERTIFICATION
f..1. Y..10. Eunry ,IMT TO, PLA Is N.Y.0 a.
Iflp / tlR4 Y a 9YPMT HAS L10EP NY fVEAUVEN CUPAA
MANTI( Ll 19li
)
APPROVAL J!J..(`/ 0
1 041 MAZZA40 REVIEW BY / 1 ° ^'�
DATE• 111 193-7
WAIVER
APPLICANT •CKNOWLE]OES THAT NE /SHE HAS BEEN
INFORMED 01 PITRIN COUNTY OF THE EAI STANCE OF
'1041 NAZ ARO AREAS' THAT MIGHT AFFECT THE
PROPERTY ANY IMPROVEMENTS, AND THE USE AND
OCCUPANCY THEREOF
ACOUTEp FOR "UNE 1. M YFEICE P CLFR m M,COROEN qE psR1N
EWIIEY, SIM[ OF [ROMpO. M�O'GZa�.N.. LNIE�� PW l..
' IEYT IN RM aOM�yl1i PNOE� MCVi1W .4
'
CLEAR NM MCpIRN ,
PREPARED AVG. 13, 1997 .You to eta
:11, S`IAYfY ftOYHii. M.
N N ln..o.� la Y. as
�� Ml�as.fA
?ay1. 4
MACHMENTZ.
UIJ0,928
.....- .nn.onr.r�u....... ._ 4'4Ry�i 1Lr9ii6'll �YMT�ppMiY�VI MnRro�umwvMbCen •xCwsTann...'�T�Nh
ATTACHMENT 3
`187 Reu'ltw poc.
DOCUMENT LAYOUT
THIS FILE MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN ALL Of THE INVORMATION
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 (11x17)
I
I
dN� I
i N
FN,
CLOSI 9M/24/1987
9/3/1987
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
PITKIN COUNTY
DATE RECEIVED: W.211e7
DATE COMPLETZ4
PROJECT
Project
APPLICANT: erAb-e,
Applicant Address-:
Ye.
PARCEL ID AND C AS .
E, No.
c;2 f2
STAFF MEMBER: I :—
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROVM:'
County Atty county Engineer Building Dept.
Housirig Di Etivir. nlialtfi '
Other.
FXLk'$TATUS! AND rpcATION.:
TYPE OF APPLICATION:
PAID: ES NO AMOUNT:
00
I STEP APPLICATION:
P&Z MEETING DATE:
PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
DATE REFTPRED-
INITIALS:
2 STEP APPLXCATI0X.:,
BOCC MEETING DATEPUBLIC
HEARING.—YES NO
DATE REFERRED:
REFE
County Atty
Aspen Consol S.D.
School District
County En gr
Afixf. 'Beii
"k 'At9
Housing bir.
- t!66idin-
miy Dept
Aspen Water
(Gliid) (Crltn)
City Er6a
- fl f r i- e M� I Lrsfia-ll'
Eftvir. Hlth.
mfiaomv.4 Vill
Colo eo urvey
County Mgr .-
gr-
F .- A -
A
Div. 1wildlife
f ... . ......
'*biv Water Res.
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROVM:'
County Atty county Engineer Building Dept.
Housirig Di Etivir. nlialtfi '
Other.
FXLk'$TATUS! AND rpcATION.:
'-' -- Li�� F nr�.-+ rJn�... �-; Y. r'.. 'Svi.a...+KY.aT]r. -_ f'kK'L..x.....e. s ✓�[' =.. eaa.
Y
Caseload Disposition sheet for the Brower 1041 minor hazard
review Planner Glenn Horn
The 1041 review for the Henshaw Lode mining claim was approved
based upon a staff level review subject to the notes on the
rcorded 1041 plat.
W,
TO: Joanie Haggerty
FROM: Glenn Horn, Assistant Planning Director
RE: Brower 1041 Minor Hazard Review
DATE:, September 3, 1987
I have reviewed the Brower"1041'minor hazard review application
and the Planning Director will grant approval to the application
pending completion o€ the plat with the "fol 'loiiing conditions
noted on the mylar.
ti.:
1. The rear wall of the proposed
'single- family house should
serve as a retaining wall" for "" "the `ilope beTiind the sti`uc-
itre. The wall should be designed by a Structural Engineer
at least three feet above finished grade. The - wall should be
designed in order to reatin snow in the event of a snow-
iii
2: Prior to construction a soils Engineer should be 'retained
to analyze soif"s on tfie side. and prepare a ciesicjn" . a ..
perimeter drain and the proper parameters for the foun-
dation, The soils analysis"sh'oald' specifically address the
effects of the old` mine on the type of foundation to be
constructed.
3. The driveway must be constructed consistent with County
driveway standards.
110 3
4. The' applicant will be recjuired to construct a" retaining
wall drr the up ' hill side' of the driveway consisting of
either,boulders, railroad ties or a comparable material.
s
Brower /gh
review the
ASPEN /PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, 00 81611
(303) 925 -2020
Date:
RE:
Dear
This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its
preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined
that your application IS NOT "'complete."
Additional items required include:
Disclosure of Ownership (one copy only needed)
Adjacent Property Owners List /Envelopes /Postage (one copy)
Additional copies of entire application
Authorization by owner for representative to submit applica-
tion
Response to list of items (attached /below) demonstrating
compliance with the applicable policies and regulations of the
Code, or other specific materials
_ A check in the amount of $
A. Your
application is complete and
we have scheduled
it for
review by the
on
We will
call
you if we
need any additional
information prior
to that
date.
Several
days prior to your
hearing, we will call and
make
available
a copy of the memorandum.. Please note,
that it
IS NOT your
responsibility' to
post your property
with a
sign,
which we
can provide you for a
$3.00 fee.
B. Your application is incomplete, we have not scheduled it
review at this time. When we receive the materials we 'have
requested, we will place you on the next available agenda.
If you have any questions, please call
the planner assigned to your case.
Sincerely,
ASPEN/PITRIN PLANNING OFFICE
Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D.
CONSULTING GEOLOGIST
0554 HIGHWAY 82
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623
(303) 9833600
August 25, 1967
Joanie Haggerty
Basalt Realty
P.D. Box 737
Basalt, CO. 81621
RE: The Henshall lade
Dear Ms. Haggerty:
It has just come to MY attention that an old mine entry
tunnel has been identified near the site of the proposed h!:)me
referred to in my letter of August 20, 1987, Tt is my
understanding that this mine tunnel, whose entry is now
collapsed, entered the side of the hillside and trended north
from a point just east of the proposed footprint for the new
home. There is a grassy area there that indicated leakage of
water which previously was attributed to the small pond
fL;rther east. Information is now available that the pond may
not leak, or at least not to the extent previously believed,
but instead, water is coming Out of a second spring developed
in the old mine portal at this location.
My recommendations, assuming that there are no branches of
this tunnel which might go under the proposed site, and I do
not believe this is very likely, are to continue with the
drainage plans as previously discussed to keep water from
trending under the proposed site. Obviously, perimeter
drains will need to be put in as recommended before, and
excess water needs to be piped toward the hillside where it
has drained for perhaps a number of years.
,,The soils engineers, which I understand will be Chen '<
ssor_iates from Glenwood Springs, should be made aware of the
/existence of this tunnel, so that their sails testing may
include a consideration of the effects of the old mine
workings. Obviously, the cut bench which is the site of the
existing cabin, the pond, and the proposed home, must have
been a bench cut during the mining days, rather than one cut
some number of years ago for the purposes of development of a
residence. I believe that the home is still possible at the
site if my present recommendations and the ones is the
previous letter are followed, and if the soils engineers will
consider not only the site specific foundation design, but
any impact that the mine workings may have on the site.
Sincerer
NL /clk ,arm
Nicholas Lampiris
Consulting Geologist.
C
hereittattereailed the prrnittee, to use su6jaet to the Conditions set out b6i%v,'die fallewirgdeacribed leads
orimprovereentr. 20 ft. and 5 ft. righf -o Nays locates in tie Sh of Sec. 12., T11S,
1t85W 6th - 15:M. as - Wi:6 "`S ecifically`shbwn on a 1" = 300 feet 'scale moo a+tactied
to and made a part t9E this This map is elated 5/81 by JH.
70
SPECIAL L;-St:. P EM . I'T °
October 27., 1976
Act of X61i*
T.%G CirrA `li rrrixo (i a1ii nfatraoa(�salit+ x ,
.. MO. Ititi77Ly" .
J,,'—u..) I n. U «nu
As ctst 41
S,rn (1S.IiI h. Cwnry
02 IPitkin
s. Pwa,
11
lb-la 734
Waterline °15
Caw no. (211 ,
1
permission is hereby granted to Richard M. Shoh4t
This permit eovem 0:09 acrrs and /or . 0.05 miles and is iSSU d for th-e parnos_ of:
Operation and maintenance -of:
(a) 170 ft. long class D £roil the - Castle Crec`c 'road to the
pu=ttees mining patent.
(b) 90 ft. of 2" diameter waterline across National Forest la-tds
to noitb end of permi mining patent.. . -. .
t 1. conatrattion or occupancy and use under this permit shall bexin :ri ;ht n 2 me, ^.ths, and
consttnc. ion, if arty. shall be c'mpleted :rithin 3 (nor63, fmm t: e_da ;e tor. pe:nit'. 'l is
Ilse shall be ac Bally e�tersed at least
90 days eacE1 yllar,'unla oc5 'emse =uth' "Led
in writing.
2 In eoasfderation for this use, the peaairtee snail pap to th:: Forest $•evvice, U.S. Ceparmaet of
agriculture. theSf axof ikPhlmArpii?a? ;tyse'tii (Jallars(S l2`1:S() _)'for theaeriod
annually 19 F, iii a i eresfter
annually on T 'Inttuv 1
• wc�¢a:, neare�Cr, �.Car`S tar MIS V:Se maY be made or'reat'.i -5te4 WC!!never necass r/ to plate :1e
e::ort -s on 'a bast`s commrtYtrtt(e"'with ttie valve of Lao aL:hofcxed'ey 15'is pe�i% "»`
3. This pe.r=it is ar_eeted subj -et to the con. (tians _Pt fori herein., and to c , 7c;dition3
31 x acised ke ;eto a;: r.. +. a p o f his per nit.
..va'vr►. C1 Y!AVITTY�' •IG:baT4 ?S Op Z ,t. ^ ^ox:.e., r' .
i_oiMIM" ` p '
Ri.cl, tr t t. S!toltet I ir? t 4,,, a j�! 3 /COAL./
i i_
i
h
i
s
r
i
j
1
li 9� (., ,� 1, l.7 (:• ^.v tTfrfl.:D :+:. n.- '.`.T;_ ov 'rj.. •y—_ . .
: rte: „ r
,y _ ..
r.
4. Development plans: Livout plans: csnstruc ^'on. reconstmetron, or alteration of impmventents; or
reyislosof Iavout or,c_ascructYon plans for thss a,�+ rm, L� q•r ... r.•1 in d •. "I" an in ' MITIa by the
'rees ar a!im�liery on'ihe P- tnnitaell aria very br r -move! 0 •!eitroy^ I only after toe
foreae ;open #sort T
forest officer in chu has approved, and has mar4ed or othenvise designated thai ..h.ch may he'resrov -d
or destroyed. Treiber cut or destroyed will be Paid for by the pemittee as ielio }rs: �(rchantable timberat
appraised value. young- grawth timber below merchantalae size it csr:"nt damage appraisal value: pmTidad
that the Forest Service reserkfl the tight to dispose the merchantabie umber t to other . an the pro-
g, P other p a he
anted x no stumpage cost ta,ttr peemtdeE:' Trees, shrubs, and lants may plsnteif to such
t nfiffi eramd in sogh places about the premises as may be approved by the forest officer in charge.
S. The Oertmittee,shell maintain the improvemettii and premises to standards of repair, crtiediness.
nestaesq, ssmitation,'andsalof aeceptible Sn she Eorestofitcer in charge.
6. Thls permit is[subject Will valid claims.
7. The permittee, 'In exercising the privileges granted by this permit, shall comply with the regulations
or the Depactment of Agriculture. and all Federal, State, county, and munici laws, ordinances. or resula-
tfous which ate applicable to the at' or operations eovered�by this Permit.
8. The permitter shall take all reasonable t r."utions to Prevent ,ltd suppress forest firs. No ma
`Mn ...
facial shall be dsQoaed afbv 6umip; t cor l% , :� ,luting th e c t �r.;ed * ?)' law or :!, d'a•
don wfehout a'wrt:el, permit fram the Forest officer in cbar?e or his authorize? agebc.'
T. The permittee shall exercise diligence in protecting from damage the lard and prcpert: of the United
States Covered by and used fn with this permit, and shall pay the United States for any damage
resulting from negligence oe.ftom the_vioiat en te+, of tCie te of this permit or of any la,r or re_jlation aopli-
._ _.
czko to the Vatiaail Formats by the penmit cr 6v my agents ar emQleyees of the petmictee acting
within the scope oCeSiir ageaoy or amployiment
10. The permittee shall fully repair damaae,'other than ortnary wear and tear, to national forest roads
and .tails caused by the permittee is the exert se of the'ptivilege 6 -ranced by this permit.
1L No It-emher of or Dele rato to Congress or Resfdent_Comnissio shall be admitted to any share or
` part of this aereetrapt or to apy that may arise herefrorn unle9s ii ism taiS a:c carton for its
•, ' amaeral_bedefit,
L upon abandonment, tet- ination, revocation, or cancellation of this pernit,the permittee shall remove
withia a reasaaable, tine all strurure's and * improvements eseept those owned by the United States, and
`.shall restore the fits, unless ate revise agreed coon fa writing or in this permit. If the permittee fails to
'• : `: remove all such siructutep of overcenta withia a reasonaoh period, they shall become the property of
i.&O United States. but +rill pot rlieve the petmittee of 'liaoitity for the cost of their rer..oval and
restoration of the site.
13 This pepmft is not -adsfe "bie ' if the permittee ihmuA vole ^tan sale or t:ansrer, or through
enf of cont:aet, foreclosure, tai,sale, or other valid o_ ! -gal pes fin¢ shaft cease ca be the owner
atthe physical improvements other than those anted' by the united States situated on the desc =beri
^...__.,_.. t ., .,.
in this permit and is unable ; to furafsa adequate proof of ability to redeem or o:hervise reestablish , title to
said Imtpttsvbments. this permit shall he subject to cancellation. but if pt son to whom title to sal
igeptnvemesu'shall have been transferred in either manner provided is quOrled as a permittee and is
>• tilling that his future aceupaaey pw the preal'aes' is t "a Ge subject to such new conditions and_stipulatioas
as 2hdsdag or prospective circumstances may wdt:ant, his continued occupancy of the premises may be
atuhorized by pealt to him If, In tl�ie eplPlan of the fasting officer or'tns suecESSor, issuance of a permit
is elesirible and in the public, interest, .
R. In rasa of ahaag� of address, the permitter shall imme;iatgly notify the forest supervisor.
:
15. '1'be'cempora y use and occupancy of the orm!ses nn,i :; ^nv- ent3' is c -in deec=bed ..-fay be sublet,
the per:ni :tee'to third parties only wit.. the Priorsvrirten n- p:pv-d of the .fors. = upeh'isor Sat the per-
mrtiee shall continue to be resoons.ble for ecmpHance with ail c: : ,7aingns of this permit jy persons .o
Whom such p h: es may be sublet.
16. This per... ^..it may be terai upon bre_t ^ if a. of
regional fprester or t Chief. Forest Se ^p�
!
17 . 1 t ^G .:'ryt pf env Cpl: fliCt jnr:vwr.7 1 a a * :• pf ^.tree : ...a ..... "at:: :1C 1•'. ,... a tall::
any of the foflowin; c!au :ea or in? ^rovtsi'rt i C.a: pt, c',: 't =,,', rCR„ ' u ^ I r_ : ^• , 71 i
, e
RICKARD M. SHOHET
18. Service Charge '
A late charge in addition to the regular fees shall be
made for failure to meet a t the fee payment due date or any of the
dates specified for submission of statements required for fee
calculation. The late "`payg8nt charge shall be $15', or an amount
calculated by applying . the current ,
e prescribed by Treasury
Fiscal Requirements Manual "ul�leticiswto the overdue amount for
'auKCS - r '.YIF.I...t
.. n :� JJ v. ..._ r�• .. .
each 30 =day perfod.oi tiaction thereof_ Yhat the payment is
overdue, "w IcKee `er greater. I F
fthe clue date falls on a
nonworkday,'the late payment charge"will not apply until the
end'`oP the next workday.
19. ' Nonpayment
This
permit may fie ".tei;nin.its? fnr nr�nn;iym�r;7 of as , l,�r.
any additional charge for late payment.
i
20. Indemnification of United States
The permittee shall indemnify the UniEed`States against any
liability for damage to life or property arising from the occu-
pancy or use or Nationa`F`o'res )a`nds urtcler this permt.
21. Esthetics -- -
The permittee shall protect the scenic esthetic values of the
"ale 'tYPfder' this permit, and the adjacent land, as far as possible
with the authorized use, during construction, operation, and
r
maintenance of the'improvements.
22, > r`asion Control
The permittee shall be" res ponsible for 'the prevention and 'control.'
of soil erosl:oe aiia" 4u on IAA covered b this
Y permit and
adjaoent thereto, regulting' from the'cors£riiction or aintenance
-
of.,the aubhcirSzed use. He shall so cons . tract and m his
improvements to avoid the accimrulA on of excessive heads of water
and to avoid encroachment on streams. He shall vegetate all ground
where the soi''has and
been-exposed shall construct and maintain
terracing, water bars, lead =off ditches; - dr tither preventative works
that may be required to prevent and control erosion as il .1
by the Dis&ic$`Ranger,
23. Revegetation, Ground • Cover •» -- _
All earth cut or fit]..Jope_s favorable to revegetition or other
areas on which ground cover is destroyed in the course of. con-
struction, will be revegetated to grassas or other snitahle
vegetation as regkiir -N1 by Ehe Di:;trict Ranger:"
i
_� - _�3�1F w4fla'S'" .roi: • „^ •.••.• -� �• :Y^ � ansp.ve. wrs a•:ct• "a-ar . 'fi sgmx ^..nsmr • .1.. ar. an vaw... ._.. -... .... -
RICHAMY SHOHET '
24. Reveaetation, Seeding or Plaiitin7
A n •. .
Seeding or planting will be done at a time of the .year, in a
manner, and with species which tha District "Ranger" considers will
offer the best chii8c; of"succ 'ess aad'will be repeated annually
until such areas are accepted in writing-6y the District Ranger
as satisfactorily revegetited and stabilized.. - '
25. Class D Permits
trac
�•�•,' This permit is issued for use of the entire " trac' t' and provides
for limited private access to'described land within t}ie I-hite
_.._ .
River National , Forest for the enjoyment of 'itie owner thereof
`
his invitees 'an guests, and so long as the property is devoted
to its preveiiE'ese.' this permit 016_s not authorize additional
access to portions of the described property, which may be
transferred to others; it is not assignable dnd 61411 teirtiiriate`
uporr"any'9hange in the title, possession or nature of, the use
of all or any portion of'Ae sa.id'property. `fto -,-
waver, anew
permit may be-granted in accordance with the then- existing laws
and regulations if this permit should be terniinated for any of
these causes.
26. Archeological- Paleontological Discoveries
The per•mittee'shall immediately brinq to the attention of the
District Ranger any and all antigii r
ities objects of
histor..ic'or scientific "interest including,'but not limited to,
historic or prehistoric ruins; fossils, or artifacts discovered
as th•.result of operations under this permit, and shall leave
such ci.sdoveries intact'd "T t'au't iorized `proceed by the
District Ranger. Protective and/or mitigativo'measures speci-
fied by the Forest Service shall be the resFonsibility of the
permittee..
27. Maintenance
The permittee shall 'provide maintenance so that at the termina-
tion of this permi£;_ "the "`road "wTj lie a con ition �equal to
that normally prevailing on ,roads of like standard, and unless
otherwise agreed to', leadoff "drainage and wafer barriers to
prevent erosion will be constructed on the road as directed by
the Forest Service.
7 _
- c
1
{r� ring
',irk•:'4•:.y .✓ ":x..4 _... •"" w. n^ s u." r- p.'+ rrc Mwwar�•.+ Mak?netK+ o31?K ��' w+ w+ an': .M,wrww�. .YOfra::s+u+na.ewewati
RICHARD, H. SHOHET
28. Control
Roads constructed under authority of this permit shall be subject
to control by the permittee Pxcept:
I
1. They shall at all times ,be. open to use by Forest service
2. The Forest service may issue permits authorizing use of the
roads by
the roadi 'Pfovided', that :such use will 'hot mat §rially
interfere with £fig use Tay the puiinittee, and PYOVi furt
ded her,
that, such,_parties will be required to bear proportionate'
maintenanca costs tinder a written ,iixrezhrerir. with the pPr-.it`e's
herein, or in accordance with arrarufements §cecificd by tha
Forest Service.
29. Area AcCess
The permittee agrees to permit the free and unrestricted access
to and upon the premises at all times for all lawful and proper
purposes not inconsistent with the intent of the permit 'or with
the reasgnable ese"rcise 'and enjoyment by the permittee of the .,
'privileges thereof. "
30. Water Rights
This permit confers no rights upon the permittee to the use
of the'watei involved; such rights - Ki'sf lie ob`t'alned under
State law.
31,' Permit Termination
Unless'sooner.terminated or revoked, this permit shall expire
and become void on b9dem5er 31, 1951; but anew perir..it to occupy
and use the same National Forest land may be granted provided
the permittee shall have notified the FOr*bt Supervisor not les's
than six (S) months prior to said date that a'neN permit is
desired, and the permittee is w111.ing that his future "occupar'dy
of the ptemises shall be subject to such conditions and stipula-
tions as existing 'or prospective circumstances'may warrant and
if, in the opinion of the issuing ofFicer or his successor,
issuance Of a permit is 'desirable and in the public interest.
000040
s
t
1
it
t'a
k.
7 ".
t
f-
I't
is
d
;
. '[/��.J.y� Y • I+ ��LF• �G! JwYaS +N:ifR4PMA.IM'.�.w'MLiTai'i Mw
•r _. .._ I/sL , •r
/N .cUICL
�Q0004!
; '.5ituatod ir,' unsurvnygJ To'wnshIp II Sou Ih,, Ran
5 y,
i 10 Fr•
Ar,4
gr
t n. thn ;:,iy.th 1'ri,rcip.�l t;,:riai,u�,
i
i
1
j
c�
•
ccrvrc.�tivE or
90 Fro .�
I
IV
�VlgTIOAJA L-
�oR eST
Q• I
SvAGE'/ /NCf/� 300F.��TT' Q
MAP OF SHOHET SPRING
�.
L__
HCGfSS ROAD
�� ��
� I
•.'.r
�Q0004!
; '.5ituatod ir,' unsurvnygJ To'wnshIp II Sou Ih,, Ran
5 y,
i 10 Fr•
Ar,4
gr
t n. thn ;:,iy.th 1'ri,rcip.�l t;,:riai,u�,
i
i
1
b Aspen Ranger District
United States 2orest White River /"�'
Department of Service National 806 West Hallam
Agriculture Forest Aspen, CO 81611
Reply To: 2720
Date: July 15, 1987
Basalt Realty
P.O. Box 737
Basalt, Colorado 81621
Dear Ms. Haggerty:
This is in response to your recent letter to Greg Thompson regarding the access
road to the Shohet property.
Our engineers had a opportunity to review the Shohet road and the stuffing
which has taken place. Their opinion is to leave the slope in its 'natural
condition and maintain and clear the road when necessary. This may require you
clear the road several times in the spring or during prolonged wet periods. You
could line the edge of the ioad'4hich buits against the slope with large rocks
to keep some of the material off the road. They do not think a retaining wall
is necessary or needed. I£ this road is properly maintained it vill
safe access to the property.
If you have any other questions, please contact Greg Thompoon at 925 -3445. If
the property should sale, we will need to have you fill out a transfer form and
reissue a new special use permit.
Sincerely,
pf William N. Johnson
District Ranger
000042
n;,: 9,Azi% :: -
United States Forest White River Aspen Ranger District
Department of Service National 806 West Hallam
Agriculture Forest Aspen, CO 81611
Reply To: 2720
Date: August 12, 1987
O
Joanie Hagerty
C/O Basalt Realty
P.O. Box 733
Basalt, Colorado 81621
Dear Ms. Hagerty:
Enclosed per your request is form FS- 2700 -3a Request for Termination and
Application for Special Use Permit.
Part I and II of the application need to be signed by both parties. Please have
the Shohet's sign and date Part I and the new owners sign and date Part II of
the splication.
After the application has been signed, please forward to: Aspen Ranger
District, 806 West Hallam, Aspen, Colorado 81611.
Sincerely,
( .
C OI William ohnaon
District Ranger
Enclosure:
F &6200-26(7.62)
.� .. .. ... .._ .f. .... .�:v.' TVLLC... :.`:t ?.L ":S Tf�. -ui -y'
Fomt Appro`ed OMB NO.0596 -0 Expires 7 /3t/a6
r✓
USDA. Foretl Sallee w•! -t:.
REQUEST FOit �RiATC�6"J''715 Pr CI`)C� Cl$ I'
(,Ref.* FSb11716)
This form B authedled by the Or9emo Act of June f, 1697 for the purppq of era)uatIng the /eolwete'd M10nt and no permit may be Issued unNat
this form is co eafeted.
PART I • REQUEST FOR TERMINATION I be eanPNnd by PPmr/frw
TO: FORESTSUPERC4SOR WLITTF RTVfiR NATIONAL FOREST
I(WE). THE UNDERSIGNED PERMITTEE(S) UNDER THAT CERTAIN SPECIAL USE PERMYY. DA'PYB May 30 81
19_.,
AUTHORIZING ME (VS) TO Operate and maintain: (a) 170 feet of class D road and (b) 90 feet of
waterline situated on National Forest land.
HAVE
• ICONVEYED ALL MY (OUR) RIGHT, TITLE, AND INTERl97 IN AND TO THE IMPROVEMENTSGOCATEIS dN "rFlE FA'ReErCeoVEiIEWOV' dkib
PERMIT.1
OR
• [ENTERED INTO A CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED ON THE 0XR COVERED BY SAPD"P'ERWIf 13UT'HAVE
RETAINED TITLE TO SAID IMPROVEMENTS UNTIL COMPLETION OF PAYMENTS UNOER"SAIO CONTRACT) WITH,
... . _ .._ ..:.. u..., ..
(NAME OR NAMES)
(ADDRESS)
ACCORDINGLY, I (We) REQUEST THAT SAID SPECIA1r1.1211E PERMIT BE TERMINATED. THE 'REMA'INING'BAL'ANtEpP hT)V FEE}PYPETIIft'USLV' "
PAID SHOULD BE CREDITED TO THE APPLICANT NAMED SECOW.
DATE,
19
-STRIKE OUT INAPPLfCA8LE ALTERNATIVES (SIGNATURES OF ALL PERMITTEES LISTED ON PERMIT)
PART 11 • APPLICATION Mobs; eoinpNtod by APDlleand
APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR A SPECIAL•USL' pEA) GliY' Di' d' 3Et7Yl1' E 3` AAPC' FIIYI "Z'E`L"2'j�L'�Yj'CCY%YR�vI'HE Pt' RPEiiRTC
IN THE ABOVE REQUEST, ANO FOR THE 3'AMH DURPOSE' O' P' SAfb' PERYd1Y, SGd7 ECY; bliYLrIC, YO'( lCYa 'N1:10'L"bIJDL`5'f(YiJL'A: ""
TIONS AS THE CIRCUMSTANCES,MAY WARRANT; '
I fWEI ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WHEN ANEW PERMIT IS ISSUED, A TRANSFER FEE OF 6 "' 15 CHARGED. IT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THI
INITIAL PAYMENT FOR THE NEW PERMIT.
DATE:
.29—.
(TYPE IN NAMES OF'PROPOSED PERMITTEES)
BY
(SIGNATURE)
(ADDRESS)
(Owr! Y FS•27002a (f /t:
000044
1. IS SITE NEHOED'FOR NION[R VS[ } OE1CR18[TENUR[ RECOMMENDATION. tF TERMINATION IS
PER PSM 2717.
2. WHAT 15 THE Comp l iTiON OF E*ttf#4d )9PMdvc
3. 13 THE FEE POWTH PERMIT APP!f6F!j6NrEI - Wtweh fee - ca Rutqw. OP it +44.&.df
4. IS THE PERMITTED AREA FRq?lgiklLy 9!kSrp . 18901 IF NOT, SHOW PROPER DESCRIPTIONt
. I. . — -- - 1—.
S. IS CURRENT MAP 6F THE tJSVATTXCMKOl ISITAOCOUATZ?— IFNOT,EXPLAIN
6.
7. LIST MANoAroRyAmi)suGd&YCDSPKCI)kLdL
REMARK&
suamirrea
TITLE
RANCEADISTRICT
OArc
DISTRICT RANGER
pfippoveo (8;9.mmp
TITLE
FOREST
DATE
FOREST SUPERVISOR
CPO
r ..'_._.+— . »,.,»,.. .a+•.r -,mc: _, - v.r�r, ,- 5..0.4.4::.',.,... ;' Kii`-' alsf•�Y%yY' "'V^R
I fern Lr,�.ro�n d'1'ibiQnnrwr C(Si 5`CwdrunmM nC Je IO SIUw CuOV IJ
] Osn Incrmw 11•yw1.G 5 ch. "1Y a Erntwsem.nl I C.11.11 Cud. 14
O N; I�/I ITM ENT: td %. h r,m.r a ch. ch."* I C
9 imal a.wnu. 1: RnW,iv Ivne
1. Effective Date July 27, 1987 at 8:00 A.M.
2 Policy or policies to be issued.
(a) Amount 9 110.000.00- PIZEMEM -4 74.50
IN ALTA Owner's Policy —Form 8 -1970 (Rev. 10.17.70 & Rtty. 10- 1744)
0 ALTA Residential Title Insurance Policy -1979
Proposed insured: ROBERT H 1
(b) ALTA Loan Policy, 1970 (Rev. 10.17.70 & Rev. 1,0.17 -84) Amount It L 50,00
Proposed insured:
PITKIN CI7M BANK & Tt' M COMPAW
i
(c) ;- z ;.,., Amount $
h...r
Proposed insured:
: MK C7�CVE '$ 5.00
11 '
3. Title to the fee simple estate or interest in the land
described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested in:
RICiM M. SFXWr and CAROLYN SMM SElOE)ET
4. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows:
i7M;KL LODE MME C[", U.S.M.S. N0. 6955,
according to the United States Patent recorded in Flat Book 3 at Page 391.
es s � to r s ss c•rr
Commitment No. 1 X' 1 -101 ( 1 -A7
Schedule A —Page 1
This commitment is invalid unless
uthorized Officer or gent the Insuring Provisions and Schad.
Form No. 91 -e0 (SCH. AI ules A and 8 are attached.
611PI -deg. 0001/4 ORIGINAL
OM00116
ja"ers Ti tle Insurance Corporation
National Headquarters
Richmond, Virginia
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE A
Idyvyers 11t1e Insurance Grporation
National Headquarters
Richmond, Virginia
SCHEDULE B— Section 1
Requirements
The following are the requirements to be complied with:
Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest
to be insured-
Item(b) Proper instruments) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record,
to-wit:
(1) Deed from : RICHARD M. SIXM iiiii cARmyN STEIN Ste)
to : RCBW W. BRCM
(2) Deed of Trust from : ROBEIIT W. BR%&
to the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin
for the use of : PMCF CO UN BM b TMW COFANT '
to secure : $70,000 .
:,..
(3) Certificate of NDnforeip Status, siped.by
RICAARD M 1 MM
atd CAROLYN SIE1N SHQrr.
This commitment is invalid unless
{helnsurinngg Provisions and Sched- Schedule B- Section f -Page t- Commitment No. --PCP-IO)9 -87
Was A an are attached.
Form No. 91.88 (a -11 -
035.1- 088.0001/4 ORIGINAL
1 t
0 .. ... • . - .
L. yers Title Insurance G,"`poration
NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA
SCHEDULE B— Section 2
Exceptions
The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the some are disposed of to
the satisfaction of the Company:
1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records.
2. Easements, or claims of easements, 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 premises 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, im.
posed by law and not shown by the public records.
5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in
the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the
proposed Insured acquires'. of record for value the estate or Interest or mortgage thereon covered
by this Commitment.
6. Taxes due and payable; and any tau, :assessments, charge or lien imposed for
water or sewer service, or for any other'Special taxing district.
7. Reservations and exceptions as contained in'United Patent recorded in Plat
Book 3 at Page 391.
8. !wry title or claim thereto beyond the planes formed by the side lines of any lode mining
claim described herein extended dowmaud vertically.
9. RiPht of way for the County Road located on the Southerly boundary of subject property.
Exceptions numbere NNR. a hereby omitted.
The Owner's Policy to be issued, if any, shall contain the following items in addition to the ones set forth above,
(1) The Deed of Trust, if any, required under Schedule B— Section 1, Item (b).
(2) Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing issuance
thereof; water rights, claims or title to water,
(3) Any and all unpaid taxes, assessments and vnredeemed tax sales.
Schedule B— Section 2 —Page 1 —No.
Form 91.88 92 Rocky Mt
035.1.098 -0504 ORIGINAL
00000 _
L8 s Title Insurance &7> _ ation
National Headquarters
Richmond. Virginia
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION, a Virginia corporation,' herein called the Company, for valuable
consideration, hereby commits to issue its policyor policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the
proposed Insured named in Schedule A. as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land
described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions
of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. "
This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policyor
Policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this
Commitment or by subsequent endorsement.
This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title Insurance and all liability and
obligations hereunder 'shah cease and terminate six (B) months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or
Policies committed for shall Issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the'failure to issue such policy or policies Is not the
fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be validorbindni guntilcountersignadbyanauthorizedofficeroragent.
M WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Cq Mtnttme'(if Yo be signed and sealed, to become valid when
countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of.ttje,,�t accordance with its By.Laws. This Commitment is
effective as of the date shown in Schedule jy a 'E(tectivgg. af9o-'
1. The term "mortgage," when used herein "'hall in u Is, ti t4t,'trust deed, or other security instrument.
2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual kngwl g„ } nyr)afect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other
matter affecting the estate or interest or mo ve there "n coveredby this Commitment other than those shown in
Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowleIe to the Company in writing, the Company'shall b re"Flived
from liability for any loss or damage resulting from,py act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced
by failure to so disclose such knowledge. if the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if
the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien; encumbrance, adverse claim or other
matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall
not relieve the Company from liability previously Incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and
Stipulations.
3. Liability of the Company under this Commiiment shall be only to'ihe riamed proposed Insured and such parties
included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss
incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or(b)to eliminate
exceptions shown in Schedule B, dr (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered bythis
Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies
committed for and such liability is subject to 'the instfr`ing provisions and'ihe Conditions and - Stipulations and the
Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policyor policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are
hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commiiment except as expressly modified herein.
4. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company
arising out of the status of the title to the estate or Interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this
Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment.
La v T 1 ( 1Ae Insu a Cgrporatlon
,.�.' � 1 c�t�t C • a,.�r'.L6v�
,T a - F President
.. ; b Atiest:
Secretary.
000049
Pltk!N COUNV T(TLt, Inc
Title Insurance Company
601 E. Hopkins
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925 -1766
The present owners of the Henshall Lode mining claim U.S.M.S.
86955 Richard M. Shohet and Carolyn Stein Shohet have never
owned any of the adjoining property to this par 1. They
have owned the property since 1968. \
by Charles A. Dom, Chief
000059
A^
Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D.
CONSULTING GEOLOGIST
0554 HIGHWAY 82
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81823
(303) 063-3600
August 20, 1987
Joanie Haggerty
Basalt Realty
P.O. Box 737
Basalt, CO. 81621
RE: The Henshall Lode
STATEMENT
FOR PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGIC SERVICES
Building Site Evaluation
ThhaJnkk You,
1 ''
Nicholas Lampiris
Consulting Geologist
$320.00
00051
��� • � i,:. Y L is LC
pekr✓i .. f `..
s/: %Ji /gbJiOq •t1�*���\•r4 y.r; it�`.�' �' • .K Jr'J �.J ,: V:.,.
.CJCrti;O.(J Q' ,J.�•\\ \. .a•� 1� v'�.- ........;. a•9.nJ•.: � .,':'s:
6 p '� w%a�itl
:
000052 -
;, mr-; . -
ASPENf#j
5
1 304diiihi'd al4
. . I a m t
S go tr
AS! C Ora dd aw Z/ -
LA ra
P" NU USE AOOLidk-Hdkfil 4
Of
- 63721 -47331
-63722 - 47332 dNP�/Pkrl:MWARyt
-63723 .47333 GA4P/F
-63724 _INAL SUB /CONCEPTUAL
-63726 .47342 S0"RFl
-63726 -47343 SUB/FINAL
-83727 -47360 ALL
-6372$ -413 ALL
1. GENOA ITEMS
00125 -63730 -47380 ENVIRONMERTAL 'AgXL-TV-
0" " -17 30 -4 7380 HOUSING- -----------
00115 .53730 -47380 ENGINEERING
Counly SuIvf
001f3 GmpjGE(4 ib�
-63712 - 47432
k
-
47133
-63 4 - 441 SUB/GENERAL
.5 - -
63715 -47442
-63716 .47443 SUB/FtNAL
• 63717 .47460 ALL
2-STEP APPLICATIONS
-----------------------
-63716 -47460 ALL 1 -STEP APPLICATIONS?
mueggAcip,�ft — CONSENT AGEND],(ITEMS
06125 - 6�36
- -47480 ENVIRONMEME I'
00123 -63736 -,47480 HOUSING
66 13 -63731 47486
ENVIPIO
40" "EWAL Coopo
OOff3 - S0dF-""ft-
ENGINEERING
PCARNfN'&bjF'AW-S
ALES (AC
001'13- -63061
dsdk COU
I 836U . . L - " r, NTY CODE
09 = COW PLAN 7
- OWW COPY FEES ------------------ �-Lti
OTH9pl c-
SUB-Tdy
T&eAl
Aadiiu
Pro
XcIddlon 511 1 Ilipg;
00005�
LLJ
rl
LU
U-
i 0
CL
LU
Li
000054
I..
J
LARGE PLAT(S)
AVAILABLE TO VIEW AT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
AVAILABLE TO BUY AT
CLERK & RECORDER
000055
i
�e�W.
•/ a . 1
•L
Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D.
CONSULTING GEOLOGIST
0554 HIGHWAY 82
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623
(303) 863x600
August 20, 19B7
Joanie Haggerty
Basalt Realty
P.O. Box 737
Basalt, CO. 81621
RE: The Henshall Lode
Dear M=_. Haggerty:
I have completed my geologic investigation of the
approximately nine acre mining claim above the Castle Creel::
Road in Pitkin County, Colorado. The property begins
approximately 3/10 of a mile south of the road intersection
with the Little Annie Road. This is along the east side of
the valley within the northernmost portion of the Hayden Peak
7 1/2 minute quadrangle.
The only part of the property considered for development is
the southern corder where an existing rough road accesses a
cabin on a bench overlooking Castle Creek and the county
road. There is a piped spring which feeds a small pond just
south of the cabin. The building site is on this same flat
bench with the cabin and the pond, but even further south.
Presently, the cut bench is heavily grassed, but the natural
vegetation above and below the site is that of an aspen
forest with native grasses. Much of this grass is watered
through leakage from this pond. The hillside above and below
the bench is greater than 30 %.
The geology of the site consists of Quaternary age moraine
deposits comprised of silts, sands, gravels and boulders in
an unstratified manner. This material can be seen in an
excellent outcrop just south of the property line, where the
access road crosses the steep slope. The underlying bedrock:
is most likely the Permian age Gothic f=ormation which is
mostly a tan or grey shale, =_iltstone and sandstone with
interlayers of limestone. Where this unit is exposed further
to the north, it dips steeply to the west. Portions of the
Castle Creek fault zone run under the moraine deposits in
a north /south direction in this vicinity.
There is no evidence of any recent movement on this fault
which occurred millions of year agog therefore it should not
be a negative factor, but the Uniform Building Code should be
adhered to concerning construction in seismic zone II. There
000056
4
August 24, 1987
The Henshall Lode
Page Two
are no sign=_ of instability on the hillside, even though it
is fairly steep above and below the site; however, because a
home is proposed to be built on the bench and into the cut
slope, the rear wall of the proposed structure should act as
a retaining wall. =nom n ; hA degioned by a structural
4-� had its toe
r
ramme Th rear foundati wall should protrude above
f' gt t t so that any snow sliding
whi might re ach the rear of the home des merge the
structiuea%-' Obviously, no windows should occur at this level.
It is assumed that the water supply for domestic use in the
new home will be from the existing spring which feeds 'the
previously mentioned pond. Improvement in the flow of this
spring water, especially as it overflows or leaks out of the
pond toward the south, is necessary. Minimal surface or
subsurface water should be allowed to reach the base of the
foundation. Soils engineering should be performed and
include a de 1 as the
parameters which will need to be considered to properly
des gn t�� he foundation.
Waste disposal at this site may be difficult because of the
existing spring, the small size of the existing bench, and
the steep slopes surrounding the site. An added complication
is the road cut below along the Castle Creek Road. The
Pitkin County Sanitation Engineer should be consulted for his
specific recommendations, but the soils will have an adequate
percolation rate and bedrock should be sufficiently deep as
to not be an adverse factor.
The arrpca ro ad as it presently exists needs to be redefined
C imp roved. Perhaps if the driveway entry were further up
C astle Creek Road, a less steep grade could be attained. The
cut in the morainal material will continue to ravel onto this
a ccess r oad u s ou a in a orm of a nuisance rather
t ha_.�,,,.. a,�.eri azar a owner should be prepared for
p eriod'r_ m� ;r =nonce involving clea sloughed material
from —the driveway.
I believe that if my preceding recommendations are followed,
especially with respect to the control of the spring water
and proper foundation design, this should be a suitable site
for the development of a single family dwelling. If you have
000057
August 26, 1987
The Henshall Lode
Page Three
further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Nicholas Lis
Consulting Geologist
encl.
NL /clk
m i
PARCeLID:2911- 124 -Op-0 JOACHIM AND SUSAN EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP AND CONSTRAINTS MAP ATTACHMENT
PROPERTY MAP
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
M mpowlf 1401 a-L YY, fn mm lumop It
OrsaK 1wa Y �, s iM ad rx plwgq
11tsmOrf,muMa
ears bllMlfG. *AV9 Op W WK ftw ULM YR Vo
RMRK W W lOp n M Lt np�1r[ 40W� uo a
1p41p0�10 Y6L! RY[OC fYiM ]i1110I1D Ai M
L1. [\p�lYmllSMp fIpL4 Yf�pf.
WISP [ttwrrr. MMr1[�OeM01pOp 1iD Ol tllt ll MlOpM
MfI11M OYIOr Y Oa4f� N4�OfilW 114e0 Y M Ytl
p M 14fOwMLCpT�
059 GRAPHIC SCALE
l ■[1t)
1rL -Y •
11 -14 -2011
S V
O
z
8
Ro
z
a
0
0
8 z
5
E
U
h
'L{IyC1 R�
y01�
u)
EXHIBIT B
ACCESS EASEMENT EXHIBIT
HENSHALL LODE M.S. NO. 6955
SITUATED IN TOWNSHIP I I SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. (SUSPENDED)
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
I IENSHALL LODE
M.S. 6955
#5 REBAR & CAP-
L.S. 033645
COR. #3
y0
#5 REBAR & CAP
L S. 03317
COR.#4
ACCESS EASEMENT
PO
EASEMENT
LINE SUBJECT TO
CHANGE PENDING
PITKIN COUNTY
RIGHT -OF -WAY
DOCUMENTATION
SCALE. I"= 50'
C'
P
Cf
t
70
U.S F.S SPECIAL USE ACCESS PERMIT #1046B
U.S F.S PRIVATE ROAD EASEMENT
FS- 2700 -91, OMB NO 0596 -0082
DRIVEWAY
'o
c�
4.36'
CURVETABLE
CURVE
RADIUS
LENGTH
TANGENT
CHORD
BEARING
DELTA
Cl
335.00'
85.46'
42.96'
1 8523'
S31 °45'15 "E
14 °36'58"
C2
115.00'
55.32'
2820'
1 54.78'
S25 °16'57 "E
27 °33'34"
PEAK \
Surveying, Inc.
10 bo.l]M RJ1cL(1 PII�50
YLOne IY791625-HH -FU (97) 625 -2954
Ixv JOACHIM F & SUSAN I DIEDRICH
•• r YITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO
1 " ACCESS EASEMENT
EXHIBIT B
:TX. ID�� 7200 CASTLE CREEK ROAD
I
N "a NO
1x1]1
I OF
000060
ATTACHMENT S cw&
EXHIBIT A
ACCESS EASEMENT DESCRIPTION
HENSHALL LODE M.S. NO. 6955
SITUATED IN TOWNSHIP 11 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. (SUSPENDED)
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
ACCESS EASEMENT DESCRIPTION
A PORTION OF LAND SITUATED IN TOWNSHIP 11 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN (SUSPENDED),
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO, SAID PORTION OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY OF CASTLE CREEK ROAD, WHENCE CORNER NO. 4 OF THE
I IENSHALL LODE M.S. NO. 6955 BEARS N56° 19'32 "W A DISTANCE OF 359.34 FEET, THE POINT OF BEGINNING THENCE N51 °48'42 "E A
DISTANCE OF 29.75 FEET; THENCE N24 °26'46 "W A DISTANCE OF 92.23 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID
IIENSHALL LODE, WHENCE CORNER NO 3 OF SAID HENSHALL LODE BEARS S2 1 °26'00 "W A DISTANCE OF 13.68 FEET; THENCE
ALONG SAID EASTERLY BOUNDARY N21 °26'00 "E A DISTANCE OF 41.79 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY BOUNDARY
S24 °26'46 "E A DISTANCE OF 164.06 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 335 00 FEET
AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14 °36'58 ", A DISTANCE OF 85 46 FEET (CHORD BEARS S31 °45' 15 "E A DISTANCE OF 85.23 FEET); THENCE
ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 115.00 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27 A
DISTANCE OF 55.32 FEET (CHORD BEARS S25 "E A DISTANCE OF 54 78 FEET); THENCE S 11 °30'10 "E A DISTANCE OF 57.82 FEET,
THENCE S5 1 A DISTANCE OF 4 36 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY; THENCE ALONG SAID
RIGHT -OF -WAY N37 °48'06 "W A DISTANCE OF 100 92 FEET, THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT -OF -WAY N37 "W A
DISTANCE OF 137.53 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING
° YO Oa Pevinar P Prnyn NO
Y lxv IOACHI F. A SUSAN 1 OIEORICH
, NITRIN COIINTV, COLOMUO I W)1
PEAK ACCESS EASEMENT
Surveying, Inc. sEy ,. y,y„ EXHIBIT A
PG".,. INx6- xru,, CO 816A 7200 CASTLE CREEK ROAD IOFi
PLOne 1970) 625- 1954 - FU (S].) 625 -2954
uw pe4rurv<)in8xx aw^ L'SFSEASE OWG
000061
NI( HOL ks 11ANIPIRIS, 1'1111)
CON S t I. I'll NG GF,01,0GISI
San Luciano, .11ocotcpcc
.lalisco, .Mexico, 4581111
nick lampiri, a ttotmail.cmil
52 i 131 4 -43 11520
,1+. . II I "I I �. ' I , : I
,k nn Ilorn
1 );n u I lung Incorporated
I Vol%lirh StPeet
nCii - (,' k 11,1d1, N 101 1
ill : Illiedru•h propert�, ' Cas(le Creek Road
i)t:l ( i I inn.
ATTACHMENT ,
I,ial Me Diedrich property in We suntlncr ul' I QX 7 and again on f Uoher . ) .h. '.01 I
nr� nl% I�r �,Itc % i,it a hou,c 11,15 hct•ll dc\clopcd un the property'. I hi, letter is
Wk 1001 I. .upl)It t nn r;porl of Ugust A 1QN7. and to adthcss four spec ilie
,'ili!" it I %% It'Lnvol t, 11 L' present piro et. I 11Cse Coln I „11111, are Illy:
Oit'ImA11% wistallle slope w the drl\c\\a\ entnincc:
\ mach rc(Iuircd to cunucct to the leach Held. south\ \csi ul the home. \\hich
t I ", `,lopes !!realcr (hall
11ni"Ilt\ .11 Ills' Uiep dupe I+'rcincr IlLul vu nordic•ast (11 the lionic \ \hCrc an
.`.a;nnri): uliti +ration ,u'ucturc \\ill he installctl::ulc1
i.thl� ,1111)C
''.11 whtl an SAW rrpolt, hat c heen ,ilklicd to till CIA 11, %tell. Inclutiillr+ the a%alanche
u llr`: "t \lt \k'w'. .I,lcchnital rcporl ht ('hen and .\,so('iatt•,. soul a letter I "rural the
+iii ",•�l i'A' 7111\ Ills' `,t'a'ip cut at the dl'I\c\\ -11\ ellirancc. Ill cat-11 C'r t- y \llh
;i) , 'opc'. ,tccper than itl "7, or junntlall\ unstable slo pcs_ dic l ( ount\ I mid
( ode %%::, rcCernd to. ,pccilicallt dc\clopnlcnt oil slope, 'greatcr than tU I)cl ni
1 ll . .0 T ( c K and the ,ccdon oII GeoIoi,ic I la /arils 1Sccl it) ll %- .'.tl-�O). I or fli
ail: r..\r( \Icurh. As adtlrt•s t c k l the a\alanche Stion 17 -70 - 50 it) and nl\ pro low, Icticr
HS ON mAl s,cd I ants, 17 -. -5111 its.
000063
I hr I'itlsin ('uuntN staff has identified talus slopes as'an issue ol* concern. There are not
❑nt utlus slopes on or above the propertN Ahich will result in rocktall danger. The
unstable slope located above the existing driveway is addressed belok%.
\, to the dri\c\�av entrance. I concur k�itll Rely 15. 1087 the Forrest See\ ice conclusions
to Ica\e the slope in its natural state. as the sloughing \g ill be minor and infrequent.
Ihuim- >pring run- uffoccasional clearing ofsloughed material \ill be needed. I lu\\c\er.
the k ncr hit, I a plan to place .Icrse\ barriers at the base of this slope alum the
c to nrinnnric material reaching the dri�c%\ay. I'he plan also proposes the installation
ofdruimwC un the uphill side of the .lose\ harriers and the extension ofthe drice\\a\ to
the South as recanunended ut nt\ r\uLUSt 20. 1987 letter to .loanic l These
proposed dri\C%\a\ intprowmcros \Nil) increase salcty to this part ofthc drive\%a\ and
( :astic (•reel. Road. l lee dl improvements do not entail cultin!! into the slope
Complies \\ith Section 7 -`0 -20 c (l) ol'the Code.
\ ucnch for the waste water disposal system is to be cut to a depth of about 4 to 5 Icct
and \\ ill be less than 18 inches in width across a slope greater than 30'Ni. As it will he
rapidly hack- Iillcd after the pipe is laid. this should not negatively affect the slability ul'
the slope in that � icinity. Water should not be allowed to collect in this trench durimt the
rntplaccntent as this could nc-Iati\cl\ affect stahilitk. Further. it is ntV urtderstundin� that
a 1 tbot retaining; \\ all \X ill be built up slope to add stabilit\ to the tirundation of the hums
and the trctrch site.
\rt \le:n and Rock Solid Solutions. Inc. hate proposed a freestandimg avalanche
ntiugaliun fence clesi�-n to the northeast side of tltc home to protect it from avalanches
ithin the 131ue /ono. Rock Solids Specilic design should be adhered to. fn order to
install the net or \�all. a temporar\ access tier machinery must be pro\ ided along the slope
behind the home. Once the mitigation is emplaced. the slope «ill be restored � \ith a
resuhm:: 11at bench up slope to catch the sno%� %shich may reach the mitigation \�.tll or
Iene; liase.l upon m\ site obscr\ations and comersations %Kith the ticncral contractor
.uui the ; t:a� aloe. it should he possible to construct the a\ alanche mitigation device on
the >Iop,: to the northeast of house \\ithuut dcstabilit.ing slopes \\hich ore grcatcr than
.;U° ".
In conclusion. all three: ol issues have been adequately addresscd lire purpuscS of
adherin;! to the Land I'sc ('odc. Please contact me if there are Iurlher (1uestions.
tiincefcl�
Nicholas I.:unpiris. 1'111)
( unsulting (;culo�ist
000064
Attachments
1. August 20, 1987 letter from Nicholas Lampiris to Joanie Haggerty
2. August 25, 1987 letter from Nicholas Lampiris to Joanie Haggerty
3. July 15, 1987 letter from United States Forest Service to Joanie Haggerty
4. October 14, 1987 letter from Chen & Associates to Buck Browner
000065
`WN&
Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D.
CONSULTING GEOLOGIST
0554 HIGHWAY 82
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623
(303) 963-3600
August 20, 1707
Joani.a Haggerty
Basalt Realty
P.o. Box 73 7
Basalt, Co. [31621
RE. The Henshall Lode
Dear Ms. Haggerty:
I have completed my geologic
approximately nine investigation of the
acre mining claim above the Castle Creek:
Road in Pitkin County, Colorado, The property begins
With the Little
approximately e of a mile south of the road intersection
Annie Road. This is along the east side of
the valley within the northernmost portion of the Hayden Peak
7 1/2 minute quadrangle.
The only part of the property considered for development is
the southern corner where an existing rough road accesses a
cabin on a bench overlooking Castle Creek and the county
road. There is a piped spring which feeds a small pond just
south of the cabin. The building site is on this same flat
bench with the cabin and the pond, but even further south.
Presently, the cut bench is heavily grassed, but the natural
vegetation above and below the site is that of an aspen
forest With native grasses. Much of this grass
through leakage from this pond. is watered
The hillside above and below
the bench is greater than 3C %.
The geology of the site consists of ( 7uaternary age moraine
deposits comprised of silts, sands, gravels and boulders in
an unstratified manner. This material can be seen in can
excellent outcrop just south of the property line, where the
access road crosses the steep slope. The underlying bedrock
is most likely the Permian age Gothic Formation which is
mostly a tan or grey shale, siltstone and sandstone with
interlayers of limestone. Where this unit is exposed further
to the north, it dips steeply to the west. Portions of the
Castle Creek fault zone run under the moraine deposits in
a north.'south direction in this vicinity.
There is no evidence of any recent movement on this -fault
which occurred millions of year ago; therefore it should not
be a negative factor, but the Uniform Building Code should be
adhered to concerning construction in seismic zone II. There
U00066
August 20, 1927
The Henshall Lode
Page Two
are no signs_ of instability on the hillside, even though it
is fairly steep above and below the site, however, because a
home is proposed to be built on the bench and into the cut
slope, the rear wall of the proposed structure should act a>
a retaining wall. It <hn"Id ho d ed by a structural
engineer to rPfnv +H .Py}g�e mnk2riai , +4ica„raa s had its the
r e d. Th rear -Foundati wall should protrude above
f t t so that any snow sliding
whi.g teach the rear of the home oes mage the
strucdursWr Obviously, no windows should occur at this level.
It is assumed that the water supply for domestic use in the
new home will be from the existing spring which feeds the
previously mentioned pond. Improvement in the flow of this
spring water, especially as it overflows or leaks out of the
pond toward the south, is necessary. minimal surface or
subsurface water should be allowed to reach the base of the
foundation. Soils engineering should be performed and
include a de sigm -c-- _ --
1 as the
paramete r�which will need to be considered to properly
design the foundation.
Waste disposal at this site may be difficult because of the
existing spring, the small size of the existing bench, and
the steep slopes surrounding the site. An added complication
is the road cut below along the Castle Creek Road. The
Pitkin County Sanitation Engineer should be consulted for his
specific recommendations, but the soils will have an adequate
percolation rate and bedrock: should be sufficiently deep as
to not be an adverse factor.
The arro« r ^ ad as it presently exists needs to be redefined
a iLd Imp roved. Perhaps if the driveway entry were further up
C astle Creek Road, a less steep grade could be attained. The
cut in the morainal material will continue to ravel onto this
access road, but should be in the form of a nuisance rather
than a serious hazard. The owner should be prepared for
periodic maintenance involving clearing sloughed material
from the driveway.
I believe that if my preceding recommendations are followed,
especially with respect to the control of the spring water
and proper foundation design, this should be a suitable site
for the development of a single family dwelling. If you have
000067
� - I
August 20, 1957
The Henshall Lode
Page Three
-further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Nis Lis
Consulting Geologist
encl.
NL. /clk
"I
UU0068
n
Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D.
CONSULTING GEOLOGIST
0554 HIGHWAY 82
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623
(303) 983.39W
August 25, 19£37
Joanie Haggerty
Basalt Realty
P.O. Box 717
Basalt, CO. 81621
RE: The Henshall Lode
Dear Ms. Haggerty:
a
It has .lust come to my attention that an old mine entry
tunnel has been identified near the site of the proposed hone
referred to in my letter of August 26, 1987. It is my
understanding that this mine tunnel, whose entry is now
collapsed, entered the side of the hillside and trended north
from a point just east of the proposed footprint for the new
home. There is a grassy area there that indicated leakage of
water which previously was attributed to the small pond
further east. Information is now available that the pond may
not leak., or at least not to the extent previously believed,
but instead, water is coming out of a second spring developed
in the old mine portal at this location.
My recommendations, assuming that there are no branches of
this tunnel which might go under the proposed site, and I du
not believe this is very likely, are to continue with the
drainage plans as previously discussed to keep water from
trending under the proposed site. Obviously, perimeter
drains will need to be put in as recommended before, and
excess water needs to be piped toward the hillside where it
has drained for perhaps a number of years.
,)The soils engineers, which I understand will be Chen °<
!! �ociates from Glenwood Springs, should be made aware of the
' ex istence of this tunnel, so that their soils testing may
include a consideration of the effects of the old mine
workings. Obviously, the cut bench which is the site of the
existing cabin, the pond, and the proposed home, must have
been a bench cut during the mining days, rather than one cut
some number of years ago for the purposes of development of a
residence. I believe that the home is still possible at the
site if my present recommendations and the ones is the
previous letter are followed, and if the soils engineers will
consider not only the site specific foundation design, but
any impact that the mine workings may have on the site.
Sincerely
I•dl_ /cik Ni� Larnpir
Consulting Geologist.
United States 'orest White River t!'% Aspen Ranger District
Department of Service National 806 West Hallam
Agriculture Forest Aspen, CO 81611
Reply To: 2720
Date: July 15, 1987
Basalt Realty
P.O. Box 737
Basalt, Colorado 81621
Dear Ms. Haggerty:
This is in response to your recent letter to Greg Thompson regarding the access
road to the Shohet property.
Our engineers had a opportunity to review the Shohet road and the Bluffing
which has taken place. Their opinion is to leave the slope in its natural
condition and maintain and clear the road when necessary. This may require you
clear the road several times in the spring or during prolonged wet period$. You
could line the edge of the road which butts against the slope with large rocks
to keep some of the material off the road. They do not think a retaining wall
is necessary or needed. If this road is properly maintained it will'provide
safe access to the property.
If you have any other questions, please contact Greg Thompoon at 925 -3445. If
the property should sale, we will need to have you fill out a transfer form and
reissue a new special use permit.
Sincerely,
Ati
Cuf William Johnson
District Ranger
Or 0070
1�
' ..•........ 5080 aced 154 ng9. co 81 "d I '
Chen &AssOCla es,. Glenmrooe spri
Cmsul9rg 0eotechnmal Engineers 3031945.7456
Casper
Colorado Sonrg9
Denver
Ft Collins
Phoenix
Rock Springs
Salt Lake City
San Antonio
ao
O �(o October 14, 1987
e;0 �. !
q 4� Subject: Observation of Partial'
Excavation,'Proposed Crib
P - " fte£ag Wall and Residence,
o� g F' 7200 Castle Creek Road,
Pitkin County, Colorado.
Job No. 4 387 87
Buck Brower
423 East Hyman
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Mr. Brower:
As requested, we met with you at the subject site on October 7, 1987 to
observe the excavation and discussed the proposed retaining wall - and residence
construction. Chen & Associates, Inc, previously observed the existing cut
slope at the site and provided design parameters for a proposed crib retaining
wall for the slope, reporting our findings in a letter dated September 30,
1987, Job No. 4 387 87.
The location of the proposed crib wall and residence has been moved about
30 to 40 feet northeast from the location discussed. in our previous letter.
The residence and wall will also now be at different bearing elevations and
configurations. The change is apparently due to encountering groundwater
seepage during excavation at the existing cut slope and proposed building
location.
We have been provided with a proposed grading plan for the site, showing
the proposed wall and residence locations, dated October 12, 1987. The con—
struction will consist of a'two —story residence and an uphill crib wall, cut
into the natural hillside. The hillside grade is steeper than the previous
building site with grades of about 45% to 60% and ranging -up to 75%. Lower
floor elevation of the residence will be at site elevation 105 uphill foun—
dation wall backfill surface will be at elevation 110 to 112 and top of
crib wall elevation will range from 116 to 126 The wall may be as close as
8 from the building foundation wall. The retaining wall will'be' designed and
constructed as previously proposed by Retention Engineering, Inc and described
in our previous letter.
At the time of our site visit, excavation in the building site and the
drive, and garage area to the south was in progress. The building site was
partially excavated along the uphill foundation wall 'to a de about 5 to
7 feet. The soils exposed consisted of silty sandy gravel with cobbles which
were slightly moist, medium dense and generally similar to those previously
observed in the. existing cut slope. Observation of several backhoe pits
000071
Ile
Buck Brower
October 14, 1987
Page 2
located on the existing older cut and fill bench (site elevation =
indicated groundwater a few feet below ground surface near the existing spring
outlet and colluvial gravel soils to a depth of 8 feet in the septic profile
pit near the southwest corner of the proposed residence.
The proposed retaining wall system appears feasible for the current
building location. Due to the proposed' 1 1/2:1 wall backfill slope, a higher
lateral pressure than previously recommended of about 55 p'cf be used in
the new design. Wall backfill should be relatively free - draining and an
underdrain, system should be provided. It appears the crib retaining wall
could impose a surcharge pressure on the uphill building wall which should be
considered in the foundation "design. We "sffould`oTiserde `the building and
retaining wall excavations to evaluate bearing conditions.
Other recommendations provided in our previous letter which are applic-
able should also be observed"; If you Have any questions or if we may be of
further service; please call.
.� �GISTFR
�p P
15222
DAY /ec
Rev. By: S.L.P.
very truly yours,
cc: Retention Engineering, Inc.
Attn: John Tryba
Chen &Associates
U00072
CHEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
ATTACHMENT$,
Arthur 1. Mean. P.H.. Inc.
Natural I laiards Consultwrts
555 County Road 16
Gunnison, CO 81230
IeIfrat (970)541 -7236
July 9, 2011
Mr. Glenn Horn
.`r .latthew La: drorst
'.'r. I�.k:my Thcroson
Via email
Re. !- 3ianche exacsue aad mitigation f - asib4ity, Diedrich property, 7. -'20
Castle C hoed
Dear Glenn, Monty, Matt
As req"ested, I ccn a site msoecoon and this"FPase t" araaysts cf the
soave- referenced c(ceeriv. The objectives of this phase of the stt.ho are as
fol 'a �s
a. C, cietion of a site visit on July 6 to evaluate terrain and aveca� •e
potential for ,'te design (100- ;.ear") avatarche;
b. Mcdelir of desien- a dynarrks've'lcclttes, flow thicFr•ess,
a -a impact - pressure potental) at the b..dding s.e and germination of
t -e extent c t tae olue avalanc- ne -hazara .-ne, and
c. Determination of the feasibility c4 ss avalanche defense.
As .�,e rlscussed on site, trrs , ortion of our work - rses not include a design -
loar_' ng analysis or discussion of uetalled structural mdigattexn ccoans. This
d be included in n future Phase 2 puraon of my ,max, if needed.
Ter .am and avalanche potentia
e s_czpe above -ne at dng house and property Is - rer.;ed toward the
sou: is inch -ed az ::rP to 35°. The ,over srcx :>LPjcds a fairly rnw—e
aspen `^cast above We 'rouse up to 9,200 feet elevation. Heeveen approximately
9,200 and 9,400 feet elevation the slope supports a sigebfuser corer. The
sagebrush will become completely ccverea oy the nessortaa snaaoack in
average to aoow - average seasons and gill serve as a starting zone, or area
where snow avalanches can start and accelerate.
This entire path for the shown on Figure 1. In
Pitkm County a c'. asign -rr rl,tLde,aiatanche •.m!h a 100 -year return period must
be considerea for haznrd zonation -ana constntF =n of structural defenses-
000073
figure •valanph fic ib, -VI
W68 zonesoarw, house Qati 3k4shoym-
V4.
ava*chet 4oas;OxW�cn rrrap"-66f$A4 *Aefrich'�
I
plope0y but are
Is
IL
4
V r
House
L • tS
0000 74
.c•.:rvi.es the a:3i.ancre ca,n into 'red" 3rd "blue" hwxa acr,.es, also
cons :>r.errt •vrn ?it.-in County regu. awns. The case top•cgraphe map is tcrr: re
F '•;n ;S%'ataoasewdh =n rriginal .-ale of V _ _•10' and a 10' contour
u ^erupt. - , - -e mad meers er e<czeas rational map acccracy star *.:.e:ds In Pitkin
Counti Hazard zones are refined as foVoAm
a. 7, ed ' - -e--e - zone vrere a.+aancches may have return periods of 30 years
x less or -ay «rcasrx urcact cre_.sures or , than 600 lbs/ft' on flat,
-
- sc,riaces rcrmar to the fl7r :!evelePTaent is t estarted w the red
. - _ , .e cecause of either relaGuely ;; -qh `naGtrercy x hign pressures;
b. -;;" Zone zory na m afanctes have return der nds of 30 to 100
years ants produce impact prassxes of less man 600 ;ur:V; deve+coment
may be 17�-rrr Zed in •rrs zone LO structural crotection is required ^o
protect'Laudings and other structures used by people.
=cetatron forest indicators am avalarcre frequency
As acted prevcusly- the sagebrush - covered slope above 9, 2CO feet el"abeon
shi7an in Figure 2 .vrll rat :;-event large stab avaiarares from starting and vnll, in
act be ccmpreteiy snAw covered on typical to above- average :. , mars.
(
. 'mss . « .�v :. �� �•. ;
F' ^,ure 2. Sagebrush- covered slope ,foreground) between 3.2JOand 9,4G0
?et elevation. -' iove may become tamoteaaty snow covered and wrli rot
,;reyent.avalancne release. >lvar.anches may be mom frequent here thus
- ^is area n included m tr:e red zone (shown in Figure 1).
000075
The zscee r_�=st direr ^_v reicw the sagebrush slope sc.00cats 6" trees an
estimated E0 dears cr e. _ roken gees atgned dowrs,acee by avalanches were
'out ^c ca,nq _ a:aianches are not frequent within to forest, The forest
> �ticertpyOeree preverirrx_si avalanche releases. F_Rfarmore, because
s Coe is c.:ry 2G9 t .''- , Iination, avafamf7es `eginrong in -e forest be
sr a acs , TitEa a size H :vever this Brest r-111. not arevent avalanches
n ;n higher on one 3 4cm reacrmutheh•3use.
As nc:_ ;rFS - ,t.ve'he = co=rm residence face to the sa;. ^west 7,^- will
not ilantial aircurrs of wind- trariscc M �-n ox becarvse:h.ey are
.r, e •r,r::t 3, by s.:ercuncing fccPst. 1 - ic-ow eer, ;'Goes a- tl-�- ! i:te
ad t.cf: ton, - ratery t ,'CI `-et to the meth are cf a srMla; +=rr ion to
r e ai• „e _ : iedrici i es. 'e .ce, .9'e only _ -, :y steeper arm are ir..he sa
snrrc'.rrata. tseslope3nT.e4nj ". Jared - f.ararcra>i`ai lave rea�`�a^d
= s Ott fhe LAI: 9 . ^• <_ Foal at 'east G l: ryes in - ;.e past 3 aecaces. . n ^4en
=main, ve• ?talon :'"?r, rr ancv to swees '•,-cram t, sx3uce avalanches e .^d
'r :S, Se . s erne i n and :t , er ava}a .che ,mates i n _.s erd -mmr
'`r 7 ��:. areas 'I - lu yP�:t.;t western 'V.-,h America, + sssume the Fctt„+nng
000076
- 'lure I AsDen forest between 9:050 and 9,200 feet elevation directly
+Dove :ne mouse and nelow the sagebrush shoe. i �8
" .?- fear avaianene can easily penetrate this'crestarm, re
aen the house.
a The a _ -ces rain arcouce avalanches Tcfe often than once
In a - =anco trat a trc aen•te •^e hcr,se trey are a "red zone;"
b The --:an Plcest .and tt'a Lie, i&scence,s in an area
3f313ocres . "ecur,,ceriecs :630'a "u':..sars; the
in a "blue' .are 'c ?r.,r*..urak de'erses.'ras be
perm;ced by � •vin County in the c•ce:_ e.
- - ----- - ='8 — 3Sr4es and structu'ai oele, "..
:aness and it -ore sL;> c cten�a s :.ere
0', he m[tsr'Ocet,;', %L -:5 .';e
-= _,-a -a 'r _, :.� -g re =_ a.z�anch,= cz. a.z.er�^es could c: asa th= dat
;n ,v iich th a n c'_ se is ':,r, gapd, 4 . zcerd the ;`eel ' yo er s.cce and =eat
C =t, _;:ec;`; -warn J.`es.gn loads and `eick!s a structuraz defense abc +'e
d .` ^aset;tcdv. Hcweaerourfindirgs
sum,-a-�zer -a:cw ^d:;a:e 'tat >, Je(enses areteas:cte:
a. aOPMnr r> Rsu. eori': at wall i-xr- ma;ed into the oacx
c• - .,acLionta ir -11 '1- set•. culorotarcz—d2 m t)- : +�;osia3a_vesst,fe
_'d t air ror - ,er..cai xs qon -n ' ^e 14A and � aa.na�ent cf :re--s b 1 `e o,,a .:e ^eta on r'caat •ate^. -•:o and :ae
_ nt i =tar.a fe ` =; ^rra t, -e o,a,e: c"eli4 rarr r.a4c ancros rr the
-au would be ro rrr: a thar, 3.5m (1'; 3 ft) high.
za�j acc - re i.'ifb t.^ati of an .�ra'ar a•.a_impaca
e. The a ;,'c•_Ir1 -e aaa of anew i : d ana ret a •ee- s•artcrq
a I _ - ssv s.rs•? I_e ^ira •„ .aR Vm.�ci be re^.,urred. '.. ^'s .a ^sm +±ian '.vvuld
be alue acra
a =r -he h = _a:4 cc a; 'rewav access
The a sting r .ewav to ne -;u ;erng `'om the Castie Ic
be;,,w a,,rte w. c)!-- %0 fee`' ^r;h thea can a'cou ::>rrat/
avai.a -:cas. We esrra•a: hat a�raFarcn =s �.w;u a reach tra �_ad less a ?er r
one n -e in a 10 -1 ear er,:,a, on 're avyr +;e, a. d 'ra :e -7ul of �:aw c.a reeved
an .3.efa re c:: it `o "-'v '-et. . =x ;v rg i ^terraacrai .- +sk as>essrrefrt
cnte7a , `e r .e risk: sccrerat rsk) 7crn ava ches on :: =e access route
Ce
'SA :.i rn•n :re:,a,tab'e l awes aril mitigation would nct c? required.
Christen, M, r ,;_rell, U Gruber, AVAL -11D. An Avalanche Dynamics Program for the
Pracirce.
' Ciamanudis, D . 2008, Background Documents on Risk Assessment m Engineering, sl.nnent
48, Risk Acceptance Criteria, trom the Joint Committee of Structural Safety
000077
- ° ary _ -- Tin points in this s::.dv
a. Tha Diedrich residence and Ir:cc aea addition to it xe I-ca:ed below
an -:.a;arc s;.,ce that • ees ::op "cx.r*ac21y -.0 'mot acave - -e
ra9P:ence;
b `-a i � ccer cart of this slcf.e is Iccared in a red the Dieo
r� F,cerce is �cca:ed is a bl-.e _3r;e'
c. " tr. ':,, I r ;' °nation acme to : cese of ,3 c e r,sed cerszr ,ztion is
d. .'mi ude, c' rection am area of the surfaces s..c 3vaanche
aas should Le sa t: `ack L z a s to scec ic ar;lresas:
e. The current mess oad to the t—xse I es ", an area of acLec *acle
r'. < ;s = leer, r .e! :amaros.
axons
Thr; reT4f is e-scerafic. It appl "es :,a rre rerram r osef ed auz: -3 he s,.'e visit
of . -,.ye, - ;11. - nyscesiartiA changes to neterrain --r s�ecation cover say
invaii•�ate the conclusions of this report.
You as my client should know th at wrile c-r .;o -pang : zxn ar,a c:es attempt to
te;d ,h ,critass: r a'r, standards, L e st.atx f s cnnfic a?d a-.
, v eeol g
- c.weace is irca'.'prere, : -nrt does - --: a ways cermit ce- *atir,r{. 1 ne ^
- _n:;*erai.r: ":zed n;: aiarc; es cancctce :t ^aeyah- xeoa.-A::redicted,
- ,:u, ::ec ^cds ir,da :��reCi� a+a+anc'e eha•oor c ^arae as :"ew. :-arch
afalace 7;: -'e ,"m f an a-c-10 c,€`er.-,x ce =_t °':>zssranJ;. :c:rznt,
�affa �f '�;.aia*' Of r�s ri
Sincerely,
, �-rg.l.,. ^t_CGi r'ri 2frb'12e3r
LCUUNQ
ATTACHMENT$
Arthur I. Mears, P.E., Inc.
Natural Hazards Consultants
555 County Road 16
Gunnison, CO 81230
Tel /Fax: (970) 641 -3236
November 8, 2011
Mr. Monty Thompson
Thunder Construction, Inc.
P.O. Box 4841
Aspen, Colorado 81612
Via email
Re: Avalanche design - loading criteria, Diedrich rockfall fence
7200 Castle Creek Rd., Pitkin County, Colorado
Dear Monty:
The Design Avalanche and Mitigation
The design avalanche was described in my July 9, 2011 report to you and Glenn Horn.
The existing house and proposed addition are located in a Blue avalanche zone.
Structural protection is required for residential structures in the Blue zone in Pitkin
County. After discussions with you and Patrick Breagy of Rock Solid Solutions
Corporation, you have decided on a detached rockfall barrier as the preferred method to
provide the required mitigation. This letter describes the design requirements of this
mitigation.
Fence Height and Impact Loading Capacity
Fence height will be 4m (13.1ft) measured from the flat bench behind the fence on the
uphill side. The vertical distribution of impact pressure from the avalanche on the fence
is shown on Figure 1. We recommend a 13.1 -foot fence for debris storage.
O'�0�77
U hd
i
i
i
U hd
Figure 1. Loading distribution on fence
Barrier (rockfall fence) location and grading
According to information (Product Manual for Geobrugg RXI -100) sent to us by Rock
Solid Solutions and the plan by Thunder Construction, a 1000kJ energy capacity fence
will be located on the slope roughly 15 vertical feet above and to the northeast of the
house (Figure 2). A location variation of up to 5 feet is permitted in the upslope or
downslope direction. A 10 -foot wide bench will be constructed behind the barrier to
provide energy dissipation and debris storage. This bench can have a slope of up to 5%
for drainage.
Avalanche energy and loading
Avalanche- dynamics calculations using the Swiss dynamics program AVAL -1 D resulted
in the following:
a. Impact speed —8.7m/sec:
b. Impact pressure —15.1 kPa (316 Ibs/ft');
c. Height of impact above ground — 3.53m (11.6ft).
Total avalanche kinetic energy dissipated over a time of 1.0 seconds over a 20m (66 ft)
width of fence will be approximately 660 to 870 kJ (243 to 321 ft- tons).
We assumed in our calculations that the rockfall fence will be loaded over a maximum
width of 20m (66 ft); the entire width of the fence will not be loaded at onetime.
Fence Type
We recommend a rockfall fence because these are designed with breaking elements to
limit peak forces and dissipate impact loads. We do not recommend a specific fence
manufacturer and cannot recommend the structural elements of any particular rockfall
fence.
2
000080
General Limitations
You as my client should know that while our company can and does attempt to uphold
high professional standards, the state of scientific and engineering knowledge is
incomplete, and does not always permit certainty. The complex phenomena involved in
avalanches cannot be perfectly evaluated and predicted, and methods used to predict
avalanche behavior change as new research becomes available. White we can and will
offer our best professional judgment, we cannot and do not offer any warranty or
guarantee of results.
Specific Limitations
The specially- reinforced 1000kJ rockfall fence you have suggested is a type of mitigation
that has been tested in Switzerland and Austria It has been used for mitigation of small
avalanches on a limited basis. Limited field experience has been obtained. The impact
and depositional loads of snow avalanches affects a wider and larger area than rockfall
and produces static loads that may last until the debris melts or is removed. Breaking
and energy absorbing elements of the fence may require adjustment or replacement in
order for the fence to remain effective. Use of a rockfall fence for avalanches must be
considered experimental because of the limited experience. We feel it is appropriate in
this case because avalanches have a return period of 30 to 100 years (a 1% to 3%
annual probability) and will be small, moderate energy events.
Si n cerely,
n
(, l��^ 4.1'V PpA4
Arthur I. Mears, P.E.
Avalanche - control engineer
3
000081
_ - - Notes:
1. Avalanche Barrier Fence shall be Geobrugg R %I -100, Energj Class 5 Ro c kfall
Barrier modified by Geobrugg for avalanche debris. The barrrq should be
installed and ins
_ _... _ petted and maintained per the manufacturers ins [ructions.
- - - - _ 2. Final location of the barrier shall follow existing contours and t\th. -S
:ft. wide -fl avalanched bris'" - �-- - "" — - (five feet) of design location in uphill /downhill direction; end poiet
- Ss rage -area , _ -- _ or exceed protection limits shown on both ends of barrier.
3. The 10 -foot wide flat area may slope up to 5 percent grade to provide
drainage. \
A_valancheBarrt
-- 4. Site plan and topography provided by Roaring Fork Civil Consultants, Inc.
-- ��0 apaEltt�._ - _.;.^•„ --" - _ - - dated October 25, 2011. Final grading not shown near avalanche barrier.
��--- 138fit:)0ng-43_ftiigh —
(42 - -.- -
t� 906
o ct Coordinates:
'
827.7
- 418.2.'
Pro ect 905 i
— --
8' AcceR�ad_ �O
O
i
s
Arthur I. Mears, P.E., Inc. Avalanche Barrier & Storage Plan
Wilbur Engineering, Inc. Diedrich Residence Figure 2
November 8, 2011 7200 Castle Creek Road, Pitkin County, Colo.
PARCEL ID: 2911-124-00-0251 JOACHIM AND SUSAN DIEDRICH DRIVEWAY ON USFS LAND
VICINITY MAP
11 -14 -2011
ATTACHMENT q
gill
d i
11
J
N
INSTALL 320 LF OF TYPE 4 BARRICADES
— PER ROADWAY SECTION DETAIL FOR
ROCK SLUFF CAPTURE.
DRIVEWAY PLATFORM 16 FEET WIDE AT
BARRICADE LOCATION, TRANSITIONING
TO APPROXIMATELY 16 FEET BEYOND
BARRICADES.
C ° ==
- -
EXISTING DRIVEWAY
LOCATION
ILI
GENERAL NOTES
1.) This sheet depicts driveway Improvements made In the fall of 2011
as recommended by Nick Lampirs, geologist.
2.) The land depicted on the site plan Is within the White River National
Forest and is subject to USFS access permit easement #
3.) Improvements shown on this sheet are subject to Pitkin County
Access and Earthwork permit numbers 0059.2011.paem and 0060.2011.paem.
GRAPHIC SCALE
lo
lvrer)
1 Im\ - t0 M1
CJ
vi
L F -1 m
m
Q s i
4T, C z
c7
y
a
Ell
V
g
no .10
2091005
USFS
STA: 1 +75.77
27 LF OF 15" CMP STORM
WATER PIPE UNDER DRIVEWAY
(x31.1 %. USE ONSITE BOULDERS
TO CREATE WATER CATCH
LOCATION FOR INV. IN.
INV IN: 8973.39'
INV OUT: 8973.09'
70.0 LF OF 15" CMP STORM
WATER PIPE UNDER
DRIVEWAY
INV IN: 8973.5'
INV OUT: 8973'
i
100 D EWAYEXTENSION I - - -J
ASPEN
s"
a
1
s
�slt£ uxnnoNI
VICINITY MAP
11 -14 -2011
ATTACHMENT q
gill
d i
11
J
N
INSTALL 320 LF OF TYPE 4 BARRICADES
— PER ROADWAY SECTION DETAIL FOR
ROCK SLUFF CAPTURE.
DRIVEWAY PLATFORM 16 FEET WIDE AT
BARRICADE LOCATION, TRANSITIONING
TO APPROXIMATELY 16 FEET BEYOND
BARRICADES.
C ° ==
- -
EXISTING DRIVEWAY
LOCATION
ILI
GENERAL NOTES
1.) This sheet depicts driveway Improvements made In the fall of 2011
as recommended by Nick Lampirs, geologist.
2.) The land depicted on the site plan Is within the White River National
Forest and is subject to USFS access permit easement #
3.) Improvements shown on this sheet are subject to Pitkin County
Access and Earthwork permit numbers 0059.2011.paem and 0060.2011.paem.
GRAPHIC SCALE
lo
lvrer)
1 Im\ - t0 M1
CJ
vi
L F -1 m
m
Q s i
4T, C z
c7
y
a
Ell
V
g
no .10
2091005
USFS
STA: 1 +75.77
27 LF OF 15" CMP STORM
WATER PIPE UNDER DRIVEWAY
(x31.1 %. USE ONSITE BOULDERS
TO CREATE WATER CATCH
LOCATION FOR INV. IN.
INV IN: 8973.39'
INV OUT: 8973.09'
70.0 LF OF 15" CMP STORM
WATER PIPE UNDER
DRIVEWAY
INV IN: 8973.5'
INV OUT: 8973'
i
100 D EWAYEXTENSION I - - -J
sio�eem
U00084
mwan+xo�.
iuiaii seEnic xeview
DIEDRICH REMODEL/
ADDITION
�aao runec�xo.
mwxtoum.onpuoo
pq x
smwm.00
N.M•crv.
ai.emf �mwa,.ian>>e.
a�
EXISTING CONDITIONS
PHOTOS
SCALE: WA
of
VIEW FROM CASTLE CREEK ROAD LOOKING SOUTHEAST -
EXISTING CONDITIONS
VIEW FROM CASTLE CREEK ROAD LOOKING SOUTHEAST -
PROPOSED ADDITION
VIEW FROM CASTLE CREEK ROAD LOOKNG NORTHEAST -
EXISTING CONDITIONS
VIEW FROM CASTLE CREEK ROAD LOOKING NORTHEAST
PROPOSED ADDITION
VIEW FROM CASTLE CREEK ROAD LOOKING EAST -
EXISTING CONDITIONS
VIEW FROM CASTLE CREEK ROAD LOOKING EAST -
PROPOSED ADDITION
ATTACHMENT IL
PITKIN COUNTY PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
LOCATION: 7200 Castle Creek Road - Henshall Lode PIDk 291 112400025
OWNER: Joachim and Susan Diedrich ZONING: AR -10
REPRESENTATIVE: Glenn Horn PHONE and EMAIL: Qhorn(rU,rof.net 925 -6587
DATE: June 2, 2011 (updated l l /10 /11)
PLANNER: Mike Kraemer, 920.5482
Type of Application /Description of Development: The Applicants are seeking approval for an addition to an existing
residence. The property is identified as the Henshall Lode Mining Claim. Two previous planning approvals were granted in
the 1980's with the most recent in 1987. A 1041 Minor Hazard Review was approved pursuant to Book 20, Page 4. This
approval is no longer vested.
The Applicant is also desirous of widening the existing access and shoring the failing cut which will encroach onto steep
slopes. In accordance with a previous land use approval, the Applicant has applied for and was issued a permit for rockfall
mitigation.
The property is also mapped within an avalanche and talus slope area.
Land Use Code Sections to be addressed in letter of request (application):
Sec. 7- 20 -10: Site Preparation and Grading;
Sec. 7- 20 -20: Steep and Potentially Unstable Slopes;
Sec. 7- 20 -30: Water Courses and Drainage;
Sec. 7 -20 -50 (a): Avalanche — Mapped within a historic avalanche path. Applicants shall provide a report detailing the
hazard and mitigation
Sec. 7- 20- 50(e): Talus Slope — Applicants shall provide a report detailing the hazard.
Sec. 7- 20 -60: Wildfire Hazard — Mapped in a Low Wildfire Hazard Area;
Sec. 7 -20 -130: Landscaping and vegetation Protection;
Sec. 7- 20- 120(d): Standards for Scenic View Protection Areas (addition to residence and avalanche fence)
Staff will refer the application to the following agencies: Castle /Maroon Creek Caucus, Aspen Fire District, and CDOW.
Review by: Community Development Director
Public Hearing: No, however the Applicant shall post a public notice sign on the property at least 15 days prior to the
date specified for the notice date pursuant to Sec. 2- 20- 100(a)(3) of the Land Use Code. In addition, the Applicant shall
mail notice (by 1" class mail) to all property owners within 300' of the subject property 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.
FEES: $4,365 (make check payable to " Pitkin County Treasurer ")
Planning Office flat fee: $3,744 Non - refundable; based on 12 hours of staff time, If staff review time exceeds 14.4
hours, the Applicant will be charged for additional time above 12 hours at a rate of $312 /hour)
Public notice fee: $54
Web Technology Fee: $25
EH /NR review: $542
U00085
To apply, submit 1 copy of the following information, unless noted otherwise:
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" by 17" Activity Envelope and Site Plan as designated in Section 2.1. l and 2.1.12 of the Pitkin
County Land Use Application Manual;
3. Scenic View Protection Exhibits as designated in Section 2.1.12 of the Pitkin County Land Use Application Manual;
4. Geologic Reports outlining the potential avalanche and talus slope hazard.
5. Previous Land Use Approvals (if applicable);
6. Proof of ownership of subject property;
7. Parcel description, including legal description and vicinity map;
8. Total fee for review of the application;
9. Signed fee agreement (1 copies);
10. Consent from owner(s) to process application and authorizing the representative (1 copy)
11. List of all property owners and mineral estate owners within 300' of the subject property (1 copy)
12. Copies of this pre -app form
NOTES
➢ PLEASE SUBMIT ONE UNBOUND AND ONE -SIDED COPY OF YOUR COMPLETE APPLICATION. PLEASE SUBMIT PVO -SIDED COPIES
OF ALL REMAINING COPIES OF YOUR APPLICATION (IF POSSIBLE). THE PARCEL IDs SHOULD BE INCLUDED ONALL DOCUMENTS
INCLUDED IN YOUR APPLICATION
ALL MAPS SHALL BE FOLDED.
r This pre - application conference summary is advisory in nature and not binding on the Countv. The informution provided of this summary is
based on current zoning standards and stuffs interpretations based upon representations of the applicant. Additional information mqv be
required upon a complete review ol'the application.
The Pitkin County Land Use Code and Application Manual are available airline at
http: /Avww. aspenpitkin. cont/depts /7/planninu. c'fm
000086
PARCEL ID: 2911- 124 -00 -025 JOACHIM AND SUSAN DIEDRICH ACTIVITY ENVELOPE AND SITE PLAN
ASPEN . `T_ . - -.._. 11-14-2011
A ,gn
ut I, rill
i 11 #21
ins / \ BLUE AVALANCHE ZONE r' \ 0 � I
- 1:1 SLOPE GRADING FOR 10 _
m, YIN r WIDE SNOW TRAP AREA BEHIND. ;
° f`" 4 FOOT TALL ROCK WALL E BEG G OF SLOPE GRADING.
PROPOSED AVALANCHE \ \,
FENCE LOCATION.
1 ! _ LOCATION FOR UP TO 3000 GA\j LON
FIRE TANK SUPPLY WATER STQRAGE. ATTACHMENT]?.
PROrossnA TMTY T
SrCE LMA RON ELOPE �r ' 1 - � - — PROPOSED TREES All
VICINITY MAP
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ME MENSHAU 100E M.S. 6955, SM)ATED IN TOWNSHIP 11
T
--
SOUTH, RANGE 03 WEST OFTHE 6TH P.M. (SUSPENDED)
_
6
PITKUP, COMN", COLORADO
d Vo
MIS OFI MIND. ADEAR1N(i OF N31- 2500 BETWEEN. FOUND REM AND RED
f
PLASTIC CAP LSe 3317 AT THE N.W. PROPERTY CORNER AND A
FOUND REM AMD RED PLASTIC CAP LSe 3317 POUND AT THE
RETAINININ WALL - -.
6. W. PROPERTY CORNER AND SHOWN HEREON.
N
MIS OF ELEVATION - AN ASSUMED ELEVATION OF lOO.o' AT THE SILL PLATE OF THE
- -- -
MAIN LEVEL ENTRY AS SHOWN HEREON WAS USED AS THE BASIS
OF THE TOPOGRAPHIC DATA.
GENERAL NOTES
PROPOSED PROPANE
1.)Ac[ualnnvnbn camorrife6 u.lnp Eve.pe ro,dlnp Of Nend-NaN CPS VIR.
TANKtiOGATIGN WITH
(DESIGN 100 0 .9067 0')
A
o 8
CONCRETE FOOTERS.
REVEGETATION AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES
l.) A mlenche force pralnp A., h.11 OF mvegemted a m poplbla Falldvonp UM
dNtulOan. P avmd unsl9Nty a.m no weed InNnebon on t o la[MS.pa Lanedwno Nan
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
Insure proper weed con.l In I rol erMA
3.) Ennion [ IMI a"rition M 61FNrbeE ,TM PM1all M ImpbmMood P .muff NEn I,
EXISTING HOUSE
no dnHlYwnPl Impact or runoff to any ords, ab.ama or wataMs
2000 SF
31 COR.NU ilon . for evalaMb ft. 0.11 M retlslmeB And rEWpeNPO.. M, f.rOnq
Ay,Pm . completed.
\ -9 000
E.1 Newry see W wpl utllped eppmyeo PORN Cpunry Sand mu „OR, [EVepnnlcn
EXISTING SEPTIC
Plan ddsmpt dr Newly selNld emac,nall M protected from wine and wets Erouon mmugn
FIELD LOCATION
OFF uP n mulches. A.E,ro le mul[MS are woad NIP, sbaw, Nyro-mulN aM erwbn .[rwl
ne[tlnp.
5.) A blWpmdeble.tended-te m nWild look CdHrOl WanAM, floe ”" AmaXMn Graan
_ ` FEET OF 3 C906PIPE____ "
SCISOBN or pulYElenq PMII be uGd on .11 df,tur ddl arch..
GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES
WITH REINFORCED
-
PROPOSED
1.) Vt. plan Ind out to depin aN1, MvelbpM br,veanche well [evlaw, a full dminape report
_
aM WE thin, AM M submitted w1N bulbinq permR wondvol
ADDITION
1.) PmpMed..I.nNe wan don not,dNersely PffPt ebnln0 onslte drnn, d, RNIsed Now.
2000 SF +/-
prWlnSloPlnepe..teme.111 be daupneo in nme Of bulldlnq permit appp.udo
FIRE SUPPRESSION LiNF
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE NOTES
ACTNNY ENVELOPE: To Incited: Mows, Ututbe, LAMMPIRp, Driveway, genoe and
\ ` CAST V. GAIN: 31 FEET
Mali nche Fen..
DoscohNor
bw pw[ r— MNPep Mwmed PV MMn CUUpwWM4nuMwApIRPI
n•wM.nwE r .mPwn.
P.ewmwrn.wmnTanwwWa . mno[w..r •T ...�> ro. m[w... w..P.w..,wwe
..iN NY MAI P. A.I,em M.b.. TH.PPw.P mmMCaw T..rum [nY Puninw [n. nMY oIM
eMM,
Name 0, M, I Appwart Ioecblm Dietrich
D o1 nnalor
fob MnnM NwryPm•p.NSm.n yr mnmw,a0.np.Wa tlm[no Wn 1ou1ry
ramwu..wwom.n px.m. no _.w w_. wnwnn
ww wwmd.W N, wwwww w
Rtbn Cd.m Communln Deralopnwe 01 Plot
Ondy Mouton
ARapPMe M RemMIM
bbm[Y fmFtlLb Wn M W[mP[oP M I14A'n Toro W [^ECN
W .O'NrJMGUm/MRMM Lo MCUw.M. N oYts•.
m. _PYw_ngwrwa.�ma._.nwem[
tee.
Oou aM RE.NP
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE \
-- PROPERTY
l- EXISTING WALL TO BE SHIFTE EAST BOUNDARY
EXISTING DRINKING �� 3
WATER CISTERN
p
EXISTING V -16' \
TALL BOULDER
` RETAINING WALL
0 1.5:1 CUT
_ N EXIST SLOP 0.7:1 WILL BE GRADED OUT b
7
0 6 FOR EXCESS IRT AT BOTTOM OF
DRIVEWAY FII�L AREA AND U
w.1 I s D ' �� REVEGETATED. �t
P� O/
310w-
>A ,
PROPERTY MAP
LE CR
., EEK
GOAD FIRE DEPZ(I MENT 8
`. STANDPIPE:- 1_ . _
EL: 8997:0' / 80
PROPOSEDFIRSDEPARTMENT U
P17L�T OLIT, 20 FEEL LONG AT g
TIN WIDTH.
GRAPHIC SCALE PRO1ND
�, v a 7A91005
PROPOSED ASPEN TREE ° PROPOSED EVERGREEN TREE
P 3m3 7
tool N 2
SPl
000087
T
--
- J
y \� -�
_
6
d Vo
0' -4' T L MSG
f
--
RETAINININ WALL - -.
\ \� �'_--`
N
Cj�
_ -" - FIRFDEPARTMENT
�� - �, _ - '.90110
STAND PIPE: _
o 8
EL: 9028.0'
m EXISTIN G PR PANE
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
o —' CATION
\ -9 000
_
o ,� �_ -`
_ ` FEET OF 3 C906PIPE____ "
�-
WITH REINFORCED
-
_
CONNEC- TIONSFOR
_ --
FIRE SUPPRESSION LiNF
qq
C
\ ` CAST V. GAIN: 31 FEET
310w-
>A ,
PROPERTY MAP
LE CR
., EEK
GOAD FIRE DEPZ(I MENT 8
`. STANDPIPE:- 1_ . _
EL: 8997:0' / 80
PROPOSEDFIRSDEPARTMENT U
P17L�T OLIT, 20 FEEL LONG AT g
TIN WIDTH.
GRAPHIC SCALE PRO1ND
�, v a 7A91005
PROPOSED ASPEN TREE ° PROPOSED EVERGREEN TREE
P 3m3 7
tool N 2
SPl
000087
ATTACHMENT
Joachiq Diedrich
The Back Office
P.O. Box 1288
Hunt Valley ND. 21030
November 14, 2011
Michael Kraemer
Pitkin County Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO. 81611
RE: Authorization to Submit a Land Use Application for 7200 Castle Creek Road
Dear Mike:
This letter authorizes Davis Horn Incorporated to submit a land use application for the necessary
approvals to expand my existing residence. Davis Horn also has my permission to represent me
in the land use review process. Glenn Horn or Alice Davis of Davis Hom Incorporated can be
reached at 970 925 -6587.
The parcel identification number for my property is 2911 - 124 -00 -025
If necessary, you may contact me at (443) 330 -4001.
Sincerely, k /
t Die f J nch, Owner
d The Henshall Lode
7200 Castle Creek Road
U00088
ATTACHMENT,
I'ITKIN C'OIJNI Y' ('Obl\9UNITY' U8VEL01'MENT DITAR'1' \41:NIT
AGREF,NIEN-r - r fQR I'A \1L \_ OP l.: \VD IiSG A ION FITS
111 1'K IN - Tt ci �I� .�t-ic.lz_- -
rn � ( -
( hcreinallcr "APPLIC AN I "') A(iRla : : \S 1:01-LOWS:
L APPLICANT has submitted to COUN'rY an application for r._ _ ___
2L'��Lt1J�LU. - --- - ihcieinaftcr, the "1'RO.If('T ").
2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that Pitkin County Ordinance No. 30 -2009 establishes a fec
Structure for land u,e applications and the payment of all processing Ibcs is a condition preccdcnt to a detcrnhi Matt nn of
application eonhpletencss. The Ice structure is based tin the COUNTY'S policy that dchclopnhcot shall pay. tit Bill. the
Coat ol'dchelopnhcnt ic%tchh It the COUNTY. Pecs have been set to be consistent and tair to the public and to rellect the
a.Npense incurred m providmhg such scrvtecs to the public.
3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of flee size, nature or scope of the proposed PROJECT, it
may not be possible at the tine ol'application to ascertain the full extent ol'the costs involacd m processing the
ippfiction.
T. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that fees charged for the processing of land use applications shall
.i xumulatc if an application includes more than one type of land use red icw.
5. 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 C'uunty ('onmuissioners to
enable the Planning Commission and.'or Board of County Commissioners to make legnlly required findings for project
approval, unless current billings Lire paid in full pl for to decision.
6. Thcreforo, APPLiC :NT agrees that in consideration ofthe COUNTY'S hvaner nuts right to collect fill
fccs prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay a base lie in the amount
Much is based on 12. hours of staff time, and ifactual time spent by stall' to process the application exceeds the uvcragc
number of hours by more than 20"4i, 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 agrccs that falure to pay
such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing.
PITKIN COUNTY
Cindyliouben
C'antununity Devclopmenl Director
70n hllh 011 "
( "APPLICANT ")
Print Name and Title (if applicable)
Date: Aloc)efnf)cl( 1 2-()t!
:.Mailing Address: _j - ivP AOCV f it,e
Ph 13ly laX2
I flan yaI PSI . rYll�, 211'3t:
000089
r
i
m
m
z m
g O
�m
uO O N i
c
Z Ox c T
N
N <
O A
m
0
N
m nP
000090
F —o
G �
y- � � D
� � m
O O
f
L Li
a 9
i
�
o
m o m
s s
Ef
02
m°�aa
n�
m
z
��
oi'omm
a 9
3 61823 =`S. };t, 726 65
_k D'A „ 2 ti 1 ., . , ATTACHMENT
SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED
Robert W. Brower, whose address is 7200 Castle Creek Road, Aspen,
Colorado 81611, for the consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00), in hand paid, hereby sells
and conveys to Joachim F. Diedrich and Susan J. Diedrich, as Joint Tenants, whose
address is 10134 Falls Road, Box 851, Brooklandville, Maryland 21022, the following
described real property in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, to wit:
All well and well rights, ditch and ditch rights, including all
shares of stock owned by grantor in any ditch company
servicing the below - described property, and all water rights
appurtenant to or historically used in connection with the
Henshall Lode Mining Claim, U.S.M.S. No. 6955, including
without limitation all rights in the Shohet Springs Collection
and Distribution System (0.178 c.f.s.) as adjudicated by the
District Court, Water Division No. 5, under Application No.
W -1850.
also known by street and number as:
with all its appurtenances, and warrants the title against all persons claiming under it,
subject to and except for general taxes for 1993 and thereafter.
SIGNED this t >' day of i._.' 1993.
'C,e /_' L, .
Robert W. Brower
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN 1
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this L day of
C, , 1993, by Robert W. Brower.
u�iES, xJ�;xpsac+�sxpc OF G�`
1 wd Pltlo,. Npm PLn Bwidmt
UJ E HepWiu
A.pen Calando slbll
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
M commission expires: S`'7 ? I/ C/'
! �, - t
Notary Public
udc.0y1
PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 920 -5526 FAX# (970) 920 -5439
December 5, 2011
Glenn Horn
215 S Monarch Street, Suite #104
Aspen, CO 81611
ghom @rof.net
Re: Diedrich Activity Envelope and Site Plan Review
(PID #2911- 124 -00 -025; Case# P090 -11)
Dear Mr. Hom:
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 December 15, 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 16 day of January, 2012. 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 31 day of December, 2011, which is at least fifteen (15) days prior to January 16,
2012. This must be submitted prior to any approvals being granted.
If you have questions, please call Mike Kraemer, the planner assigned to your case, at 920 -5482.
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
Iul*UTr1:a►1 u
To: Aspen Fire Protection
Pitkin County Zoning
Castle/Maroon Creek Caucus
FROM: Mike Kraemer, Community Development Department
Michael.kraemer(a�,co.pitkin. co.us
Re: Diedrich Activity Envelope and Site Plan Review
(PID 2911- 124 -00 -025; Case P090 -11)
DATE: December 5, 2011
Attached for your review and comments are materials for an application submitted by
Joachim and Susan Diedrich. The Pitkin County Community Development Director will
review the application.
Please return your comments to me by Monday, January 16, 2012.
http : / /www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals /0 /docs /county /Com %20Dev /Plannin /g Land_Use Ap
nlications /P090 11 app.pdf
If you require a paper copy of this application contact Bonnie Waechtler at
bonnie .waechtlergco.pitkin.co.us or 920 -5109.
Thank you.
Name:
Project Address
Type:
Permit Number
0090.2011. PLAN
0090.2011. PLAN
0090.2011. P LAN
0090.2011. PLAN
PITKIN r AUNTY COMMUNITY DEVEL WENT
Permit Receipt
RECEIPT NUMBER 00031735
Roaring Fork Civil Consultants Date: 11/21/2011
7200 CASTLE CREEK RD
check # 1472
Fee Description
PP- Flat Fee
PP- Clerk Tech Fee
PP- Public Notice Fee
PP- Planning Eng Referral Fee
Total:
Amount
3,744.00
25.00
54.00
542.00
4,365.00