Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.eh.264515300021 (1998) BOCC Reso0 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITK[N COUNTY, COLORADO, DENYING 1041 HAZARD REVIEW, CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION, AND SCENIC OVERLAY/RIDGELINE REVIEW, TO ROBERT SCHUSTER Resolution No. 98-_0,1 RECITALS Robert Schuster (hereafter "Applicant"), has applied to the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners (hereafter "Board") for approval to construct a single-family residence. 2. The property is located in the Shield -O -Mesa area, and is more specifically described in Exhibit A. The property contains 3 5. 8 acres and is zoned RS -30. 4. This application was reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission (hereafter "Commission") at a regular meeting on July 28, 1998, and a recommendation of denial was forwarded to the Board. The Board heard this application at a duly noticed public hearing on October 28, 1998, at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application. The Board finds that the entire parcel is encumbered by severe wildfire hazard as determined by the Colorado State Forest Service and Community Development staff and that the proposed access crosses slopes in excess of 30%. 7. The Board finds that development of the subject property is prohibited, pursuant to Section 3-80.70 (A)(3) of the Land Use Code, which prohibits development in areas identified by the Colorado State Forest Service as containing severe wildfire hazard and Section 3-80-050(C)(2), which prohibits development on slopes in excess of 30%. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners that it does hereby deny Schuster 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission, Scenic Overlay/Ridgeline Review and Lot Line Adjustment. DENIED on the 28th day of October, 1998. 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 IN 424872 11/25/1998 03:12P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 1 of 4 R 0.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO f Resolution No. 98 -.,'-'?P"7 a Pale 2 NOTICE OF PUBLIC BEARING published in The Aspen Times on the 25th day of September, 1998. ATTEST: Deputy County Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Cindy Houben Community Development Director P66-98 PID #2645-153-00-021 suzannew\pitkin\cases\ 1041 \schuster\resodeny. doc BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Dorothea Farris, Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM: John El Co Attorney 111111111111111111 III IIIIIIIIIIIIII III IIIIIIIIIIIII III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IN 424172 11/25/1998 03:12P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 2 of 4 R 0.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO s 9 fs-zoy =iIBIT A PARCEL I. ;parcel of land situazed i_^. t7e SSouthwest guartsr of the Northwest cuartar, and 4n the West _za_f Southwest quarter, all in Section 15, =ownsrip 3 South, Range 86 West of the 6th P.M., Saste__y 0 the Westerly 1-ine of said Section 15 and Southwesterly of the centerline ,_,f a 50 root road easement, said'parcel Is lescribed as follows- Beginning ollows: Beginning at a point or. _he Westerly line of said Section 15 whence the Southwest corner of said Section 15 bears S 00028'27" W 495.00 feer• thence N 00°28127" E ...45.00 :eet along th.e Westerly line of said Section 15; thence N 63°59'03" E 365.?2 -feet _o a point in the center of said road easement; along `'ie center ci said road easement S 16050'35" 2 =60.34 15023130" W 40.00 feet; on the westerly line of said EXCEPTING THEREFROM that certain parcel of land conveyed to St. Benedicts Monastery in the Deed recorded in Book 326 at Page 307, described as follows: A parcel of land situated in the SWI/4 a INW1/4, Section 15, Township 9 South, Range 86 West -feet ; 6th P.M., described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Westerly line of said Section 15, whence the SW thence S 32°50129" -1 350.35 feet; thence S 29°07'39" E 201.53 feet; thence S 61127'26" 'S 75.00 feet; thence S 74°36130" 3 103.09 feet; thence leaving said road easement S thence `1 89°00' 00" W 73 .71 feet; thence S 01046'49" W 46-1.23 -Feet; thence N 88005146" W 94.59 -feet; thence S 21052139" W 51.79 '-eet; thence S 05°45'00" W ;90.00 feet; thence S 66°45'58" E 64,39 feet; thence S 00026120" W 105'0.00 feet; thence West 664.51 feet =o a point Section 15 the point of beginning. WITH a 40 fcot road easement, the centerline of which is more 15023130" W 40.00 feet; on the westerly line of said EXCEPTING THEREFROM that certain parcel of land conveyed to St. Benedicts Monastery in the Deed recorded in Book 326 at Page 307, described as follows: A parcel of land situated in the SWI/4 a INW1/4, Section 15, Township 9 South, Range 86 West of the 6th P.M., described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Westerly line of said Section 15, whence the SW corner of said Section 15 bears S 00028127" W 495.00 feet; thence N 00°28'27" E 2,34.500 feet; thence N 63°59'03" E 264.02 feet; thence S 16050'35" E 158.25 feet; thence S 32050129" E 360.79 feet : I 111111111111111 '�I"I 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 thence S 28°07'39" E 49" W 158.76 514.32 feet, feet; 424872 11/25/1998 03:12P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI thence thence S S 01°46' 21°52' 39" W 61.60 feet; 3 of 4 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO thence S 05°45'00" W 277.51 feet; thence S 42000'00" E 246.27 Beet; thence S 00026'20" W 635.62 feet; thence S 90000'00" W 664.51 feet to the point of beginning. TOGETHER WITH a 40 fcot road easement, the centerline of which is more particularly described as follows: APR -13-1998 16-13 970 925 =80396% P.04 EXHIBIT A (Continued) Beginning at a poi^.t on a 60 foot road easement whence she Szouthwest corner of said Section 15 bears S 48028'^1" W 2152.90 feet thence a'lony^ said centerline N 01°55'00" :3;.00 feet; thence 203.63 -set aiona the arc of a curve to t:^_e 'eft _�avin g- a radius of !03.33 =eet, t:7e ch crd of which bears N 5,1021'00" I _72. %3 feet; thence S 69028'00" Wr 20.00 feet; thence 98.24 eet along the arc of a curve to she right, hav_na a he chord of which bears S 32036'30" W37.38 radius of �-4._6 =_et, �� - feet; thence N 840'.5'00" W 213.00 feet; thence 200.92 'feet along t e arc of a curve to t e r_ght, having a radius of 280.06 feet, the chord of which bears N 63041152" W 196.54 feet; thence N 33008'00" W 29.86 feet; --hence 75.35 feet along she arc of a curve :o :he =aft having a radius of 96.69 =eet, the chord of which bears N 65037'14" W 73.?2 =eet; thence N 88005146" W 7_33.00 feet• r thence 129.22 'feet along the arc of curve to e -e-t, hav_n g a radius of 86.69 feet, the chord of which bears S 49012107" W 117,58 feet; thence S 06030'00" W ,.69.53 feet to a point on the Southerly _ine of the above described parte-1 of land. PARCEL B: A parcel of land situated in the SWI/4 & NW1/4, Section IS, -Township 9 South, Range 86 west of the 6th P.M., described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Westerly line of said Section 15, whence the SW corner of said Section 1-5 bears S 00028'27" W 495.00 feet; thence N 00128'27" E 2,34.500 feet; thence N 63059'03" E 264.02 feet; thence S 16050'35" E 158.25 feet; thence S 32050129" E 360.79 feet; thence S 28007'39" E 158.76 feet; thence S 01046149" W 514.32 feet; thence S 21052139" W 61.60 feet; thence S 05045100" W 277.51 feet; thence S 42000100" E 246.27 feet; S 00026'20" W 835.62 feet.- 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 eet; thence _ thence S 90000'00" W 664.51 feet to the point of beginning-: APR -13-1998 16 13 111111111111111111III11111111III1111111III111111111 IN 424872 11/25/1998 03:12P RESOLUTI DAVIS SILVI 4 of 4 R 0.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 970 925 1803 96% - P.05 0 0 MEMORANDUM To: Suzanne Wolff, Community Development Department Through: Lee Cassin, Environmental Health Department ,� Z C From: Jannette Whitcomb, Environmental Health Department Date: July 9, 1998 Re: Schuster 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission & Scenic Overlay/Ridgeline Review . Parcel ID #2645-153-00-021 The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the details of the Schuster application under the authority of the Pitkin County Land Use Code and has the following comments. Due to time constraints, we were unable to do a site visit, which limits these comments to the material presented. ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS: Sections 2-17 and 3-1104: "It is the policy of the County to insure the availability of a water supply of adequate quality, quantity, pressure and dependability for fire protection and support of a proposed land use prior to approval of the use. The County shall require land uses to hook up to existing public systems if service is available." This Department needs adequate information on the quantity and the quality of water available. A shared well will serve this property. The applicant needs to provide documentation that the well permit allows these three residences to share the well. This department requires a pump test before it issues the septic permit to make sure the yield of the well is sufficient to serve three residences. Before this Department can issue a septic permit, the owners must ensure that the setback distance between the well to the septic system is met. Pitkin County Land Use Code requires that the well site be within the building envelope. Since the maps do not show the well location, the possibility exists that the well may not be in the building envelope. The Community Development Department can determine if the well location is acceptable. We recommend low water landscaping (xeriscaping), with the timing of any sprinkler systems decreased for low water plants. Contact the Colorado State University Cooperative Extension office or Denver Water Board for more information on xeriscaping. Printed on Recycled Paper A condition of approval for this application is documentation that the well(s) meet setback requirements and that quantity and quality of the well water is adequate. The county cannot issue septic and building permits until these requirements are met. SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: Sections 2-18 and 3-1105: "It is the policy of the County to ensure that adequate sewage treatment facilities are available to serve existing and new developments. Public and private sewage disposal systems and connections to such systems shall comply with the sewage disposal guidelines of Pitkin County's Individual Sewage Disposal System Regulation." Individual septic systems serve the lots in the Shield O'Mesa Subdivision. It is very likely that this building envelope is too small to hold a house and septic system. This is certainly true if the well is closer than a few hundred feet from the building site and if the soils are poor, as the engineer's report indicates they are. All septic systems installed within Pitkin County require septic permits issued by the Environmental Health Department, and must comply with the County's septic regulations. Owners should realize that soils tests can be done only between April 15 and November 15 of each year. Building and septic permits require soil tests before being issued. To receive a septic permit, the applicant will need to submit a septic permit application through a Registered Professional Engineer who will design the system. Included in the packet must be percolation test results and profile hole information, site plan with pertinent physical features, floor plan for the dwelling and caretaker unit and a copy of the County's land use approval. Once we receive the completed application, this Department will analyze and review the proposed septic design. The applicant should know that it may take some time to have soils tests performed and additional time to have the system designed. Since soils tests cannot be done all year, the owner should carefully evaluate this schedule to assure all steps have been taken to make the permitting process as fast as possible. Applicants should also be aware that many building envelopes are too small to allow any but the smallest house and still have the septic system meet required setbacks from wells. It may be difficult to locate the sewage disposal within the building envelope. Here are some examples of required distances between wells and septic systems. (The greater the sewage flow, the greater the distance must be between the septic system and the well. Sewage flows are a function of the size of the house and the number of rooms that these or future owners may use as bedrooms as their family size and situation changes.) Applicants should carefully evaluate this information so they can ensure the house they want to build can meet these setbacks. A 3 -bedroom house with one office that is 2,400 sq. ft. must have its well 132 feet from the septic system. A 4 -bedroom house with one office and one playroom, of 2,400 sq. ft. must have the well 188 feet from the septic system. Printed on Recycled Paper A 4 -bedroom house with one office and one playroom, of over 6,000 sq. ft. must have the well 238 feet from the septic system. A house with over 6,000 scl. ft. with 5 bedrooms and one office in the main house and an attached 2 -bedroom caretaker unit, must have the well 311 feet from the septic system. The type of soil will determine how large the septic system must be. The owners will need to obtain site specific soil data. The Preliminary Engineering Report submitted. indicates that the property has clayey soils with the potential for being expansive. The report stated that an evapotranspiration (ET) type wastewater disposal system may be necessary. The example given in the report is a good example of how big this type of system could be. As stated in the report, a four-bedroom home of under 6,000 square feet would have a design flow of 1,400 gallons per day. An ET -system would require 25,650 square feet of bed area. The building envelope for this property will not be able to fit an ET -system of this size. The leach field should be in an area of no traffic, planted with dry land grass, and should not be watered. It is desirable to locate the system below the house so that the system can operate by gravity. The site may require a pumped disposal system. The applicant should refer to the Pitkin County Sewage Regulations for detailed information, or call our office to discuss this site. This site might pose some difficulty in placing the system away from hazards due to the slope of the site. The first consideration is that water drainage from runoff could impair the functioning of the septic system by overloading and saturating the soils. This would severely impair the soil's function to absorb and filter water from the septic system. Percolation tests must be done during runoff in the area of the proposed leach field. Measures to mitigate water drainage include but are not limited to culverting or creating diversion swales to move the water away from the septic system. If the well permit states that the septic system must be of the non -evaporative type where the water is returned to the stream system in which the well is located, a completely lined field, such as an evapo-transpiration bed, is prohibited without a new well permit or a plan of augmentation. A condition of approval for this application is the receipt and approval of the septic permit before issuance of a building permit, and the understanding that this building envelope may be limited to a very small house and may require drilling a new well. WATER QUALITY IMPACTS: Sections 2-14 and 3-705 and 3-710: "It is the policy of the County to preserve and protect its present water resources. To this end it is the policy of the County that no land use be initiated which would adversely affect the quantity, quality, or accessibility of the County's water resources; or which would occur at the expense of established water -dependent agricultural activities; or which would result in increased salinization of water resources, loss of minimum stream flows, further destruction of wildlife habitat, or major expenditures to reacquire or redistribute major water resources. It is also the policy of the County to maintain a natural vegetative buffer along its surface waters such that the surface and groundwaters of the area are not encroached upon Printed on Recycled Paper 3 r by land uses or other human activities which could cause deterioration of water quality or impair the natural treatment processes provided by meadows and wetlands." The Environmental Health Department will be addressing water quality impacts on down stream water quality. This application should not impact down stream water quality if the setbacks between the septic system and physical features comply with the Pitkin County Sewage Regulations. The Environmental Health Department's mission is to preserve and protect the quality of Pitkin County's water resources. Since a large percentage of the population is dependent upon water from wells, elimination of groundwater pollution, and protection of aquifers and their drainage areas are of utmost importance. Roofs and asphalt areas can be nonpoint sources of water discharge that can contaminate water supplies. This Department recommends that nonpoint sources of discharge be retained on the property of origin. This can be accomplished through landscaping, drainage patterns, detention ponds, and dry wells for water runoff from buildings. AIR QUALITY: Sections 2-13 and 3-602: "Only that development is permitted which will not contribute significantly to degradation of air quality in Pitkin County. Developments may not constitute an indirect or direct air pollution source under Federal, State or County regulations." This project should not contribute significantly to degradation of air quality in Pitkin County it is a single family dwelling. FIREPLACE The less densely populated parts of the county like the Schuster site may have two devices per building: a maximum of one wood burning fireplace and a second device that can be either a gas log fireplace or a certified woodstove. In addition, unlimited numbers of decorative gas appliances are allowed. Coal may not be burned in any device. Fireplaces and woodstoves may not be installed in barns or agricultural buildings. A condition of approval for this application is the receipt and approval of the fireplace/woodstove permit by the Environmental Health Department before the building permit can be issued. Printed on Recycled Paper 4 (970) 925-6727 ' FAX (970) 925-4157 ENGINEERS SURVEYORS GM SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER April 27, 1998 EXHIBIT A Mr. Jim Curtis CURTIS & ASSOCIATES Crystal Palace Building, 2nd FI. 300 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, CO. 81611 P.O. Box 2155 Aspen, CO 81612 RE: Preliminary Engineering Report, Schuster Property 1041 Environmental Hazard Review Application II Dear Jim: This letter comprises my Engineering Report regarding relevant aspects of the Schuster Property 1041 Environmental Hazard Review application. My analysis and comments are the result of our discussions, on-site field inspection, review of available mapping and review of relevant Pitkin County code requirements. II Introduction 1 Mr. Robert Schuster owns a 35.8 acre property located above Shield -O -Mesa in Section 15 of Township 9 South, Range 86 West, of the 6th Prime Meridian in Pitkin County. The 1041 application is for a single-family homesite within a designated building envelope. 11 Access 1.1 The Schuster Property is accessed via a shared driveway from the upper segment of the Shield - O -Mesa Road. A 40 foot wide driveway easement approximately 1,050 feet in length has been granted across the intervening property from the Shield -O -Mesa Road. Our site inspection indicated that the existing driveway cut in place to the vicinity of the property may not fall within the easement as granted. Our inspection also indicated that the existing driveway cut is the appropriate alignment over most of its length since realigning it into the easement as granted would move it north and east onto steeper sloped areas. A new driveway from the existing driveway in place would be needed for about the last 250 feet into the Schuster property from just past the steep slope area descending into the site. Our recommendation would be that, when snow conditions allow, the centerline of the easement be surveyed and compared against the existing driveway. We recommend the easement be modified, if possible, to encompass the existing driveway where appropriate. The Pitkin County code requires that driveways be between 8 and 16 feet in width although several approvals point toward a minimum standard of 12 feet of width with wider pullouts where sightlines require. A 12 foot wide single -lane drive represents a width comparable to the normal travel lanes on streets and highways in the County and is quite adequate for fire vehicles and 118 West 6th, Suite 200 • Glenwood Springs, Colorado • (970) 945-1004 1� C 0 Il April 27, 1998 Mr. Jim Curtis Page 2 other truck access. The existing and proposed driveway will not exceed the 12% maximum grade limitation in the County standards and sight lines at Shield -O -Mesa Road are adequate for the proposed intersection location. The driveway will need minor grading and widening to achieve the 12 foot width. Gravel placement as well as culverts where appropriate to accommodate existing drainage patterns will be required to meet Pitkin County standards. The Schuster Property is accessed via the Shield -O -Mesa subdivision road leaving the Snowmass Creek Road. The subdivision road was upgraded recently including gravel placement, widening, switchback curve improvements, drainage and grade improvements. Widths are now very good, between 20 and 24 feet for the entire length of the Shield -O -Mesa Road. The road would now appear to meet at least a Pitkin County Class V-A Country Access standard consistent with comments I had offered on behalf of some applicants in the subdivision back in September of 1992. Mir current_understanding is that a Counta[_.Itttposed moratorium on building permits in the Shield -O -Mesa area has be lifted due to these road improvements. Water Supply Water is proposed to be supplied by an existing well in place across the Shield -O -Mesa Road in the immediate vicinity of the existing driveway. According to the attached letter of April 14, 1998 from R. Scott Fifer of Resource Engineering, the well was drilled under Permit Number 65829 for p Dperty.owners ster, Gilbert and Fiala. The well is intended to be shared by all three property owners. The Fifer letter indicates that the well totals 200 feet in depth and that water was encountered at 105 feet. Scott's letter does not indicate whether any flow r waterq �y_testing was done on the well (although it was decreed for 15 6 -pm) -We would recommend that the existing well be pump tested for flowrateand sampled for bacteriological contamination (at a minimum) to determine its condition and suitability to physically supply three residences. In addition, the owners may want to verify other water quality parameters such as hardness to determine if any in-house softening or other treatment will be appropriate. Water from wells in areas with significant Manc:os shale and related clay soils are often quite hard. Waste Water Disposal Soils in the vicinity of the building site on the Schuster Property do appear to be clayey in nature and may contain a significant proportion of weathered Mancos material. Percolation rates are likely moderate to poor and may, in a worst-case scenario, suggest the need for an evapo tra �pirafion (E) type wastewater disposal system. ET systems are certainly feasible on a site of this nature with good solar %poagre but are si ng ificant, in terms of their area requirements for a given flow. As a rough example, a four-bedroom home of under 6,000 square feet would have a design flow under Pitkin County regulations of 1,400 gallons per day. Disposing of 1,400 gpd in an ET -type system would require 25,650 square feet of bed area (160 feet square). ET beds need to be level and cannot be "sloped" into the terrain although they can be stepped onto sloped terrain and the area requirement can be broken up into several beds. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. or— April 27, 1998 Mr. Jim Curtis Page 3 Site specific percolation testing and an engineered wastewater disposal design based on the final home design and anticipated occupancy is recommended. Design of a home for this site should consider the wastewater disposal requirements early in the process and should seek to set aside the necessary area for the bed disposal system. Site-specific percolation testing may reveal better soil conditions than I am anticipating based on a cursory site -inspection. r. Electric, Telephone and Other Utilities ■ Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc. is the rural electric cooperative that serves the Shield -0 - Mesa area. Electric primary is in place as an overhead line ending with a short buried segment to a vault in the edge of the Shield -O -Mesa Road in the immediate vicinity of the existing driveway. The primary line and vault were clearly placed to allow future service to the lots served by the shared driveway from this location. A primary extension of about 1,200 linear feet and a secondary transformer would be required to serve the Schuster site. Telephone is also in place to the same general location as the electric primary. Phone service . would need to be extended along with electric to the site. Other utilities such as gas and cable N are not available to the Shield -O -Mesa area. Slopes The proposed building envelope and most of the driveway are located outside of steep slope areas. As noted in the access discussion, the existing driveway cut does traverse one area of perhaps 200 feet of steep slope condition. We are recommending only minor grading and gravel placement on this existing driveway segment and would not recommend trying to relocate it. Slopes in the vicinity of the envelope itself are moderate and show no evidence of rockfall or avalanche hazard. Given the shale and clays evident throughout the area, we would recommend site specific soils analysis of the site for structural design and on-site sewage disposal purposes. Drainage and Erosion Control The proposed shared driveway into the building envelope will not create significant drainage ' impacts. A couple of small diameter culverts crossing the driveway to the house site located to accommodate existing drainage patterns and a culvert crossing at the driveway intersection with the common road are recommended. Theproposed buildin envelope for the Schuster Property is generally located in a ridge top area 9 avoiding wet soils as well as any major drainages. Design of the homesite should take into account normal requirements for positive drainage away from the structures and routing of drainage water to avoid highly concentrated flows or high velocities. Given the clayey nature of the soils, I anticipate that drywell disposal of increased runoff may not prove feasible (although future soils testing should seek to verify this). Minor detention basins incorporated into the ' SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. ' April 27, 1998 Mr. Jim Curtis ' Page 4 landscape design are recommended to contain any additional flows attributable to the impervious surface associated with structures, paved drives or parking areas. We would be available to assist the architect or site designer for either parcel with sizing appropriate structures and improvements. Clayey soils in the area are likely to be highly susceptible to erosion problems once the vegetative cover is removed or if concentrated flows are placed on slopes without rip-rap or good plant cover. In addition to the drainage measures indicated above, we would generally recommend that all disturbed areas created by development activity be revegetated as soon as possible after completion of construction. Temporary measures during construction are also appropriate including temporary drainage swales, hay bale detention areas and temporary IP culverts within the construction area. I suspect that clay soils in the area may also be expansive when exposed to water intrusion so general efforts to prevent water from 'ponding" in the construction area are recommended. I hope these comments will be adequate for purposes of submitting the Schuster Property 1041 application. Please feel free to contact me if I may provide any further assistance or comment. ' Very Truly Yours, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. ;��Jay W. Hammond, P.E. �. Principal, Aspen Office JH11 98040ER SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.