Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.planning.264306200007DOCUMENT LAYOUT THIS FILE MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN ALL OF THE INFORMATION LISTED BELOW IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER Summary Sheet Resolution for the BOCC and /or P &Z Ordinance for the BOCC and /or P &Z Determination for the Hearing Officer Administrative Determination Staff Memo Application Public Notice, Acceptance Letter, Referral(s) Letter Site Plan Miscellaneous Plat(s) Parcel ID: 2643 -06- 2-00-007 Application Date: 2/9/12 Case No: P011 -12 Planner: Suzanne Wolff Description: Pollock Activity Envelope Review # Copies: 1 Allocated Hours: 6 % Over Hours: 7.2 Project Address: 4054 LOWER RIVER RD, SNOWMASS, CO 81654 Property Owner: POLLOCK PERRY H Owner's REP: SUNNY VANN REP's Email: vannassociates @comcast.net Referrals: PLANNING ENGINEER REFERRAL ALL OTHER REFERRALS Comments Due Date: 04/02/2012 Meetings: 1st Meeting: Meeting Date: Review Body: admin Public Hearing? yes Notice Date: 03/01/2012 Meeting Notes: Approvals: BOCC Resolution #: BOCC Ordinance #: Admin Determination #: 039 -2012 #590006 Other Information: Address: PO BOX 950 ASPEN, CO 81612 Address: PO BOX 4827 BASALT, CO 81621 Owner Phone: REP's Phone: (970) 925 -6858 Other Referrals: Woody Creek Caucus none 2nd Meeting: P &Z Determination #: HO Determination #: VR Approval Date: 06/21/2012 Plat Recorded Date: 08/07/2012 VR Expires Date: 06/21/2015 Plat (Bk, PG): 8100 P62 #591187 Remarks: Application Type: Activity Envelope %woe v 3rd Meeting: RECEPTIONM 590006, 06/21/2012 at 12:08:29 PM, 1 OF 6, R $0.00 Doc Code ADMIN DECISION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, APPROVING THE POLLOCK ACTIVITY ENVELOPE Administrative Decision No3(3 -2012 RECITALS 1) Perry H. Pollock (hereafter "Applicant ") has applied to the Community Development Director of Pitkin County (hereafter "Director ") to establish an Activity Envelopes to construct a single - family residence. 2) The property is located at 4054 Lower River Road, and is more specifically described in Exhibit A. 3) The parcel contains 2.6 acres and is a non - conforming size parcel in the AR -10 zone district. 4) The parcel was created in 1969 and, therefore, is exempt from growth management for up to 5,750 square feet of floor area, pursuant to Sec. 6- 30- 100(a) of the Land Use Code ( "Code "). 5) The Director finds that the request complies with the applicable provisions of the Code, as follows: A) The Activity Envelope complies with the 100' setback from the Roaring Fork River. Small areas of riparian vegetation extend into the Activity Envelope outside of the 100' setback. If disturbed during construction, these areas will be replaced on the property at a 1:1 basis. B) The Activity Envelope avoids the 100 year floodplain of the Roaring Fork River. C) The wildfire hazard is rated as low, and can be mitigated pursuant to the provisions of Sec. 7- 20 -60.c of the Code. D) The activity envelope contains slopes of less than 30 %. E) The parcel is not within any mapped mule deer or elk habitat. F) The parcel is within the mapped Scenic View Protection Area Area ( "SVPA ") and proposed development will be reviewed pursuant to the SVPA standards at Site Plan Review. APPROVED by the Director, subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest: 1. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made in the application and shall consider those representations to be conditions of approval, unless amended by other conditions. 2. Prior to submission of a Site Plan Review application, the Applicant shall be required to submit to Community Development for recordation the Activity Envelope Plan. The above referenced approvals shall be a condition precedent to finalization and recordation. 3. Prior to submission of any building permit applications, the Applicant shall be required to submit for approval an application for Site Plan Review, pursuant to Secs. 2 -30 -20 and 7 -10 -50 of the Code. With the Site Plan Review application, in addition to all other applicable provisions of the Code, the Applicant shall: A. Submit a preliminary design for the On -Site Wastewater Treatment System. B. Submit a revegetation plan to demonstrate that any riparian vegetation removed within the Activity Envelope will be replaced on the property at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Administrative Decision Na;_2� -2012 Page 2 C. Submit a report from a wildfire expert that specifically addresses wildfire mitigation on the site, structural or otherwise, given the limitation on removal of riparian vegetation outside of the Activity Envelope. 4. The parcel is exempt from the Growth Management up to 5,750 square feet of floor area. 5. Prior to issuance of building permit application for the residence, the Applicant shall: A. Submit a detailed and engineered drainage and erosion control plan for review and approval by Planning/Zoning. If the development disturbs one (1) acre or more, the Applicant shall apply for and obtain a State Stormwater Permit. All historic and natural drainage patterns shall be maintained. Stormwater shall be detailed onsite and allow infiltration of runoff prior to discharge. B. Submit a large scale detailed construction management plan for review and approval by Planning/Zoning. No parking shall be allowed on Lower River Road. C. Obtain a County access /driveway permit to install a driveway. The permit application shall demonstrate compliance with the Asset Management Plan and the requirements of the Aspen Fire Protection District, and shall include details on turnarounds and parking locations. D. Provide proof of an adequate water supply (in terms of quantity and availability) for domestic and fire protection purposes, and for irrigation purposes, if applicable. E. Obtain an on -site wastewater treatment system (OWTS) construction permit. F. Submit a wetland delineation to demonstrate that no development will occur within any wetlands. G. Complete a fireplace /woodstove registration form with the Community Development Department, if necessary. H. Pay the applicable road and employee housing impact fees. I. Submit a tree mitigation plan and a landscape plan. Only native species shall be allowed for landscaping due to the proximity to the Roaring Fork River. J. Submit a detailed revegetation plan for disturbed areas with appropriate seed mixes. Any riparian vegetation removed shall be replaced on the property at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Only native species shall be allowed for revegetation. K. Submit a lighting plan. 6. Areas disturbed by construction shall be re- vegetated within one growing season of the project's completion. No development in excess of 30" above or below natural grade shall occur within the setbacks of the parcel, with the exception of driveways and associated retaining walls of up to 6' above or below natural grade and fencing. Landscaping in the form of berms within the setbacks shall not exceed four feet from the most restrictive grade. Any development located within setbacks mandated by County zoning regulations that does not comply with these restrictions shall require a variance from the Board of Adjustment. Approval of an activity envelope within such setbacks does not assure approval of a variance. 8. The Applicant shall comply with the following standards for Development in a Low Wildfire Hazard Area: A. Defensible Space: The area around all buildings /structures, limited by property boundaries that may limit a property owner's ability to comply with this section, shall incorporate landscaping with wildfire defensible space considerations as follows (note: actual vegetation manipulation to meet these conditions may not be necessary where the natural vegetation patterns have already Administrative Decision Na,_!� -2012 Page 3 fulfilled these conditions). Riparian vegetation shall not be removed outside of the Activity Envelope, unless approved at Site Plan Review as part of a site specific wildfire mitigation plan. 1) Brush, debris, and non - ornamental vegetation shall be removed within a minimum 10 foot perimeter around the structure. 2) Vegetation shall be reduced to break up the vertical and horizontal continuity of the fuels a minimum of a 30 foot perimeter around the structure. 3) Spacing between clumps of brush and vegetation within the 30 foot perimeters shall be a minimum of two times the height of the fuel. Maximum diameter of the clumps shall not exceed 10 feet. All measurements shall be from the edges of the crowns of the fuel. 4) All branches from trees and brush within the 30 foot perimeter shall be pruned to a height of 10 feet above the ground and ladder fuels from around trees and brush shall be removed. 5) Tree crown separation within the 30 foot perimeters shall have a minimum of 10 feet between the edges of the crowns. 6) All branches which extend over the roof eaves shall be trimmed and all branches within 15 feet of the chimneys shall be removed. 7) The density of fuels within a 100 foot perimeter of the structure shall be reduced. 8) All deadfall within the 100 foot perimeter shall be removed. 9) Low vegetation shall be maintained within a 10 foot perimeter around all structures. 10) The applicant shall be responsible for the continued maintenance of the defensible space vegetation requirements. B. Roofing Materials: Class A covering or Class A assembly as defined by the currently adopted Building Code. No wood shakes or shingles. All other adopted Building Code compliant methods and materials permitted. Roofs with less than a 3:12 pitch are not permitted unless they comply with the following: I ) All roof coverings shall be constructed of non - combustible materials and installed on a Class A roof assembly. 2) All roof coverings shall have a surface that shall facilitate the natural process of clearing roof debris. 3) Protrusions above the roofline, such as parapets, shall be prohibited, unless specifically approved by the Fire Marshal. 4) Roofs shall be installed as required by the adopted Building Code and shall have a minimum pitch of 1:48. 5) All roof designs, coverings, or equivalent assemblies shall be specifically approved by the Fire Marshal prior to submittal of a building permit application. B. Maintenance and Miscellaneous Requirements 1) Roofs and gutters shall be kept clear of debris. 2) Roof vents shall be screened with corrosive resistant wire mesh, with mesh one -fourth ('/4) inch maximum. 3) Any outbuilding shall adhere to the same wildfire requirements. 4) Yards shall be kept clear of all litter, slash and flammable debris. 5) All flammable materials shall be stored on a parallel contour a minimum of fifteen (15) feet away from any structure. Administrative Decision No� -2012 Page 4 6) Weeds and grasses within the ten (10) foot perimeter shall be maintained to a height not more than six (6) inches. 7) Firewood /wood piles shall be stacked on a parallel contour a minimum of fifteen (15) feet away from the structure. 8) Swimming pools and ponds shall be accessible by the local fire district. 9) Fences shall be kept clear of brush and debris. 10) Wood fences shall not connect to other structures. 11) Fuel tanks shall be installed underground with an approved container. 12) Propane tanks shall be buried, if possible, or installed according to NFPA 58 standards and on a contour away from the structure with standard defensible space vegetation mitigation around any aboveground tank. Any wood enclosure around the tank shall be constructed with materials approved for two (2) hour fire- resistive construction on the exterior side of the walls. 13) Each structure shall have a minimum of one ten (10) pound ABC fire extinguisher. 14) Addresses shall be clearly marked with two (2) inch non - combustible letters and shall be visible at the primary point of access from the public or common access road and installed on a non- combustible post. 15) Utilities shall be extended underground. 9. The Applicant shall comply with the applicable codes and requirements of the Aspen Fire Protection District, including but not limited to access, turning around of fire apparatus and water supply. The Applicant shall install an automatic fire suppression system in all buildings that shall be approved by the Fire Marshal. 10. The Applicant shall comply with the following conditions regarding wildlife: A. Manipulation of vegetation outside of the activity envelopes is prohibited, except as necessary to comply with the wildfire hazard mitigation measures. B. Fruit bearing trees and shrubs shall be prohibited. C. Trash/garbage shall be kept in an approved bear resistant container or enclosure as required by the County's Wildlife Protection Ordinance. D. Construction workers shall be prohibited from bringing dogs on -site. E. All outside doors shall utilize only solid round handled door knobs unless another type is required by the applicable building code for disabled accessibility purposes. F. Bird feeders, including hummingbird feeders, shall be hung away from any deck or window, and shall be at least 10' from the ground suspended between 2 trees or posts. All seed feeders shall include a seed catchment pan to catch discarded seeds. Bird feeders should be removed from April through November. G. Composting shall be restricted to yard waste. H. Fencing shall comply with the following, except for fencing immediately adjacent to the buildings to contain pets or livestock: 1) Wood fencing shall employ three rails or less, be the round or split rail type, shall not exceed 48 inches in height above ground level and 12 inches in width (top view), and shall have at least 18 inches between two of the rails. 2) Wire fencing shall consist of no more than 3 strands of smooth wire and shall not exceed 42 inches in height. 3) Mesh or woven wire fences are prohibited, except when used for protection around isolated trees or clumps of trees. Administrative Decision NZ8_-2012 Page 5 11. No development shall occur outside of the approved activity envelope, with the exception of vegetation removal necessary to comply with the wildfire mitigation measures described above. 12. Prior to commencement of any earthmoving or other construction activity, the Applicant shall stake the corners of the activity envelope and install construction fencing around the construction site within the perimeter of the envelope. The fencing shall remain in place until issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 13. No calculations for height, bulk, setback, size, floor area, or any other building and zoning requirements have been conducted. These requirements will be considered at the time of building permit. Any structures represented in the application may not be permitted under building and zoning regulations. 14. Failure to comply with the conditions of this approval may result in revocation of this approval, or any subsequent permit(s) or approval(s) related to this property, or vested rights associated with this property. 15. Statutory vested rights for the approval contained herein are granted pursuant to the Pitkin County Land Use Code and Colorado Statutes, subject to the exceptions set forth in Pitkin County Land Use Code, § 2 -20 -170 and C.R.S., § 24 -68 -105. The statutory vested rights granted herein shall expire on :y1, n2 Z 1 , 2015. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY on the I" day of March, 2012. APPROVED by the Director, this day of , 2012. PUBLISHED AFTER ADOPTION FOR VESTED REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS in the Aspen Times Weekly on the a day of , 2012. "� /A h"VPC" C- C' dy uben, Community Development Director PID 4264306200007 POII -12 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION A tract of land situated in Government Lot 7 of Section 6, Township 9 South, Range 85 West of The 6th PM being that portion of the Perry H. Pollock land described in Book 225 at Page 141 of the Pitkin County Records bounded on the North by that tract of land described in Book 237 at Page 242 and Bounded on the South by that tract of land described in Book 242 at Page 646 described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Westerly right of way line of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad Company's Aspen Branch from which the Northwest corner of said Section 6 bears North 71 010'07" West 1,060.41 feet, more or less Thence Southerly along the Westerly right of way of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad South 27 030'00" East 411.54 feet to the Northeast corner of said Book 242 at Page 646; Thence South 17 001'42 West 220.64 feet more or less along the Northerly boundary of said Book 242 at Page 646 to a point in the center of the Roaring Fork River, Thence Northerly along the center of the Roaring Fork River to the Southeast comer of said Book 237 at Page 242; Thence North 66 038'30" East 157.83 feet more or less along the Southerly boundary of said Book 237 at Page 242 to the point of beginning. VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning Consultants I February 1, 2012 1 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Suzanne Wolff, Senior Planner Pitkin County Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Pollock Activity Envelope Application - Dear Suzanne: Please consider this letter an application for administrative approval of an Activity Envelope on a parcel of land located at 4054 Lower River Road (Parcel ID# 2643- ' 062 -00 -007) in unincorporated Pitkin County (see Exhibit 1, Pre - Application Confer- ence Summary, attached hereto). Vested rights status is requested for the approved a envelope. The application is submitted pursuant to Sections 2- 30- 20(g)(3), 6- 30- 100(a)(1) and 7- 10 -50 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code (the "Code ") by Perry H. Pollock, hereinafter "Applicant ". The Applicant's ownership of the property is evidenced in the attached Proforma Title Report (see Exhibit 2). Permission for Vann Associates, LLC to represent the Applicant and an executed application fee agreement are attached as Exhibits 3 and 4, respectively. y Project Site As the attached letter from Leonard Oates indicates, the Applicant's property consists of a legally created metes and bounds parcel containing approximately 2.6 acres (see Exhibit 5). The property is located approximately 3.4 miles north - northwest of Woody Creek and 6.9 miles southeast of the Town of Basalt in Government Lot 7 of Section 6, Township 9 South, Range 85 West of the 6th PM. As the attached Activity Envelope Plan illustrates (see Exhibit 6), the property's western boundary lies within the adjacent Roaring Fork River. Its eastern boundary abuts the former Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad right -of -way. A portion of Lower River Road traverses the property adjacent to its eastern boundary. No dedicated easement or right -of -way ( "ROW ") for the road, however, is believed to exist. P.O. Box 4827 • Basalt, Colorado 81621 • 970/925 -6958 • Fax 970/920 -9310 vannassociates@comcast.net 000001 of 17q Ms. Suzanne Wolff February 1, 2012 Page 2 The Applicant's property is zoned AR -10, Agricultural /Residential -10 Acre. As the parcel contains less than ten acres, it is by definition a "Substandard Size Parcel". Existing development is limited to an approximately 1,800 square foot barn which is believed to have been constructed in the early 1960s. An approximately 0.4 acre pasture area is located immediately north and south of the barn. The pasture area has been more or less continuously maintained for over 40 years. Maintenance of the pasture, however, has periodically lapsed for short periods of time allowing coyote willows to establish therein. It should be noted that a "Notice of Violation" was sent to the Applicant in 2009 by the County's Code Enforcement officer (see Exhibit 7). The notice pertained to the Applicant's removal of the coyote willow from the historic pasture area. The notice maintained that the area in which the willows were removed was protected pursuant to Section 7 -20 -80 of the Code. It is my understanding, however, that, following an on- site meeting with County staff, it was determined that no remedial action was '- required. No further clearing of the pasture area is believed to have occurred in recent years. As the attached Ecological Assessment of the property prepared by Jonathan Lowsky of Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC indicates (see Exhibit 8), the area subject to the prior Notice of Violation is located outside of the County's 100 foot River setback, is devoid of riparian habitat, and does not contain wetlands. The Applicant's prior maintenance of the pasture area, therefore, was arguably not subject to the require- ments of Section 7 -20 -80 nor in violation of applicable Code regulations. The property's existing vegetation consists of non - native pasture grasses, narrowleaf cottonwood /thinleaf alder riparian woodland, and a small stand of young aspen. The grasses are located in the pasture area while the riparian woodland area is located between the River and the pasture, and almost entirely within the 100 foot River setback. The aspen stand is located adjacent to Lower River Road at the northern end of the property. As Mr. Lowsky's Environmental Assessment states, the property's riparian area is "... of moderate to low functional value from a hydrological and ecological perspective given adjacent development. " A small area of slopes greater than 30 percent is located in the southeast corner of the property. Proposed Development The Applicant proposes to designate an Activity Envelope within the property to accommodate a future single - family residence and such accessory structures and uses as may be permitted from time to time in the AR -10 zone district. In the event required, the existing barn will be relocated or demolished upon construction of the Ms. Suzanne Wolff j February 1, 2012 Page 3 i residence. An application for Site Plan Review will be submitted following the design of the residence. Pursuant to Section 9- 20 -10, a single - family dwelling unit is a use permitted by right on any legally created parcel made substandard as to size by the initial adoption of the Code or any relevant amendment thereto. Such units are exempt from the County's Growth Management Quota System ( "GMQS ") pursuant to Section 6- 30- 100(a)(1) provided that the underlying parcel was created prior to June 12, 1978. As Exhibit 5 indicates, the Applicant's property was legally created in August of 1969. As a R result, a single - family residence with up to 5,750 square feet of floor area may be constructed thereon exempt from the GMQS. As the Activity Envelope Plan illustrates, the proposed envelope encompasses that portion of the property lying between Lower River Road and the required 100 foot setback from the mean high water line of the River. The envelope excludes those areas of the property with slopes greater than 30 percent and those areas located within the required 20 foot side yard setbacks. Given existing site constraints, the envelope has been sized as large as possible so as to accommodate the single - family residence, vehicular access thereto, its utility requirements (i.e., well, septic system, etc.) and landscaping. The proposed envelope, however, will be refined in connection with a subsequent Site Plan Review application. Pursuant to Section 11 -10, Lower River Road is designated as a collector street. As such, a 50 foot setback from the road right -of -way is required pursuant to Section 5- 10 -10. The imposition of a 50 foot road setback, however, measured from the edge of the existing road's pavement (no ROW is believed to exist) substantially reduces the area of the property in which development can reasonably occur. As a result, a setback variance from the Board of Adjustment will be required to accommodate the future single- family residence. The extent of the required variance will be determined in connection with the design of the residence and submitted with the Site Plan Review application. An application for a variance will be submitted following the receipt of Site Plan Review approval. Review Requirements The proposed review standards for Activity Envelope Review approval, and the proposed envelope's compliance therewith, are summarized below. 1. Section 7- 20 -10: Site Preparation and Grading All grading, to the extent required will occur within the proposed Activity Envelope. While small areas of riparian vegetation located outside of the 100 foot UbUJA Ms. Suzanne Wolff February 1, 2012 Page 4 { River setback may be disturbed or otherwise impacted by the proposed development, such areas will be replaced on the property on a 1:1 basis as recommended in Mr. Lowsky's Environmental Assessment. Should the disturbance of any such area be proposed in connection with Site Plan Review, a restoration plan meeting the Code's revegetation requirements will be submitted therewith for review and approval by the County. No trees with a diameter of six inches are greater at breast height are located within the proposed envelope. 2. Section 7- 20 -20: Steep and Potentially Unstable Slopes No steep or potentially unstable slopes (i.e., slopes greater than 30 percent) are located within the proposed Activity Envelope. 3. Section 7- 20 -30: Water Courses and Drainage The proposed Activity Envelope is located outside of the required 100 foot River setback, and development therein will have no adverse impact on the property's existing drainage patterns. No development activity is proposed within or immediate- ly adjacent to the Roaring Fork River. Appropriate sedimentation controls will be utilized during construction to ensure no adverse impact to the River. 4. Section 7- 20 -40: Floodplain Hazards As the Activity Envelope Plan illustrates, the proposed Activity Envelope is located outside the property's 100 Year floodplain. 5. Section 7- 20 -60: Wildfire Hazards The Applicant's property is mapped as lying within a low wildfire hazard area. All development will comply with the applicable wildfire mitigation standards contained in Section 7- 20 -60(c) of the Code. 6. Section 7- 20 -70: Wildlife Habitat As Mr. Lowsky's Environmental Assessment indicates, the development of a single - family dwelling unit within the proposed Activity Envelope will have no direct or indirect adverse impact on any wildlife habitat regulated by the Code. More specifically, no bighorn sheep, elk or mule deer production habitat, migration corridors, severe winter range or winter concentration areas will be affected by the proposed development. Mr. Lowsky's recommendations with regard to the minimum- ization of ecological impacts, however, will be strictly adhered to in the design. construction and operation of the proposed residence. G00004 Ms. Suzanne Wolff February 1, 2012 Page 5 7. Section 7- 20 -80: River and Stream Corridors and Wetlands The proposed Activity Envelope is located entirely outside the Code's required 100 foot River setback. As Mr. Lowsky's Environmental Assessment indicates, no wetlands are located within the envelope. Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Yours truly, [1UCt��S cc: Perry Pollock Leonard Oates, Esq. c: \oldc \bus \county.app \app571I Lae1 EXHIBIT PITKIN COUNTY PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Suzanne Wolff DATE: 7/21111 PHONE: (970) 920 -5093 E -MAIL: suzannew0co.Ditkin.co.us - LOCATION: 4054 Lower River Road APPLICANT: Perry Pollock REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann Type of Application: Activity Envelope Review PID# 264306200007 ZONE: AR -10 EMAIL: vannassociates @comcast.net Description of Project/Development: The Applicant proposes to obtain activity envelope review approval for a single family residence. There is an existing barn on the parcel. Criteria • 6- 30- 100(a): GMQS Exemption for parcel created before June 12, 1978 • 7 -10-50 & 60: Activity Envelope • 7- 20 -10: Site Preparation and Grading • 7- 20 -20: Steep and Potentially Unstable Slopes • 7- 20-30: Water Courses and Drainage • 7- 20-40: Floodplain • 7- 20 -60: Wildfire Hazard - Mapped Low Wildfire Hazard Area • 7- 20-70: Wildlife Habitat: No mapped mule deer or elk habitat • 7- 20-80: River and Stream Corridors and Wetlands Staff will refer the application to the following agencies: Woody Creek Caucus, Planning Engineer Review by: Community Development Director Public Hearing: NO. However, notice is required via posting, mailing and publication. The Applicant shall post a public notice sign on the property at least 15 days prior to the date specified for the Administrative Decision pursuant to Sec. 2- 20- 100(a)(3) of the Land Use Code. In addition, the Applicant shall mail notice (by certified mail) to all owners within 300' of the property and mineral estate owners with the return address of the Community Development Department (form of notice to be obtained from the Community Development Department). The names and addresses shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County, as they appear no more than 60 days prior to the date of the public hearing. A property owner receiving the public notice shall have 2 weeks from the date the notice was postmarked to submit comments or objections to the Community Development Department. FEES: $2,575 (make check payable to " Pitkin County Treasurer") • $1,872 Planning Office flat fee (non - refundable; based on 6 hours of staff time. If staff review time exceeds 7.2 hours, the Applicant will be charged for additional time above 6 hours at a rate of $312/hour) • $624 Planning Engineer • $54 Public Notice Fee • $25 Web Technology Fee: OUtiju6 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 (if applicable), and addressing compliance with the Code sections listed above. 2. 24" by 36" and 11" by 17" Activity Envelope Plan as designated in Section 2.1.1 of the Pitkin County Land Use Application Manual 3. Technical Reports as designated in Section 2.1.1 of the Application Manual (as applicable) 4. Street address and parcel description, including legal description, and 8 -1/2 "x 11" vicinity map locating the subject property within Pitkin County; 5. Total fee for review of the application 6. Executed Pitkin County Community Development Agreement for Payment of Land Use Application Fees form (form attached); 7. Consent from owner(s) to process application and authorizing the representative (if applicable) 8. This Pre - Application Conference Summary Sheet NOTES: ➢ PLEASE SUBMIT ONE UNBOUND AND ONE -SIDED COPY OF YOUR COMPLETE APPLICATION, THE PARCEL IDs SHOULD BE INCLUDED ON ALL DOCUMENTS INCLUDED IN YOUR APPLICATION. ➢ ALL MAPS SHALL BE FOLDED. One copy of submittal materials shall have all documents in format no larger than 81/2" by 11' ➢ This pre- application conference summary is advisory in nature and not binding on the County. The information provided in this summary is based on current zoning standards and staffs interpretations based upon representations of the applicant. Additional information may be required upon a complete review of the application. • The Land Use Code is available on -line at County Code • The Land Use Application manual is available on -line at ➢ Applicant will be responsible for mailed and posted notice. Public Notice requirements are described in section 2- 20-100 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. A signed, notarized copy of the affidavit confirming notice must be received from Applicant prior to approval. 'r EXHIBIT 3 Z PROFORMA TITLE REPORT SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: August 29, 2011 at 8:00 AM Case No. PCT22560P4 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: Proposed Insured: PROFORMA 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: PERRY H. POLLOCK 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is described as follows: See Attached Exhibit "A" ° PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. ' 601 E. HOPIQNS, ASPEN, CO.81611 970- 925 -1766 Phone /970 - 925 -6527 Fax 877 -217 -3158 Toll Free AUTHORIZED AGENT Countersigned: 1 Y EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION A tract of land situated in Government Lot 7 of Section 6, Township 9 South, Range 85 West of ° The 6th PM being that portion of the Perry H. Pollock land described in Book 225 at Page 141 of the Pitkin County Records bounded on the North by that tract of land described in Book 237 at Page 242 and Bounded on the South by that tract of land described in Book 242 at Page 646 described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Westerly right of way line of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad Company's Aspen Branch from which the Northwest comer of said Section 6 bears North 71 °10'07" West 1,060.41 feet, more or less Thence Southerly along the Westerly right of way of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad South 27 030'00" East 411.54 feet to the Northeast comer of said Book 242 at Page 646; Thence South 17 001'42 West 220.64 feet more or less along the Northerly boundary of said Book 242 at Page 646 to a point in the center of the Roaring Fork River; Thence Northerly along the center of the Roaring Forts River to the Southeast comer of said Book 237 at Page 242; Thence North 66 038'30" East 157.83 feet more or less along the Southerly boundary of said Book 237 at Page 242 to the point of beginning. SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS THIS REPORT IS FURNISHED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, IT IS NOT A CONTRACT TO ISSUE TITLE ' INSURANCE AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS SUCH. IN THE EVENT A PROPOSED INSURED IS NAMED THE COMPANY HEREBY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND /OR EXCEPTIONS AS DEEMED NECESSARY. THE RECIPIENT OF THIS INFORMATIONAL REPORT HEREBY AGREES THAT THE y COMPANY HAS ISSUED THIS REPORT BY THEIR REQUEST AND ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS ACCURATE AND CORRECT, THE COMPANY SHALL NOT BE CHARGED WITH ANY FINANCIAL LIABILITY SHOULD THAT PROVE TO BE INCORRECT AND THE COMPANY IS NOT OBLIGATED TO ISSUE ANY POLICIES OF TITLE INSURANCE M q SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS ' The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same 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, 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, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing 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. A 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. 7. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract or remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted as reserved in United States Patent recorded July 23, 1962 in Book 198 at Page 342. 8. Reservation for the right of joint use of the existing roadway as set forth in Deed recorded July 6, 1964 in Book 208 at Page 54. _ 9. Any question, dispute or adverse claim as to any loss or gain of land as a result of any change in the river bed location by other than natural causes, or alteration through accretion, relict ion, erosion or avulsion of the center thread, bank, channel or flow of waters in the Roaring Fork River lying within subject land; and any question as to the location of such center thread, bed, bank, bed or channel as a legal description monument or marker for the purposes of describing or locating subject lands. NOTE: There are no documents in the land records of the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County Colorado accurately locating past or present location(s) of the center thread, bank, bed, or channel of the above River or indicating any alterations of the same as from time to time may have occurred. AND Any rights, interest or easements in favor of the riparian owners, the State of Colorado, The United States of America, or the general public, which exist, have existed, or are claimed to exist in and over the waters A and present and past bed and banks of the Roaring Fork River. 10. Right of way for county road. 1 January 24, 2012 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Suzanne Wolff, Senior Planner Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Permission to Represent Dear Ms. Wolff: EXHIBIT Please consider this letter authorization for Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC, Planning Consultants, to represent me in the processing of my application for Activity Envelope'Review for my property which is located at 4054 Lower River Road. Mr. ' Vann is hereby authorized to act on my behalf with respect to all matters reasonably pertaining to the aforementioned application. Should you have any questions, or if we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Ui vJJ L Yours truly, Perry H. Pollock P.O, Box 954 Aspen, CO 81612 c:\oldc \bwNwunty. ttr\Ur57111.swn EXHIBIT PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ., AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT OF LAND USE APPLICATION FEES PITKIN COUNTY (hereinafter COUNTY) andJ J `� (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS; 1. APPLICANT has subCOU ere application EfPROJEC�! 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that Pitkin County Ordinance No. 30 -2409 establishes a fee structure for land use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. The fee structure is based on the County's policy that development shad pay, in full, the cost of development review in Pitkin County. Fees have been set to be consistent and fair to the public and to reflect the expense incurred in providing such services to the public. 3. APPLICANT and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it may not be possible at the time of application to ascertain the full extern of ttie costs involved in processing the application. 4. APPLICANT acid COUNTY agree #hat fees charged for the processing of land use applications shall accumulate if an application includes more than one type of land use review. 5. COUNTY and APPLICANT further agree that it m impracticable for COUNTY staff to complete processing or present sufficient informafion to the Planning Commission and/or Board of County Commissioners to enable the Planning Commission arid/or Board of County Commissioners to make legally required findings for project approval, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 6. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in censideraSon of the GOUNTY s waiver of its right to collect foil f to a determination of appplication completeness, APPLICANT shall pay a base fee in the amount of 10 ich is based on f+ hours of staff time, and if actual time spent by staff to h process the m apptication exceeds the average number of hours by more than 20%, then the COUNTY will bill the ., APPLICANT quarterly for the additional time spent. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing. PITKIN COUNTY APPLICANT A Cindy Houben Community Development Director Effective 1126110 G :county\adminlforms�agreement to pay Ou ` iA .�2 Signature , Date: o Mailing Address: 2k G� L41G /L r f s s u Dear Suzanne: I am a licensed Colorado attorney actively practicing in Aspen, Colorado. I represent Perry H. Pollock. Mr. Pollock is the owner of the 2.6 acre, more or less, parcel described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property"). The Property has existed as a separate parcel of property and was created and isolated as a separate parcel of property from any other owned by Peny H. Pollock on August 11, 1969 when Mr. Pollock conveyed the Property immediately south of and adjacent to the Property to Wallace and Viola Schimpf by deed recorded in Book 242 at Page 646 of the records of Pitkin County Colorado. Mr. Pollock has owned no abutting lands to the Property since August 11, 1965. Mr. Pollock had previously conveyed the property lying immediately to the north of and abutting the Property by conveyance to Hayword and Wennogle on April 30, 1968 by Deed recorded in Book 234 at Page 499 of those records. By the two above referenced deeds the Property was isolated as a separate parcel. Mr. Pollock originally acquired title to the Property and lands adjacent thereto by conveyance from Wallace and Viola Schimpf on January 9, 1967 in Book 235 at Page 481 and has owned the Property continuously since that date. If you should be in need of further information please feel free to contact me. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH, GARDENSWARTZ, KELLY & MORROW, P.C. LMOlbab LMD Dmpbox LMO Clients POLLOCK Ltr m Cmmm Dev in River Rd Ponxl doe ouci .Ll EXHIBIT u ]j r ' LAW OFFICE$ OF OATES, KNEZEVICH, GARDENSWARTZ, KELLY SG MORROW, P.C. PROFESSIONAI CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING ' 933E HOPKINS AVENUE „+ ASPEN COLORADO 81611 LWfN OKGKV,VI COM LEONARD M TELEPHONE (970) 92G.1700 +� RICHARDA KNEZEVICH RICH NEZFV FACSIMILE (9701920-1121 ' TEOD GARDENSWARTZ �w. DAVIDB KELLY a MARIAMORROW OF COUNSEL m I rnv °L"' ,rR 9 wm STEPHEN CONNOR J ANNE NIARIE MCPHFF $ARM1A DATES September 12, 2011 VIA HAND DELIVERY Pitkin County Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Attn: Suzanne Wolff Re: Perry H. Pollock River Road Parceb16 Acres, more or less r f s s u Dear Suzanne: I am a licensed Colorado attorney actively practicing in Aspen, Colorado. I represent Perry H. Pollock. Mr. Pollock is the owner of the 2.6 acre, more or less, parcel described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property"). The Property has existed as a separate parcel of property and was created and isolated as a separate parcel of property from any other owned by Peny H. Pollock on August 11, 1969 when Mr. Pollock conveyed the Property immediately south of and adjacent to the Property to Wallace and Viola Schimpf by deed recorded in Book 242 at Page 646 of the records of Pitkin County Colorado. Mr. Pollock has owned no abutting lands to the Property since August 11, 1965. Mr. Pollock had previously conveyed the property lying immediately to the north of and abutting the Property by conveyance to Hayword and Wennogle on April 30, 1968 by Deed recorded in Book 234 at Page 499 of those records. By the two above referenced deeds the Property was isolated as a separate parcel. Mr. Pollock originally acquired title to the Property and lands adjacent thereto by conveyance from Wallace and Viola Schimpf on January 9, 1967 in Book 235 at Page 481 and has owned the Property continuously since that date. If you should be in need of further information please feel free to contact me. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH, GARDENSWARTZ, KELLY & MORROW, P.C. LMOlbab LMD Dmpbox LMO Clients POLLOCK Ltr m Cmmm Dev in River Rd Ponxl doe ouci .Ll w w e n. a. r w s EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION A tract of land situated in Government Lot 7 of Section 6, Township 9 South, Range 85 West of The 6th PM being that portion of the Perry H. Pollock land described in Book 225 at Page 141 of the Pitkin County Records bounded on the North by that tract of land described in Book 237 at Page 242 and Bounded on the South by that tract of land described in Book 242 at Page 646 described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Westerly right of way line of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad Company's Aspen Branch from which the Northwest corner of said Section 6 bears North 71 010'07" West 1,060.41 feet, more or less Thence Southerly along the Westerly right of way of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad South 27 °3900" East 411.54 feet to the Northeast corner of said Book 242 at Page 646; Thence South 17 °01'42 West 220.64 feet more or less along the Northerly boundary of said Book 242 at Page 646 to a point in the center of the Roaring Fork River, Thence Northerly along the center of the Roaring Fork River to the Southeast comer of said Book 237 at Page 242; Thence North 66 °38'30" East 157.83 feet more or less along the Southerly boundary of said Book 237 at Page 242 to the point of beginning. r U'JuJi5 1 Iu. DLO POP CO. SECTION e POLLOCK ACTIVITY ENVELOPE PLAN PARCEL ID NO. 2643 - 062 -00 -007 SECTION 6. TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH. RANGE 65 WEST 6th P.M. PITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO .' E x Of E% 'IT . 6.1 e \ anu. \ BOOK 237 PAGE 242 • � `9y� ••\ �I -- � r.' L GOVEPAMENT LOT 7 VICINITY MAP SLOPE LEGEND ® s1aPES Iz -]DN wuE i j gl \ 0 \• SCALE I INCH 40 FEET LEGAL DESCRIPTION 0\ \ ® • . .f L.a .u..w 1. m.n.xu NI I.r RLxE] ]D ' ' a �\C� its eitr'3ii3 {"I Si(AT: iuiM Nnl x. NllxL loa NnIN11. WS -.5i p yyea1ww��:MI MNIOIXI IXIERVLL IS i fEFi G•nV Yi «I. N..4a M Y..A 1[ INI 1 wl Of In1 hnrlLN 1• Ns1 Lr ITITJLI N .A ^ \7� \ r • e O '`\ ie e:i: �'.: taST.N b[ HMr r if L.I 1 ..rlbw 1. 3x3 U2.1 [.p [M 4..rIbN ❑p M • n • M Ynnl rl M .Inv Ilx d IN ON .... .d SLOPES ` P5. ORME Vy i•\ p.i;: :Pu,..i•FI(:�x .bl.b IM YrIMOI n ••V d x11 Sxllo 3 Sxn N•Owb.al IT "I., SYN a3 \ eia rX.«Ie«Ia7i.rl1 .l:q NO IN .... IV rl✓'l .f ..S .T IM a.... ..I al. Y.." 1" ; .nb ]0'w' [.n uLN for «.M Yrnxu o..o et xia M.3 ta! -q•_ y.{1\ i \, \ INN... bnI ITDI'R Yn 1w.M I «I xn « bx .1x3 IN YnR., IV • \. ` \ l r.rtlisi le 1p1 NO O ! @. , if 3x11•• lark ti: r •�� '\ TM•.. INtIMrI ibq :i:. 1 M'J."I i i a...... IN Y.. M.•I f . a Sss3 fal FLOOD PLAIN NOTES \, }i.:::'Ynb eruwf.n uau l «�.... I .I.. NY.IMrq I f. PLAIN .$ SYFD ax ONE qw Kph IwYe•Ni eeF....xkk \ A x3 b«.mrr .r a 4.3 an x rq. Na . e. y.ia :r Cgi..I.O.' JOIE eV FOY rinu @III.. CY.1,' [lIERIrE 31SEY T \I' \ RAW OF OLO JLIE . RE [oEwlrx w. Ow[ef r OOeT ro Q Rr,1,R eer RAW. mLOJ1[D x. ELEVA.T:" NE 43FD i HEW IIFSAO YMX ' iaE' P• .a' 7 IMwa WCA!" TAI V N OY IE w3T • w' \ Q t A. ].e .UU IME ON lEY ] Jlyp lT•TI WIw 3O3w ql °�3E wlp� li/,ll \ [I a 0 ON WAIVER TO TOOK Er I. M Ti i ale U&N .. 1. F� DEVIATION Ie WE➢ OR FM fLOCO � \ A I ade Iw.fl. ' \7O EXrnAl..1 Ni uEA EXIST TIRE ylaA AFFECT 1111 9HT EENEa ur nxOroErrte. uo nE u!E am xar•xc 1u11 I.L.I. pmR \ /� I IAll, wIMECONO ••Q \ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL A \• .1. ACTIVITT uVELME Tux Iu3 a ."FIFO •w unlDrFn eV THE PITON CWMY COMENi 9EYFLMENT OEI..T NII POI a • \ dMIT10N�NOTFF Map Id SELL u Ix10F�l�R O NO TxF LEGEND AND NOTES �r3,, g4M•A ` a xouLrl O BMVEY xONIEm .5 ¢V.TR al Rl CN x3 MOTFD C+'`VG .� Rnu SET auras CONTROL CLHtE It 16001061 ACCEPTANCE 10X[1 POLE TELEPHONE ep \ � ' \ � rITXIx WYmY. ax TXIe O•r ER - •CCEPip ip i1Llw IN M 1LE N Ti- GqN •w RfCOwCR ,.I� orERIEAO mlllTV Llxn \ � ?3. i• x rur w0A _waiaiw0s _ uT¢rnM -!� REARlxw TEOX OETEAx IXED IRw OeeF11V1i1d1 A•A \ P, CFm Ix E¢E OF EYI STI W T.1 Ae SXOw e]T.' w'E � P a '•\ QE1N AW b TITLE INFORNATION YS 2Rtll PITXIM CAOIG .121111 INC. V�pt4 K n' rrtlF QW rtxEX2 rCPa15wA piEO llO aa. EOIL \�\� G/ I RIVER'S BEND \ .I.E. I. .O. LORII RVER... Edllw le Al -10 � � /. {(�;` CONDOMINIUM PIT E.I. SHOW OIS£X ip TIE JOI. RAE OF TIE C ESISi IND ROMSAY IN TE pRiNFAOi Pprlp OF TIE 1.1C." IS LOPER RIVER ROAO1 M w02 EOX AT PROF 5. BOOK 242 PAGE 646 \. 000316 •o, Spin IN rsvuiD er TON; uli NO ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS. INC. • ON., ORM 4. x eFnBnY a lltl �vIu sRP f .1.11 p •x l Flaw ¢ KIa.O' rcxEPT u R., exs.xle m ux 10nE Wm [�ep� •m LEOV. .KTlr Iw n naaD WO y ii O$ F4Ea WON NEA 0£11101 IN MIS r1Ai.I TNIx 1MFE YFAxe 1. 'E FIa3r DISNOVUED N TR YP ECf. x w EYED I WIr Mr T. RE , HEM CAT I xCE ru. eF wYENI£O THAN ru rFYe ixE IMIpLI FEV. I , T,OI ISErLIwe erwrl LATI CAM r.E O•n aF E C CERTIFICATION FwM HEREON. 1OLLT -KII10 SHEET I OF I .wI NO I. RATE v201E 000316 EXHIBIT PITKIN CNJNI'Y C0D1-' ENF0RCF.MF.N "F Coo dhow,, : btne\ IfaiLhu,e 530 Last Main Surer, Sumo 30_ A+pcn, 04mado 8161 1 )W4 2 a -J\N v'u 1 'v.o.e„ 9MMQ No I IC'I- OF VIOLAIION Mr, Perry PaIIUCk P.O. lion 950 Aspens Co 8161: Dear Mr. Pollock. 1 .1111 the Pitkin County Code I`nforcenu•nt 1)rlicer and (his letter serves as a Notice of Violation of the Pithin Counly I and I Ise Coda Ittr the property owned by you at 4054 1 otter River MO. Pitkin ('aunt\. As you nun' recall, I met it, ith you and Mike Kraemer of Pitkin County ('onn0unky Development during the week of August 24" a) discuss the recent clearing of vegetation fionn your properl) ' located al 4054 Lotter River Road. Snhsequcnl w our discussion Mike Kraemer and I \ isiled the properly \eith vaur permission. I'he Pitkin ('ounh Land I Ise Code defines Riparian habitat as "plural commmliiira ronilr;unas hr'00 < lit "'It•d hr sru• /urr• (lilt/ .\tdrxt r lure ln'r/rulr)•t; it /i•0d/lr•rs'. ... ... _..... \\ ith "Jl,Vin lA' di(1i•rr'ttf vegelulive %flora's than 10jaceill 111 -vas ". Coun(v start' believes the area where you rema\ed vegetation is a riparian area as dclined by the Land I Ise Code. The County Land Ilse ('ode. Section 7- 20 -80 prohibits clearia4 of a riparian area. conscyucmh because vegetation ryas removed from the riparian area on your property, file propet1y is in \ iolalitnt of the Land I Ise Codc and dos Notice of Violation is Issued W WIL ro cute this Notice please do the litlla\\mg: I ) Meet \v ith Mike Kraemer or Pitkin C lmwv Wvanuniq Development (9211 - 5421 by MIMI- 15, 21)09 to submit a revegctalion plan lix the arl-ected area. Ile plats should he a prolcssionally produced plan dculiling replacement orthc reccnth removed vegetation \\ ith \egelaion appropriate for the area. 2) the approved plan muss he impkmwmed and completed before the 200() planting season ands. Please he adv iced that this Notice nmsl he cured hellwe any land use applications lit this properly are considered by Pitkin Coun ly Conununiq Development. I hank vau lir your prompt a0cntiun to this matter Sincereb. Carrington Blom n Pitkin Count\ Code F.nllmrnneln ('c:.tohn ldh, Pitkin County attorney 60 Oil7 1t1119 011811 [IllrJll `r' ,24 4711 St EXHIBIT 8 Ecological Assessment of Residential Development for County Activity Envelope & Site Plan Review Pollock Property Piddn County, Colorado November 11, 2011 Report for: PERRY POLLOCK PO BOX 950 ASPEN, COLORADO 81612 0U0j18 Report By: a COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC Jonathan Lowsky, MS 0100 Elk Run Drive, Suite 128 Basalt, CO 81621 6wlri�nal_- irrzrrorrn/ ofRevdenl,,l Drre1of,,n1 Pollmk Pry ol)' COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC Jonathan Lowsky MS Wildlife Biology Certified Wetland Delineator Certified Applied Fluvial Geomorphologist Andy Herb MS Environmental Science Alpine Ecological Resources, LLC Certified Wetland Delineator Subcontractor to Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC I hereby certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate. oremlxr 1 MCI li 101 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I TABLE OF CONTENTS Em qg,,, -,b,, nenl fRna %n /rnlDnr /ajm:n/ PI& k Rvperl) . \'... mix, l 1. °M 1 Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. ..............................5 2.0 METHODS .............................................................................................. ..............................5 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................. ............................... 5 4.0 WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS - § 7- 20- 70 .......................................... ............................... 6 4.1 Significant Mountain Sagebrush, Aspen, & Mountain Shrub Habitat - §7- 20- 70........ 6 4.2 Clustering to minimize impact on wildlife - § 7- 20- 70( c)( 8) ............. ............................... 6 4.3 Nest/Roost Buffer - § 7- 20- 70( d)( 1) ....................................................... ............................... 6 4.4 Intensive Use Buffer - § 7- 20- 70( d)( 2) .................................................. ............................... 6 4.5 Rare, Threatened & Endangered Species - § 7- 20- 70( d)( 3) ................ ............................... 6 4.4.1 Bald Eagle (ST, G5 /S1B,S3N) ...................................................... ............................... 6 4.4.2 Canada Lynx (FT /SE, G5/ Sl) ...................................................... ............................... 7 4.6 Important Waterfowl and Wading Bird Habitat Area - §7- 20- 70(d)(4) ........................ 7 4.7 Winter Range, Severe Winter Range, Winter Concentration - §7- 20- 70(d)(6); (e)(2) .. 7 4.8 Production Areas - §7- 20- 70(d)(7); (e)(4) ............................................ ............................... 8 4.9 Migration Corridors - §7- 20- 70(d)(5); (e)(3) ....................................... ............................... 8 4.10 Black Bears - §7-20- 70(c)(7); (c)(10); ( c)( 12) ......................................... ............................... 8 5.0 LANDSCAPING & VEGETATION PROTECTION - §7 -20- 130 ... ............................... 8 5.1 Protection of Natural Vegetation - §7 -20- 130( b)( 1) ........................... ............................... 8 6.0 RIVER/STREAM CORRIDORS & WETLANDS - § 7- 20- 80 ............ ............................... 9 7.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................... .............................11 8.0 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ................. 12 9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS TO MINIMIZE ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS .........................12 10.0 LITERATURE CITED ........................................................................... .............................15 BACKGROUND & QUALIFICATIONS ........................................................... ............................... 57 Ou0,J20 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I TABLE OF CONTENTS r E:nlgr:n(.- lurumrnl nfR,vdnlwl Dni 1q) et Pnlln.i P'0'r /1' NorrmGtr 11, 2011 Appendices AppendixA: Maps .................................................................................................. ............................... 17 AppendixB: Photos ................................................................................................ ............................... 23 AppendixC: Survey ................................................................................................ ............................... 33 Appendix D: CPW NDIS Ungulate Seasonal Activity Area Definitions ................. ............................... 35 Appendix E: State Of Colorado Threatened & Endangered Vertebrates ............... ............................... 36 Appendix F: List Of Plants Observed ..................................................................... ............................... 38 Appendix G: Wetland Determination Forms .......................................................... ............................... 40 Appendix H: Eli Cerise Ditch Letters ................................................................ ............................... 51 Maps Map1. Location map ........................................................................................ .............................18 Map 2. Aerial view - entire property ............................................................. .............................19 Map 3. Clustering & Zones of Influence ...................................................... ............................... 20 Map 4. CDOW NDIS mapped mule deer seasonal habitats ..................... ............................... 21 Map 5. CDOW NDIS mapped Rocky Mountain elk seasonal habitats ... ............................... 22 Photos Photo1. Existing barn ........................................................................................ .............................24 Photo2. Pasture ................................................................................................ ............................... 24 Photo 3. Riparian vegetation paralleling the Roaring Fork River ............... .............................25 Photo 4. Young aspen at the north end of the Property ............................... .............................25 Photo 5. Existing residence on the Charles E Jones Trust parcel ................. .............................26 Photo 6. The Roaring Fork River at the Property .......................................... .............................26 Photo 7. Reed canarygrass occurs throughout the riparian area ................. .............................27 Photo 8. Lower terrace in the background with mature trees and shrubs . .............................27 Photo 9. Reed canarygrass wetland fringe along the Roaring Fork River, looking south ....28 Photo 10. SP -1 in young coyote willow looking north ................................. .............................28 Photo 11. SP -2 at interface of young coyote willow and woody riparian area (lower floodplain), looking west ............................................................................. .............................29 a Photo 12. SP -3 in young coyote willow, looking north .............................. ............................... 29 Photo 13. SP-+4 at interface of young coyote willow and woody riparian area (lower r floodplain), looking north ............................................................................ .............................30 Photo 14. SP -5 at lower edge of aspens, looking north ................................ .............................30 Photo15. Soil profile at SP-1 ............................................................................. .............................31 Photo16. Soil profile at SP -2 ........................................................................... ............................... 31 Photo17. Soil profile at SP -4 ............................................................................. .............................32 Photo18. Soil profile at SP -5 ........................................................................... ............................... 32 U UJ21 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I TABLE OF CONTENTS w E:nLmiml.iue.rrmem o)RzriAznlmlDerrhDmenl r Put! 4 Pmprdi Nn,m,be, 11 20/ r 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents an evaluation of the wildlife, wildlife habitat, wetland and other ecological resources of the Pollock Property (the "Property ") in unincorporated Pitkin ' County, Colorado (PID# 2643 - 062 -00 -007) as prescribed by the Pitkin County Land Use ' Code. This analysis addresses significant, present wildlife use of the Property, evaluates potential effects of development on wildlife and other important ecological resources, and recommends actions to reduce ecological impacts. The Wildlife Habitat Areas ( §70- 20 -70) and Protection of Natural Vegetation ( §70 -20 -130 — Landscaping and Vegetation Protection) sections of the Pitkin County Land Use Code (LUC) is addressed in this report as it pertains to Activity Envelope and Site Plan Review. Constrained Areas as defined by the LUC discussed in this report include: critical wildlife a habitat; severe winter range, and/or winter concentration areas; wildlife migration corridors or habitat; wildlife production, birthing or calving areas; important waterfowl and wading bird 7 habitat areas; significant mountain big sagebrush, aspen, and mountain shrub dominated habitat; and rare, imperiled, sensitive, threatened, or endangered species critical habitat ( §7- 20-70); and riparian and wetland areas ( §70- 20 -80). 2.0 METHODS The following assessment assumes that re- development of the site will consist of a single family residence. This assessment is based on: (1) detailed site assessments of the Property; (2) a review of current Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW) Natural Diversity Information Source (NDIS) Species Distribution Maps (CDOW 2010b); and (3) the author's experience in recognizing, avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating potential impacts of development on wildlife and other ecological resources in Pitkin County and western Colorado. The Property was evaluated on October 5, 2011 to identify wetlands and other waters of the U.S. Potential wetlands were examined using procedures outlined in the Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountain, Valleys, and Coast Region (Environmental Laboratory 2008). This involved a detailed examination of plants, soils, and hydrologic indicators. All plant nomenclature in this report and its attachments follow the NRCS Plants Database (NRCS 2011a). 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The Property is along the Roaring Fork River approximately 3.4 miles north - northwest of Woody Creek and 6.9 miles south east of the Town of Basalt in Township 9 South, Range 85 West, Section 6 at approximately 7,063 feet in elevation (Map 1). A 0.4 ac (approximately) pasture was created on the Property over 40 years ago and has been more or less continuously maintained as such since that time (Map 2). Periodically maintenance has lapsed for short periods of time allowing coyote willows to quickly establish over a matter of weeks. Aerial photos of the Property from 2005 and 2009 clearly show the pasture maintained as grass with no shrubs occupying the area. A barn was built on the Property in the late 1960s (Map 2; Photo 1). The Property is dominated by 2 vegetation types — non - native grass pasture (Photo - 2) and narrowleaf cottonwood / thinleaf alder - willow spp. riparian woodland (Photo 3) with _ a small stand of young aspens at the northern end of the Property (Photo 4). The activity OJrOJ22 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I INTRODUCTION Emkgi:vL9 �e�m�rnl o/ Rerrd,,w1Dnukpmeia N11,,k Proprnp To,,mbrr 11, 7011 envelope is proposed within the existing pasture and includes the small stand of aspen at the northeast comer of the Property. 4.0 WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS - §7 -20 -70 4.1 SIGNIFICANT MOUNTAIN SAGEBRUSH, ASPEN, & MOUNTAIN SHRUB HABITAT - §7 -20 -70 The Property does not contain any significant mountain sagebrush, aspen, or mountain shrub habitat. 4.2 CLUSTERING TO MINIMIZE IMPACT ON WILDLIFE - §7-20-70(c)(8) The proposed activity envelope was selected to ensure that the zone of influence (ZOI) resulting from the development of the site would overlap the existing ZOI of the neighboring Charles E Jones Trust (Photo 5) and River Bend Condos properties, thus reducing the net effect of development on ecological resources. Given that Odell and Knight (2001) found that houses and areas of frequent human activity in Pitkin County have a ZOI that extends approximately 180 in in all directions into adjacent habitat, the ZOI created by a residence built within the proposed activity envelope will be completely encompassed by those created by the existing homes on the adjacent parcels (Map 3). 4.3 NEST/RoOST BUFFER - §7-20-70(d)(1) A nest search was conducted during the site assessment and no raptor nests were located. No active peregrine falcon, osprey, golden eagle, or bald eagle nest or roost sites are known to occur on or within close proximity of the Property. No other raptor nests were found during the site assessment or otherwise known to occur within 0.25 miles of proposed development. 4.4 INTENSIVE USE BUFFER - §7- 20 -70(d) (2) No intensive use is proposed on the Property. 4.S RARE, THREATENED & ENDANGERED SPECIES - §7- 20- 70(d)(3) There are no federally listed Threatened, Endangered or Candidate plant or animal species known or suspected to occur on the Property nor is there critical habitat for any federally listed species occurring on the Property. 4.4.1 Bald Eagle (ST, G5 /S1B,S3N) Bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) were listed as endangered under the ESA in 1978 but a had recovered sufficiently by 1995 to be downlisted to threatened status. This species is also state- listed as threatened. Because of its successful recovery, the bald eagle was removed from the federal list of threatened and endangered species on August 9, 2007. Protections remain, however, under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), and the Bald Eagle Protection Act. Bald eagles are listed as Threatened by the state of Colorado (CDOW 2010a). According to CDOW data, in 2001 there were 51 known nesting pairs in Colorado, and approximately 1,000 bald eagles winter in the state (CDOW 2010c). Bald eagles depend on OuOuj23 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCB?NCE, LLC I WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS - §7 -20-70 E.vl+gmd. -1 « rrvnu+t n/ Rr¢drnnal Dri rlr�mn+l Pollock PV,,t, 11. 2011 small mammals, waterfowl, and carrion. There are no mapped or otherwise known bald eagle x sensitive habitats on the Property. The slopes to the east and west of the Property are mapped as bald eagle winter range and winter forage habitat. No known bald eagle nests occur in or adjacent to the project area. 4.4.2 Canada Lynx (FT /SE, GS /S1) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published a final rule on March 24, 2000 listing the Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) in the coterminous United States as a "threatened" species under the Endangered Species Act (Federal Register: 65 FR 16052). According to USFS lynx analysis unit (LAU) data, potential lynx winter habitat occurs 0.4 miles to the northwest and potential lynx denning habitat occurs 0.7 miles to the northwest of the Property. No Canada lynx have been documented on or adjacent to the Property (K. Broderdorp, USFWS, pers. comm.). Denning habitat is comprised of spruce -fir forests, north- facing lodgepole pine forests, and Douglas -fir forests with complex multi- storied conifer stands, large quantities of downed woody debris and or dense understory conifer that provide den sites in close proximity to habitat for foraging on snowshoe hazes. Winter foraging habitat is all denning habitat plus conifer stands that lack structure for dens sites but provide optimal winter foraging conditions of dense (35% or more) horizontal conifer cover at or above the snow - (USDA Forest Service 2002). On November 9, 2006, the proposed critical habitat plan for lynx released today by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Federal Register: 50 CFR Part 17 66008) omits Colorado, New Mexico, and southern Wyoming (United States Fish & Wildlife Service 2006). 4.6 IMPORTANT WATERFOWL AND WADING BIRD HABITAT AREA - §7 -20 -70 There are no important waterfowl and wading bird habitat areas on or adjacent to the Property. The nearest great blue heron colony is more than 7 miles to the south west on Woody Creek. 4.7 WINTER RANGE, SEVERE WINTER RANGE, WINTER CONCENTRATION - §7- 20 -70(d) (6); (e) (2) Mule deer occur on the Property throughout the year. As snow accumulates in early- winter, migrating elk (Map 5) and mule deer (Map 4) move across the Property to winter range and severe winter range on the south to west facing slopes of Triangle Peak on the east side of Lower River Road and the north facing slopes of Williams Hill on the west side of State Highway 82 (SH -82). Although both species likely cross the Property in mid - winter to access the river, given its position on the valley floor, it retains far too much snow to provide winter range. In general, mule deer and ells do not tolerate snow depths greater than chest height and are impeded when snow is knee -deep (Loveless 1967, Kelsall and Prescott 1971, Parker 1984, Toweill et al. 2002, Ungulate Winter Range Technical Advisory Team 2005). The nearest mapped mule deer and elk winter range and severe winter range is on the aforementioned slopes of Triangle Peak across Lower River Road and the popular Rio Grande Trail from the Property. These seasonal habitats have been field verified and are correctly mapped as severe winter range for both species (CDOW 2010e). The LUC prescribes a '/4 mile buffer from severe winter range. The field verified severe winter range on Triangle Peak is within 0.25 miles from the proposed activity envelope. The seasonal elk habitats are mapped at a 1:24,000 scale and often need to be confirmed Ut v i� 4 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS - §7 -20.70 E�nlo�rmf -4 � rrrmrr++! of fttaJ.v+Gaf Pnr(opmrc9 P,lh,k P,,#,, 1 \'a+rmGer 11. _'011 and/or modified (i.e., field verified) to reflect more micro -scale conditions. Although the Property is within the '/4 mile buffer of mule deer and elk severe winter range and winter concentration it is within the ZOI of the adjacent residential development and the Property has been actively maintained since the 1960s. Consequently, there is a zone of influence resulting from the 40+ years of human activity and pasture management on the Property (Odell and Knight 2001). This influence has resulted in disruption of the habitats around the Property, extending approximately 87.5 in - 500 in from the areas of regular human activity (Ward 1973, Schultz and Bailey 1978, Edge 1982, Thomas et al. 1982, Edge et al. 1985, Edge and Marcum 1985, Schroer et al. 1988, Cassirer 1992, Powell 2003). The lands within the zones of influence provide less effective severe winter habitat. In addition, the severe winter range and winter concentration habitats are separated from the Property by Lower River Road and the Rio Grande Trail on the east and SH -82 on the west. There is no bighorn sheep habitat within close proximity to the Property. 4.8 PRODUCTION AREAS - §7-20-70(d)(7); (e)(4) There are no mapped or field verified production areas on or within close proximity to the Property. The nearest production area is more than 2.4 miles away to the north - northwest near the top of Sloane Peak. 4.9 MIGRATION CORRIDORS - §7-20-70(d)(5); (e)(3) The Property is not within or adjacent to any mapped or field verified migration corridors (Maps 4, 5). The nearest migration corridor is across SH -82 at Watson Divide. 4.10 BLACK BEARS - §7-20-70(c)(7); (c) (10); (c) (12) The Property lies adjacent to a field verified black bear (Ursus americanus) fall concentration area (CDOW 2010d). Although bears are common in the spring, summer, and early fall, the plant communities on the Property are not typical of fall concentration areas and do not provide sufficient forage for the hyperphagic and fall transition stages of a bear's annual cycle (Folk et al. 1976, Nelson et al. 1983). In the upper Roaring Fork Valley, black bear fall concentration areas are most often located in Gambel oak and mixed montane shrublands where most of the shrubs produce ripe fruit and mast in the fall. These vegetation types are found on the slopes of Triangle Peak across Lower River Road east of the Property. 5.0 LANDSCAPING & VEGETATION PROTECTION - §7 -20 -130 5.1 PROTECTION OF NATURAL VEGETATION - §7 -20 -130 The activity envelope is proposed in a disturbed area dominated by grasses and forbs with coyote willow beginning to colonize the site. No native trees greater than 6 inches DBH occur within the proposed envelope. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I LANDSCAPING & VEGETATION PROTECTION - §7- 20-130 L, dqg, nl. 1 uenmeni n/ Read..iad Dercdyonen( Pollock. Prmeih .'o emh,, 11. -'W 6.0 RIVER /STREAM CORRIDORS & WETLANDS -§7-20-80 Streams, riparian areas and wetlands are regulated according to §7 -20 -80 of the LUC. This section establishes setbacks (or "buffers ") from the identifiable high water line of: (a) "Blue line" perennial streams shown on U.S. Geological Survey maps of the area; (b) Intermittent streams or streambeds known or apparent from field study, with the exception of man -made waterways such as ditches and water features; and (c) Isolated, natural wetland and riparian areas (Pitkin County 2006). The buffers are intended to serve multiple purposes including preservation of riparian and wetland systems for flood attenuation, sediment control, water quality protection and wildlife habitat preservation. Due to the steep, confined nature of most streams in Pitkin County, riparian plant communities are encompassed within the buffer from a hydrological feature. Plant communities determined to be riparian in nature yet lie outside a given buffer may or may not be protected by the LUC. The status of such areas is to be determined by means of a subjective evaluation by the County water resources expert (W. Rider, personal communication, Oct. 7, 2008). A survey to delineate wetlands and Waters of the U. S. was conducted on October 5, 2011 by Andy Herb of Alpine Ecological Resources, LLC (AER) under subcontract to Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC (CWS) using the routine onsite determination method as described in the 1987 Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (Environmental Laboratory 1987) in conjunction with the 2008 Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Regional Supplement (Environmental Laboratory 2008). On the same day, CWS Ecologist Jonathan Lowsky delineated the boundary of riparian vegetation shown on the survey attached in Appendix C. The riparian delineation was based on: (1) Riparian area definitions described in A System for Mapping Riparian Areas in the Western United States (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1997); (2) Riparian plant communities described in the Colorado Natural Heritage Program's A Classification of Riparian Wetland Plant Associations of Colorado (Kittel et al. 1999); and (3) the author's experience in recognizing and delineating riparian areas in western Colorado and the Roaring Fork Watershed. From a hydrological perspective, the Property is generally comprised of a lower terrace dominated by woody riparian plants intermixed with small wetland areas, and an upper terrace area dominated by a mix of riparian and upland plants. These are described below and shown in photos in Appendix B. Given the adjacent development, the riparian area on the Property is of moderate to low functional value from a hydrological and ecological perspective. A complete list of plants observed on the property (with wetland indicator status) is in Appendix F. Appendix G contains the Wetland Determination Data Forms completed for - the five study points shown on the survey. The Roaring Fork River, a 6th order perennial tributary of the Colorado River and its associated riparian- wetland complex flows north - northwest along the western property boundary (Photo 6). The Roaring Fork is classified as a Traditionally Navigable Water (TNW) by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The potential natural (pre- development) riparian plant association on the Property is likely a narrowleaf cottonwood / thinleaf alder - willow spp. (Populus angustifolia / Alnus incana -Salix spp.) riparian woodland. On the Property this riparian woodland occurs as a narrow linear strip bounded by the river on the west and the pasture on the east. It is in relatively good condition with some invasive species such as reed canarygrass reducing ecological function (Photo 7). uu�J�6 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I RIVER /STREAM CORRIDORS &wEnANDS -§7 -20-80 E,'o(aa'alAun ovrn! n/ Rr,rdenlr✓l hrrrLrmurl Polak Pmfen) .'gym rmher 11.707 ] Lower Terrace The lower terrace is mostly contained within the 100 -foot river setback (Appendix C - Survey) and is a mosaic of small wetland areas and woodland riparian habitat (Photo 8). The wetlands in this area were not delineated since they are all within the 100 -foot setback and will not be disturbed. Non- wetland areas on the lower floodplain are dominated by various species of willow (Salix spp.), water birch (Betula occidentalis), thinleaf alder (Alnus incana) and Wood's rose (Rosa woodsii), with pockets of mostly mature narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia). The understory in areas with an open canopy is mostly redtop (Agrostis gigantea), orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata), smooth brome (Bromus inermis), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), and smooth horsetail (Equisetum laevigatum). Much of this non - wetland area appears to be an old earthen dike or levee that was constructed to minimize overbank flooding. This feature is breached in some areas, allowing extremely high flows in the river to backwater flood into small wetlands that are located in the lowest portions of this area. The small wetland areas within the riparian/wetland mosaic tend to be in small depressions or along small backwater channels that can collect and detain water. They typically have an overstory of willow, thinleaf alder, or water birch with beaked sedge (Carex utriculata), Nebraska sedge (Carex nebrascensis), and woolly sedge (Carex pellita). Additionally, there is a narrow wetland fringe comprised of dense reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) along the river edge that vanes from 5 to 15 feet wide in most locations (Photo 9). The wetlands on the lower floodplain are not "isolated" and are expected to be considered jurisdictional under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act since they are hydrologically connected with a significant nexus and "directly abutting" the Roaring Fork River which is either a "relatively permanent' ' and/or "traditionally navigable" waterway. Upper Terrace The upper terrace is outside of the 100 -foot river setback (Appendix C - Survey) and is mostly comprised of mesic meadow, with newly established coyote willow (Salix exigua). The largest stands are in the vicinity of sample point (SP) -1, SP -2, SP -3, and east of SP -4 (Photos " 10, 11, 12, 13). One pocket of quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) is situated north of the - existing barn (immediately east of SP -5) (Photo 7 Photo 14). No wetlands are present in the upper terrace. The open meadow areas are dominated by smooth brome and Kentucky bluegrass. The young coyote willow areas appear to have grown up since the site was left fallow and not mowed or grazed (likely within the last year or two). These areas have an understory of mostly upland plants, mainly smooth brome, Kentucky bluegrass, western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii), and quackgrass (Elymus repens). The quaking aspen stand has an understory of mostly smooth brome, Kentucky bluegrass, Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), timothy (Phleum pratense), and red fescue (Festuca rubra). No hydric soils were found in the upper terrace. According to the Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2011b), the soils at the site are mapped as Southace cobbly sandy loam. These soils are usually found on alluvial fans, mountains and terraces with slopes of 12 to 25 percent. The parent material is alluvium derived from sandstone and shale. They typically have a depth to groundwater of more than 80 inches and are well- drained. duo Z COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I RIVER /STREAM CORRIDORS & WETLANDS - 47 -20-80 L.olaiml.'1 urnm +rtl rl Raab and Dev,1p l Polkk P"P" /r N,,.ber 11, 2011 Detailed investigations of the soils at the five sample points revealed a silty clay loam soil with a matrix color of 7.5YR3/2 across the entire site (Photos 15, 16, 17, 18). Four of the five sample points (all except SP -5) also had 2 percent or more faint redoxymorphic features below about 10 inches, indicating a high water table at some point. In order for this soil to be considered hydric, however, these features must be "distinct' and must be entirely within the upper 12 inches of the soil profile and they are not. See Appendix G for more information. No wetland hydrology indicators were observed in the upper terrace. Most of the area, however, appears to have once been wetter than it is today. This is evidenced by the presence of coyote willow and small remnant populations of hydrophytes like beaked sedge and Nebraska sedge. A change in water regime is likely the result of the removal of intentional _ irrigation or from repairs to the Eli Cerise Ditch, which is located up- gradient of the property. Individuals familiar with the history of the area have said that the ditch used to leak substantial amounts of water which would substantially increase the subirrigation of the Property which would sometimes daylight in a sheet -flow at the toe of the slope below Lower River Road. A portion of the ditch was repaired several years ago which eliminated the leakage. Letters from Beach Environmental and Resource Engineering regarding problems with the Eli Cerise Ditch are attached (Appendix H). i Wetland Determination The 2.6 -acre Pollock Property was investigated for wetlands using the routine onsite determination method as described in the 1987 Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (Environmental Laboratory 1987) in conjunction with the 2008 Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Regional Supplement (Environmental Laboratory 2008). No wetlands were identified outside of the 100 -foot river setback. Within the setback, there is a mosaic of woody riparian vegetation and small wetlands that are hydrologically connected to the Roaring Fork River. The remaining portion of the property is mostly mesic meadow with large stands of young willow with an upland understory. Five study points were investigated in the meadow area and no wetland hydrology or hydric soils were identified. 7.0 CONCLUSIONS r The site assessment, field observations, and GIS analysis revealed the following: 1. The CDOW NDIS data pertaining to the Property are relatively accurate given the scale at which they were created. 2. The proposed development will not result in the loss of wildlife habitat regulated by the LUC. Specifically, no bighorn sheep, elk, or mule deer production habitat migration corridors, severe winter range or winter concentration areas will be affected by the proposed development. 3. A comparative buffer analysis was conducted of the existing residences to determine overlap of their ZOIs versus the proposed activity envelope using ArcGIS 9.2 (ESRI 2008). This analysis revealed that the proposed activity envelope is entirely within the ZOI of the adjacent residential properties and that it is separated from elk and mule deer severe winter range by Lower River Road and the Rio Grande Trail and its heavy Utj V jG COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I CONCLUSIONS 'a E,'ologrxlArrenmry ( a /2rndrn /rol Pnrlofnun/ P,,N4 P op,a)' \'mrm /er / /.2011 recreational activity. As such, it is unlikely that development of a single family home will result in any new anthropogenic influences on wintering elk and mule deer in a severe winter (Map 3). 4. No other wildlife habitat features regulated under §7 -20 -70 (Wildlife Habitat Areas) will be affected by the proposed development. 5. It is unlikely that legally protected, sensitive, or economically important wildlife species will be affected by residential development of the Property as proposed. 6. No habitat for animal species listed as Threatened or Endangered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service will be affected by the proposed actions. 7. No habitat for animal species listed by the State of Colorado as rare, Threatened, Endangered, or State Special Concern will be affected by the proposed actions. 8. No raptor nests were found or otherwise known within 144 mile of the proposed activity envelopes. 9. The proposed development will not directly affect any jurisdictional wetlands or other Waters of the U.S. 10. Any naturally occurring riparian habitat affected by the proposed development will be replaced on the Property on a 1:1 basis according to a restoration plan submitted to and approved by the County. 11. The proposed activity envelope is more than 100 feet from the identifiable high water line (as defined as the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) at 33 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Sections 328.3(e) and 329.11(a)(1)). 12. No naturally occurring trees (12t) greater than 6 inches DBH and shrubs will be removed for development of the proposed activity envelope. 8.0 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Given the above assessment, development as proposed will not result in the direct or indirect loss of wildlife habitat or other significant ecological resources as regulated by the LUC. Wetlands, riparian habitat and habitat for rare, Threatened, Endangered, or Candidate species will be completely avoided. 9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS TO MINIMIZE ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS 1. Domestic Animal Controls — Given the proximity to elk and mule deer severe winter range, when outside, all dogs should be leashed or restricted to a fenced enclosure (i.e., kennel or run) adjacent to the residence. a. Dogs of guests should be required to comply with these restrictions. b. Contractors should be prohibited from bringing their dogs on site during construction even if kept within their vehicles. UUO127 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT 0 E,, /,q,, l.'1. naunent n� Rrvdruadl Drirl7+rnrxl Pollo,k Property "'aonlar 11. _'011 2. Construction — To protect the integrity of the elk and mule deer severe winter range, exterior construction should be prohibited between December 15th and March 30th . 4 3. Black Bears: a. All refuse containers should meet or exceed the Wildlife Proof Refuse Container/Dumpster Enclosure Standards described in Pitkin County Ordinance # 010 -2001 and the 2004 amendment to that ordinance. b. Fruit - bearing trees and shrubs should be avoided in any landscaping within the residential lots. c. Pets should not be fed outside. d. Wherever possible, lever style door handles should be avoided on the exterior of the house. e. Bird feeders should be avoided from April through November. f. Composting should be restricted to yard waste (e.g., leaves and grass clippings). Food waste will be prohibited within compost. 4. Protection of existing native vegetation: a. Native vegetation, particularly quaking aspen and native shrubs species on the Property should be preserved to the maximum extent possible except where management is necessary to reduce wildfire hazards. b. Except for wildfire and forest management (e.g., removal of hazard trees), alteration of vegetation should be prohibited outside the proposed activity envelope. c. Landscaping should be restricted to the activity envelope. d. An orange safety fence should be placed around the activity envelope during construction to prevent any unnecessary vegetation disturbance during construction. A e. Vegetation disturbed outside the approved activity envelope should be revegetated according to the current Pitkin County Revegetation Guidelines. £ Following construction, naturally occurring vegetation should not be disturbed outside of the activity envelopes. 5. Riparian Habitat/Vegetation a. Any riparian vegetation removed or otherwise harmed due to re- development of the Property will be replaced on the Property at a 1:1 ratio according to a riparian restoration plan submitted to and approved by the County. b. Only plant species that are identified by Pitkin County Revegetation Guidelines (www. aspenpitkin. com/Portals /0 /docs /county/Publie Works /land- management /reve¢ u�pdfl as being appropriate for wetland or riparian areas, or native species found to occur on site but not listed in Pitkin County Revegetation Guidelines, will be introduced into or used for revegetation of any wetland or riparian area. _ 6. Wetlands and Waters of the US: DUCJ33 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I RECOMMENDATIONS TO MINIMIZE ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS . Awu .mrat n/ R, ,dowal D,,,I p n w :Cnr �ml n' 1/, 21171 a. Surface and ground water flows intercepted by roads, utility trenches and other development improvements should not be diverted away from existing wetlands. b. No activities below the seasonal high groundwater table or fill should be allowed outside the activity envelopes. 7. Noxious weeds should be managed by means of an Integrated Weed Management strategy according to the current Pitkin County Weed Management Plan. UuLOA1 COLORADOWTLDLEFESCIENCE,LLC I RECOMMENDATIONS TO MINIMIZE ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS Eraloei ..ul_- lae��mor /o /Rendntlml hrrrinfntrnl 10.0 LITERATURE CITED . \',,ember 11. 2011 Cassirer, E. F., David J. Freddy, and Ernest D. Ables. 1992. Elk responses to disturbance by cross- country skiers in Yellowstone National Park. Wildlife Society Bulletin 20:375 -381. CDOW. 2010a. Colorado Listing of Endangered, Threatened and Wildlife Species of Special Concern — Species Pages. Available online at http: / /wild] ife. state. co. us/ WiIdlifeSpecies/ SpeciesOfConcern /ThreatenedEndanaeredList/List OfThreatenedAndEndaneeredSpecies .htm. CDOW. 2010b. Colorado Species Distribution Digital Data. Available online at http: / /ndis.iirel.colostate.edu /. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. A CDOW. 2010c. Colorado Species Distribution Maps - Bald Eagle. Available online at http: // ndis .nrel.colostate.edu /ftp /data/sam /bald eagle.zip. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. CDOW. 2010d. Colorado Species Distribution Maps - Black Bear. Available online at http: / /ndis.nrel.colostate.edu /ftp /data/sam/elk.zin Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. CDOW. 2010e. Colorado Species Distribution Maps Metadata - Elk. Available online at http: / /ndis.nrel.colostate.edu /ftp /data/sam /meta/elk.htm]. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. Edge, W. 1982. Distribution, Habitat Use, and Movements of Elk in Relation to Roads and Human Disturbances in Western Montana. University of Montana. Missoula, MT. Edge, W., C. Marcum, and S. Olson. 1985. Effects of logging activities on home -range fidelity of elk. The Journal of Wildlife Management 49:741 -744. Edge, W. D., and C. L. Marcum. 1985. Movements of Elk in Relation to Logging Disturbances. Journal of Wildlife Management 49:926 -930. Environmental Laboratory. 2008. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland .. Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region. ERDC/ECL Technical Report TR- 08 -13. US Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 139pp. ESRL 2008. ArcGIS version 9.x, version 9.2. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, California, USA. Folk, G. E., A. Larson, and M. A. Folk. 1976. Physiology of hibernating bears. Ursus 3:373 -380. Kelsall, J. P., and W. Prescott. 1971. Moose and deer behaviour in snow in Fundy National Park, New ® Brunswick. Canandian Wildlife Service Report 15. Loveless, C. M. 1967. Ecological characteristics of Mule Deer winter range. Technical Publication 20. Colorado Department of Game, Fish and Parks. Nelson, R. A., J. G. Edgar Folk, E. W. Pfeiffer, J. J. Craighead, C. J. Jonkel, and D. L. Steiger. 1983. Behavior, biochemistry, and hibernation in black, grizzly, and polar bears. Ursus 5:284 -290. NRCS. 2011a. Plants Database. Website: http: // plants .usda.gov /plants /index.html. Accessed October 2011. NRCS. 2011b. Web Soil Survey. Website: http: / /websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov /app /. Accessed October 2011. A COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I LITERATURE CITED Emlagaxl. -1 rtr� rnrvvt/ .f Rr.uAe+t /m! De+eloFnxnl Poll Prgloly .N,,e 1 , 11. 2W l Odell, E. A., and R. L. Knight. 2001. Songbird and medium -sized mammal communities associated with exurban development in Pitkin County, Colorado. Conservation Biology 15:0 -0. Parker, K. L., Charles T. Robbins, and Thomas A. Hanley. 1984. Energy expenditures for locomotion by mule deer and elk. Journal of Wildlife Management 48:474 -488. Pitkin County. 2006. Pitkin County Code (July 2006). Title 8, Chapter 11. Pitkin County, Aspen, Colorado. Powell, J. 2003. Distribution, Habitat Use Patterns, and Elk Response to Human Disturbance in the Jack Marrow Hills, Wyoming. University of Wyoming. Laramie, Wyoming. Schroer, G. I., G. Witmer, and E. E. Starkey. 1988. Effects of land use practices on Roosevelt elk winkr range. Pages 68 -74 in M. Zahn and J. Pierce., editors. Proceedings of the Western States and Provinces Elk Workshop. Washington Deptartment of Wildlife, Seattle, WA. Schultz, R. D., and J. A. Bailey. 1978. Responses of national park elk to human activity. Journal of Wildlife Management 42:91 -100. Thomas, J. W., D. E. Toweill, D. P. Metz, Wildlife Management Institute., and United States. Forest Service. 1982. Elk of North America: ecology and management. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, Pa. Toweill, D. E., J. W. Thomas, and D. P. Metz. 2002. North American elk: ecology and management. 1st edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington [D.C.]. Ungulate Winter Range Technical Advisory Team. 2005. Desired conditions for Mule Deer, Elk, and Moose winter range in the Southern Interior of British Columbia. B.C. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Biodiversity Branch. Victoria, BC. Wildl. Bull. No. B -120. 18pp. United States Fish & Wildlife Service. 2006. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Contiguous United States Distinct Population Segment of the Canada lynx; Final Rule. November 9, 2006.71 FR 66008- 66061. USDA Forest Service. 2002. Lynx habitat parameters, White River National Forest. Unpub. Forest Service document. Glenwood Springs. CO. 3pp. plus LAU spreadsheet (subject to further revision -last available update 02/11/2005). Ward, A. L., J.J. Cupal, A.L. Lea, C.A. Oakley, and R.W. Weeks. 1973. Elk behavior in relation to cattle grazing, forest recreation, and traffic. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 38:327 -337. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I LITERATURE CITED y Etohgeel. 4nemew of Reudoeliul Dejelopmml Polleek Properly Nwembe, 71, 2011 ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR COUNTY ACTIVITY ENVELOPE & SITE PLAN REVIEW APPENDIX A: Maps Pollock Property GUGJ34 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX A: Maps f :q v AOL Al are Ewlcgualil«ev en[ o(Rendentral Derelopmenl I'Jak- P oe,yy w r r ' buCj40 .Nmemix,11 2211 ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR COUNTY ACTIVITY ENVELOPE & SITE PLAN REVIEW APPENDIX B: Photos Pollock Property COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX B: Photos W441hji& EologiadAsiomnl -263 VLduxdLnm Aan g6, 10/2 Photo 1. Existing barn Photo 2. Pasture OUCJ41 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX B: Photos Gm/agual Asn wm! of Fe ,&nwl De,vkpment Pollack P2 m 000142 COLORADO WB.DM SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX B: Photos E4wl%mlArrermicnl of ReA*tdial Deeelomenf Pollock PrMen, Norm &r 11. 2011 OUOJ43 COLORADO WILDLIFE SaWCE, LLC I APPENDIX B: Photos Aeusrmcal ojRandenlra! De, c%pmea/ Naxmder 11. 2011 looking west 000044 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX B: Photos &ukjml Alsw i yl Re, denjwl Darlgimml Padak Prz ft Photo 10. SP -1 in young coyote willow looking north 0'00045 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX B: Photos 2011 EmlogimlA.rnsrmenf,fReddenlwl Unehpmeof Pollock Proeerfv Noxmlxr 11, 2011 floodplain), looking West Photo 12. SP -3 in young coyote willow, looking north juCj46 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX B: Photos Emlogim[A —smW ofRcd&"dD whpmrol popork pyRKy. Nomm &r 11, 2011 floodplain), looking north 000047 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX 8: Photos Avusmenl of Revdem1wl Dealrpmew Nmrmbm I OUO048 COLORADO WRALIPE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX B: Photos Aw,., l grReadenlml D.x "aa .,,...« Nwember I Photo 18. Soil profile at SP -5 Ou0J49 COLORADO WRDL.mE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX B: Photos ', Grnln�rrvl .- lrrenmen /ofRe idenleal Dere!fmrn/ Pollak Propea) 1 M A uUGJ50 11. 2011 ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR COUNTY ACTIVITY ENVELOPE & SITE PLAN REVIEW APPENDIX C: Survey Pollock Property „, COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIXC:Suwey fill M jyj a �i ,1 Iya e! 1"r EiE Fti- ''li• if ywa�e jig fr c1 c arx � x �-77 �i f8L1Y:ii : Y- E° � 5a G a 8 w 2 vi ♦ `off yz s f�• .a /% x 3 g 3 !a Eli 3 9 � �a •� `4 E } �ae E,nloGLuL� 1, rr, vnrn/ n/ RrorAn�lr.a(Dnr! fnrtvn Pal(u.k Prrq+rrp APPENDIX D: CPW NDIS ungulate seasonal activity area definitions Sm rmba 11. ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK HIGHWAY CROSSING: Those areas where elk movements traditionally cross roads, presenting potential conflicts between elk and motorists. MIGRATION CORRIDORS: A specific mappable site through which large numbers of animals migrate and loss of which would change migration routes. PRODUCTION AREA That part of the overall range of elk occupied by the females from May 15 to June 15 for calving. (Only known areas are mapped and this does not include all production areas for the DAU). RESIDENT POPULATION: An area used year -round by a population of elk. Individuals could be found in any part of the area at any time of the year, the area cannot be subdivided into seasonal ranges. It is most likely included within the overall range of the larger population. SEVERE WINTER: That part of the range of a species where 90 percent of the individuals are located when the annual snowpack is at its maximum and /or temperatures are at a minimum in the two worst winters out of ten The winter of 1983 -84 is a good example of a severe winter SUMMER CONCENTRATION: Those areas where elk concentrate from mid -June through mid - August. High quality forage, secunty, and lack of disturbance are characteristics of these areas to meet the high energy demands of lactation, calf rearing, antler growth, and general preparation for the rigors of fall and winter. SUMMER RANGE: That part of the range of a species where 90% of the individuals are located between spring green -up and the first heavy snowfall, or during a site specific period of summer as defined for each DAU. Summer range is not necessarily exclusive of winter range; in some areas winter range and summer range may overlap. WINTER CONCENTRATION: That part of the winter range of a species where densities are at least 200% greater than the surrounding winter range density during the same period used to define winter range in the average five winters out of ten. WINTER RANGE: That part of the overall range of a species where 90 percent of the individuals are located during the average five winters out of ten from the first heavy snowfall to spring green -up, or during a site specific period of winter as defined for each DAU. MULE DEER - CONCENTRATION AREA: That part of the overall range where higher quality habitat supports significantly higher densities than surrounding areas. These areas are typically occupied year round and are not necessarily { associated with a specific season Includes rough break country, riparian areas, small drainages, and large areas of irrigated cropland 1 HIGHWAY CROSSING' Those areas where mule deer movements traditionally cross roads, presenting potential conflicts between mule deer and motorists. .� MIGRATION CORRIDORS: A specific mappable site through which large numbers of animals migrate and loss of ' which would change migration routes. RESIDENT POPULATION: An area that provides year -round range for a population of mule deer. The resident mule deer use all of the area all year, it cannot be subdivided into seasonal ranges although it may be included within the overall range of the larger population. �. SEVERE WINTER: That part of the overall range where 90% of the individuals are located when the annual snowpack is at its maximum and /or temperatures are at a minimum in the two worst winters out of ten. SUMMER RANGE: That part of the overall range where 90% of the individuals are located between spring green - up and the first heavy snowfall. Summer range is not necessarily exclusive of winter range; in some areas winter range and summer range may overlap WINTER CONCENTRATION: That part of the winter range where densities are at least 200% greater than the surrounding winter range density during the same period used to define winter range in the average five winters { out often. WINTER RANGE. That part of the overall range where 90 percent of the individuals are located during the average five winters out of ten from the first heavy snowfall to spring green -up, or during a site specific period of winter as defined for each DAU. iii.i r'uJ� COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX D: CPW NDIS ungulate seasonal a0vrty area definitions a r Etnlagun(A re, rmrn/ n/ f{endmt¢r(Dnrl, fmml P 11 k Pmp "y " \'or emlur 11. 2011 APPENDIX E: State of Colorado Threatened & Endangered Vertebrates Boreal Toad s Northern Cricket Frog Great Plains Narrowmouth Toad Northern Leopard Frog Wood Frog Plains Leopard Frog Couch's Spadefoot Whooping Crane Least Tern Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Plains Sharp - Tailed Grouse Piping Plover Bald Eagle Mexican Spotted Owl Burrowing Owl Lesser Prairie - Chicken Western Yellow - Billed Cuckoo Greater Sandhill Crane Ferruginous Hawk Gunnison Sage- Grouse American Peregrine Falcon Greater Sage Grouse Western Snowy Plover Mountain Plover Long - Billed Curlew Columbian Sharp - Tailed Grouse Bonytail Razorback Sucker Humpback Chub Colorado Pikeminnow Greenback Cutthroat Trout Rio Grande Sucker Lake Chub Plains Minnow Suckermouth Minnow Northern Redbelly Dace Southern Redbelly Dace Brassy Minnow uuCtjj3 AMPHIBIANS Bufo boreas boreas Acris crepitans Gostrophryne olivacea Rana pipiens Rana sylvatica Rana blairi Scaphiopus couchii BIRDS Grus americana Sterna antillarum Empidonax traillii extimus Tympanuchus phasianellus Jamesii Choradrius melodus circumcinctus Halioeetus leucocephalus Strix occidentalis lucida Athene cunicularia Tympanuchus pollidicinctus Coccyzus americanus Grus canodensis tabida Buteo regalis Centrocercus minimus Falco peregrinus onatum Centrocercus urophasianus Choradrius alexandrinus Choradrius montanus Numenius americanus Tympanuchus phasianellus columbionus FISH Gila elegant Xyrouchen texanus Gila cypha Ptychocheilus lucius oncorhynchus clarki stomias Catostomus plebeius Couesius plumbeus Hybognathus placitus Phenocobius mirobilis Phoxinus eos Phoxinus erythrogaster Hvboanathus hankinsoni COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX E: State of Colorado Threatened & Endangered Vertebrates SE SC SC SC SC SC SC FE, SE FE, SE FE, SE SE FT, ST ST FT, ST ST ST SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC FE, SE FE, SE FE, ST FE, ST FT, ST SE SE SE SE SE SE ST Emlogaul. Irrejr nl of Reudenlral Delelfinenl Pollak Pmp m UUG,J54 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX E: State of Colorado Threatened& Endangered Vertebrates I, Common Shiner Luxilus cornutus ST Arkansas Darter Etheostoma cragini ST Mountain Sucker Catostomus playtrhynchus SC Plains Orangethroat Darter Etheostoma spectabile SC Iowa Darter Etheostoma exile SC Rio Grande Chub Gila pandora SC _ Colorado Roundtail Chub Gila robusto SC Stonecat Noturus flovus SC Colorado River Cutthroat Trout Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus SC Rio Grande Cutthroat Trout Oncorhynchus clarki virginalis SC Flathead Chub Platygobio gracilus SC MAMMALS Gray Wolf Canis lupus FE, SE Black- Footed Ferret Mustela nigripes FE, SE Grizzly Bear Ursus arctos FT, SE Preble's Meadow lumping Mouse Zopus hudsonius preblei FT, ST Lynx Lynx canadensis FT, SE Wolverine Gulo gulo SE River Otter Lontro conadensis ST Kit Fox Vulpes macrotis SE Townsend's Big -Eared Bat Corynorhinus townsendii pollescens SC Black - Tailed Prairie Dog Cynomys ludovicianus SC Botta's Pocket Gopher Thomomy bottae rubidus SC Northern Pocket Gopher Thomomys talpoides macrotis SC Swift fox Vulpes velox SC REPTILES Triploid Checkered Whiptail Cnemidophorus neotesselatus SC Midget Faded Rattlesnake Crotalus viridis concolor SC Longnose Leopard Lizard Gambelia wislizenii SC - Yellow Mud Turtle Kinosternon flovescens SC Common King Snake Lompropeltis getula SC .. Texas Blind Snake Leptotyphlops dulcis 5C _ Texas Horned Lizard Phrynasoma cornutum Sc Roundtail Horned Lizard Phrynasoma modestum SC Massasauga Sistrurus catenatus SC - Common Garter Snake Thamnophis sirtalis SC UUG,J54 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX E: State of Colorado Threatened& Endangered Vertebrates I, o/ Krvdnda l P,,ehpmrel APPENDIX F: List of Plants Observed \3rrmbn 11. 2011 r- u;1�j 5 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX F: List of Plants Observed Woody Plants_ Thinleaf alder Alnus tenuffolio _ FACW Serviceberry Amelonchier alnifolia FACU Water birch Betula occidentalis FACW ra bbitbrush Chrysothamnus viscid_ ifloru_ s UPL -Yellow Red osier dogwood Cornus stolonifera FACW hawthorn Crotoegus rivularis UPL _River Rubber rabbitbrush Ericamerio nauseosa _ UPL Rocky Mountain juniper luniperus scopulorum _UPL Twinberry honeysuckle Lonicera involucrata FAC _ Creeping barberry _ _ Mahonia repen_s _UPL spruce Picea pungens _ FAC _Blue Narrowleaf cottonwood Populus ongustifolia _ FAC _ Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC _ Chokecherry Prunus virginiano FACU Gambel oak Quercus gombelii UPL Woods' rose _ Rosa woodsii FAC Bebb willow Solix bebbiona FACW Coyote (narrowleaf) willow Solix exigua OBL Geyer willow Solix geyeriana FACW_ Greenleaf willow Salixlucido flosiandro) _ OBL _ _ Park willow Solix monticola OBL Western_snow_be_rry _ _Symphoricarpos occidentalis U_ PL _ Herbaceous Plants_ common yarrow _ Achillea millefolium FACU Redtop Agrostis giganteo NI brome Bromus inermis UPL _Smooth Mountain brome Bromus marginatus UPL Spiny plumelessthistle Carduus acanthoides UPL Nebraska sedge _ Carex nebrascensis OBL Woolly sedge Carex pellita OBL Beaked sedge _ Carex utriculato _ _ COIL _ Fireweed _ Chamerion angusti loiu_m FAC_ U_ Goosefoot Chenopodium sp. _ _ _ _ Canada thistle _ Cirsium arvense _ _ _ FACU _ _ Bull thistle Cirsium vulgare FAC Poison hemlock Conium maculatum FACW Field bindweed _ Convolvulus arvensis UPL Gypsyflower Cynoglossum officinale _ UPL _ Orchard grass _ _ _ Doctylis glomerato _FACU Quackgrass Elymus repens - FACU Fringed willowherb Epilobium ciliatum FAC Field horsetail _ Equisetum arvense FAC _ Smooth horsetail Equisetum laevigatum _ FACW _ Variegated scouring_ rush _ _ Equisetum variegatum _ _FACW _ Red fescue Festuca rubra FAC _ Common co_ wparsnip Herocleum maximum FAC Baltic rush Juncus balticus FACW _ Slender rush _ _ _ Juncus tenuis _ _ _ FAC _ _ _ Prickly lettuce _ _ Loduca serriola _ FACU_ Basin wildry_ e _ Leymus cinereus N_ I - - - - Lupine Lupinus sp. r- u;1�j 5 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX F: List of Plants Observed .9 ne«menl of ILwArnLa! DnrinPmrrs! Starry false lily of the valley Disc ma_ yweed Yellow sweetclover Black medick Western wheatgrass Reed canarygrass Timothy Common plantain Kentucky bluegrass Greenflowe_red wintergreen Dock Climbing nightshade _ Common tansy Common dandelion Intermediate wheatgrass Common mullein Maianthemum stellatum Matricaria discoidea _ Mehlotus officinalis Medicago lupulina Pascopyrum smithii Pholoris arundinacea _ Phleum protense Plantogo major Poo pratensis Pyrola chlorantha Rumex sp. Solanum dulcamoro Tonacetum vulgare Taraxacum officinale Thinopyrum intermedium Verhascum thapsus vuCj1) COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX F: List of Plants Observed FAC FACU FACU FAC FACU OBL FACU FAC FACU FACW FAC__ NI FACU UPL UPL 11.2011 E, olo,rtal a i mi mien! of Rrvdenlru! Derrb fnxnt P Ilk P f 'h. .\'camber 11. 2011 ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR COUNTY ACTIVITY ENVELOPE & SITE PLAN REVIEW APPENDIX G: Wetland Determination Forms Pollock Property �u0Sj7 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCI ENCE, UC I APPENDIX G: Wetland Determination Forms WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Weamm MWntains, Valioyrs, and Coact Region P '0D11ock saw oafa- A,ppSWWOwner: &I.//* t..lc stare: a sarplwg Point T mvagguer(a): ft, Wnnb swum. raw,". Rte: � �� ggs-Al _. L.ndli m 00--dam. ut . etc.} _ w ��! CG Load reed (owom, cmvex, near)y. Sabreown(LRR):X v AK 4KI 4-efit tat: 3'r 3 °H717 Lurg: - /Wr MCl'rj Ddam:N-0 U_ sail DW Una Name: S.- ..71..ce --- AMCUMtielW019O& contitiarson 911110 hrptad for on w4alYear? Yea _J No_ (p ra, explain in Rertlmka) / AmVegebtwn J Saa or Hydr*W_ sfVdkerMy dourbed? Am'Nomal CWWMWeee' present/ Yes_ No Am VogeADW _ Soh or Hydrology _ naluffallY PraMemeaC7 (if needed. explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Aitach Sft map showing sampling point locallons, transects, irnportant features, etc. Hydrophylw Veoalatbn Present? Yes— No Yes NO Is to Sampled Area NyNw Sol Present? _ within a Vftda d? Yas No WW" Hydrabgy PMBKV Yes_ No Number of DOMIM It SPaoiea Rdnaksf /. f K - C.i� ^7i N a � fe .-� Af s7 O r 7p�':� YT 5^ yl: i s�:ef l R7° f / yam• /Yd- jj .�jSr�(' fA•.±i� fP, /f . /� i M".' /s:'.. /i)'c sa'r " �. m / /rm`' �P t .t VEGETATION - Use scientific names of Plants. Rentatks /O %�+rl Vo`1 .}af1C .if �nu Nie"t 7kvv'"' .t t'trW 1/tt.3j o/v ) Na"��J / ;. S c K /Y1rn tior vG {•c. (,p -rnC. L //�i�`l� a(c9r• ,tv, dt.� '� US Army Corps d EngMeas'��' k'� / UUCja8 Wwown Motmhdrm Vaieys,a id Cass! -hdedm Verwan Absolute Da inant mdicamr D Doaddaoce TWO worksheet Trod Saaaan (Pfd ems: ) - -SPOOMIQ - - N Number of DOMIM It SPaoiea - T 2. T Tote! Number of Dominant 3._ S 4. P Pe cent as Domou" Spaded r ' Taw C°"a T re (Pia srze: � 1 1 Prevakr Mkwa eMIalle : z. T TdA%Caverot Mutt tor. COL epetles x 4 F S. F = Total Coves F 3. �MG - «S .i+� -���t� l l� - -��7J— /1Y Ht P HydrophYdc Vegetation mdi°tom 6. _ 7. _ 8. _ _ Wetmnd Mon-Vascular Nuts' 9. _ _ Pro01eme9c Hydrwglic Vepeww' (Explain) 10. 4 4k4caas of hYdr'asod and wellatd hyt mbW must It, b =Total Cavar 4k //4� Yypadvyme Sbarmr (Pbtsiae: ,.�_) 2. _ V ptid? Yes_ No _,_— V % ewe Ground in Ft0 SUMM N s = TOW Carat US Army Corps d EngMeas'��' k'� / UUCja8 Wwown Motmhdrm Vaieys,a id Cass! -hdedm Verwan SOIL Sampling Point S Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.) 7 Depth Matrix Redox Features ( inchas) calm (moist! Tyoe� t'or',_ OT9 z_ 1 D — — — _ J i Texture Remarks iT�4S e iie — PPrimar,, Indicators, r mumim of one reiguired check all that armiyl Secoodary Indicators (2 or more reouiredl _ Surface Water (At) _ Water - Stained Leaves (89) (except MLRA _ Water-Stained Leaves (89) (MLKA 1, 2, _ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 48) 4A, and 481 _ Saturation (A3) — Sell Crust (et t) _ Drainage PeBerns (810) 'Type: C= ConcenUation, D=Dap4eeon, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS-Covered or Coated Sand Grains, 'Location: PL -Pore Linn M= Matrix. Hydric Soil IRdixx tprs: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted) Indicators for Problematic Hyddc Solis': _ Hislosoi (At) _ Sandy Radox (S5) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) Fkstic Epipedon (A2) , Stripped Matrix (Be) _ Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histw (A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineml (F1) (except M1.RA 1) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) _ Loamy Gwyed Matrix (F2) FAC- Neutral Test (135) _ Depleted Below Dark Surtace (Al 1) Depleted Matrix (F3) Raised Am Mounds (DS) (LRR A) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _T Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and _ Sandy Mucky Minaret (St) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wenand hydrology must be present. Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) — Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or pmblemaec Restrictive Layer (if present): Type; ` Sudace Water Present? Yes, No Y Depth (inches). Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes,„_, No Remarks 04' N /ek tior ' _ brF.at (rYA -r �•sl .C'�''!.. '_t "` 4' f t!`1 / t "* t f����j �trlvyt ���`� jq or p'7'¢¢ //r'• rj�[i'/'d'4i_ /'r �e ��T /' "`.'/T3 r 7 n J- r -1y.oK x!l /v1 e�S t.:..�. /o W&✓ it HYDROLOGY Weiland Hydrology Indicators: PPrimar,, Indicators, r mumim of one reiguired check all that armiyl Secoodary Indicators (2 or more reouiredl _ Surface Water (At) _ Water - Stained Leaves (89) (except MLRA _ Water-Stained Leaves (89) (MLKA 1, 2, _ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 48) 4A, and 481 _ Saturation (A3) — Sell Crust (et t) _ Drainage PeBerns (810) _ Water Marks (61) _ Aquatic Invertebrates (813) — DrySeason Water Table (C2) _ Sediment Deports (B2) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Drift Deposits (83) _ Oxidized Rlxzosplcres along Living Roots (C3) — Geomorphic Positron (D2) _ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _ Presence of Reduced tron (C4) _ Shallow Aquhard (03) _ Iron Deposas (BS) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soas (CS) _ FAC- Neutral Test (135) _ Surface Son Cracks (BS) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (DI) MIR A) _ Raised Am Mounds (DS) (LRR A) _ Inundation liable on Aerial Imagery (87) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Frost-Heave Hummocks (07) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Sudace Water Present? Yes, No Y Depth (inches). Water Table Present? Yes _ No Depth (inches)' S Saturation Present? Yes— No— Depth (nches). Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes_ No J inrJUdas Ile tri bascritre Recorded beta ( s u ged. m^o^(ni lF oor ring wall, aia(l photos, previous inrspf ec tions), if avaaable . Afa.?am 7 'T Remarks: / i l 3 °yra iYE- !Vt'/ 140,y ARVG. A 44 - yg -a'f � Y- T-A {."t l+14t ) US Army Corps of Engmeers LiC1Uji / Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast- Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM- Wls"DM Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Pm lm;u Pollack T' clyroundy: &-e P, r kl fh_ sampkng Daft /a A- " AppkWWO r,er: A Ck alma rsv nSWOW ftm Inresh9owop M. Se12gt6 TOUVMMt, Rair�:.LC. 4 7 -?S . AfS' V L2"dfBrm Mb&kpe.�ptairece. ete-Y 4r /'✓1Mi'C Loom out (eamm ar ewA mr, now)- 4r_Xn Ca vt; woe sdbregion 4.RR): /\kv /j�fiL ,¢an. r o+ -tIOtt ]at 37, 3oY (# � �- ,,aw: ►. 7 0 �3 oaken. N�� gl �rr ��r f swl Map Thal Naas: T"- Ce l -,,"4e iw r leg Al - �. HY+Mciaw,kalian: -- Are rlarsde l Irydrologk WnrsNona m gre ode typical tw Its Ianed` seat Yes V KO_ (Nn o expimn h Remarks.) Are Vegesim Sol w Hydroogy _ slW911camill, dfaMbed7 Aro "Nomrl Ciranmatcirces' preseni7 Yes_ No y Are VegeWiM : Ste_ w HYd^obgy _ nalmly WoWwmft7 (If needed. expialn cry answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FIND WS – Attach site mass showing sampling point locatfons. transacts, important features. etc. WrdmpMiK Vegetation PreSWO Yes i No� Hydra Sot Present? You No_/ is ibe S"Oed Am ✓ — Wedend Hydrology Present? Yes_ NO _✓ wftfna Watland7 Yes No Rdnadrs: rpr'rr I"4 t qr± : h Al, Number of tmnrrinant Spades Y= J O O'vro � Stap w •a/ . l�r j/m tJ ~' rtllrc. r.n.L'e��>" . VEGETATION –Use sdentific names of pMnts. r Absolute DmNnant Indicator Dominance Testvmrkshest Troe S[ndun (Pbt Sim: .S l . Soerioui St" Number of tmnrrinant Spades I. Pe9wZ6t� r6s.. S rkL That Are OB4FACW.w FAG: (Aj Total Number or tMminan[ _, 2. 3. SpearsAcmas AM Strafe: 4 pwcw tof Dorrersrd Specks �S s = Tow � Sae6rr+;mre (%W sine: C �J That Are OBt. FACW. or FAC: (MB) 1. .S�w� Cc- e2o J n i. '-T— Prevalence Index workdtmet Tomt%Gwerot tAUk®Iv br, 2. 3. OBL species x t FACW apedes x2- . FACspecim x3= FACU species x4- 4. S, s , AO = Total Cover (%et ate: l 6 J t h(. UPL species x6- ..Zr rrc n S S DNS a -- Cotumm Totals (A) (8) -)--- 2. Prevalence Index = BfA- 4, a�lf'f �t�� cis .S IY All Hydrophyttc Vage4daa Indicalws: Dorrilverm Tout is >ti01L — pNvalenm Index is MW _ MarPhobgirat Adaptaadra' (PMO& WWWfhb date in Remarb or m a seperala sheet) s. 7. 8. Wetland NOn- Vaswler %mds' a _ — Pmdematic Hrdrophyfic Vegetation' MA*j r) to_ bdicetentofte" =4 and weiWdhydmwgy must 11. be present, unku dlstrabad w probldnetk. �� =Tooatc�eryrfiQ '.. woody ybe & aaw (plot 1 ' t. prment? Yes J No_ _ 2' r S 7 =Tdtl Cover ' %F�re Otaxxi of Herb Siwaxtn Ir-�i.7- .�y"✓f rJ'L{: L GwHwI N H •' 7 � � Wt.�'T!.r -r ra( � us"Corps of Et O"m uIU0,j6. wasiem Mmx*dm, Vab ", and Coact - Irverkn Version a .w w VLi'T Sampling Point. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix (inches) a Dii 2 _L— l2 ^ /G* '7r TT g• Redox Features Cnhximvprsti % Type. Lw' — — >.r o Tamura Remarks l �G%st i /aim — zanw Gip lew — •t— — check all that apply) Secondary indcatin (2 or more reruued) _ Surface Water (At) _ Water - Stained Leaves (69) (except MLRA _ Water - Stained Leaves (09) (MLRA 1, 2. _ High Water Table (A2) 1. 2, 4A and 46) 4A, and 48) _ Saturation (A3) _. Sat Crust (811) _ Drainage Pehems (010) Water Marrs (01) `T ; C= Concentratron. DwDeplation. RM =Reduced Matdx, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 'Location. PL -Poe Lining, WMatim, Hyddc Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRe, union lxherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydria Bolls : _ HistosW (A7) _ Sandy Redox (S6) _ 2 cm Muck (AID) _ Hislic Epipedon (A2) ` Stripped Matrix (86) _ Red Parent Material (TF2) _ Black Kirk (A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Ft) (except MLRA 1) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) _. Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Surface Sal Cracks (BB) — Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) _ Thick Dark surface (Al2) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) _ Redox Dark Surface (FO) 31rall [ors of hydrophytic vegetation and _ Sandy Mucky Mineral (61) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wahand hydrology must be present. Sandy Gieyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic _ Restrictive Layer (h present): Surface water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Type; Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (riches); Weiland Hydrology Present? Yin No Depth (inches): — No Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present, ?? Yes No v �j I Ram ®dcs: ��� �YY✓ in .tglpay fatj"�'✓ j Mot Ay1i�12 f Gl °.fit- /" F4 HYDROLOGY Welland Hydrology brdicatas: Primary I tmmimum of 2M reeuired check all that apply) Secondary indcatin (2 or more reruued) _ Surface Water (At) _ Water - Stained Leaves (69) (except MLRA _ Water - Stained Leaves (09) (MLRA 1, 2. _ High Water Table (A2) 1. 2, 4A and 46) 4A, and 48) _ Saturation (A3) _. Sat Crust (811) _ Drainage Pehems (010) Water Marrs (01) _ Aquatic irwerrebrates (013) _ DtySeason Water Table (C2) _ Sediment Deposits (02) J_ _, Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) ,_,,, Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (w) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along LMng Roots (C3) _ Gaortiorphk Position (D2) Algal Mat or Gust (84) _ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Shallow A9uitard (D3) _ Iron Deposits (85) _ Recent Iron Reduction in TiH&d Sons (CB) _,_. FAGNeu cal Test (DS) Surface Sal Cracks (BB) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (DI) (LRR A) _ Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) _ _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (07) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Frost -Heave Hummocks (DT) _ Sparsely Vagetated Cortceve Surface (08) Field Observations: y,, Surface water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (riches); Weiland Hydrology Present? Yin No Saturation Present? Yes _ No Depth (inches): lnckldes td e Recorded Data (Sttream monitoring wall, aerial photos, previous, inspections), it available; Describe gauge, N 7s,y r w-r—` f (H• t Vest k;d ii...iC'n eyt ! US Anny Corps of Engineers Uul",J61 Western Mountains. Valleys. and Coed – Interim Version WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Westwn Mountains, valleys, and Coast Raglan PrweC1571e �o / /aGk CmdC«�r. Arrt.. �fk.� s,o om� /o s /r Apaormer: — � ° /lKaG`k stye: G® APB: SF -3_ Invasa�toKsL / Seclimf. Taxm R®n9g 9.S. "T57%1% r 4.JZ >�EG LocS rdlof (canoave; oomrex, nd�a }: l -V"CQL - slope (%Y Ladfem "mope. BTaa.OtcJ Sabregfon(t.RR} J{k , 4.t4 �Ir lee 39. to,,: -101k VP omm. NOP 6? .. Sea temp tW Homo: '2�41A*rry 60"k 61J�I /" At NWi clasaficafia: T-- AM dimatic! hydrologic condition so n the Ste typimi for it" txra of 7oY? Yes _t/ No (K n0. e>g2oin in Remaks.) / Are VgpMbat _, Soll _. or Hydrology_ 300cantly distabed? Are Wonnal Cfrcurrrsterrtx:s' pnesan? Yn _ No _ .. Are Vegetation _ Sol _ or Hy"M _ naturaM pMb6W e7 (tf needed, axpkfm any amwaro in Remarks.) .. -A?- SUMMMY OF FtNDINOS - Attach site RUP Showing sampling point locations, tttaneeCtS, kMmftnt features, etc. Hydraphydc Vegetation Present? Yes_ No Hydric Sol Present? Yes__ Na Absdota IS SAS Sampled Arsa DooWnerme TestwwkSmet Tree Sbatun, (Plot4¢e t t. vAddn a wetland? Yes No Welland Hydrology Preset? Yes _ No _ Number of ntnant Species That Ara OBL. FACW. or FAC: Z (A) -_� Remarxa: �du �n�R.n n.+t /t.✓ lu�-� as-r� -.r. ;.4 Sfv�""f L 410,a-; n o 4yAl� Told Number of Dominent Species Across AN Strata: 3 (B) VEGETATM- Use Wentift names of plants. Us MmP Caps of Etgkwa. UUCJo2 vWstem mom wrn. Valleys, and Comm- hdonnt Version Absdota DwNnant Indicator DooWnerme TestwwkSmet Tree Sbatun, (Plot4¢e t t. %Coven Number of ntnant Species That Ara OBL. FACW. or FAC: Z (A) -_� 2. Told Number of Dominent Species Across AN Strata: 3 (B) 3. Al. That of BL.F C spedem FA (AS) ThN Are OBL. FACW, a FAC: ��_ =TOW Cover SI (Plot size: ) t_ rk C-xwTtNe— SO � Prevalence index 1000&108t: 2 Told % Cgv(y d: _ h4uY6N bv. 3. O!A spies x t - FACW spades x2- FACspeom x3= FACU species x 4 = UPL spec" X6. Colunin TotaW (A) (B) Prevalence kdox °B /A= 4, 5. -5'0 = Tow Cover Herb Ma (Plot size: S r Y t. /'�•,. /a >^,tl.•rtCs - 30 N�. 2, 3 Ra do 3, ow fr'1 m 4. AfIg,[ N I S. t4 l rAl /O �- IEC L�l. IV NP6 IV FA-G N A-eW Hydrophytia WaGIBOoa Wacatae: _ Dominance Test is >60% _ Pmvabnce Index is st.o' _ MorOWMIrJl Adaplatlons'(PmvWe ampor" date in Remake or on a separate sheet) Web"d Nat - Vascular Plats' g• _ PmM mabc Hyerophyeo Vege1etlert` (Explain) t0. 'indmators of M'dric sell and wetland hydmioW must it. ?.�_= raw Cover be paMM unless rTrsaubed or l rab{dnatic. WoodvVloe SaeWm (Pia Sze: t. d Vagebtlon pessera Yes_ No_ 2. - - N a O %Bare (hound In Herb boutim = Total Cove Remake: rjS' ✓� 6/a'r�e� .'Yayit -r�_ Ltrr -v :.e %:ni iT' •r ✓R t)(� jY+ ✓wf "b'v/ '/". Us MmP Caps of Etgkwa. UUCJo2 vWstem mom wrn. Valleys, and Comm- hdonnt Version SON. Sampling Pant Sf- 3 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.) Depth Matrix _ Radox Featurea (inched C r 1LI Cotm (moisti °�_ Typo, Loc• Texn,re Remarks Primary indic_" rs im ti mum 01 one reguired check all that apply) Secondary Indicators, 12 or more reatnred) _ Surface Water (At) _ Water - Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA _ Water - Stained Leaves (89) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, $ 4A, and 461 4A, and 48) _ Saturation (A3) _ Saitcruat(811) _ Dramaga Patterns (B10) 'Type: C= Concemri tion D-Depletim, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Cated Sarin Grains. 'Location, PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix. Hyddc Soft indicators: (Applicable to all LRRe, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': _ Hislosol (At) _ Sandy Redox (SS) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) _ Histic Epipedon (A2) — Stalped Matrix (86) _ Red Parent Material (TF2) _ Bleak H'lstic (A3) T Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gayed Matrix (F2) _ Presence of Reduced ban (C4) _ _ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) _ Iron Deposits (65) T Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ R&dox Dark Surface (F6) 'indicators W hydrophyhc vegetation and _ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ^ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must he present, _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (FS) unless disturbed or problematic _ Restrictive Layer (If present): Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Type, — Depth (hxk,as): Hydric Soil Present? Yes _ No V Remarks: sa; �. e�- �Mofj� A- - Fir v�+^"f • '.°"oX Ha f' c�il '^r 'r" �°r y�'.►' Surface Water Present? Yes No HYDROLOGY Welland Hydrology Indicators: Primary indic_" rs im ti mum 01 one reguired check all that apply) Secondary Indicators, 12 or more reatnred) _ Surface Water (At) _ Water - Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA _ Water - Stained Leaves (89) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, $ 4A, and 461 4A, and 48) _ Saturation (A3) _ Saitcruat(811) _ Dramaga Patterns (B10) Water Marks (Bt) _ Aquatic invertebrates (613) — Dry-Season Water Table tC2) _ Sediment Deposits (82) _ Hydrogen Sudids Odor (C1) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial ) magery (Cg) Drift Deposits (B3) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along I-Mitg Rests (C3) _ Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Ctust (84) _ Presence of Reduced ban (C4) _ Shadow Aquitand (D3) _ Iron Deposits (65) _ Recent Iran Reduction In Tiled Soils (C6) _, FAC-Neutral Test (05) _ _ surface SOD Cracks (66) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (41) (L.RR A) _ Raised PM Mounds (06) (UF A) _ inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches). Water Table Present? Yes _ No Depth (inches)- Saturation Present? Yes _,_ No x7- Depth (inches): Weiland Hydrology Present? Yes— No includes i0a fin Desulbe Recorded Defa (stream gauge. monROrhtg waft. aerial Photos. Previous inspections), 9 ava(IaNe� Remarks: �'dl"� %, VC..Y -% %,i 4.� N01 V, a, dt1L -�tAt US Army Corps of Engineers u�CJo3 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version i m WETLAND DETERMIDIATION DATA FORM - western Nountbinna,, Val", and Coast Region pOl�gGl�' Y Cfdcou�tr k_tt .tkj;t.. 5emv8q De'te: /o S I( AW4.'Om� ?o /1-ck _ St2W Cj�, Ser WWV pmd: Si_ N tmrasegatarcax n% a. sew. Towut*, Rye: sew 9 s , 2 ysw Landkum (hMabw. ptv,r- , etas �aaa, tttZ f Lout r (coweve, convex, none): _. e_ + CQ vG Skrpe m: < Sdxedon(LRft �vNL �� ©t,* 3`l ToS91 S`3 Lai: —Iokr f_320.33 Dunn: Aft lr3 sag "Una Nanw Ste+ raft /S, AsM Nvw cb�rTiwtiwx Am dinretieltrydrobgk condtxMra an fhe sde tylxWl�ade firtreofyasfl van_ No_ (If no, expledn v, RemarNa.) ,/ Are Vegetetwn _, SoH _. or Hy&WoW _ sWff=n ly d Kd*d? Are'NOmwl C6wmatanoW present? Yee _ No Am VegeWon _ Sod `. or Hydrology _ nalsalr Wof iematic? (B newel% explain any answers In Ramecks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach sibs map showing sampling point locations, transects, impbrtant features. etc. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. - Dominarce Twtwwkshaet Hydrophylie Vegembon Preeant? Yee— Hyddc Sod Present? Yee_ No No4 b #w ed AM 2. .-- 3. 'wMw a wetmnd? Yes No V/ Wsdwrd Nytkdaw Ptean._t',t/ Yee— No Percent of Dominant Species That Am OSL FACW. or FAC: -33, Rerneds: Le.�y,r G p s'Y'1 /) r."y ^ / lao 1, 4/ h — P& VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. us Aran Corps of EnOw" 71P h4 ✓G 0-we ,4lfitZ wfif -& ' wextem Mamfakra. Vntleys• am Cotiad- Mte m Version - uuGiOU r 7 Absolute Doa*wn lndcdor Dominarce Twtwwkshaet Tree Stratum (Plot dw. ) 1. . - spocift? swn Number of Dwuneot specs ThM Are Oat, FACW, w FAC (A) Tow Number of 00mfnant Spec Across Ae Sbsm: 3 (8) 2. .-- 3. 4. Percent of Dominant Species That Am OSL FACW. or FAC: -33, r �p(pStmkan (Phi sae: S 1 1, f- _P.r�s� �re- as_n.. 2. J-1! zN Q m TOW Corer c20 _ FIN n� L Prevalence Was worksheet Tow % cam c rka> Wft _/0 3 OBL Spas x t = 4. FACWspecks x2= FACspedss x3= FACU species X4= t1PL Spades x5= CeAxm Tots: (A) (8) Prevabnce Index - B)A = 5. r 3V =TOM Cover is/r' ! (Plcl size j 1. —J -- All 3. '_ 4. -K a, 'd'! .+ 4_ EAt K 1 L Hydrophyttc Ve"W on Indicatatse ._ ,)animas Test Is >50% Prate Index is 9.0' _kWW,mo&4al MaPt> rm'(PM da*Mpwft dam in RarnwMix on a sepsSWa street) WOUM No Vascuwr Plants, 5 f'r'LK rltM.n7 Y T_ b(3L T. G:i' •1• ar/ yvtGt �L h't(�L a �+tY a!' �r rs _i- sY.i•�G �_ NT rM Probmnwk Hydroowyrc Vegamtlm' (awn) 10. 'Ir4oebws ofhyd wA and weilrtd 4*4A*gy mrst It be preseM. t,aeae dsasbed or prot is 7% =Taw Cover J1 15' woodryare t. Hydrophyfic - / Ptaserd? Yes_ NO v 2• %Bare Clontd n Herb sbatmt Tdai ewe` Remarks: A;I/ -'f-< A'YfiG iN.iG. F'"'' �✓ /.iD'r"'t W /(IIf�/ y. -D'N� Cr.iGr nr" s %r^•fGLUw� W. 0 76 i:(mC p�sf;�jg7 )110;f 711 r-C �r 4• y c ✓MeSt fz,fytJ a+ L� a� e.L ¢ us Aran Corps of EnOw" 71P h4 ✓G 0-we ,4lfitZ wfif -& ' wextem Mamfakra. Vntleys• am Cotiad- Mte m Version - uuGiOU r 7 r WL Sampling Point -Sr Profile Desedptfon: (Describe to the daptlt needed to doctariWit ttw kuifcato or cwdfrm the absence of indicators.) -� Depth Matrix Redox Features r,es1 -0gillor Imoisl Color fmofatl % 7voe Texture Remarks g ox Irdicatm 12 or more munmd) _ Surface Water (A1) i water - Stained Loavas Mal (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 48) 4A, and 48) _ Saturation (A3) _ Saa Crust (811) — Drainage Patterns (810) _ Wet" Marks (Bt) `7 : C= Concentratan D-De ehon. RM =Reduced Matrix, CS-Covered or Coated Sand Grams. 'location: PL =Pore Lin , Matrix, Hydrfc Sold Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRS, unless otharw)sa noted.) Indicators for Poblematfc Hyddc S01134: _ Hirdo aof (At) _ Sandy Redox (S5) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) Hfsfic Fpipedon (A2) — Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F7) (except MLRA I _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Hydrogen Sulfite (A4) _ Lowny Gteyed Matrix (F2) Shallow Aqultard (D3) — Depleted Below (lark Surface (At 1) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) — Thick Dark Surface (Al2) — Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'fMicawrs of hydrophyts'"gemilion and _ Sandy Mucky Mineral (51) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) welland hydrology must be present - _ Sandy Gteyed Matrix (S4) _ Redox Depressions (F6) unless disturbed or Problematic. Restrictive Layer (if presem):��. Frost -heave Hummocks (1)7) Type / Depth (Inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Vy Remarks dot 41 J,-r I - -- C IuS-C ir* HYDROLOGY Wetfand Hydrology, tndfcators: Pd indicators firldrltorff of one redWred' check all that apply)— Sacggdary Irdicatm 12 or more munmd) _ Surface Water (A1) _ Wider-Stained Leaves (89) (except MLRA _ water - Stained Loavas Mal (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 48) 4A, and 48) _ Saturation (A3) _ Saa Crust (811) — Drainage Patterns (810) _ Wet" Marks (Bt) _ Aquatic tmenaMates (813) _ DrySeas ni Water Table (C2) _ Sediment Deposits (82) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (01) — Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Drift Deposits (63) _ Oxidized Riltwspheres along Living Roots (C3) -- Oacmoiphfc Position (D2) _ Algal Mat or Crust (84) _ Presence of Reduced trot (C4) _ Shallow Aqultard (D3) _ Iron Deposits (B5) _ Recent iron Reduction In Tilled Sods (C6) _ FAC-Neutral Test IDS) _ Surface Soil Cracks (86) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (01) (LRR A) _ Raised An( Mounds (06) (LRR A) _ Inundation Visible on As" Imagery (B7) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) — Frost -heave Hummocks (1)7) _ Sparsely V"ted Concave Surface (88) _ Pistol Observadans: Surfaee Water Present? yes - " Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ✓ Depth (inches)! V/ Saturation Presan:7 Yes _ No Depth (inches): Walland Hydrology Present? Yes _ No includes oardfilary frin Desoibe Recorded Data (stream gauge, moriformg waq. aeria) photos, previous inspeclians), it avasahle: Remarks: • D f L' i. ' iP`�'�S' ` e�,a✓�GY! f �' Oa/ •- n.k.��ef,.�� Y�C L rV C ✓'�1 N 0/ i� �';�( // US Amry Corps of Engineers U iCj6 Western Mountain. Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version w WETLAND DE7ERMINATtON DATA FORM - Western IiMnntains, Valleys, and Coast Region goltQck P-% , rllv,camw /91LA5fVtk,:a. s cab- 16 s /r A mmar. - setae: Ga sonvisopoint, V -.S irwsscpata(sY ___.G�� � Saddam Town". -sec 6P . T9S� /Z ZC-Al Lo odlorm � n(tR(hi�dov®.,/tewaoej.�u,(•):../._..� 4�b? lY/►rACC t.adre (eoneavaeonv .na�eY Csn�vv� SubreR)' Xkl lRw�,I.Axl�y tfsrtt?" 18a: Soh Map Urn@ Nara �sy. scz- Y. -dL[4, /e t aW NON ttessife&WM '-`- AN tlk,Wic I hwd,Ml a' carMitica on the see typbN for #has 6rta of Yes? Yea i NO — (B no, ezpiin in Remarks.) Are Vegafebon _„ 6011 or HY*GlDW _ z* cahebed? Ate ^Normal CbcUmstarMW present? Yes _ No ✓ Are Vegetation Soh _. or HY�BY_____ natureNy Pn ? (g needed. explain any answers In Pemarks.) T SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point rations, transects, important features, etc. HydroptrYilic, Vegetation Present? Yes_ No� Sol Present? Yes— No Is the Samped At" ✓ WeNaifd KY&CI r PRISSrR? Yes_ No= WOOMaWeaand? Yes No Remarks: t.irrc P1G Y:43ya�.t ,l f /'war G��. wr�wt 5�4v �. A% at �7' /dtvs�. VEGETATWN - Use scientific names of plants. US AMN Caps of Etfgstems U: :301 Sampling Point. W-S- Profile Description: (Deserlbe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the aNbsencrilcators -1 Depth Matrix Redox Features (inehosl Color _ Color fmotsll % _-TARL Loy` Texture R�mga�rka / all 11110 aop(y}, Secondary Indicators f2 or more recurred) _ Surface Water (41) _ Water - Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA _ Water - Stained Leaves (89) (MLRA 1. 2, _ High Water Table 02) 1, 2, 4A, and 431 4A, and 48) _ Saturation (A3) _ Safl Crust (B11) _ 'Type: C =Concentration, D-De etion, RM =Reduced Matrix, CS--Covered or Coated Sand Grains. �Locaiion: PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix Itydde Sol Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sofles _ Historic! (At) _ Sandy Redox (S$) _ 2 = Muck (A10) _ Hlsllc Epipedon (A2) Snipped Matrix (S6) -,_ Red Parent Material (TF2) _ Black Hislic (AS) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) a Other (Explain in Remarks) — Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) _ 4oemy Gleyed Matrix (F2) - _ Depleted Balm Dark Surface (Al 1) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) _ Presence of Reduced Iron (04) _ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and _ Sandy Mucky Mineral (St) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, _ Sandy Grayed Matrix (SO _ Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Type: _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (86) Depth (inches} Field observations: tiydHC Soil Prevent? Yes ^ No Remarks. /Br if % ✓).f rlr.[m 4 HYDROLOGY Welland Hydrotogy Indicators: P_jr t((any buffo •tcni (rat imum of wte reeunreO check all 11110 aop(y}, Secondary Indicators f2 or more recurred) _ Surface Water (41) _ Water - Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA _ Water - Stained Leaves (89) (MLRA 1. 2, _ High Water Table 02) 1, 2, 4A, and 431 4A, and 48) _ Saturation (A3) _ Safl Crust (B11) _ Drainage Patterns (Si0) _ Water Marks (Bi) Aquatic Invertebrates (819) _ Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (CI) _,-„ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ OM Deposits t83) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _ Geomorphic Position 02) _ Algal Mal w Crust (B4) _ Presence of Reduced Iron (04) _ Shallow Aquhard (D3) _ Iron Deposits (86) _ Recent Iron Reduction In Tilled Solls (CS) _ FAC- Neutral Teat (D5) _ Surface Son Cracks (86) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants Of i (lRR A) _ Raised Ant Mounds (DB) tLRR A) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (86) Field observations: 5urface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No tr Depth (riches): No Saturation Present? Yes No 17 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes— includes capillary fit Describe Rec— or7d to (stream gauge, monitoring war. aerial photos, previous Inspections), d avallable: -ed Remarks: T r frVY.7" -. DS Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Interim Version E"I"'mJ -1 rn +,mrnl n/ Rnn$rk ✓llkrr! fnxn/ P,11ak Pnp,/i ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR COUNTY ACTIVITY ENVELOPE & SITE PLAN REVIEW APPENDIX H: Eli Cerise Ditch Letters Pollock Property utlL) 0� COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX H: Eli Cerise Ditch Letters oCT -12 -2009 09:13 pM Beach Environmental. LLC 0T0925205y POLLUCKIMRSTRRNGEL�� - Temple Glassier RFRHA/pitkin County Open Space & Traili 76 Service Center Road Aspen. Colorado 81611 Re; Eli Cerise Ditch November 7, 2000 Via facsimile @ 920.5374 Dear Temple; At your request, we have completed an evaluation of portions of the 1311 Cerise bitch to determine if there were negative Impacts to the ditch and its carrying struction of the bike/hike trail adjacent to the ditch. The capacity as a result of the con o ev impacted b` r nswer is es re ae eseeas ae limitCd hower, negatively both numbr and the construction on the t h severity of impact. in order to get an understanding of the scope of the potential problem, we first reviewed legal status of the ditch as a structure and as a water right The 3 Cerise 0 (its Ditch was awarded 8.33 cfa for irrigation in Case No. 2785 O of the ditch water rights adjudication date). The date of appropriation for this Po was May 1, 1905. in a subsequent court notion, Case No. 3082, an additional 6.66 cfs was decreed for irrigation with a date of adjudication of August 25, 1936 and a date of appropriation of May 5, 1906. Total water rights adjudicated to this ditch for irrigation are 14.99 cfs. Since the rail bed P aspriat,o acted in the early 1 Ar to coonnfirrm thpre cXUStence past 1906, the dates of a ro nation for im anon a pe the Eli Cerise of the rail bed to the construction of the ditch. It is possible therefore, Ditch does not enjoy any protection from improvements within the rail corridor. You may wish to have your attorney advise in this regard. A check of historic records for diversion indicate that for at least the pest 10 years, diversions of water and lands irrigated under the Eli Cerise Ditch have been declining. For the period 1990 through 1999 (to years) average diversions through the Eli Cerise Ditch were 4,91 cfs end ranged between 3.3 cfs in 1991 to 6.4 cfs in in 1995 and 150 ilk 1947. Avcmgc days diverted were was 149 ranged a g d between 120 acres and 1997. Average acreage irrigated 209. According to the water commissioner for this area, the irrigation of crops under the Eli Cerise has dropped substantially and water today is used for purposes not nsw Pmi= contained within orip..inal decrees. spec So+ 4'M CO •I4n ro 19m] 9tsJ47i �iuC�6`J POLLOCK �MHSTKFING nV', �.J ' OCT -12 -2009 09]14 •7M bV4,1- rVQL,b BEACH gNrIRoNMENTAL, LLC OUCJ70 Page 2 m a follow -up vicuA]ly inspected the ditch from the headgate toga Points Past historic diversions, the Phillips property, down gradient of the crossing of the ditch and Lower River Road. This evaluation confirmed findings contained within a letter reviewed by Scou Fifer of Resource Engineering that certain portions t h pe�ovtil ewer River Road to d have been by the construction of the asphalt trail along the (lerbae Way. However, we disagree with Scott's recommendations and instead find the number end Sise of the impacts to the ditch are minor and can be mitigated with relative ease. Although nP we cannot comment on the historic use of a treck -hoe to clean the Eli Cerise t]ltch, we do not believe that it would be necessary to use a track -hoe in dais portion of the ditch nor do we believe the encroachment of the trail ad,acent to the ditch warrants the installation of a culvert through this section of the ditch, the ditch owner with an opportunity Rather, we believe the nail now provides to use a rubber tire hoe in this area, if necessary, bUt in all likelihood, the ditch will be easier to maintain since it is now very accessible, the ditch seems to well armored and in relatively good condition and there are minimal conditions Present which would lead to the degradation of the ditch condition or capacity, Recognizing the rights of the ditch use antotal op land tcapable of being ng 14.99 rfs the declining avefagc diversions, type or Irrigated Under the ditch, it is possible that Improveme ltanst�rue U! on.. condition and completed which would return the ditch to its "Pre - capaeNy. These improvements would include removal of fill material that has been pieced of sloughed into the ditch, retaining shoulders of the trail to keep -Construction t material from sloughing or eroding into the ditch, and ensuring p r capacity is returned throughout this section of the ditch. Furthermore, l agtee with your assessment that the open ditch along the nail as more of an amenity to trail users than It would be if the ditch ulverting would likely culvert. Reduction of the ditch losses through seepage Y result in the premature loss of the numerous narrow -leaf cottonwoods adjacem to the ditch. Finally, you %too requested that we view the portion of ilea ditch down gaitch Leh of Lower River Road as this portion of the ditch appears to be subject to higher ditch from the tortes. We have inspected this portion of the ditch and find that the potential for dt losses is higher in this section due to sandy soils, fractured a e n �dw 11 Armored_ The ditch due to vegetation sad ditch wells and �oUouwmethat AUSing A reduction in the slope of the ditch through this section apps n. 070925 Z0� °A'J. C3:1 �' i. OCT -12 -2009 09:15 AM POLLOCK /MASTRFNGHI_4 •"U'. . isV'i 1 04N1 r, N.ty bVONl, r'J�LIL 0t� N1 BEACH RNMONMPNTAL, LLC Page 3 U!1,.171 velocity of the water. This can result in an increase in hydrostatic pressure which tends to inetcase seepage through the bottom and sidewalls of the ditch. We also noted several areas in which sloughing from the right bank may periodically cause blockage of the ditch thereby increasing the potential for seepage andior overtopping. Curative measures for this portion of the ditch may include averting or lining, removal of some shrub /scrub vegetation, or some combination of the above. it is possible, as you surmised, that left alone this portion of the ditch could jeopardize the integrity of the new trail if a significant seep were to exist. During our Investigation the ditch was flowing at icss than 3.0 cis and consequently the area influenced by seepage was not cleat nor did it appear significant. It would be prudent to reassess this section of the ditch next spring to determine what corrective actions, If any, should be taken to protect the new trail. As always, should you have any questions please feel free to call 0210.1 a t To be sand ddlvared I1 +0o Sincerely, By G ch Principal RES`7URCE INEEMS E N G I N E E R I N G I N C. Loyal Leavenworth, Esq. August 17, 2000 Leavenworth & Tester PC PO Drawer 2030 Glenwood Springs CO 81602 RE: Eli Cerise Ditch Investigation Dear Lee: On August 8, 2000 1 conducted an inspection of a reach of the Eli Cerise Ditch that purportedly had been impacted by recent construction of a paved bike and pedestrian trail adjacent to the ditch. Our office had been contacted by Mr. Chuck Cherek and other ditch users expressing concern that the new trail has adversely affected the ditch's operation and maintenance. The path was constructed by Pitkin County as part of their trail system that follows the historic Southern Pacific and Denver Rio Grande Railroad line now owned by the Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority. Based upon our site visit, we conclude that the concerns expressed by ditch users are well founded. Steep fill slopes associated with the trail construction encroach into the ditch in several locations thereby reducing its capacity. In addition, the fill slopes and the paved trail have created existing and longterm maintenance problems. Our findings are outlined in more detail below. CONSTRUCTION FILL IN THE DITCH Our initial visit identified five locations totaling 830+ feet in which fill material from the new trail had either directly entered the ditch or posed an immediate threat to enter the ditch. There may be other ditch segments adversely affected as well, however, time did not permit us to examine the entire length of ditch. The problems caused by the fill encroachment into the ditch are illustrated in photographs 1 through 6, attached. In many instances, the paved trail is located within five feet (t) of the ditch. The fill slopes constructed to support the trail are typically steep and consist of unconsolidated sand and gravel. Due to the steep slopes the material is moving by gravitational and weathering processes downward into the ditch. In numerous locations we observed the fill extending. 18 to 24 inches into the bottom of the ditch. The fill material in the ditch effectively reduces its flow capacity. Moreover, during the early season when ditch volume and velocities are greater, there is potential to displace and redeposit the fill throughout the ditch system. This increases ditch maintenance requirements. High ditch velocities could also scour the toe of the unconsolidated fill causing accelerated erosion and sedimentation within the ditch. This erosion could eventually undermine the trail causing material to slough into the ditch and jeopardize the integrity of the trail itself. uuC,J 12 neulu;ng Engineers and Hydrologists Lis I t,7-c!cracoAvenue (970)945-6777 ■ Fax [9i0] °4E -1'! 37 Loyal Leavenworth, Esq. Page 2 MAINTENANCE OF THE DITCH August 17, 2000 The presence of a paved trail adjacent to the ditch will prevent or will radically alter the a way in which the ditch has historically been cleaned and maintained. According to Mr. Cherek, the ditch is cleaned annually using a cleated track vehicle with a 60 inch blade. The vehicle enters the ditch at selected locations and pushes material down ditch where it is periodically removed by a bucket loader stationed adjacent the ditch (now a paved path). It is highly probable that this type of equipment will damage paved asphalt. Therefore a potential conflict has been created between the historic users of the ditch, trail users and Pitkin County. The conflict cannot be avoided by simply moving to the other side of the ditch as the bank is fragile and extremely steep. MAINTENANCE OF THE TRAIL " We are also concerned that the annual maintenance of the paved trail will further adversely affect the Eli Cerise Ditch. As shown in photograph 7 attached, the cut slopes adjacent to the trail and opposite the ditch are extremely steep and contain unconsolidated materials that will continue to erode and deposit debris on the trail. This material will have to be removed periodically in order to maintain a safe and passable trail. Unless this material is "end hauled" a great distance, there is no place to put it except adjacent to the ditch. This action would further adversely impact the ditch by creating a source of erosion and ditch sedimentation. MITIGATION The problems described above could be mitigated if Pitkin County culverted the Eli Cerise Ditch in critical locations. The culverts would have to be properly designed and contain periodic cleanouts to allow access for maintenance. R Another potential solution would be to construct three to four feet vertical retaining walls near the toe of the fill slope to keep the material from entering the ditch. This would also lessen the steepness of the fill allowing for revegetation of disturbed areas. This solution does not, however, mitigate the ditch maintenance conflicts described above. SUMMARY In summary, it is our opinion that the construction of the bike and pedestrian trail along the historic Eli Cerise Ditch easement has adversely affected the flow characteristics and maintenance requirements of the Ditch. Without mitigation by Pitkin County, ditch users will continue to be harmed and placed in a position of continuing conflict with A trail users and Pitkin County. uuCJ l3 MOHRESOURCE �r EmlairvL�l nr,nmrrn n/ RudnJivl Deulnhnnr,/ Pnllo,k P,/P,dl' Na rmGn It. _'O! 1 BACKGROUND & QUALIFICATIONS ' Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC (CWS) is a small wildlife and ecological consulting fine based in Basalt, Colorado, specializing in wildlife research, management, and monitoring, ecological assessments, baseline inventories, ecological planning, habitat management, and ecological restoration. CWS applies a scientifically sound approach to biological resource studies and management. Our work combines professional integrity and strong academic training with extensive experience working for government, private, and non - profit clients. With an extensive network of professional collaborators that includes plant ecologists, foresters, hydrologists, and soil scientists, CWS leverages the collective knowledge of experienced professionals working toward practical, effective and cost saving solutions. CWS provides expert services to a diverse array of clients. Since we are a small company, personal attention is ensured. We combine full in -house GIS (ArcGIS) with real time, sub- ' meter GPS to provide state -of -the -art spatial data, analyses, maps, and presentations. We '? have prepared Biological Assessments and Biological Evaluations, and contributed to EAs and EISs. CWS has worked with large private firms such as Jacobs, Carter and Burgess, r Parsons, CH2MHILL, and SAIC as well as city and county agencies and governments such as City of Aspen, City of Glenwood Springs, Pitkin County, Colorado Department of Transportation, and Roaring Fork Transportation Agency. CWS is currently collaborating on the Pitkin County Airport Wildlife Hazard Assessment. - Owner and Wildlife Biologist Jonathan Lowsky, M.S. Wildlife Biology, Colorado State University, has a broad range of knowledge. With more than 19 years of professional experience with federal (US Forest Service), state (Colorado Division of Wildlife), and county agencies as well as two major universities (Colorado State University and University of Washington), Jonathan's career has focused on a diverse array of wildlife from bighorn a sheep, elk, and songbirds to northern goshawks, flying squirrels, small mammals, and spotted ' bats. Mr. Lowsky's experience includes biological assessments and evaluations for NEPA compliance, conservation planning, GIS mapping and modeling, wildlife research, and ecological monitoring design and implementation, as well as wetland and riparian delineations, evaluations, and restoration. He has authored management plans and conservation easement baseline inventory reports and published scientific papers. An expert birder, experienced tracker, certified wetlands delineator, and passionate observer of wildlife, Jonathan has spent countless hours studying and appreciating Colorado's diverse ecological communities. r Jonathan Lowsky completed the US Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineator Certification Program in 1999 and the Wildland Hydrology (Dave Rosgen) Applied Fluvial Geomorphology Course in 2001. This training has contributed to the quality and success of the wetlands delineations and wetlands and stream restoration projects Mr. Lowsky has completed and contributed to over the last 12 years. Prior to the inception of Colorado Wildlife Science, Jonathan served as the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist for more than 6 years. In that role, he acted as the County's wetlands, stream, and riparian expert. A detailed description of Mr. Lowsky's professional experience and references are available. For additional information, please visit our website at www .coloradowildlifescience.com. uuC174 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I BACKGROUND & QUALIFICATIONS PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to the general public that on June 21, 2012, the Pitkin County Community Development Director granted approval for the Pollock Activity Envelope Review (Case P011 -12; Deter. #039 - 2012). The property is located at 4054 Lower River Road and is legally described as a tract of land situated in Government Lot 7 Section 6, Township 9 South, Range 85 West of the 61h P. M. The State Parcel Identification Number for the property is 2643 - 062 -00 -007. This site - specific development plan grants a vested property right pursuant to Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes. S /Cindy Houben Community Development Director Pitkin County, Colorado Published in the Aspen Times Weekly, on JULY 5, 2012. PUBLIC NOTICE RE: Pollock Activity Envelope Review (Case P011 -12) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that an application has been submitted by Perry Pollock (PO Box 950, Aspen, CO 81612) requesting to obtain activity envelope review approval for a single family residence. The property is located at 4054 Lower River Road and is legally described as a tract of land situated in Government Lot 7 Section 6, Township 9 South, Range 85 West of the 6`h P. M. The State Parcel Identification Number for the property is 2643 - 062 -00 -007. The application is available for public inspection in the Pitkin County Community Development Department, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 81611. For further information, contact Suzanne Wolff at (970) 920 -5093. Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on March 1, 2012. Attention All Property Owners within 300' of the subiect property A property owner receiving this public notice who wishes to submit comments or an objection shall submit those to the Pitkin County Community Development, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611, by April 2, 2012. If any objections to the development application are received the Community Development Department shall continue the application to a public hearing before the Hearing Officer. http: / /www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals /0 /docs/ county/ Com% 20Dev /Planning/Land_Use_Applicatio ns /.pdf County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE & } ss. MAILING PURSUANT TO State of Colorado } PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE CODE SECTION 2 -20 -100 I, ` , being or representing an Applicant to the Pitkin County Development Department, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 2 -20 -100 of the Pitkin County Land Use Regulations in the following manner: 1. By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first- class, postage prepaid U.S. Mail at least 2 weeks prior to the public comment deadline to all o ers of property within 300' of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on 5Vl , 201Z(which is 30 days prior to the deadline of Z , 201, The names and a dresses of the adjacent property owners shall be those on the c ent tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than 60 days prior to the public comment. 2. By posting a sign in a con icuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) on the , 20e, which is at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public comment deadline. A photograph of the posted sign is attach hereto. Applicant's name (Attach photograph here) J —� PUB�iC' PAS ;' gTfofco� 6 Signed before me this °`2 day of A'?V-% L- 201?by 5L),Y,y y �ANIV WITNESS MY HAND AND 0,FFICI)kL SEAL My commission expires: 13 tary P L A \\4t==_ of P lies Si ature G: \county \admin\forms\affidavit for Activity Envelope /Site Plan /Caretaker Dwelling Unit 11 0� I/ PUBLIC NOTICE RE: Pollock Activity Envelope Review (Case P011 -12) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that an application has been submitted by Perry Pollock (PO Box 950, Aspen, CO 81612) requesting to obtain activity envelope review approval for a single family residence. The property is located at 4054 Lower River Road and is legally described as a tract of land situated in Government Lot 7 Section 6, Township 9 South, Range 85 West of the 6h P. M. The State Parcel Identification Number for the property is 2643 - 062 -00 -007. The application is available for public inspection in the Pitkin County Community Development Department, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 81611. For further information, contact Suzanne Wolff at (970) 920 -5093. Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on March 1, 2012. Attention All Property Owners within 300' of the subiect Property A property owner receiving this public notice who wishes to submit comments or an objection shall submit those to the Pitkin County Community Development, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611, by April 2, 2012. If any objections to the development application are received the Community Development Department shall continue the application to a public hearing before the Hearing Officer. http: / /www.aspenpitkin.comI Portals /0 /docs/ county/ Com% 2ODev IPlanningILand_Usc_Applicatio ns /.pdf a Easy Peel'0 Labels i ♦ Bend along line to i Use Avery* Template 51600 j Peed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeTm j BARTLEY FAMILY TRUST BOVINO FAMILY INVESTMENTS LLC 14901 S CAENEN LN PO BOX 4395 OLATHE, KS 66062 ASPEN, CO 81612 FELDMAN GARY M & AMY H GABIANELLI NINA M PO BOX 4464 73 DAKOTA DR ASPEN, CO 81612 CARBONDALE, CO 816231632 HANSEN THOMAS A & CYNTHIA L HILST ERIC J PO BOX 8243 4070 LOWER RIVER RD #17 ASPEN, CO 81612 SNOWMASS, CO 81654 JONES CHARLES E TRUST LARSON ANDREW & NOELLE 4405 HAMILTON BLVD PO BOX 241 SIOUX CITY, IA 51104 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 MONACO LIONNEL PITKIN COUNTY PO BOX 300401 530 E MAIN ST #302 DENVER, CO 80203 ASPEN, CO 81611 SCHMIDT VICTORIA A S -G LAND COMPANY LLC 391 HORSESHOE DR 30376 HWY 82 BASALT, CO 81621 SNOWMASS, CO 81654 SMUGGLER ASPEN LLC STAFFORD WILLIAM A & CHRISTINE C 100 ELK RUN DR #129 PO BOX 6017 BASALT, CO 81621 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 STUTSMAN RICHARD & DOLORES THOMS TIERNEY J PO BOX 695 PO BOX 43 BASALT, CO 81621 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 WELLER KRISTINA USFS WALTER MICHAEL FOREST SUPERVISOR 4070 LOWER RIVER RD #6 PO BOX 948 SNOWMASS, CO 81654 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 I:tiquettes faciles A peter ; A Repliez a la hachure afin de Utilisez le abarit AVERYO 51600 Sens de reveler le rebord Pop UpT"' ' 1 c argement � AVERY(R) 5160® 1 BRENNAN BENJAMIN T & JENNIFER L 2203 ELK LN BASALT, CO 816218207 GERBAZ JERRY & JUDITH PO BOX 695 BASALT, CO 81621 JOHNSON TEREE L PO BOX 4884 ASPEN, CO 81612 MILL TIMOTHY G PO BOX 11692 ASPEN, CO 81612 RIVER CAT COMPANY LLC 250 STEELE ST STE 375 DENVER, CO 80206 SHAW BARBARA A 11138 AGUA VISTA ST #22 STUDIO CITY, CA 91602 STARWOOD VENTURES LLC 6646 OLD RANCH TR LITTLETON, CO 80125 TUMA DENNIS 4070 LOWER RIVER RD APT 1 SNOWMASS, CO 81654 BLM PO BOX 1009 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 www.avery.com 1- 800 -GO -AVERY ' 1 TO: Pollock File FROM: Suzanne Wolff DATE: April 19, 2012 I spoke with Dennis Tuma, a homeowner at Rivers Bend Condos, adjacent to the Pollock property. Mr. Tuma noted that the Condo Association had installed a wastewater treatment facility that was permitted by the State. He asserted that the adjacent property owner was required to utilize that system, rather than installing an individual on -site wastewater treatment system. He agreed to forward information. I did not receive any further information from Mr. Tuma. I left a message for Scott Leslie, the manager of the Rivers Bend wastewater system. He did not return my call. I then contacted Tom Schaffer with the CO Department of Public Health and Environment /Water Quality Control Division (970 -248- 7152). He reviewed their files and provided the following information: • The facility is at 99% of its capacity. A new site application would be required to increase the capacity. • He found a note that the Pitkin County specified that use of the facility is limited to the residents of the Rivers Bend Condos. Having found no evidence to support a requirement to connect to the neighboring wastewater treatment facility, I have included our standard condition in the Administrative Decision regarding obtaining an OWTS permit prior to issuance of a building permit application and included a condition requiring a preliminary OWTS design at Site Plan Review. Suzanne Wolff From: janet k schoeberlein <janetkayes @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 3:54 PM To: Suzanne Wolff Subject: Pollock Activity Envelope Review Dear Suzanne: Our Planning Commission visited the subject site with Sunnt Vann. The site is very constricted, but as long as all County regulations are met, especially as far as the septic system, we have no objections to the application. Sincerely, Janet K. Schoeberlein 7274 Upper River Rd. PO Box 423, Woody Creek, CO 81656 970 - 923 -0040, fx 970 - 922 -7295 Email secured by Check Point PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920 -5526 FAX# (970) 920 -5439 February 17, 2012 Sunny Vann PO Box 4827 Basalt, CO 81621 vannassociates a comcast.net Re: Pollock Activity Envelope Review (PID#2643- 062 -00 -007; Case# POI 1-12) Dear Mr. Vann: 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 March 1, 2012. 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 2 "d day of April, 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 16`h day of March, 2012, which is at least fifteen (15) days prior to April 1, 2012. This must be submitted prior to any approvals being granted. If you have questions, please call Suzanne Wolff, the planner assigned to your case, at 920 -5093. Sincerely, Bonnie Waechtler Administrative Assistant Encl: Affidavit Code Section 2 -20 -100 PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920 -5526 FAX4 (970) 920 -5439 MEMORANDUM To: Planning Engineer Woody Creek Caucus FROM: Suzanne Wolff, Community Development Department Suzannc.wolffc�co.pitkin.co.us Re: Pollock Activity Envelope Review (PID 2643- 062 -00 -007; Case P011 -12) DATE: February 17, 2012 Attached for your review and comments are materials for an application submitted by Perry Pollock. The Pitkin County Community Development Director will review the application. Please return your comments to me by Monday, April 2, 2012. http: / /www aspenpitkin corf Portals /0 /does /county /Com %20Dev /Planning/Land Use AR plications /PO11 12 app.pdf Thank you. PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920 -5526 FAX# (970) 920 -5439 MEMORANDUM To: Suzanne Wolff FROM: Susan Pearson, Zoning Officer Re: Pollock Activity Envelope Review (PID 2643- 062 -00 -007; Case PO11 -12) DATE: March 14, 2012 After reviewing the application I propose the following conditions: ➢ The applicant shall obtain an approved Access Permit for any improvements to existing access road and /or new driveways. The application shall include: • Compliance with the current Asset Management Plan, • Compliance with all requirements of the Aspen Fire Department, and • Details on all turn arounds and parking locations. ➢ The applicant shall apply for and obtain an Earthmoving, Clearing and Grubbing Permit for all earthwork, landscape and water course /water way /water feature improvements. The permit application shall address: • All State requirements. • Documentation of adequate water rights. • Engineering of all overflow structures, recirculation systems, etc. • Any scenic issues and necessary screening for this site • Top soil shall be stockpiled and maintained for re -use • No berry bearing species shall be included • All plants used for landscaping and revegetation must be native plant species — native meadow grasses shall be used in or near meadows • All regrading, berming and landscaping shall comply with County setback requirements and shall be completed only within the activity envelope ➢ A detailed and engineered drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted with each development permit. If the total development disturbs one (1) acre or more a State Stormwater Permit shall be applied for and obtained. All historic and natural drainage patterns shall be maintained. Stormwater shall be detained onsite and allow infiltration of runoff prior to discharge. • Natural drainage patterns shall be observed • Minimal disturbance shall take place I a Z • Natural vegetation shall be preserved as much as practicable • Mitigation measures and BMPs shall remain in place until replacement vegetation is viable — • Wetland and riparian areas should be protected at all costs from construction disturbance through the use of appropriate BMPs — if these areas are disturbed during construction appropriate riparian species shall be replace during the revegetation process • Sediment produced by soil disturbances shall be maintained on site and run- off into water bodies, riparian areas or wetlands is prohibited • A landscaping plan shall be submitted to both address necessary screening for the site and adequate vegetation replacement • It shall be noted that this site is directly adjacent to the Roaring Fork River therefore, only native speeies shall be allowed for landscaping and revegetation • Erosion control matting shall be used for revegetation on steep slopes • Any riparian habitat removed for construction shall be replaced /recreated at 1:1 ratio on this site ➢ The applicant shall submit a Large Scale detailed Construction Management Plan (CMP) with each development permit that addresses all phases of construction. This shall include a site plan and written methodology addressing the requirements of a large scale CMP. Top soil shall be saved and kept alive and stored on site using adequate BMPs. The application shall include: Fugitive dust control A revegetation plan inclusive of the entire site — native grasses and any wetland species which are natural to this site and shall be used for revegetation No construction parking will be allowed on Lower River Road — this should be addressed in the CMP ➢ A tree mitigation plan shall be submitted for the removal of any trees larger than six (6) inch DBH. ➢ No retaining walls or berms are proposed in this application ➢ Outdoor lighting shall be minimal ➢ This lot is severely constrained and any work within the setbacks must be approved by the Board of Adjustment ➢ DOW recommendations shall be complied with for months, times and hours of construction activity ➢ Noxious weeds should be managed before during and after construction — the proximity of the Roaring Fork River should be considered when choose the best course of action for weed abatement Note: I visited this site before the NOV was issued — the owner explained that the ditch above this property on the opposite side of Lower River Road was leaking and causing wetland vegetation to grow outside the natural riparian areas and within the pasture area. The application claims the ditch was repaired — this should be verified or addressed before the submittal of a building permit Name: Project Address Type: Permit Number 0011.2012.13LAN 0011.2012.PLAN 0011.2012.PLAN 0011.2012.PLAN PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Permit Receipt RECEIPT NUMBER 00032038 Perry H. Pollock Date:2/9/2012 4054 LOWER RIVER RD check # 4600 Fee Description PP- Flat Fee PP- Clerk Tech Fee PP- Public Notice Fee PP- Planning Eng Referral Fee Total: Amount 1,872.00 25.00 54.00 624.00 2,57500 FOUND 1926 GLO ~� BRASS CAP SCALE I INCH - 40 FEET NW CDR SECTION 6 0 20 40 00 80 CONTOUR INTERVAL IS 2 FEET o BOOK 237 F'Aim)E \242 \mwunmwian,ma',.y X�.S SLOPE LEGEND 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON FEMA REFENCR MARK "RM8" USG &GS STANDARD TABLET IN CONCRETE POST "A 158" ELEVATION - 7.125.4' 3. RIVER STATIONING BASED ON GERBAZ BRIDGE STATION OF 553 +15 AND CARRIED ALONG THE RIVER CENTERLINE TO THE PROPERTY USING THE PITKIN COUNTY GIB MAPPING 4, 100 YEAR FLOOD ELEVATION IS BASED ON FEMA FLOOD PROFILE SHEET 71P. LEGEND AND NOTES Q SURVEY MONUMENT e5 REBAR WITH CAP AS NOTED SPIKE SET SURVEY CONTROL POWER POLE 0 TELEPHONE BOX ANt- -- OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES BEARINGS WERE DETERMINED FROM OBSERVATION OF CENTERLINE OF EXISTING TRACKS AS SHOWN 527030'00 "E TITLE INFORMATION WAS FROM PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. TITLE COMMITMENT PCT- 2258OP3 DATED AUG 29. 2011. ADDRESS IS 4054 LOWER RIVER ROAD. ZONING IS AR -10 NO EASEMENT WIDTH GIVEN FOR THE JOINT USE OF THE EXISTING ROADWAY IN THE NORTHEAST PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN BOOK 208 AT PAGE 54 lako LOWER RIVER ROAD) POLLOCK ACTIVITY ENVELOPE PLAN PARCEL. 0 NO, 2643 - 062.. -00 -007 17 FLOOD PLAIN NOT S I, FLOOD PLAIN IS BASED ON THE FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE RATE JUNE MAP FOR 4. 1987 PITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO EFFECTIVE COMMUNITY NO. 080287 PANEL 0067 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON FEMA REFENCR MARK "RM8" USG &GS STANDARD TABLET IN CONCRETE POST "A 158" ELEVATION - 7.125.4' 3. RIVER STATIONING BASED ON GERBAZ BRIDGE STATION OF 553 +15 AND CARRIED ALONG THE RIVER CENTERLINE TO THE PROPERTY USING THE PITKIN COUNTY GIB MAPPING 4, 100 YEAR FLOOD ELEVATION IS BASED ON FEMA FLOOD PROFILE SHEET 71P. LEGEND AND NOTES Q SURVEY MONUMENT e5 REBAR WITH CAP AS NOTED SPIKE SET SURVEY CONTROL POWER POLE 0 TELEPHONE BOX ANt- -- OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES BEARINGS WERE DETERMINED FROM OBSERVATION OF CENTERLINE OF EXISTING TRACKS AS SHOWN 527030'00 "E TITLE INFORMATION WAS FROM PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. TITLE COMMITMENT PCT- 2258OP3 DATED AUG 29. 2011. ADDRESS IS 4054 LOWER RIVER ROAD. ZONING IS AR -10 NO EASEMENT WIDTH GIVEN FOR THE JOINT USE OF THE EXISTING ROADWAY IN THE NORTHEAST PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN BOOK 208 AT PAGE 54 lako LOWER RIVER ROAD) POLLOCK ACTIVITY ENVELOPE PLAN PARCEL. ID NO, 2643 - 062.. -00 -007 (,7a,5 f :, PO ;I -1 . SECTION 6, 'TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE £35 WEST 6th P.M. PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO SPIKE IN CENTER, OF EXIST. RR \ TRACKS 6,P VP `LSD276A13 \ vi o� , Is o - -" - — 1,,O T' / / V� V ,r \ ENVELOPE ` o`\ `1aR9 4 RIVER STATIONING 514 +21 FEMA FLOOD EL 7079.0° 100 YR FLOOD (TYPICAL) (::lGlenmral CAfJfr iOKdxH4094 ®8[9,gxd - O7l M;72 — 90:24 AM -- ,S'vale 1 : 480.o CENTERIOR EXIST. RR TRACKS t r� r e , f VICINITY MAP �19MV913wromE, A tract of land situated in Government Lot 7 of Section 6, Township 9 South, Range 86 West of The 6th PM being that portion of the Perry H. Pollock land described In Book 225 at Page 141 of the Pitkin County Records bounded on the North by that tract of land described in Book 237 at Page 242 and Bounded on the South by that tract of land described in Book 242 at Page 646 described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Westerly right of way line of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad Companyy Aspen Branch from which the Northwest corner of said Section 6 boors North 71'10' 07" West 1.060.41 feet, more or less Thence Southerly along the Westerly right of way of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad South 27 "30'00" East 411.54 feet to the Northeast corner of said Book 242 at Pago 646: 'thence South 17°01'42 West 220.64 feet more or less along the Northerly boundary of sold Book 242 at Pago 646 to a point in the center of the Roaring Fork River: Thence Norther)y along the center of the Roorinq Fork River to the Southeast corner of said Book 237 at Page 242: Thence North 66°38 "30" East 157.83 feet more or leas along the Southerly boundary of said Book 237 at Pogo 242 to the point of beginning. COUNTY OF PITKIN STATE: OF COLORADO AREA - 2.6 ACRES MORE OR LESS OWNER'S ACTIVITY ENVELOPI WARNING AND W.A.IVER IED BY PITKIN COUNTY OF THE EXISTENCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANY IMPROVEMENTS. AND THE USE AND OCCUPANCY THEREOF. ANY WAY ASSURE OR IMPLY THAT THE AREAS OUTSIDE OF HAZARDS, OR THAT APPROVED MITIGATION MEASURES WILL. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THIS ACTIVITY ENVELOPE PLAN HAS BEEN REVIE BY THE PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT W IM NI TRATIVE DECISION NO. % A400 0 . RECEPTION #: 591187, 08/07/2012 at 02:14:52 PM, 1 CiF 1, ft $11.00 ►araicta K. Vas Caudill, Pitkira County, Co PLAT BK 100 PG 62 PREPARED BY ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, a INC. 210 S. GALENA STREET ASPEN. COLORADO 61611 PHONE /FAX (970) 925 -3816 REV. 10 -28 «2011 (WETLANDS STUDY) JOB NO 391968 DATE 7/12