HomeMy WebLinkAboutmckenney.takings.determinationMCKENNEY 1041 HAZARD REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION
TAKINGS DETERMINATION
MEMORANDUM
TO: Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners
Regular Meeting - July 9, 2003
"~e~ (~r~ ~ vel~-ment Director
THRU: Cindy Hoube?l,'C'o~ununiry tJe up
FROM: Ezra Louthis, Planner
RE: McKenney 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission Takings
Determination
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The Applicant requested a takings hearing, pursuant to Section 4-
150 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code, as a result of the Hearing Officer denial on June 17th,
2003 for the McKermey property located in the Capitol Woods Subdivision. The Applicant
contends that the denial constitutes a taking of private property without just compensation.
The Applicant is requesting 1041 Hazard Review, Conceptual Submission approval to establish a
building envelope for the construction of a single-family residence.
The proposed building envelope lies entirely within riparian and wetland areas, within which
development is prohibited pursuant to Code Section 3-80-080.
APPLICANT: Nancy Haywood McKenney
REPRESENTATIVE: Wright Water Engineers, INC. and Mt. Daly Enterprises, LLC.
LOCATION: The property is lot 4, Capitol Woods Subdivision.
ZONING/LOT SIZE: The property is zoned R-30 and contains 1.27 acres.
BACKGROUND: The Applicant submitted a 1041 Hazard Review application that was denied by
the Hearing Officer on June 17, 2003 due to the inability of the Applicant to find a portion of the
property free of 1041 Hazards. The proposed building envelope avoided all 1041 Hazards with the
exception of riparian habitat and wetland areas. According the Applicant's representatives, the
proposed envelope avoided the most critical habitat and wetlands. Additionally, the Applicant has
received a 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers to impact the wetlands within the
proposed building envelope, and septic envelope.
STAFF COMMENTS: The standard of review for a Board takings determination is identified in
Section 3-290 of the Land Use Code, and reads as follows:
"The Board shall determine whether the property owner will be denied all reasonable use
and economic return on the property as a result of the questioned determination. If the
Board determines that a taking has or may occur, it shall take such action as it deems
appropriate to remedy the situation, in making its decision the Board shall consider the
value of the property as a whole and shall not base its decision on the impact of the
regulation on one portion of the ownership interest. In making its determination, the Board
shall consider the beneficial uses which remain in the property notwithstanding the
challenged determination and shall give due consideration to the reasonable investment-
backed expectations of the landowner."
Section 4-150 of the Code requires that the Applicant submit the request for a takings hearing
within 15 days of the decision and that the Board schedule a hearing within 15 days of the request.
The Board is required to make a decision regarding the application for a taking determination
within 15 days after the hearing on the matter.
SUMMARY OF APPLICANT'S POSITION: In the attached letter, the Applicant requests a
takings determination pursuant to Code section 4-150 and has included documentation that
addresses Code section 5-220-010. The Applicant contends that the Hearing Officer's denial of the
application has denied her all beneficial use and economic return on the property.
ISSUES RELATED TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Issues related to the proposed
development on the subject property have been fully addressed in staff's memorandum to the
Hearing Officer dated June 9, 2003. The Hearing Officer, upon the finding that the proposed
building envelope lies within riparian habitat and wetlands areas, denied the application pursuant
to Section 3-80-080 (G) of the Land Use Code.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to section 3-290-020 of the Code, the
Board shall consider whether or not a taking has occurred by virtue of the previous denial. The
BOCC shall:
1. Find that no taking has occurred because:
A. The Applicant has no reasonable investment backed expectation to develop a new
single-family residence in an area that contains riparian habitat and wetland areas;
B. The Applicant has not been denied all reasonable use and economic return in
connection with the denial of the development application;
C. The Applicant does not have the right to the most profitable use of her property,
which would require development in hazard areas.
2. Find that a taking has occurred because:
A. The proposed building envelope is in the most suitable location on the property for
development; and
B. The denial constitutes a taking of all reasonable use and economic return from the
subject property.
The BOCC shall direct staff to prepare a resolution of approval or denial based on their final ruling.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Letter # 1 from Applicants regarding takings determination
B. Letter #2 from Applicants regarding takings determination
C. Copy of Hearing Officer Determination
D. Staff's memo to the Hearing Officer
Jun.23, 2003 3:51PM No,0944 P. 2
iCAPE AR ITECT
HALL 100 North Third Str~t
: MT DALY ITERPRISES LL¢ Suite 102
~"~ Carbondale CoJorado 81623
ATTAGHMENT
Fax 970 963 5775
mrdal,/~*opr~$.net
June 23, 2003
Board of County C ~mmissioners
Pitkin County, Col< rado
C/O Ezra Louthis, Fanner
Pitkin County Co[~ v~unity Development Department
Via: Facsimile ', ....
Board of County'C gmmissioners,
I formally request ( takings determination hearing before the Board of County
Commissioners co ~ceming denial of a 1041 Hazard Review for Lot 4 of Capital
Woods Subdivision in accordance to Code Sections 4-150-040, 5-220-O10 on
behalf of the petit )net, Ms. Nancy McKenney. The required information is listed
below:
Pitkin County Cod, ~ Section 5-220-010
~. A. TI Is letter serves as a written request for a takings hearing.
B. S~ bject property- Lot 4, Capital Woods Subdivision, 1.2 acres.
P ~rcel ID# 264503201004. Without approval of a building
e ~velope for this property, the entire property cannot be
d ~veloped with a single family home as allowed by the zoning
f¢ ir the property. The property is owned solely by Ms.
tv :cKenney, so the entire property interest is adversely affected
bi ' denial of a 1041 Hazard Review.
C. Ti e property, past and present, was and is vacant land with no
~',,,',wn cast agricultural uses.
D, ~e SubJect property was not purchased by the petitioner,
)wever the petitioner was granted the subject property
rough a divorce settlement agreement in 1987.
E. Je assessed valuation of the properly according to the 2002
Ikln County Tax Bill is $94,250.
F. eliminary estimates of value of the propedy set the value at
~50,000, This estimate is based on the following facts:
Lot 3 of Capitol Woods Subdivision, a lot of comparable
size, was sold for $288,000 in 2001.
Services have been paid for approvals for development of
this property, starting in 1999, which to date total
$50,613.65. These Include a wetland delineation, a 404
permit from the Army Carp of Engineers, a floodplain study
and preparation of the 1041 Hazard Review. The services
of surveyors and attorneys were also required.
Jun.23. 2003 3:52PM No,0944 P, 3
G. T~' ~ c, urrent modgage principal balance is $0.00.
H. - ..... .~ generated by the property is $0.00. Expenses
re ating to the properh/are listed here:
Property taxes paid since 1987 are estimated ia total
$26,149.72.
An attorney was consulted in 1988 concerning the existing
ddveway and was paid approximately $2,000.00
A surveyor was hired in 1988 to perform a survey of the
propedy and was paid approximately $700.00.
Services have been paid for approvals for development of
this property, starting in 1999, which to date total
$50,613.65. These include a wetland delineation, a 404
permit from the Army Carp of Engineers, a fJoodplain study
and preparation of the 1041 Hazard Review. The services
of surveyors and attorneys were also required.
Total expenses paid to date relating to the property are
thus estimated to be $79,463.37.
I. TI petitioner is the sole proprietor and owner of the property.
J. TI' owner/petitioner's current tax bracket is 10%. This is based
ot i the 2002 Federal Individual Income Tax Return, which
re ~ords a taxable income of $0.00.
K. TI-~, renfaJ value of the property wth or without an approved
'1 ~ ,~ ~' r~uz~.lra F:eview is estimated to be $0.00. The property is
v~ cant and has no agricuJtural use.
L. Ti' current sale value of the propel'h/according to the Pitkin
C )unty 2002 Tax Bill is $325,000.00. I assume this is based on the
fc :t that the property can be developed with an approved
1( 41 Hazard Review. The current free market value is $350,000
w ~th an approved 1041 Hazard Review. Without an approved
1(i41 Hazard Review, the value of the property is $0.00.
M. C [her pertinent information:
If a 1041 Hazard Review is not granted for this property, the
only persons who would have any valued interests in the
property are the owners of lots ,5 and 6 because they have
easements to use the leach field (lot 6 only) and spring on
the property.
The petitioner accepted this property as part of a divorce
settlement agreement because at the time it had value as
a developable piece of land Pecause it was part of a
board approved subdivision,
Please contact me further information is required.
Sincerely,
Jun.25, 2003 4:23PM No,0979 P. 1
¢ ^ ~ ~ ~. ¢. 'r, c ~ ATTACHMENT ~
North
Thbd
Stre.t
Suite 102
~ MT DALY EH ;RPRISES LLC
/, Carbondalm Colorado 81623
Tel 970 963 9896
Fax 970 963 5775
mtdaly~saprb.net
June 25, 2003
Ezra Louthis, Planner
Pitkin County Camm' ,nity Development Department
Via. Facsimile 9~_,_ ~ -,,,,~
Re: Takings Hearing,! ~apit~l Woods Subdivision, Lot 4
Per Nancy McKenn~ "s direction, I accept the BOCC meeting date for July 9,
2003 even though ti- it date is 16 days from submittal of the letter requesting the
fakings hearing. Pie lse inform us of the agenda for that date with an
approximate time o: 'when the BOCC will discuss our request.
Sincerely,
Susan T. Umbarger
ATTACHMENT
DETERMINATION OF THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, DENYING THE MCKENNEY 1041
HAZARD REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION
Determination No. -2003
RECITALS
1. Nancy Haywood McKenney ("Applicm~t') has applied to the Pitkin County Hearing Officer
("Hearing Officer") for 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission approval to establish a building
envelope for a new single family residence.
2. The parcel is located on the north side of Capitol Creek Road, and is more specifically described as
Lot 4, Capitol Woods Subdivision.
3. The property is zoned R-30 and contains approximately 1.27 acres.
4. The Hearing Officer considered this application at a duly noticed public hearing on June 1'7, 2003,
at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application.
5. The proposed building envelope is located almost entirely within riparim~ and designated wetland
areas, m~d according to Section 3-80-080 of the Lm~d Use Code, development is prohibited within these
areas.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Community Development
Hearing Officer that be does hereby deny the McKenney 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED I/q THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY on the
17th day of May, 2003.
DENIED this 17th day of June, 2003.
Hearing Officer Determination No. -2003
Page 2
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT HEARING OFFICER
OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
By.
ATTEST: James R. Tree, Hearing Officer
Date
Janis Taylor, Administrative Assistant
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
John Ely, Cindy Houben,
County Attorney Community Development Director
P043-03; PID#264503201004
ATTACHMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jim True, Pitkin County Hearing Officer
FROM: Ezra Louthis, Planner
THRU: Cindy Houben, Community Development Director
RE: McKenney 1041 Hazard Review and Conceptual Submission
DATE: June 9, 2003
REQUEST: The Applicant requests approval to establish a building envelope within which to construct a
single-family residence up to 5,750 square feet. The parcel is part of the Capitol Woods Subdivision, which
was approved by the BOCC on September 5, 1972. There are six lots in the subdivision and lot 4 is one of
two undeveloped lots. The parcel is constrained by steep slopes, shared easements, riparian habitat,
wetlands and the Capitol Creek Floodplain.
APPLICANTS: Nancy Haywood McKenney
REPRESENTATIVES: Wright Water Engineers, INC. and Mt. Daly Enterprises, LLC
LOCATION: Capitol Creek Road, Lot 4, Capitol Woods Subdivision
ZONING/LOT SIZE: The property is zoned R-30 and contains 1.27 acres.
REFERRAL AGENCIES: Comments from the County Wildlife Biologist, and the County Engineer are
attached for reference. The Snowmass/Capitol Caucus was referred, but did not submit comments.
STAFF COMMENTS
GMQS: The parcel is located along Capitol Creek Road. The lot is within a BOCC approved subdivision
(September 5, 1972), and, therefore, is exempt from growth management up to 5,750 square feet of floor
area.
1041 HAZ4RD REI/IEW & CONCEPTUAL SUBMISSION:
Floodplain: The parcel runs along Capitol Creek, and is somewhat constrained by the 100 year floodplain
of Capitol Creek. With the exception of the very Northwest corner, the building envelope avoids the 100
year floodplain.
Wildfire: Scott Chism, RLA, Fire Assessment Advisor, has rated the wildfire hazard within the building
envelope as low, due to the presence of wetlands and plant material with a relatively high moisture
content. Development is permitted within Low and Medium wildfire hazard areas, subject to mitigation
(pursuant to BOCC Ordinance No. 021-2002).
Wildlife: Jonathan Lowsky, the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist, states that the parcel is dominated by
functioning riparian habitat that includes mature thin-leaf alder, Colorado blue spruce, twinberry
honeysuckle, and a variety of other riparian species (see Exhibit A). Additionally, most of the proposed
building envelope contains jurisdictional wetlands. It is important to note that, due to the presence of a
shared septic easement and a shared water line easement, as well as other 1041 hazards, there is no location
that is going to be free of wetlands or other 1041 hazards. According to the Applicant, the proposed
envelope is the most logical arrangement.
The Applicant received a Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in March of 2003 to
impact 0.167 acres of wetlands within the building envelope, and 0.032 acres of wetlands within the septic
envelope. However, according to Section 3-80-080(G), of the Pitkin County Land Use Code, development
is prohibited within riparian and wetland areas.
Proposed Building Envelope Area as looking to the South.
Geologic: The proposed building envelope is relatively flat mid contains slopes of less than 15%. The
eastern portion of the parcel contains slopes in excess of 15% and 30% slopes.
The proposed building envelope is located in the alluvium of Capitol Creek. According to the Applicant,
the primary geologic hazard is high groundwater and flooding. Foundation design will reflect those
potential hazards.
Access: The property is accessed from Capitol Creek Road on an existing drive. The existing driveway
accesses Lot 6, and will easily accommodate access to the Applicant's building envelope. It should be
noted that the existing access was constructed without an access permit, and is outside of the platted
driveway easement for Lots 4 and 6. The platted driveway easement could not be utilized, however, due to
the existing slope issues. The County Engineer has recommended that the Applicant apply for a Pitkin
County Access Permit for the existing driveway, and remove the old driveway easement offofthe recorded
Plat.
Water & Sewer: Water is available from the existing spring on the parcel for which the Applicant has rights
for domestic use. The Applicant proposes to utilize the existing septic easement for a septic system which
would comply with Pitkin County standards.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the McKenney 1041 Hazard Review based on
Section 3-80-080 of the Pitkin County Land Use Code which prohibits development in riparian and wetland
areas.
Exhibits
A. Wildlife Biologist
B. County Engineer
Application and Site Plan provided sep.arately
PITKIN COUNTY APPLICATION
FOR 1041 HAZARD REVIEW
SUBMISSION FOR LOT 4 OF
CAPITOL WOODS SUBDIVISION
PARCEL ID: 264503201004
(NANCY HAYWOOD MCKENNEY)
Wright Water Engineers, Inc.
April 2003
011-130.000
PITKIN COUNTY APPLICATION FOR 1041
HAZARD REVIEW SUBMISSION FOR LOT 4 OF
CAPITOL WOODS SUBDIVISION
PARCEL ID: 264503201004
(NANCY HAYWOOD MCKENNEY)
Prepared by:
WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC.
Denver, Colorado
AND
MT. DALY ENTERPRISES, LLC
Basalt, Colorado
April 2003
011-130.000
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PaRe
1.0 APPLICANT INFORMATION .......................................................................................... 1
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 1
3.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF APPLICATION .................................................................. 2
4.0 INFORMATION FOR SUBMITTAL ................................................................................. 3
4.1 Site Plan ............................................................................................................................... 3
4:2 Letter From Owner Authorizing Representatives ................................................................. 3
4.3 Proof of Ownership and Legal Description .......................................................................... 3
4.4 List of Adjacent Property Owners and Mineral Estate Owners ............................................ 3
4.5 Total Fee for Application ...................................................................................................... 3
4.6 Copy of Pre-Application Form .............................................................................................. 3
4.7 Information for Code Section Review .................................................................................. 4
4.7.1 Section 3-60: Section 3-60: Environmental and Aesthetic Standards ............... 4
4.7.2 Section 3-70: Water Resources..'i ....................................................................... 5
4,7.3 Section 3-110: Improvements and Services ....................................................... 8
4.7.4 Section 9-110-051: Growth Management Exemption for Pre-1978 Parcels ..... 10
4.7.5 Section 3-80:1041 Hazard Review ................................................................... 10
-i-
DRAWINGS
1 Site Plan .................. .. End of Report
2 Water Features on Lot 4 .............................................................................................. End of Report
3 Erosion Control Plan .................................................................................................... End of Report
ATTACHMENTS
1 Drawings (including "Site Plan")
2 Pre-Application Conference Summary
3 Letter Authorizing Representatives
4 Proof of Ownership & Legal Description
5 List of Adjacent Property Owners & Mineral Estate Owners
6 Soils & Geology Information
7 401 Water Quality Certification Letter
8 Wildfire Hazard Report
9 Floodplain Study
10 Wetland Delineation Report
11 Section 404 Permit
12 Legal Opinions on Use of Easements on Lot forDevelopment
-ii-
PITKIN COUNTY APPLICATION FOR 1041 HAZARD'REVIEW
SUBMISSION FOR LOT 4 CAPITOL WOODS SUBDIVISION
PARCEL ID: 264503201004~(NANCY HAYWOOD MCKENNEY)
1.0 APPLICANT INFORMATION
Applicant: Ms. Nancy McKenney
P.O. Box 715
Snowmass, Colorado 81654
(970) 927-6627
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This applicat.ion is to establish a building envelope on the subject lot to enable construction of
one single-family residence with an attached garage and turn-around. Access would be off an
existing unimproved driveway that is used by the owner of Lot 6 of the Capitol Woods
Subdivision. A "Site Plan" that shows the building envelope, driveway, and other features
required by Pitkin County (County) is included in Attachment 1.
The building envelope is 7,270 square-feet (0.167 acre). The envelope was determined from an
extensive site planning process required for th~$!ection .4,Q~gp~g~k...w.[i~ch~wa~.is~ed::~r~ M~ch
~2~,-~ As described in this application, the building envelope is adequate to accommodate a two-
story residence with a footprint of around 2,200 square-feet and attached garage with turn-
around. This size of house is significantly less than the maximum house size of 5,750 square-
feet allowable for the lot. The envelope was reduced in size from that originally proposed to
minimize impacts to wetlands and associated resources on the property. The envelope does not
contain any significant hazards that preclude construction of a house or that require unusual or
expensive design and construction methods. A house and attendant features can be constructed
following standard design and construction methods.
~?er will' be supplied to the house constructed ~vithin the envelope by 'a well that will be
constructed on the lot. The:Water tine f0t~'s:W~ll~'fiS'fi~i~tili~"afi-existing.platted 15-foot water:'
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 1
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004--(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
line easement on the lot. An individual sewage disposal system (septic system) will be
constructed within an existing leach field easement on the lot.
3.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF APPLICATION
This report addresses the items identified by Pitkin County during the pre-application conference
on September 4, 2002 for 1041 Hazard Review for Lot 4 of the Capitol Woods Subdivision. A
revised summary of the pre-application conference was prepared by the County on
March 26, 2003 and a copy is included in Attachment 2. Information identified by the County
for the submittal by the applicant includes:
1. 24-inch x 36-inch site plan.
2. Letter from owner authorizing representatives.
3. Documentation of proof of ownership including legal description.
4. List of adjacent property owners and mineral estate owners.
5. Total fee for application.
6. Copy of pre-application form.
7. Information that addresses the following areas of the Pitkin County Land Use Code
a. Section 3-60: Environmental and Aesthetic Standards.
b. Section 3-70: Water Resources.
c. Section 3-110: Improvements and Services.
d. Section 9-110-051: Growth Management Exemption for pre-1978 parcels.
e. Section 3-80:1041 Hazard Review.
i. 3-80-70: Wildfire (low)
ii. 3-80-40: Floodplain
iii. 3-80-50: Geologic (slope)
iv. 3-80-80: Wildlife (wetlands)
011-130,000 Wright Water Engineers, inc. Page
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 26450320100~ (Nancy Haywood McKenney)
The text and attachments of this application will also be submitted in digital format.
4.0 INFORMATION FOR SUBMITTAL
4.1 Site Plan
The Site Plan that shows the proposed building envelope is included in Attachment 1.
4.2 Letter From Owner Authorizing Representatives
Authorized representatives are as follows:
' David B. Mehan, PWS Julia Marshall and Susan Umbarger
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Mt. Daly Enterprises, LLC
2490 W. 26th Ave, Suite 100A 100 N. 3rd St., Ste. 102
Denver, Colorado 80211 Carbondale, Colorado 81623
(303) 480-1700 (970) 9b$-9896
dmehan~wrightwater.com mtdal¥~sopris.net
A letter authorizing these representatives is included in Attachment 3.
4.3 Proof of OwnerShip and Legal Description
See Attachment 4.
4.4 List of Adjacent Property Owners and Mineral Estate Owners
See Attachment 5.
4.$ Total Fee for Application
The total fee for the application identified in the March 26, 2003 Pre-Application Conference
Summary is $3,150. This amount will be provided by the applicant under separate cover.
4.6 Copy of Pre-Application Form
See Attacl'nnent 2.
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 3
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission :
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004--(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
4.7 Information for Code Section Review
The following addresses the specific sections of the Code identified for review in the pre-
application conference. The following information was prepared in accordance with the relevant
sections of the Code.
4.7.1 Section 3-60: Section 3-60: Environmental and Aesthetic Standards
3-60-020 Air Quality: Establishment of a building envelope on the lot will not result in a direct or
indirect source of air pollution under federal, state, or county regulations, and will comply with
Code Title III air pollution regulations.
3-60-030 Preservation of the Natural Landscape: Most of the natural landscape of the lot will be
preserved with due proposed building envelope. The lot is approximately !,.,2~.a. cres; ~he propOs~d~'
building envelope is 0.167 acre or l~4.~}erc~nt--~f":the lo. The following will minimize impacts to
the natural landscape:
· All the development will be clustered on one relatively small portion of the lot.
· Access will be offan existing driveway,
· The new driveway for the house will not traverse the property, and [-
· Utilities will be located within existing driveways and easements. [
3-60-040 Scenic Overlay: The house that will be constructed in the building envelope will be on
relatively flat land in a "valley" next to Capitol Creek. The ridge on the southeast portion of the
lot (Site Plan), which is the most visible part of the lot, is not included in the building envelope
and will not be disturbed. Therefore, establishment of the proposed building envelope will not
affect any scenic view plane, and will maintain the natural ridgeline silhouette.
3-60-060 Scenic Quality: The only disturbance on the lot from establishment of a building
envelope will occur in one relatively small, low-lying part of the lot. This minimizes visibility
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004--(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
impacts. A house with a garage and driveway will be constructed consistent with the zoning of
the lot and the nature of adjacent development in the subdivision. Only a small portion of the
building envelope will be landscaped, and the landscaping will include a small area of sod or
grass with trees, shrubs, and flower gardens.
A house in the proposed building envelope will not be readily visible and will not affect any
scenic views or vistas.
3-60-060 Solar Access: There are no houses in proximity to the proposed building envelope
whose solar access will be affected by establishment of the envelope and construction of a house
within it.
3-60-070 Reduction in Density for Steep Slopes: The proposed building, envelope is not located
on a designated steep slope.
4.7.2 Section 3-70: Water Resources
Relevant water resources and related features on the property are shown on Drawing 2 and
include Capitol Creek and its 100-year floodplain, a spring with an old spring box, channel and
culvert, shallow groundwater, and wetlands (floodplains and wetlands are addressed in more
detail in Section 4.7.5). There are no water rights, irrigation ditches, headgates, or irrigated lands
on the property.
Surface Water and Drainage: A small portion of the proposed building envelope is situated
within the 100-year floodplain of Capitol Creek. However, site planning for the lot showed that
a house and associated features can be constructed within the building envelope outside of the
100-year floodplain (the floodplain is addressed in more detail in Section 4.7.5). The building
envelope is set back from the creek so that construction of a house within it will not impede
flood flows of the creek (Site Plan, Attachment 1).
There are no springs in the proposed building envelope. A small perennial spring exists south of
the building envelope that flows into a small channel through a 12-inch culvert and to the creek.
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 5
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004--(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
Improvements to the spring were made years ago by a previous owner, and the remains of the
improvements still exist. Research at the State Engineer's Office determined that there are no
water rights for the spring. This was confirmed by a title search for the lot.
The deed for the property reserves an easement for collection and conveyance of water from the
spring for the benefit of Lots 5 and 6 (Site Plan). Establishment of a building envelope, as
proposed, and construction of a house and associated structures will not encroach on the spring,
or interfere with this easement.
A drainage plan is not warranted for the building envelope since it will only contain one single-
family residence. The amount of impervious surfaqe created will be relatively small so that the
amount of additional runoff will be small. No special measures are needed to control surface
water in the building envelope. The following measures can be used to manage surface water
from the building envelope:
· Downspouts from any gutters from a house should discharge to pervious areas.
· The driveway should be constructed with a crown to provide positive drainage.
· A curb and gutter system should not be constructed for the driveway.
· Culverts should be installed along the driveway, as needed.
Groundwater: Relatively shallow groundwater associated with Capitol Creek and the spring
exists beneath the building envelope. This groundwater sustains the wetlands that occur on the
lot.
The building envelope is also located on a recharge area for the alluvial aquifer along the creek.
Construction of a house could potentially reduce the amount of recharge to the aquifer through
the creation of impervious surfaces. However, the actual effect on groundwater recharge and
water levels will be insignificant becai~se of the very small area of impervious surface compared
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 6
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004--(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
to the total recharge area. Precipitation on the lot can be directed off the lot onto pervious areas
where it will recharge to further reduce the potential for any impacts.
A preliminary evaluation of foundation requirements for a house was completed by a
geotechnical engineer. ~This. ~val~ .m3~ti~rj.;f0:und that t_he .groundwater does~not pose~a sigr~c, ant
~t-~,.~ t-,~, ~ ...... ,.,~ ...... · .....
const-raint .for a house in ,the building envelope,; It is recommended that a house not have a
basement, and that a spread-footer foundation system be used.. Exterior drains should be
installed around the foundation to keep the crawl space dry. In addition, the house should be
constructed on a fill pad to reduce the depth of penetration of the footers.
The recommended, foundation system for a house will minimize adverse impacts on the local
groundwater table and associated wetlands. Significant effects on groundwater are not
envisioned by a house. The groundwater beneath the building envelope is not a finite resource
but is recharged at a relatively high rate by the alluvial aquifer. The amount of withdrawal from
a well for a house will be small compared to the storage capacity of the underlying aquifer.
Water will be withdrawn in accordance with any well permit issued by. the State Engineers
Office.
Erosion and Sedimentation: The proposed building envelope is on a flat portion of the lot where
~k)w~go, ten.aal, fo~,~em~.on,:~-Accord~ng tO the "Soil Survey for the Aspen-Gypsum Area"
(SCS May 1992), soil on the property consists of Fluvaquents, which is a floodplain soil with a
high proportion of sand, gravel, and cobbles. There is not a high erosion hazard with this soil
type (Attachment 6).
The hillside on the southeast portion of the lot where the erosion hazard is higher due to the
steepness of the slope will not be disturbed.
A relatively small area would be disturbed by construction, given the relatively small size of the
proposed building envelope (0.167 acre), and this will reduce the potential for erosion. A
preliminary erosion control plan that shows how erosion can be managed from construction
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 7
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004--(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
within the building envelope is included as Drawing 3. Measures that can be used include silt
fence, hay bales, and revegetation of disturbed areas immediately after construction.
Water Quality: The proposed project is the establishment of a building envelope for the
construction of one single-family residence and does not pose any unusual or significant threats
to water quality. As discussed in the proceeding sections, surface water will not be adversely
affected by runoff from a house in the building envelope. Erosion controls can be implemented
during construction to control erosion and sedimentation to the extent feasible. Only a small
amount of landscaping will occur so that the potential for use of large amounts of fertilizers and
pesticides and impacts on water quality is low. The septic system for the house will be designed
by a qualified engineer according to Pitkin County standards. The septic system will not pose
any unusual threats to water quality.
A letter from the Colorado Water Quality Control Division dated December 30, 2002 certifying
that Construction of one single-family home in the proposed building envelope will not affect
water quality is included in Attachment 7.
Irri.qated Areas: Since there are no irrigated areas on the property, there will not be any impacts
·
on existing irrigation practices, water supplies, irrigation ditches, or structures. A small amount
of landscape irrigation may occur in the building envelope in conjunction with construction of a
house.
4.7.3 Section 3-110: Improvements and Services
Lot 4 is located within a subdivision that has existed for years and is served with power and
telephone service.
Lo.qical Extension of Utilities: Establishment of a building envelope on the lot does not represent
a "major utilit~ extension." No expansion of utilities is required or will occur for the building
envelope.
011-1'30.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 8
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
~'or Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004---(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
Water Distribution System: No water distribution system will be constructed for the building
envelope.
Water Supply System: No public or private water district exists to serve the subject property.
.The applicant has access and the right to a spring on the property for water supp!y. Due to its,
proximity to Capitol Creek, it is anticipated that an adequate water supply can be developed.
applicant has the financial resources avail/~ble to construct and maintain a water system for .the
building envelope.
Sewa,qe Treatment and Collection: The building envelope is not located within any public
sewage disposal system service area. An. individua! sewage disposal. SYstem will be constructed
within the leach field easement on the lot (Site Plan) according to Code Title X Sewage Disposal
Guidelines.
Public Utilities: Power, telephone, and fire protection services exist for the subdivision and lot
and will be used for the proposed building envelope. Utility lines for the building envelope will
be underground.
Roads: An existing unsurfaced driveway that has been constructed and used for the adjacent Lot
6 will be used for the building envelope on Lot 4 (Site Plan). A recorded easement does not exist
for this driveway for the benefit of the owners of Lot 6, but such an easement could readily exist
via adverse possession (see April 25, 2002 letter in Attachment 12). A recorded easement exists
for access along the northern property line of Lot 4. However, a driveway in ~this easement
would have-a slope or;around 2.0 percent in places, and use of this easement would increase the
extent of disturbance in the area. Use of the existing driveway for access to the proposed
building envelope on Lot 4 will minimize additional disturbance. No major improvements are
necessary or planned for the driveway, except for installation of culverts, where needed.
Parkin,q: Two off-street parking spaces, consistent with County standards in Section 3-110-080
of the Code, are possible within the proposed building envelope (outside of the garage) on the
lot.
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 9
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004---(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
Trails: No trails exist on the lot or are proposed on the lot.
Liahtinm It is anticipated that lighting for safety and security may be provided for a house in the
building envelope consistent with Section 3-110-110 of the Code.
Si,qns: It is not anticipated that there will be any signs on the lot or in the building envelope that
require a permit, as defined in Section 3-110-130 of the Code.
4.7.4 Section 9-110-051: Growth Management Exemption for Pre-1978 Parcels
The proposed building envelope qualifies for the Growth Management Exemption, as defined in
Section 9-110-051 of the Code, for the following reasons:
I. The proposed building envelope is for the construction of one single-family dwelling.
2. The lot upon which the building envelope will be established is a County Board
approved subdivision that was created before June 12, 1978. The subdivision was
created in September 1972.
3. The building envelope is not large enough to construct a dwelling unit of greater than
5,750 square-feet.
4.7.5 Section 3-80:1041 Hazard Review
3-80-70 Wildfire: The lot is within an area of Pitkin County that is mapped with a low wildfire
risk. A "Wildfire Hazard Report" has been prepared for the property by Scott Chism, RLA, Fire
Assessment Advisor (Attachment 8). As described in this report, much of the lot, including the
proposed building envelope, is wetland with plant materials with a relatively high moisture
content and reduced risk for wildfire. In addition, the risk of wildfire is reduced by the presence
of firebreaks around the lot that include Capitol Creek, Snowmass Creek Road, and the existing
driveway. Therefore, there is not a high wildfire risk on the building envelope, and the
magnitude of the risk can be lowered through mitigation measures recommended in the report.
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, inc. Page 11~
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004---(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
The measures identified in the report, which are consistent with County standards, will be
followed for construction within the building envelope, consistent with the Section 404 permit
issued for the lot. These measures, which are described in more detail in the report in
Attachment 8, include:
1. Removal of brush within 10 feet of structures.
2. Clearing of underbrush within 10 feet of the trunks of spruce trees on the lot.
3. Removal of the lower branches on spruce trees that are at least 25 feet tall to a height
of 10 feet above the ground.
4. Removal of all deadfall within 100 feet of the proposed building site.
5. Removal of the one fallen tree over Capitol Creek.
6. Providing for sufficient space in the building envelope or in front of the house to
allow for emergency vehicles to turn around.
7. Clearly posting the property address from the roadside.
8. Limiting the size of any wood decks around a house in the building envelope and
using a Iow masonry wall to protect any wood deck from an adjacent wildfire.
3-8040 Floodplain: The floodplain on the lot and building envelope was evaluated by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) using approximate methods. Flood Insurance Rate
Map 0809'~C0066C for unincorporated Pitkin County shows the floodplain on the lot.
Because of the generalized nature of the FEMA floodplain mapping, a more detailed study was
completed to more accurately define the 100-year floodplain for the lot. This study is included in
Attachment 9, and the more refined floodplain limit from this study is shown on the Site Plan
and Drawing 2 (Attachment 1). The 100-year floodplain for Capitol Creek encompasses
approximately the western one-third of the lot. Most of the building envelope is located outside
of the floodplain. Sufficient area exists within the envelope outside of the floodplain to construct
a house, garage, and driveway. All development within the floodplain will abide by the County's
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 11
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004---(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
flood insurance program. Therefore, the proposed project will not affect the floodplain or flood
conveyance capacity of the area.
3-80~050 Geolotlic (Slope): The lot and proposed building envelope are not located in an
avalanche area, landslide area, rock fall area, talus slope, area with Mancos shale near the
surface, area with active geologic faults, expansive soil and rock area, on an alluvial fan or area
of known ground subsidence. A copy of the "Geologic Map of the Woody Creek Quadrangle"
(USGS Map GQ-967, 1972) that shows the lot, and soils information for the lot from the "Soil
Survey of Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado" (SCS 1992) are included in Attachment 6.
The lot and building _envelope :lie within the alluvium of Capitol Cre~ek This is ~escribed as
"poorly sorted gravel, sand, and silt in main valley ootto . ,~ The soil survey indicates the soils
on the lot are Fluvaquents, which are deep, somewhat poorly drained soils on floodplains and
alluvial valley floors. The soils are formed in alluvium and include appreciable amounts of sand,
gravel, and cobble. The main geologic hazard on the lot and building envelope is flooding and
high groundwater. Development within the floodplain will be in accordance with the County's
flood insurance program. Measures for foundation design are needed to address high
groundwater (see Section 4.7.2), but groundwater does not preclude development in the building
envelope.
N~!;~eas of sl0pes!:6'~erld5;iPercent occur within:the proposed building envelope., Slopes of
·
greater than 15 percent occur on the southeast portion of the lot (Site Plan in Attachment 1).
Slopes,over 30 percent occur in this area at the base of the slope. These areas are outside of the
building envelope.
It is proposed to use the existing driveway that serves adjacent Lot 6 for access to the building
envelope on Lot 4. This driveway is unsurfaced and traverses across the slope on the southeast
portion of the lot (Site Plan, Attachment 1). The first approximately 110 feet of the drive is
across a slope of 15 percent or less. Approximately 35 feet of the drive is across slopes of greater
than 15 percent where the steep slope occurs due to the presence of a minor change in the
gradient of the slope.
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 12
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004.--(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
Use of the existing drive for access will reduce the amount of disturbance from ~tevelopment. It
will reduce the potential for incremental visual impacts from construction of a new alignment
through an area with a flatter slope. Use of the existing drive is consistent with Section 3-80-
050.C.2 of the Code because:
1. The reach of the slope greater than 15 percent is short and due to the presence of a
minor change in the gradient of the slope.
2. No improvements will be made to the existing drive across slopes of greater than 15
percent.
3. The existing road is not causing, excessive erosion or instability and will not increase
visual, wildlife or wildfire impacts, or conflict with other policies in the Code.
3-80-070 Wildlife and Wetlands: The proposed building envelope is located in a riparian corridor
along ..Capitol Creek. Due to the presence of a multi-layered vegetation community (i.e.,
herbaceous understory with overstory of shrubs and trees), wetlands, a nearby spring, and its
location along the relatively intact riparian corridor, the building envelope has relatively high
value for wildlife. ,~he~en,v~..10pcrp.ro.v.}~es c.qy~e~;..93ig,ra~!0n,.an{;,fprage,for.bjg gome~,~.n, ql.
mammals. It also prov!des habitat for birds.
However, there are no unique habitat types present in the building envelope, and the type of
habitat that occurs in the envelope is common along Capitol Creek and other creeks in the
COunty. Establistunent of the proposed building envelope should not have a significant impact
on wildlife, in the area, ~he building,;envelope is. small .so thai on!y a sm~l.1, a?ea.w0u.[d b~
disturbed by'construction, Construction of a residence and measures for wildfire protection will
likely result in clearing and elimination of vegetation and some habitat fragmentation, but an
ample supply of similar habitat occurs in the immediate project area. Dispersed, low-density
residential development that includes houses and roads exists in the area, so that the incremental
impact from the proposed house is relatively small.
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 13
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004--(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
The following measures will minimize potential im~acis On Wi'ldlife!
1. Development will be clustered on one side of the lot within the building envelope and
utilize ~n existing drive for access to reduce the extent of new disturbance.
2. The area of vegetation removal can be kept to the minimum possible, with the
required measures for wildfire control.
3. Large spruce trees, alders, and willows can be preserved to the extent feasible for the
benefit of wildlife.
,~4. The amount of landscaping within the building envelope can be kept to a minimum.
5. The spring on the lot will not be impacted by the development within the building
envelope.
6. Fencing on the lot will adhere to the standards in the Code.
Riparian, Shoreland, and Wetland Areas: A significant portion of the lot and building envelope is
wetland (Drawing 2). Wetlands were delineated by Nature Tech Consultant Services Corp in
May of 1999. A copy of the delineation is included in Attachment 10, and the limit of wettands
is shown on Drawing 2.
There is 0.446 acre of wetlands of two types on the lot: forested and scrub-shrub wetlands.
Forested wetland occurs on the southern end of the lot and is dominated by thin-leaf alder (Alnus
tenuifolia), honey suckle (Lonicera involucrata), yellow willow (Salix /urea) and Colorado
Spruce (Picea pungens). The scrub-shrub wetland is somewhat drier and occurs around the west
and northeast sides of forested wetland. Both wetland types are sustained by shallow
groundwater associated with Capitol Creek. The wetlands provide functions for flood storage,
groundwater recharge and wildlife habitat.
The scrub-shrub wetland type occurs within the proposed building envelope. ~i~S~ect~on 40
· permk.-to impact 0.167 acre of wetlands within the building envelope and 0.032 acre within the
leach field easement for a total impact of 0.199 acre was obtained from the U.S. Army (~orps of.
Engineers in March 200}., ~ copy of this Permit is included in Attachment 11.
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 1 d
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 26450320100-I, (Nancy Haywood McKenney)
It is not possib}e to eslablish a building envelope on the lot Outside of wetlands_ due to the
presence of wetlands in the middle of the lot, where development is .most logically,, ~laced, and
the presence of hazards elsewhere on the lot. There is no hazard-free area on the lot outside of
wetlands for a building envelope. Hazards and constraints on the lot include: 100-year floodplain
for Capitol Creek that encompasses the western approximately one-third of the lot (Drawing 2),
steep slopes, a 15-foot recorded easement for a water line, a recorded easement for a leach field
to benefit Lots 4 and 6, a 30-foot recorded easement for a private road on the northern portion of
the lot and a driveway that has been created and used by the owner of Lot 6..'As.~.result of the
wetlands and other constraints on the lot, there is only approximately 2,000 square feet of area at
two locations available for development outside of hazard areas: This represents only 3.8 percent
of the lot. Since the 2,000 square-feet occur in two areas, it is not possible to establish a building
envelope on it of an adequate size to enable construction of a residence.
.,The use of the easements for a building envelope was investigated by the property owneL As
discuSsed in the legal opinion in Attachment '12 d.,ated April 25, 2002 from Brooke Peterson,
none of the easements would be considered abandoned ~'~' ~ ...... ~' .... '- · .....
and :lS~lld~/~li,:,on ~e~ea~ements ~s !not~
.advisabl.e. Furthermore, as discussed in the legal opinion dated August 9, 2002, the applicant
cmmot reasonably acquire or purchase the easements and does not have power to condemn them
for development of the lot.
The proposed building envelope is consistent with Section 3-80~080 G of the Code, as follows:
1. The building envelope would cause impacts from development to be clustered on only
a portion of the lot. The rest of the lot will remain as wetland and wildlife habitat.
The floodplain and groundwater recharge functions of the remaining wetlands will not
be affected. The amount of vegetation removed will be limited to that necessary to
construct one single-family residence within the building envelope with required
wildfire protection.
2. An erosion control plan will be implemented during construction to minimize erosion
and sedimentation.
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 15
April 2003
Pitkin County Application for 1041 Hazard Review Submission
for Lot 4 of Capitol Woods Subdivision
Parcel ID: 264503201004--(Nancy Haywood McKenney)
3. The project will comply with the set back requirement in Section 3-50-040 of the
Code.
4. No stream banks ("shorelands") will be impacted.
5. No stream channelization will occur.
6. No culverts or other obstructions to fish movements will result.
7. There will be no changes to stream channels or capacities and no increase in
sedimentation and suspended loads to Capitol Creek.
8. There will not by any increase in stream water temperature (the canopy over Capitol
Creek will not be altered).
9. There will not be any discharge of sewage or inorganic or organic pollutants to
Capitol Creek.
10. Baseline biological conditions will be maintained in Capitol Creek.
Mitigation for wetland disturbance will be provided in accordance to the Section 404 permit.
0.2985 acre of wetland credits will be purchased from the Rocky Mountain Institufe's wetland
mitigation bank. This represents a ratio of 1.5:1 to the 0.199 acre of peimitted wetland impacts.
All other conditions of the Section 404 permit will be adhered to.
The following can also be conducted to minimize potential impacts on wetlands and riparian
areas:
1.The boundary of the proposed building envelope can be clearly staked on the lot prior
to breaking ground.
2. The limit of the 0.199 acre of wetland impact can be staked in the field prior to
construction.
3. Wetlands on the lot in the vicinity of the proposed development can be staked prior to
any construction.
C:\P~011-130\000mds\1041 Report.doc
011-130.000 Wright Water Engineers, Inc. Page 16
April 2003
ATTACHMENT 1
Drawings (including "Site Plan")
SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 86 ~ OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MF-.RIDI/~N
., ,~. ,;.. ~... , --~ [~~.-~..
F]UNO NO. 1 ~. ~1i~ 5~'~e~'~,~-;~:~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~
~ BUI~ING ~LOP/ :_ .
, -' z' .X ~;?"//~, ~~SUBDIVi'S '~"~'~"-:"~'~-'~'~'~
~oP[ > 3o~ ~.-/ ;'..~~L~-~' ~,~:-:'~.,
N~T~ AT~
LEGEND
WETLANDS
FLOODPLAIN
PROPERTY LINE
0 25 50
SCALE IN FEET
1 "=50,
- . ,-.-.,. :--.?':"; !.'-".~';;/
-/.. :.--:.'.... - . .:.. .... ..-..: .
//.,,'"'// /...,.."-., :~.:..' '-.- :..,...-,-: ......
"- - .'.' ;- .'- -..' ..: ':
/¥' -' ._.....-::,..:,:"-'-:-' ":,. --:'.'--",:...' :v:' ':
.' .... -'~- MATURE :-TREES-~. ' .. ' ~. ~..~-, --,~/~ ~"~ ~
....--'::..--.:'--,,: ""! .... ~ LEACH FIELD
-'---f' --. ---.- ', - :...~:-' EASEMENT
:- ': .... : ....'"' SPRING, OLD
DRIV~AY
FOR LOT 6
WRIGHT WATER
ENGINEERS, INC.
2490 W. 26TH AVE. 100A
DENVER, CO 80211
(303)480-1700
DESIGN DBM
DETAIL KAW
CHECK DBM
DATE 04/14/0~
SCALE 1"=50'
DRAWING 2
WATER FEATURES ON LOT 4
CAPITOL WOODS SUBDIVISION
LEGEND
WETLANDS
PROPERTY LINE
BUILDING ENVELOPE
(~) SILT FENCE
VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL
0 25 50
SCALE IN FEET
1 "=50'
INST,*~ i FI)
DRIVEWAY
FOR LOT 6
NOTES:
W
ETLAND BOUNDARIES WILL BE MARKED IN FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
LIMIT OF IMPACT AND CONDITIONS OF SECTION 404 PERMIT WILL BE ADHERED TO.
NO DIRT OR OTHER MATERIAL WILL BE STOCKPILED IN WETLANDS.
A FINAL EROSION CONTROL PLAN WILL BE PREPARED FOR ACTUAL HOUSE.
WRIGHT WATER
ENGINEERS, INC.
2490 W. 26TH AVE. 100A
DENVER, CO 80211
(303)480-1700
DESIGN DBM
DETAIL YAW
CHECK DBM
DAlE 04/14./0.3
SCALE 1 '=50'
DRAWING 3
PRELIMINARY EROSION CONTROL PLAN -
LOT 4 CAPITOL WOODS SUBDIVISION
ATTACHMENT 2
Pre-Application Conference Summary
MP, R-26-2003 NED 11: 31 AH FAX NO, P, 02/02
PITKIN COUNTY
I'RE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
DATE: March 26, 2003
PROJECT: Mcl¢cnncy 1041 H~.~l'd Review and Conceptual Submission
LOCATION: Capitol Woods SubdivisiOn (Parcel ID: 264503201004)
ZONE RS-30 PUD
APPLICANT: Susan Umb~gcr Tel: 963-9896~ F~: 963-5775
PI,ANNER: Ezra Lou~his 'l'e[: 920-5492
1. Type of Application: 1041 Hazard Ro~'io~ and Conceptual Submission
2. Ocscription of ProjecUDevelopmen(: Applicant proposes to establish a building envelope for a
~ew rcslde~co.
3. Areas in which thc Applicmlt is requested to t~pond, typ~ of rep0r~
;* Sectiolx 3-60, Environmental a~d Aesthetic Staadards
~ S~ctlon 3-70, Water Resources
~ Section 3-110, Improvements and Servi~s
~ Section 9- [ 10-05 I, Growth Managemeat Exempt[on for pr~1978 parcels
~* Scc[ion 3-S0, 1041 Ha~rd Review
3-g0-70 Wildfire (Iow)
3-80-40 Floodplain
- 3-80-50 Geologic (.Slo~)
3-80-80 Wikllif~ (W~tlands)
4. Review is before: Hcaring Ofl~ccr
5. Public Hcaring: Yes, at Hearing effect. The applicant shall post ~ public notic, e sign on thc
propel~y at le,~t 15 days prior to the hearing and shall mail notice to all adjacent proper~ owners
and mineral estate owners' at least 30 prior to the hearing wid~ lhe remn~ address of the
Commt~ni~ Development D~par/ment (copy of the notice to be obtait~zd From th~ C~mmuniW
Development Department). The names and addresses shall be those on [l~e cu~bnt ~x records of
Pitkin Couaty as they appear no more th~ 60 days prior to the dat~ of the public hearing.
6. Will be referred to: Wildlife biologist, Sn0wm~s/Capitol Caucus, Engineer.
7. What fee.s was the applica.t requested to submit:
Planning Office $2,100 Flat Fee ~on-reftmdable, based on 10 hfs of staffdme)
Eagineer ~525 Flat Fca
Wildlife Biologist $500 Flat Fee
Public Notice Fee
- ~otal Fee at Submittal$3,I50]
- If tho st~fftime for this application exceeds 12 hrs, the Applicant will hc dmrgcd at
$210 per hour beyond 12 hrs.
Fees for Hearing Officer at $135~1r.
Application is required to b~ submia~d digitally (acceptable formats at'~: .rxt, ,doc,
.wpd, .~f, jpeg, .pdO
8. To apply~ submit five (5) copies of the following informatlon~ unless ntherwise noted (please use
double sided copying when possible):
Letter of request addressing Code Sections lisxed above.
-24" X 36" folded Site Plans (please see a~ached site plan reqairements):
· L~uer fi'om owner authorizing representative, if applicable (1 copy);
.Docum~marioa or Chain of Tide/Proof of ownership (from a title company or a~orney
liccnsud in the Stat~ of Colorado) including lcg~l description (I copy);
-A list of adjacent property owners al~d mineral ~state owners (1 copy);
.Total fee for review oldie appli~tion;
· .Copy of[hls pre-application form (I copy);
PLEASE NOTE: Thi. r pre-applicatlnn co~ranea .vumma~ ix adviso~ in nature and/*at binding on
Ihe Cozm~v. 7~e in~ormalion provided in thi~ sutmnary ~' based on current zotffng ~.ltt/vda/'~s'
s/t~'s interpretatinrtr based W)on representotiona of the applicant. ~ddi~ional infor/na/k)a may
req~/h'ed upon complete t.¢vi~v eft'the appllc'atio~
ATTACHMENT 3
Letter Authorizing Representatives
1041 Hazard Review Authorization Letter
I, Nancy McKenney, authorize the following persons to be my representatives for
submission and review of the 1041 Hazard Review for Lot 4, Capitol Woods
Subdivision, PJtk. in County, Colorado.
Dave Mehan
Wright Water Engineers, Inc.
2490 West 26th Avenue, Suite 100A
Denver, Colorado 80211
303.480.1700
Julia Marshall and Susan Umbarger, Landscape Architects
Mt. Daly Enterprises, LLC
100 North Third Street, Suite 102
Carbondale, Colorado 81623
970.963.9896
'N~ncy H.jMcKenney I~ Date
ATTACHMENT 4
Proof of Ownership and Legal Description
DEC, S.~00~ ~e=a4R~ ST£~RRT TZTLE RSPEN N0,56~ P.Z
COMIVii't'IVlENT i~OR TITLE INSUR/~CE
ISSUED BY
STEWART TITLE
GUARANTY COM~A~
Order Number: ' 40260
STEWA.KT TITLE GUA.R3.NTY COMPri_NY, a Texas Co~oratioa, hcrdn called the Company, for
valuable consideration, hereby commit~ ~o issue its policy or policies of tide insurance, as identified in
Schedule A, in favor of th~ proposed Insured ~rned in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate
or interes: covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the
premiums and charges therefore; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions
and Stipulations hereof.
This Commitment shall bc effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the
policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the
time ef the issuance of th/s Commitment or by subsequent endorsement.
The Commitment is prellmi~ary tn the iss~m~ce of such policy or policies of title insurance and all
hability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six m~nths after the effective date hereof or
when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that th~ failure to
issue such policy or pohcies is not the fault oft. he Company.
Signed under seal for the Company, but this Commitment shall not be valid or binding until it bears an
authorized Countersignature.
IN WITNESS W'HY_REOF, Stewart Title Cxuaranty Company has caused its corporate name and seal to
be hereuntn af/ixed by its duly authorizc<l ofilcers on the date shown in Schedule A.
STEW.ART TITLE
GUARANTY COlVI~ANY
I
Stewart Tfde of Aspen,
620 E~t Hopkb~
Asp~m, CO 81611
(970)
Agent ID # 0601 lA
Numbe~:'
I i Order 40260
DEC, 3.2002 10:34AM STEb4ART TITLE ASPEN I"lU.Ob~. r,
CO~ITIONS ~ S~AT~ONS
1. ~e ~ me,gage, wh~ used h~e~ s~ ~elude deed of ~ ~t fl~, ~ o~ see~
2. ~ ~e proposed ~s~ed has o~ acq~es ~ ~o~ledge of ~y defec~ He~ ~c~br~ce, adverse
cla4m or o~ ~er ~ec~ ~e ~ or ~e~ or me,gage th~eon covered by
Co~ent o~ ~ ~ose sho~ m Sehed~e B hereof~ ~d shall fall to disclose such ~owl~ge
to ~e Company ~ ~g, ~e County sh~l be relieved ~om ~ab~ for ~y loss or da~ge
r~g ~om my act of relimce h~eon to ~e extent ~e Co~y is p~ejufliced by faille
disclose such ~owledge. ~ ~e proposed ~ed shall disclose ~ch ~owled~ to ~e Co~y, or
if~e Co~y o~se ~q~es ac~l ~owledge of ~y ~ch defee~ li~, ~br~ee~ adverse
cla~ or o~er m~t~, the Comply at its option may amend Schedule B of ~s ~i~ent
accordin~7, but such ~t.~l nol reli~e ~e Co~y ~om lisbili~ ~e~ously Ec~ed
p~s~t m pa~ph 3 of these Condi~ons ~d
3. LiabiliW of ~e ~mp~y ~d~ ~s Co~l s~ll be o~y ~ ~e n~ed proposed h~ed
s~ch p~es ~eluded ~der ~e de~on of ~s~ed ~ ~e form of policy or policies coat, ed for
~d oEy for octal loss mo~ed ~ relimce hereon ~ ~de~g ~ good fai~ (a) ~o comply
~e req~rem~ts h~eof, or ~) to et~nate exe~fio~ sho~ ~ Sched~e B, ~ (c) to acquke
~cate ~e estate or interes~ or moCgage ~ereon eov~ by ~s Co~ent. ~ no ev~t s~ ~ch
l~abfl~V exee~ ~e ~o~t mated m Schedule A for ~e policy or policies eo~ed for ~d
liabflit~ is subject to ~e Ms~g pro~sio~ ~e Con~dons ~d Sdpuladons, ~d the ~clusions
~om Coverage of ~e fo~ of policy or policies co--ii, ed for in favor of ~e ~oposed ~s~ed
w~e~ ~e ~ere~y ~eo~o~ate8 by ~efer~ce ~6 ~e ~de ~ p~ o¢ ~s Co~t exc~t
expressly mo~fie8
4. ~y action of actions or fights of action ~t ~e propos~ ~ may have or ~y 3~g
~e Comply ~s~g out of~e eta~ of the title to ~e estate or i¢~rest o~ ~e ~ o~
~eon coveted by ~is Co~e=t mus~ be 3~e~ on ~d are ~bjeet to Ae pro~io:~
Co~ent.
STEWART TITLE
GUARANTY COM1~ANY
Ail notices requ~ed tn be given the Company and any statement in writing requ~ed to be furnished the
Compsny shall be addressed to it st P.O. Box 2029, Housten, Texas 77252, and identify this
com,u-~tment by i~s printed OI~EK NUMBEK which ~ppears ell fihe ~op of the front of the f~rst page of
this comr~itment.
Order Number: 40260'
DEC. 3.E002 10:34AM STEWART TITLE ASPEN N0.561 P.4
COIV~TME~. FOR TITLE INST. Ti~CE
S ClqT, DULE A
1, Effective Date: October 28, 2002 at 7:30 a.m. Order Number: 40250
2, l'olicy or Policies To Be Issued:
( X ) ALTA (1992) Owner's Policy `amomzt: TO BE DETERMINED
( X ) Standard ( ) Extended Premium:
Proposed l~ured:
TO BE DETERMINED ~
( ) ALTA 1992 Loan Policy .amount:
( ) Standard ( ) Extended Premium:
The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in ibis Commitment and covered herein is:
Fee Simple
4. Title to the estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in:
NANCY HAYWOOD MeKENNEY
/: 5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows.
Lot 4, CAPITOL WOODS SUBDIVISION, FILING NO. 1, according to the Plat th~zeofzecorded
September 27, 1972 in Plat Book 4 at Page 288 as Reception No. 154281,
COUNTY OF P1TKIN, STATE OF COLOKA.DO.
Statement of Charges Examiner Name: Chuck Dom
Policy prerrfimm shown above, ~nd
any charges shown below are due and
payable before a policy eau be issued.
DEC. B.~BO~ 10:B4AM STEWART TITLE ASPEM Nu.~i
Order N~ber: 40260
The fo~o~ng ~e ~e req~remen~ to be comp~ed ~th:
Item (a) Payment ~ or for the ac~unt of ~e ~tors or morlgagors of the ~ consid~a~on for
~e ~tate or ~terest to be ~sured. ~ -.
Item ~} Proper ~t~ment(s) crea~g ~e ~tate or interest to be ~sured must be executed and
duly filed for record, to ~t:
1. ~. C~cate of non-fo~ei~ ~tams, duly ex~u~ by ~he seIl~(s), p~su~t to Set,on 1445 of ~e
h~temal ~evenue Code ~
B. Sa~sfacto~ ~d~ce of ~e s~ll~(s) Colorado rcsid~cy (0r ~co~o~on) p~t to Colora~
I{o~e B~ll 92-1270.
NO~: S~cfion 1445 of ~e ~1 ~v~u~ Code req~es ~hol~ng of ~x ~om sales
~i~old~ of ~x ~om sales proc~ ~f ~ seller(s) is ~o% m Col~ado resider.
~o~tion ~d ~o~ ~e a~ilaBle ~om S~t Title.
2. D~d ~om vested o~, ves~g fee s~ple title N p~cMser(s).
DEC~ 3.EOOE 10:BS~M STEWART TITLE ~SPEM MO.bbl r.b
SCHEDULE B - Section
EXCEPTIONS
Order Number: 40260
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. l~ghts or cl.,~ ofpar~ies in possession, not shown by the public r~cords.
2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the publ/c records.
3. Discrepancies, conflicts in bounding, lines, shortage/n area, vncroach,~ents, and any facts wkich a
correct survey ez~d/nspect/on of the prom/sea wou/d disclose and which are not shown by the public
records.
4. Any hen, or right to a lien, for sereices, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, i~uposed
by law and not shown by the public records.
$. Defects, livns, cncumbrances~ adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, £~rs~ appearing/n the
public records or attaching subsequ~t to the effect/ye date hereof, but prior to the da~e thc proposed
insured acquires of record for value the estate or interes~ or mortgage thereon covered by this
6. Unpatcnted mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents, or an act author~_,.g thc issuance
thereof; water rights, clain~ or tide to water.
7. Any and all unpaid taxes ~d assessments and any unredeemed tsx sales.
The efte¢~ of inclusions in any general or specific w~ter conservancy, fire proration, soft
conservation or other district or inclusion in any water service or street in~provcmc'nt a~ea.
8. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to ~x~ract and re,hove his ore there/rom, should the sm-ne be
found to penetrate or intersect thc premises and right of w-ay for ditches or canals constructed by thc
authori/-y of the United States as reserved in United States Patent recorded/n Book 55 at Page 321 as
P. eception No. SS21$, and m Book 175 at Page 144.
9. The Sno~vrnass Project as er/deuced by the maps thereof filed in Plat Bock 3 at Page 104.
10. Kights of way, if'any, for Williarn~ Ditches 1, 2, 4 and 5, the Little Elk Creek Ditch and thc Borm'n
and White Ditch.
DEC. 3.£00£ 10:BSRM STEWRRT TITLE RSPEM
11, B~s~t for $ pipcl~c ~d n~s ~ md m a ~ing located on
~s~ent recorded ~ Book 243 a~ Page 274 ~ ~fion No. 137019.
12. T~s, condifiom ~d obhga~ons as set fo~ m cap~tol Woods SubdeaCon ~g No.
Decl~a~on of Res~icfive Coven~*s recorded S~mb~ 27. 1972
R~epfion No. 154280.
13. Easemts ~o Holy Cross Elect~c ~sociafio~ ~*. as set fo~ ~ ~t rc,orded J~e 25~ 1973
~ Book 277 at Page 221 ~ R~epfion No. 160584, ~d recorded
Page 367.
14. E~em~t ~d figh~ of way as s~ fo~h ~ ~s~ent record~
15. Easemm~ for utilizes, pilate ro~ leach ficl~ water' l~e, Spmg
Disclaimer ~d Note as set fo~ on Pla~ of Capitol Woo~ Sub~sion recorded $~tcmb~ 27,
1972 ~ ~lat Book 4 at Pa~e 288 as Reception No. 1542B1~ NOTE: Po~o~ of said easements
~ected by Relinquis~ent of ~semmt docummts record~ Aphl 10~ 1987 in Book 533 at Page
282 as Rec~fion No. 287625, and recorded ~ Book 533 at Page 28~ as Recephon No. 287626, ~d
recorded A~ 10, 1987 ~ Book 533 at Page 286 as Kec~fion
533 at Page 285 as K~ephon No. 287628, and by ~e M~a~on of Easment recorded May 21, I996
as ~on No. 392877.
NOTE: Provided that Stewart Title of Aspen, Inc. records the documents of conveyance ~n the
proposed transactbcrn the status of title will be updated from the time ef this commitment to the time
of said recording. If said update reveals intervc-ning Hens or changes in the status of smd title
appropriate action(s) will be taken to disclose or eliminate sa/d change prior to the record!~g of said
documents. If said update reveals no intervening liens or chm~ges in the status oft/fie} Exception No.
5 above ~vill be deleted.
NOTE: Policies issued hereund~ will be subject to thc terms, conditions, md exclusions set forth
in the ALTA 1992 Policy form. Copies of the 1992 form Policy Jacket, sefdng forth said tea'ms,
conditions and exclusions, will be made available upon request.
DEC. 3.~00~ 10:35~M STEN~RT TITLE aSPEN HO.b~l ~.~
DISCLOSURES
'Pursuant tn C.K.S. 10-11-122, notice is hereby giwn that:
A. The ~ubjcct real property may be located in a Special Taxing District;
B. A, Certificate of T~es due )isting each t~ming jurisdiction sh~ll be obtained for~ the Cour~ty Treasurer or the County
Treasurer's authorized agent;
C. In.formation regarding Special Districts ~nd the botmdaries of s~tch districts may be obta~od from the Board of
CounV7 Cor~missioners, the County Clerk ~nd l~corder, or thc County Assessor.
Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations ~-5-1, P~ragraph C of Article VII requires that '~Every title entity
shall be responsible for ~11 matters which appear of record prior ~o thc time of recording whenever the title entity
conducts the closing zud is responsible for recording or filing of legaJ documents resulting from the transaction
whkh w~s closed." Provided that Stswart Title of Aspen, Inc. conduct~ the closing of the insured transaction and
is responsible for rccordin~ ~h¢ legal documents ~rom the ~-ansaction, excepdon number $ will not appear on tl~e
Owner's Title Policy and the Lender's Title Policy when issued.
Note: Affirmative Mechanic' s Lien Protection/'or the Owner may be a~ilable (typically by 'deletion of Exception No. 4
of Schedule B, Section 2 of thc Commitment form the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance witl~ the
following conditions:
A. The l~.ud describM in Schedule A of this comm/~nent must be a singlo f~nily r~sidence, which/ncludes a
condominium or townhouse unit.
B. No labor or materials have been furnished by mech,,ica or matcrialmen for purposes of cons~ction on the
land described m Schedule A of this Commi~-ncnt within the past 6 months.
C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavi~ indern~i£Ting'the Company against unfiled mechanic's
and mster/~]rnen's liens.
D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.
E. If there has been construction, improvements or n'mjor repairs undertaken on the property to be purch~-~cd,
within six months prior to the Date of Commitment, th~ requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded
liens will include: disclosUre of certain construction information; t~n~ncial information as to the seller, the
builder and/or the con~-actor; payment of the appropriate premium; fully executed Indernn~ty agreements
satisfactory to the company; and, any additional requirements as may be necessary aitcr ~ examination of
the aforesaid i-formation by the Company.
No coverage will be given under any circu~.<mnces for labor or material for which tim i~ured h~ contracted for or
agreed to pay.
NOT~rC.~G HEREIN CONTAI2CED WILL BE DEEM~ED TO OBLIGATE TI:F~ COM]'ANY TO pROV'DE ANY
O~' THE COVEILAGES REFERRED TO HEREIN UNI~$$ ~ ABOVE CONDITIONS A1LE FULLY
SATISI~IED,
File Number:
S~ew,xr~ Titl'~ of,Aspen, Inc.
Disclosures
Page 1 of 1
DEC. 3.Z002 10:B6~M BTE~RT TITLE
PRIVACY POLICY NOTICE
?URPOSE O~F THIS NOTICE
Title V of the C-ramm-Leach-Blilcy Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, d~cctly
or through it~ affiliates, from sharing nonpubl/c personal information about you with a nonaffil/ated
third party urdess the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such
as the type of information that it collects about you and the categories of persons 'or entities to whom
it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, we are proving'ag you with this document, which
notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Stewart Title of Aspen, Inc..
We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources:
· Information we receive from you such as on applications or other forms.
· Information about your transactions we secure from our files, or from our affiliates or others.
· Information we receive from a consumer repm~5.ng agmcy.
· Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate
agcut or lender.
Unless it is specilScMly stated othcn'wise in an ~rnended Primcy Policy Notice, no additional
nonpublic personal information will be collected about you,
We may disclose any of the above information that we collect about our customers or former
customers to our affiliates or to nonaffiliated third parties as p.cuyail~ed by law.
We also may disclose this information about out customers or former customers to the following
types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing sca-vices on our behalf or with whom we have
joint marketing agreements:
· Fiuanei~l service provider~ such as companies engaged in banking, consmer fimnce:
securities and insurance.
· Nomfinancial companies such ss envelope stuffers and other fulfillment sm'vice providers.
WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBLIC pERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH
ANYONE FOR ANY PUI~OSE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY pERMITtED BY LAW.
We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know
that information in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic,
and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal
inform,hon.
File Number: 40260 [.~
Stewart T~fle of Aspc~. l~c.
Privacy Palicy Notice
Page 1 of I t '
PRIVA POLICY NOTICE
PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE
Title V of the Crramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prokibi~s any financial institution, directly
or through its affiliates, bom sharing nonpublic personal infom~tion about you with a nonaffiliated
third party ,mless the instifirl/on provides you with a not/ce of its privacy policies and practices, such
as the type of infomtion that it coll,cts about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom
it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, wc are providi~.g you with this document, wh/ch
notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Stewart Title Guaranty Company.
We may collect nonpubhc perscmal information about you from the following sources:
· Information we receive from you, such as on applications or other forms.
· Information about your transactions we secure from our ~es, or from our affiliates or others.
· Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency.
· Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate
agent or l nder.
Unless it is specifically stated otherwise in an ammded Privacy ?ol/cy Notice, no add/tional
nonpublic personal information will be collected about you.
We may disclose any of the above infonmtion that we collect about our customers or former
customers to our affiliates or to nonaffihated third part/es as permitted by law.
We also may disclose this bafomation .qbout om customers or former customers to the following
types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or with whom we have
joint marketing agreements:
* Financial service prov/ders sm:h as companies engaged in banl~g, consumer fn~nce.~
securities and insurance.
* Non-financial companies such as envelope stuffers and other fulfillment service providers.
W-E DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NON'PUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH
ANYONE FOR. A.NY PUI~POSE TI4~T IS NOT SPECIFICALLY ?ER_M1FI~D BY LAW.
We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to lmow
that/nformation m order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic,
and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal
information.
File Number: 4.0~260
P'r~wcy Policy No,ice
Page i of 1
DEC. 3.E88~ tO:BTAM STEWART TITLE ASPEM MO.bbl r.x~
.OWNERSHIP AND ENCUMBRA_NCE REPORT , .
Order No.: 40260
Prepared For: Nancy Haywood McKenn~y
STEWART TITLE OF ASPEN, INC.
HEP,.EBY CEKTI2~I~S from a search of the boo-ks in this office *hat titlo to:
September 27, 1972 in Plat Book 4 at Page 288 as Keception No. 154281.
County of Pittfn, State of Colorado.
situated in the CounW of Pitl4u, State of Colorado, appears to be ve~ted in the aame of:
Nancy Haywood McKermey
and that the above described property appear~ to be subject to the followillg liel~q:
1. None ~
EXCEPT any and. all taxes and assessments. ~
EXCEPT all ~a~ements, rights of way, restrictions and ~:es~'vatiom of record.
Fil~ Number: 40260
.S~ewart Title of.Aspen, Ina.
0 & E Kcport
Pa8~ 1 of 2
DEC. B.200~ 10:B?~M STEWRRT TITLE aSPEN N0.561 P.12
This report does not reflect any of the following matters:
1. BanIa'uptcies which, from date of adjudication of the most recent bm,~kruptcics, antedate the
report by more than fourteen (14) years.
2. Su/ts and judLzments which, from date of entry, ante<late the repo~ by ~orc tb~ seven (?)
years or un/il the gow'm~,~g statue of limitations b.~s ~xpired, whichever is the lomger period.
3. Unpaid tax Hens which, from date ofpayment~ antedate the report by more than seven years.
Although we believe the facts stated are true, this letter is not to be construed as au abstract of
tide, nor an opinion of title, nor a guaranty of title, and it is understood and agroexi that Stewart
Title of Aspen, ]nc., neither as.~umes, nor will be charged with any financial obligation or liability
whatever on/my statement contained herein.
Dated: October 28, 2002 at 8:00 a.m., at Aspen, Colorado
Authorized Signature
DEC. 3.2002 12:30PM STEWART TITL~E~ ASPEbL_~--. ~ ..... ' ..... MO.5?D P. 1
'
t Pen/so~ does hereby ~orcvo~' reliaquleh any and all right be ha~
· o ~tllize the ~rtion''Of smid Ut~li~y a~mement~, wi~h~ ~'aid
:~ " Capitol ~od~ 5ubdivSSion, ~21~ Dumber 1',' d~cri~o~ ~
~ , ~] A,..n ,10) ,oo. ,vide ..r~p o~ 1,.d lying'~oqth o~ .nd
' "! .~J.cemt to the ,o,lo,vimg ~''c'ib'' 1,,e, .,id line
, b~l~,g~ 'l~.innin~ mt ~he nor=he~t prepertY cor~_o~
'. ~ ,~ IN ~ITNESS ~BEREOF, Ifenr~ 'g, Denl~o~ has cmUSO~ hi~ n~m to
~ ~m hereunto svbscribed og' this 102h.. d~Y o~ .~'
-- ,} ~ ~7~ /~ ~ ~ ~w~d L. ~iman ~d ~ie ~=
8TA~ OF COLORADO
, , ~.
I '~ ~
~-- ~ · - ,. -
DEC. 3.20B2 12:BOPM STEWART TITLE ASPEN Mm.b'r~ K.~
VACA~ OF ~S~
~SETH;
~AS, the M~t~ o~ ce~ r~ ~op~ Io~d In ~tt~ Count, Col~o,
des~d es L~ 1, Cspl%~ W~ds Su~M~ ~rd~ to ~ ~l~ ~r~ed ~ Pl~t ~oh 4 ~
:
pro~8~ In ~he ev~t ~ wcH on~t ~ ~ ~ b~ p~ductiv~ ~ ~ as ~'~t~ w~t~
linc ~' ~ ~m t~ ~t~te w~ ~t to the ~t l ~fi~in$ site; ~d
'
~AS, ,~e Lot 1 ~t~e well wa~ ~v~ drilled ~d is not ne~ss~ b~au~ ~e
we~ ou ~t 2 w~ch s~es Lo~; ~ 2 {~ pmdu~ end ~s ~t ~p~ to ~ ~s 1
W~, ~o~ th~ ~tm~a~ wa~r ~e ~sem~ on ~t 1 is ~ lo.er nu~.
NOW ~0~, ~c M~iettem h~eby ~te ~e ~t~e wat~ line e~ ~
fol{o~m:
~ ~tm~le ~ line ~m~nt depl~ed ~ ~t 1 on O~e above r~eren~ Cmpi~i
Wuo~ Su~di~un plat i~ h~By ~ed ~ forever m~du~d. ~ t~ ev~ ~
~tem~e well ~sem~nt im :v~ B~le or requ~ for ~ling o~ a w~ to ~e Lot I or
~t 2 of ~pitol Woo~ ~dM~o~ ~e o~uer ~t ~ mh~l {~e ~ prairie a n~
water l~e a~t to s~e ~e bufid~g s~es on ~ 1 ~ Lot 2 in lo~atiom e~ee~l~ to
the o~ of~t 1.
~ ~SS ~0~, tMs doc~t u ~a b~ ~ted on thc dae ~d ~ first
-' ~ D~.,~~O )
' ~'.' ~ · ~ .' . , /
: 2'.. ."' ~ ~ ' r ~s dayo~ 1996, by
ATTACHMENT 5
List of Adjacent Property Owners &
Mineral Estate Owners
Capitol Woods Subdivision, Lot 4, Pitkln County, Colorado
Adjacent property owners-
Verified at the County Assessors Office on April 17, 2003
Lot 2: Ms. Sharon Doyle and Dr. David Bacon 491 Josephine Street
Denver, Colorado 80206-4208
Lot 3: Ms~ Stephanie Ryan P.O. Box 321
Snowmass, Colorado 81654
Lot 5: Mr. Edward FlanJgan 1457 Catalina Street
Laguna Beach, California 92651-3154
Lot 6: Mr. Joel Zane
0199 Capital Creek Road
Snowmass, Colorado 81654
Capitol Creek Road ROW- Pitkin County Commissioner
530 E. Main Street
Aspen, Colorado 816t 1
Adjacent Mineral Estate Owners -
None found
ATTACHMENT 6
Soil & Geology Information
United States In cooperation withSoil Surveyof
Department of United States Department
Agriculture of the Interior, Bureau of
Land Management, and Aspen Gyps
Soil t~ne Colorado Agricultural ~ U m
sCOt, ceervation Experiment Station Area, Colorado,
Parts of Eagle,
Garfield, and Pitkin
Counties
39
Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado
Suitable management practices include proper ~b 42--Fluvaquents, 0 to 10 percent slopes. This
roadly defined unit consists of deep, somewhat poorly
grazing use and a planned grazing system. The
suitability of this soil for range seeding is poor. The drained, nearly level soils on flood plains and alluvial
main limitation is the slope. The slope limits access by valley floors. These soils formed in alluvium.
i~vestock. The limited accessibility results in overgrazing Fluvaquents are stratified and vary widely in texture
of the lesS sloping areas, and in depth to sand, gravel, and cobbles. Typically', the
This unit is poorly suited to homesite development, surface layer ranges from loamy sand to fine sandy
The main limitation is the slope, loam or from silt loam to clay loam. The underlying
This map unit is in capability subclass Vile, layers are generally sandy loam or loam stratified with
nonirrigated. It is in the Deep Loam range site. sand, gravel, and cobbles. In some areas gravel and
cobbles are on or near the sudace.
41~Evanston loam, 45 to 65 percent slopes. This The water table fluctuates between depths of 0.5 foot
deep, well drained soil is on alluvial fans, terraces, and and 2.0 feet during spring and summer. These soils are
valley sides. It formed in mixed alluvium. Elevation is occasionally flooded for brief periods in late spring and
6.500 to 8,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is early summer.
13 to 15 inches, the average annual air temperature is included in this unit are small, isolated areas of
42 to 46 degrees F, and the average frost-free period is Redrob soils. Also included are small, isolated areas
80 to 90 days. where water stands at or near the surface all year.
Typically, the suHace layer is brown loam about 12 These water areas are identified by a special symbol on
inches thick. The subsoil is clay loam about 13 inches the soil maps. Included 'areas make up about 15
thick. The substratum to a depth o~ 60 inches or more is percent of the total acreage.
These soils are used for wildlife habitat, recreational
loam.
Included in this unit are small areas of Tridell soils, development, or grazing. The native vegetation is
areas of Evanston soils that have slopes of less than 45 mainly cottonwood, willow, water-tolerant grasses,
percent, and small areas of Rock outcrop. Included sedges, and rushes. Mule deer, cottontail rabbit, coyote,
areas make up about 15 percent of the total acreage, and bobcat and ducks, geese, and other native birds
Permeability is moderate in this Evanston soil. find food and shelter on these soils. Where feasible,
Available water capacity is high. The effective rooting planting small grain, trees, and shrubs improves the
depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the habitat for upland wildlife.
hazard of water erosion is moderate or severe on the This unit is poorly suited to homes[te development.
steeper slopes. The main limitations are the flooding and the seasonal
This unit is used mainly as rangeland. It also is used high water table.
as wildlife habitat. This map unit is in capability subclass Vlw,
The potential plant community on this unit is mainly nonirrigated. It generally is in the Riverbottom range
bluebunch wheatgrass, western wheatgrass, site. At the higher elevations, however, it is in the
muttongrass, Douglas rabbitbrush, and mountain big Mountain Meadow range site.
sagebrush. Utah serviceberry, mountain snowberry,
prairie junegrass, and Ross sedge commonly are also 43--Forelle-Brownsto complex, 6 to 12 percent
included. The average annual production of air-dry slopes. This map unit is on mountains and benches.
vegetation is about 1,500 pounds per acre. If the range Elevation is 6,500 to 7,500 feet. The average annual
condition deteriorates, mountain big sagebrush, precipitation is 12 to 14 inches, the average annual air
Douglas rabbitbrush, cheatgrass, and annual weeds temperature is 40 to 44 degrees F, and the average
increase in abundance, frost-free period is 85 to 105 days.
Suitable management practices include proper This unit is about 55 percent Forelle soil and 30
grazing use and a planned grazing system. The . percent Brownsto soil.
suitability of this soil for range seeding is poor. The Included in this unit are small areas of Tridell soils on
main limitation is the slope. The Cope limits access by knolls, Mussel and Morval soils in swales, and basalt
livestock. The limited accessibility results in overgrazing Rock outcrop. Also included are small areas of soils
of the less sloping areas, that are similar to the Forelle and Brownsto soils but
This unit is poorly suited to homesite development, have soft bedrock below a depth of 40 inches. Included
The main limitation is the slope, areas make up about 15 percent of the total acreage.
This map unit is in capability subclass Vile, The Forelle' soil is deep and well drained. It formed in
nonirrigated. It is in the Deep Loam range site. mixed alluvium derived dominantly from sedimentary
'L8S.
T9.~.
7'30'
Pat ]06'52'30'
39'22'30'
~. ~ Alluvium . ,
~ Poorlt! sorted #m?,el. so,d. o.d silt i. ,.ai*~ *,alley Imttoms; c~ a~ ] Pearly sorttd
~ san~tbroad~mlle~sw(thi*~o.tcrupareaqfMan~sShale. ]nehz&s
~ Imoes~,~ace depositn al,nra R(mri.9 Fork Rib,er ~ well ~ sm.all
~ ~ Alluvial-f:
o ~ Older alluvium Hil[slope deposi~
~ ~ M, ~fl,lchtq'tt/rl so.~ deposited btl .sheet- P~rlysorled nn.d.
560~ .~ ~ Alh, rh m. ~ st ttht tril~.t, rien: oldeM , . '
p t 'ts llrohahl~ an old ess {frei vel ~tfl C ~raslt: itlclmh's t~tnsporta,d a~u] res~d-
F~E~ ~ ~ (Qgc): d,,.,,~trea,,, ;,arts ~ h.rt ,', q .... I
~:~m~: l' Gravel
', ~' '"- ' ' P,,orly sorted g~,~l and sand; ~el~ of gla6oflu,,ial or.
Morainal deposi~ Qg..~td~firr~liated gravel in nmall deposits ~tot comb
Ver~t poorly sor~ deb~.* wit h bould~ ~ much as 12 Jl,ct with m ond~ or te~ d~os~Ln
fl~ I .~ gth fl~ am. at~ of sand and cIhy Qga, Qgb, and Qgc fora well-de~ltq~d te~ace.~; Qga
n~orah*c v~it Qmb {Bryant. 197~J Qgd, eroded gravel rt~nt ~o ~noer zhowi*t[I
Qmbc. ~ di~f~enfi~tted equflmlent of merino units Qmb Oveu~ri~tt pallet i~imte, s .nit ~.tuins ~ndder:
~ a,,d Qmc (B~,ant, I.,,,/ Q,,ater ,,.r~ b~,alt (Qb). lso~ted o,'eu,".t o, other.[~
~ Qmd, oldest moraine, co~hlf~L~ dee;;19 wmfhered ho.ldcrs mafions, ve~jsmn. U remnants with ~mrlt boulder
N Qb
Basak
I) rkqlr, ll oli~q~e h~ealt in at ~mst 1~ flows, ma,~ wilh vesfc,I,
c, lu,~*a~r )ointing. A bore flows gs poorl~ ~po.sed .sco~a tidal
eroded sco~a cone. F~ws tzt.al a~ut 500 fe~ thick
Older gravel
Poorlg notted gravel ~,~th z~nd mat~, ~ly ~eathe~d~. ~.ta,
~alt. old. than Q~ate~a~ ~alt ~Qb), wh?h ~mgte reaa
Utac{oflu~{al equ~l~t of o~est g~l ~s~t (Qme) zn Asp~
{B~ant, 1971)
ATTACHMENT 7
401 Water Quality Certification Letter
9TATE OF COLOIV O
Dougla, H. Benevento, Acting Executive Director
4300 Che,~ Creek Dr. S. Labor,to~ and Radiation 5e~ices Division
Phone (303) 692-2000 . Denver, Colorado 80230-6928 ~ - [~ '
TDD Line (303) 691-7700 (303) 692-3090 ~ ~lo~do Dep~ent
December 30, 2002
Ms, Nancy McKanney Re: Section 401 Water Quality Certification
PO Box 715 Permit No. COE 200275458
Snowmass, Colorado 81654 Colo. Cert. No. 3019
Dear Ms. McKenney:
The Water Quality Control Division has i-eviewed the federal license or permit application, public notice, or other
'" information submitted related to certification for the activity described below. Provided the plans of operation included in
the submitted information are followed and the attached General Conditions (where applicable) are complied with, the
Division is reasonably assured that Sections 301,302, 303,306 and 307 of the Clean Water Act and applicable sections of the
Colorado Water Quality Control Act will not be violated by this activity.
An antidegradation review has also been completed as required by the Basic Standards and Methodologies for Surface Water
effective Suly 31, 1988. This review showed that only temporary changes to water quality would occur as a result of this
project. Thus this project is certified as designed with the attached General and Special Conditions (where applicable).
Description: Construction of a single family home.
Location: Lot 4 property on Capital Creek Road in'Pitkin County, Colorado.
Watercourse: capital Creek, Upper Colorado River Basin, Segment COUCRF03 of the Roaring Fork River Sub-basin.
This certification does not constitute a relinquishment of the Water Quality Control Division's authority as delineated in the
"Colorado Water Quality Control Act", or any subsequent alterations thereto, nor does it fulfill or waive any other local, state
or federal regulations.
Sincerely,
Andrew Ross
Water Quality Assessor
WATER QUALITY CONTROL DMSION
Attachment
cc: Corps of Engineers, Mr. Mark Gilfillan, Western Colorado Regulatory Office
Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District Office
.~Applle~nt's A~ent, MI~.. I')ave R Mehan_ .W_right Water Engineers. Inc.
District Engineer, Mr. Dwain Watson, Water Quality Control Division, w/o attachment
File
ATTACHMENT 8
Wildfire Hazard Report
WILDFIRE HAZARD REPORT
NANCY McKENNEY
PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
I. o1' 4, u l;ix/l l
Scott Chism, RLA, Fire Assessment Advisor
Colorado State Forest Service & Aspen Volunteer Fire Dept. trained
October 2002
INTRODUCTION
This report contains the results of a wildfire hazard assessment performed for a 1.2 acre parcel
owned by Nancy McKenney for the purpose of establishing a Pitkin County approved building
envelope on the undeveloped parcel. The property is located adjacent to Capitol Creek and lies
within an area of Pitkin County that is mapped with a low wildfire risk.
The property can be generally described as a linear parcel with a north-northwest aspect that is
primarily vegetated with wetland plant species. The wetland vegetation and aspect indicate moist
soils and therefore plant materials that have relatively high moisture content. Land that is
vegetated with high moisture content plant materials has a reduced risk to wildfire. The risk of
wildfire is further reduced by the fire breaks that are formed around the property with Capitol
Creek, Snowmass Creek Road and the access driveway.
HAZARD ASSESSMENT
The proposed building envelope is an essentially flat area located within two types of wetlands
found on the property. A separate wetland delineation report describes the Forested wetland type
and Scrub-shrub wetland type that the building envelope will include. Significant cleating of
vegetation will be necessary to allow for building construction. Prior to any cleating and
grubbing, an actual building footprint within the building envelope should be established in order
to preserve specimen trees.
The Colorado State Forest Service recommends the removal of all flammable vegetation within
15' of all structures. The Pitkin County Land Use Code requires that brush should be cleared
within 10' of all structures. The Pitkin County requirement is more appropriate for this site and
the existing vegetation type and value. Establishing a building footprint prior to cleating will
allow only the necessary vegetation within the building footprint and 10' primary defensible zone
to be removed. Approximately six specimens of Thin Le~tf Alder (Alnus tenuifolia) exist within
the area of the proposed building envelope. These tree specimens should be retained if possible
and considered the same as the structure when the 10' defensible perimeter zone is established.
All underbrush should be cleared within 10' of the trunks of these trees whether adjacent to the
building footprint or not.
Mature specimens of Colorado Blue Spruce (Picea pungens) are also evident on the property but
not within the proposed building envelope. These evergreen trees are one of the more flammable
types of on-site vegetation due to the resin content, but are located primarily along the banks of
Capitol Creek. The proximity to the creek and high water table ensure an elevated moisture
content in these spruce trees, which reduces the potential to burn. These trees are located within
the area described as Zone 2 fuel reduction by the Colorado State Forest Service and some may
be within the 30' perimeter vegetation reduction zone required by the Pitkin County Land Use
Code. The spruce trees occur in isolated groups. The tree groups should be retained and all
underbrush/ladder fuels should be cleared within 10' of the trunks. The spruce trees that are at
least 25' feet tall should have all branches removed up to a height of 10' above the ground.
Natural deadfall is evident in some areas around the property. Nearly all of the deadfall is
located within 100' of the proposed building envelope and should be removed to comply with the
Pitkin County Land Use Code for fuel reduction reasons. One fallen tree over Capitol Creek
creates a potential 'fire bridge' risk if a wildfire occurred on opposite south facing sage vegetated
slope. The fire risk of the fallen tree/snag could be mitigated by complete removal or the lower
20' of dead branches could be removed to minimize the potential fire transmission and to
maintain the wildlife habitat value of the snag.
All vegetation removal, including selective thinning, should be done carefully. Given the
location of the proposed building envelope relative to Capitol Creek and wetlands, increased
rnnoffand soil loss is possible from development. Proper soil stabilization and erosion control
techniques should be followed, both during construction and post completion. All vegetation
that is required for removal from within the building envelope should be chipped on site and
spread as mulch around the property. Retaining the chip material on site will maximize the
nutrient retention and water holding capacity on the land and minimize greenwaste for landfill
disposal. The chip material should be primarily spread under the specimen trees that receive
ladder fuel pruning since the shade from lower branches will be decreased. The mulch will
reduce heating and drying of the soil. Some cut brush could be retained in two or three widely
spaced piles for wildlife habitat if the owner desires.
COMPREHENSIVE FIREWISE SITE DEVELOPMENT
The creation of defensible space around structures is only one aspect of reducing the danger of
wildfire. Safe access to and escape routes from the building area are equally important
considerations when developing buildings in wild land settings. Sufficient space should be
available either at the end of the shared driveway or in front of the building to allow for turn
around space for emergency vehicles. The property address should be posted and clearly visible
from the roadside to allow for easy identification by emergency workers.
A dedicated water supply for fire suppression is recommended to further reduce the risk of
uncontrolled wildfire. Fire hydrants do not exist in close proximity to the property. Instead, two
natural supplies of water exist on the property: Capitol Creek and a natural spring. Pumps could
be used at either source to provide emergency water.
The building design may potentially include a deck due to the site location adjacent to Capitol
Creek. Ifa wood deck is proposed as a building element, a noncombustible patio and low
masonry wall is recommended to isolate the deck from the radiant heat and convective energy of
a wildfire.
SUMMARY
Wildfire mitigation must be balanced with maintaining the habitat provided by the on-site
wetlands and tree canopy which affect the soil and water quality of the Capitol Creek stream
corridor. The proposed building envelope is located within a vegetation area that has a low
wildfire risk. One-third (1/3) of the naturally occurring vegetation are plant species identified by
the Colorado State Forest Service as being Firewise plant materials, which tend to be more
resistant to wildfire. Although the three species of willow found on the property are not shown
on the Firewise plant material list, the genus, Salix, is shown. Moisture content is the single most
important factor that determines a plant's volatility. The vegetation found on this undeveloped
parcel typically has a high moisture content, which significantly reduces wildfire danger. If the
recommendations in this report and the mitigation standards outlined in the Pitkin County Land
Use code are followed, the land within the proposed building envelope for this property should
have a low, manageable risk to wildfire.
· ATTACHMENT 9
Floodplain Study
.Wright Water Engineers, Inc.
818 Col~aclo Ave.
PO. Bo× 219
G~en,,,vooa Spnngs. Colorado 81602
1970J 945-7755 TEL Febm~] I, 2002
1970i 945-921o FAX
~30-~1 ~93-1608 DENV~,R DIRECT. UNE
Via Regular Mail
Ms. Nancy McKenney !,!~'r 1 $ 2002
c/o Mt. Daly Enterprises, LLC '
Post Office Box 1537
Basalt, Colorado 81621
Re: lO0-Year Floodplain Delineation for Lot 4, Capitol Woods Subdivision
Dear Nancy:
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. (WWE) has completed an evaluation of the 100-year floodplain on
Lot 4 of the Capitol Woods SubdMsion in Pitkin County. The Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has previously evaluated the regulatory floodplain for reach of Capitol Creek
encompassing the site using approximate methods. The Flood Insurance Rate Map that includes
the property is identified as 08097C0066C of unincorporated Pitkin County with an effective
date of June 4, 1987 (Attaclmaent A).
W\VE met with the surveyor, Louis Buettner. and Susan Umbarger of Mt. Daly Enterprises on
November 21,2001 to observe the site conditions and to locate the cross sections to be surveyed.
WWE received the survey data on January 16, 2002. The survey information also included 2-
foot contours within the property boundary.. Photographs taken during the site visit are included
as .,\ttachment B.
Hydrologic Evaluation
Caphol Creek has not been gaged h)' thc U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Therefore, Flood
flows were estimated using peak Flow measurements from nearby'basins with simil~ drainage
areas. The drainage basin tributary to the subject property was delineated on ]:100.000 scale
USGS mapping (Figure I) and has an area of 34.1 square miles.
USGS gaging stations were maintained on Castle Creek and Maroon Creek for 25 vears, between
1970 and 1994. Statistical analyses were conducted on these gage data to derive ~he unit runoff
['or the 100-year storm event, which ranged from 19.0 to 25.9 cfs per square mile. Applying the
upper value to the Capitol Creek basin, the 100-year peak flow estimate is 883 cfs.
The details of the hydrologic evaluation are included in Attachment C. The flow estimate for
Capitol Creek is likely conservative since the peak flow is generated during snmwnelt runoffand
the nearby drainages receive more precipitation.
Ms. Nancy McKenney
February 11, 2002
Page 2
Hydraulic Analysis
WWE input the surveyed cross sections and the results of hydrologic evaluation into the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers HEC-RAS hydraulic model. HEC-RAS is the industry standard model
for conducting riverine hydraulic analyses. The results of the hydraulic model show the water
surface to be at critical depth throughout the study reach of Capitol Creek (Attachment D).
The water surface elevations obtained from the HEC-RAS model were used to delineate the 100-
year floodplain on the subject property (Figure 2). Since detailed topography was only available
on the property, the floodplain delineation was truncated at the property boundaries. The
delineation shows that most of the property between Capitol Creek and the previously delineated
wetlands is included in the regulatory floodplain.
Very truly yours,
WRIGHT WATER ENGIN ~L~ERS, INC.
· Jonathan M. l~elly', P,~.
Water Resources E eer
Attachments
C:\Projcct5\0 .130\o0tl.im k\Rc ptm.d~c
CROSS SECTION 40
WSEL =
CROSS SECTION 50
WSEL = 63.17'
100 YEAR
FLOODPLAIN
BOUNDARY
LOT 6
NOTES
1. ALL INFORMATION SHOWN, OTHER THAN FLOODPLAIN
DATA, PROVIDED BY SURVEYOR.
2. BASED ON SURVEYOR'S NOTES, THE PROPERTY WAS COVERED
WITH UP TO TWO FEET OF SNOW AT THE TIME OF THE
FIELD OBSERVATIONS, CAPITOL CREEK HAD FORMED ICE
DAMS AND OVERFLOWED THE BANKS OF THE CREEK AT
SOME POINTS ALONG THE STUDY.
5. RELATIVE ELEVATIONS SHOWN BASED ON LOCAL BENCHMARK SET
TO ELEVATION 100.0 FEET.
SCALE: I' = 50'
CONTOUR INTERVAL = 2'
25 50 75 1 iX)
I
BASE MAP PROVIDED BY:
LOUIS h. BUETTNER SURVEYING
0040 WEST SOPRIS CREEK ROAD
BASALT, COLORADO 81621
970-927-3611
WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC.
818 COLORADO AVENUE
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602
(970)94-5-7755
DESIGN
DETNL
CHECK
DATE
SCALE
JMK
DRO
JMK
2/11/02
I"=50'
FLOODPLAIN
CAPITOL
FIGURE 2
DELINIATION FOR LOT
WOODS SUBDIVISION
4
PROJECT NO.
011-130.000
ATTACHMENT A
FLOOD INSURANCE
RATE MAP
SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAs INUNDATED'
BY 100-YEAR FLOOD ~~..
ZONE A No b~e flood elevations determined.
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE ZONE AE Buefloodelev&tionsdeU~minod.
ZONE AH Flood del~ths of 1 to 3 feet (u~uaJly uea.~ of
poodin~]; be-~ flood elevations dctet'mined.
ZONE A0 Flood depths of I to 3 feet (u~ually sheet
flow o~ dol~inl tm'rain); eye,ale depths
deLe-mined. For a~ea.~ of alluvial faro flood-
ZONE A99 To be protected from 100-year flood by
FoderaJ flo~¢l protection system under
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
ZONE V coutaJ flood with velocity bez,std (wave
act. ion); no bm flood eieva~ons deter.
PITKIN COUNTY, ZO.E VE .~ .ood .,t, ..,o.ity .....d
INCORPORATED AREAS ~ FLOODWAY AREAS IN ZONE AE
OTHER FLOOD AREAS
ZONEX Areas of 500-year flood; areas of
100-year flood with average depths
of less than 1 foot or with drainage
PANEL 66 OF 325 areas less than 1 square mile; and
areas protected by Icy*es from 100-
year flood.
OTHER AREAS
ZONE X Areas determined to be outside 500-
year flood plain.
COital,s: ZONE D Areas in which flood haZards are
NUMade NUMBER SUFFIX
Flood Boundary
V,IIdC0 APO RAT[ 0 A RE kS, ..... Oltl2Sl ...... lOSS ......
~ - Floodway Boundary
Zone D Boundary
~ Boundary Dividing Special Flood
Hazard Zones, and Boundary
Dividing Areas of Different
Coastal Base Flood Elevations
Within Special Flood Hazard
Zones.
Base Flood Elevation Line;
08097C0066 C ~a :- va.on,n Feet'
Base Flood Elevation in Feet
EFFECTIVE DATE: (ELB"?I Where ',.,.,for., W,,,I. Zone
JUNE 4, 1987 EM7x Elevation Reference Mark
*'Referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929
NOTES
Federal £mergency Management Agency This map is for use in administering the National Flood Insurance
'- Program; it does not necessarily identify alt are=, subject to flood-
ing, particularly from local drainage sources of smaJI size, or aJI
" planimetrlc features outside Special Flood Hazard Areas.
C~rr~in areas not in glacial Flood Hazard Areas may be protected
// .L ~[ by flood control structure,
Boundaries of the floodways were computed at cro~$ sections
and Interpolated between cross sectlons~ The floodways were
based on hydraulic considerations with regard to requirements
of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Floodway widths in some areas may be too narrow to show to
scaJe. Floodway widths are provided in the Flood Insurance
Study Report.
Coa,$tal base flood elevations anblv only landward of the shoreline.
Elevation reference marks arc described in t~e Flood Insurance
I
ROAD
ZONE X :
T. 8S. )NE
T. gS.
ZONE X
ZONE A ~;
ATTACHMENT B
SITE VISIT
PHOTOGRAPHS
~-
ATTACHMENT C
HYDROLOGIC
EVALUATION
WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. Date Y~l/ol,- Sheet of
2490 West 26th Ave.,'Suite 100-A Proj. No. 0
Denver, Colorado 80211 Proj. Name
Tel. (303) 480-1700 Des. By ,,]/h~c' Ckd. By
Subject i00 . ~.,~,
USGS 09074800 CASTLE CREEK ABOVE ASPEN, CO
Water Streamfiow Date
Year (cfs)
1970 398 June 23,1970
1971 368 June 20,1971
1972 311 June 6,1972
1973 428 June 14,1973
1974 307 June 16,1974
1975 315 July 9,1975
1976 261 June 5,1976
1977 170 June 1,1977
1978 405 June 15,1978
1979 382 July 1,1979
1980 372 June 10,1980
1981 305 June 9,1981
1982 290 July 1,1982
1983 '468 June 25,1983
1984 559 June30,1984
1985 556 June 8,1985
1986 436 June 7,1986
1987 364 June 8,1987
1988 285 June 6, 1988
1989 275 June 16,1989
1990
1991 312 June 11,1991
1992 212 June 25,1992
1993 477 June 17,1993
1994 291 May 31, 1994
USGS 09075700 MAROON CREEK ABOVE ASPEN, CO
Water Streamflow Date
Year (cfs) ·
1970 382 June 26,1970
1971 490 June 19,1971
1972 522 June 6,1972
1973 716 June 29,1973
1974 492 June 20,1974
1975 528 July 5,1975
1976 451 June 10, 1976
1977 157 June 8,1977
1978 589 June 14,1978
1979 440 July 1,1979
1980 836 June22,1980
1981 430 June 10,1981
1982 372 June 22,1982
1983 826 July 1, 1983
1984 480 June 1,1984
1985 604 June 20, 1985
1986 604 June 20. 1986
1987 230 June 14,1987
1988 275 June 11, 1988
1989 286 June 19,'1989
1990 424 June 11.1990
1991 381 June 19.1991
1992 230 July 8.1992
1993 500 June 17.1993
1994 334 June 20,1994
DATA TABLE
iholumn(1)I Column (2).. Column(3) (Gro~,i. ng)C°lumn(4)
( dent tier) (Data) I (IdenUfier)
FLOOD FREQUENCY ANALYSIS
LOG PEARSON TYPE Ille
USGS 09074800 CASTLE CREEK ABOVE ASPEN, CO
CALCULATIONS MATRIX RESULTS:
X pog X-x)^2 (~°gX-x)^3 I
Where: x = AVG (log X)
Z540~
SORTED
YEAR IN YEAR IN
1970 398 1984 559
1971 368 1985 556
1972 311 1993 477
1973 428 1983 468
1974 307 1990 460
1975 315 1986 436
1976 261 1973 428
1977 170 1978 405
1978 405 1970 398
1979 382 1979 382
1980 372 1980 372
1981 305 1971 368
1982 290 1987 364
1983 468 1975 315
1984 559 1991 312
1985 556 1972 311
1986 436 1974 307
1987 364 1981 305
1988 285 1994 291
1989 275 1982 290
1990 460 1988 285
1991 -312 1989 275
1992 212 1976 261
1993 477 1992 212
1994 , 291 1977 170
2.747 0.0428 0.008859
2.745 00419 0.008562
2.679 0.0191 0 002629
2670 0.0168 0.002184
2.663 0.0149 Q001828
2 639 0.0098 0.000970
2.631 0.0083 0.000752
2 607 0.0045 0.000300
2600 0.0035 0000209
2 582 0 0017 Q000072
2 571 00009 0.000027
2.566 00006 0.000016
2561 0.0004 0000009
2 498 0.0018 .-0000075
2 494 0.0021 -0 000100
2493 0.0023 -0000109
2 487 0.0028 .0.000152
2.484 0.0032 -0000177
2.464 0.0059 -0.000450
2.462 0.0061 -0.000476
2.455 0.0073 -0.000628
2.439 0.0102 -Q001035
2 417 0.0153 -0.001900
2.326 0.0459 -0.009822
2.230 0.0961 -0029804
X-DATA
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS: 25
AVERAGE LOG: 2.540
LOG STANDARD DEVIATION: 0.123
LOG COEF. OF SKEW: -0.443
LOG COEF. OF SKEW/6: -0.074
32.2 mi2
Flood:
Recurrenc Chance: z-value: K-value: log Q: Q (cfs) q (cfs/mi;)
0.5 0.000 0.073 2.550 354 11.0
0.2 0.842 0.855 2.646 442 13.7
0.1 1.282 1.224 2.691 491 15.3
0.04 1.751 1.590 2.736 545 16.9
0.02 2.054 1.811 2.764 580 18.0
0.01 2.327 2.000. 2.787 612 19.0
0.004 2.652 2.214 2.813 651 20.2
0002 2.878 2.355 2.831 677 21.0
2
5
10
25
50
100
250
500
DATA TABLE
FLOOD FREQUENCY ANALYSIS
LOG PEARSON TYPE Ille
USGS 09075700 MAROON CREEK ABOVE ASPEN, CO
CALCULATIONS MATRIX RESULTS:
I Column (1) I' Column (,2){ Column (3) l:,Column(4)
SORTED
YEAR IN YEAR IN
1970 382 1980 836
1971 490 1983 826
1972 522 1973 716
1973 716 1985 604
1974 492 1986 604
1975 528 1978 589
1976 451 1975 528
1977 157 1972 522
1978 589 1993 500
1979 440 1974 492
1980 836 1971 490
1981 430 1984 480
1982 372 1976 451
1983 826 1979 440
1984 480 1981 430
1985 604 1990 424
1986 604 1970 382
1987 230 1991 381
1988 275 1982 372
1989 286 1994 334
1990 424 1989 286
1991 381 1988 275
'1992 .230 1987 230
1993 500 1992 230
1994 334 1977 157
X-DATA
NUMBER OF DATA POINTS:
AVERAGE LOG:
2.922 0.0828 0.023842
2.917 0.0799 0.022567
2,855 0.0486 0,010724
2 781 0.0215 0.003154
2.781 0.0215 0.003154
2.770 0.0184 0.002500
2,723 0.0078 0,000687
2.718 0.0069 0.000578
2.699 0.0042 0.000269
2,692 0.0033 0.000191
2.690 0.0031 0.000174
2.681 0.0022 0.000103
2.654 0.0004 0.000008
2.543 0.0001 0.000001
2.633 0.0000 0.000000
2 627 0.0000 QO00000
21582 0.0027 -0.000143
2.581 0.0029 -0.000153
2.571 0.0041 -0,000260
2.524 Q0122 -0,001355
2456 0 0317 -0.005642
2.439 0.0380 -Q007421
2.362 0.0743 -0.020271
2.362 0 0743 -0.020271
2.196 0.1923 -0.084310
LOG STANDARD DEVIATION:
LOG (~OEF. OF SKEW:
LOG COEF. OF SKEW / 6:
25
2.634
0.175
-0.609
-0,102
35.4 mF
Flood:
Recuffenc Chance: z-value: K-value: log Q: Q (cfs) q(cfs/mF)
2 0.5 Q000 0.101 2.652 449 12.7
5 0,2 0.842 0.856 2.784 608 17.2
10 0.1 1.282 1.198 2.844 698 19,7
25 0.04 1.751 1.526 2.901 796 22.5
50 0.02 2,054 1.718 2.935 860 24.3
[.~ :,~.!00~;?.~ i;:,,O.O~ ~:32~1:8~9..~2 963 :~. 918:~ 25:9~j 250 0.004 2.652 2.055 2.994 986 27.8
500 0.002 2.678 2.169 3.014 1032 29.1
ATTACHMENT D
HYDRAULIC
ANALYSIS
HEC-RAS Plan: McKenney 100 River: CapitolCreek Reach: McKenney Profile: PF
Reach .... Rk;~'Si;,- ...... ~'T'oi~-I--'--Mi~;-h El- ' W~S~lev ~ Crit W,S. E.G. Elev
McKenney 56 883.00 75.90 80.08; 80.08 ~, 80.88
UcKenney 50 ' 883.00 ...... f0. io ........ 7~.201 ...... ~/4.20[ 75 89
McJ<enney 40 883.00 6:~.9d ...... ~)~.~7i .... i-'6~.6f 1 ....... 6~.8~
McKenney 30 883.00
McKenney 20 ' 883.00 51.80 56.56[ 56.561 ' * 58.02
M ~:Ke-n-~y 10 883.00 46.80 50.41: 50.41 '. 51.32
E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Ama Top Width Froude # Chi
(fi/fi) , (fl/_s)______~(sq It) (It) .
0.009895 8.32 198.28 129.16 0.77
o.o~2o2 ....... io.~o ..... i~9.b3 ...... 49.59 ..... 0.89
0.010071 ' 8.28 ' 163.87 .... 114.68 0.79
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
0
McKenney Property Floodplain
· . McKenney
200
400
600
Main Channel Distance (fi)
Plan: McKenney lO0-Year
800 1000
"Legend '
Ground
1200
McKenney Property Floodplain Plan: McKenney 100-Year
Cross Section 60 - Upstream End
.08 .04 ~ ............ .08 ........................., ....
82
81
80
79
78
77
76
75
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Slation (It)
McKenney Property Floodplain Plan: McKenney 100-Year
Cross Section 50
78
77
76,
75
74
73
72
71
70
0
Legefid
WS PF 1
Gro=und
Ban~ Sta
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
- --E~-d --
WS PF 1
GrO~und
Ban~ Sta
Stalion (It)
I;
76
74
72
70
68
66
64
McKenney Property Floodplain Plan: McKenney 100-Year
Cross Section 40 - Upstream end of Property
62
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Station (fi)
McKenney Property Floodplain Plan: McKenney 100-Year
Cross Section 30 - Downstream end of Property
/
- ' ....' ......... · "- ' ---~ ........ '-- * .....
- -,.--| - --,- - r -.,---,---,---,---,-----
~,.,. .., :[:::~~: , -. ......... ~ ..... ,,. :_., ;__
50 100 150
WS PF 1
Ground
Ban~ Sta
80
75
70
65
60
55
WS PF 1
Gro~und
Levee
- Ban~ Sta
200 250
Station (It)
McKenney Property Floodplain Plan: McKenney 100-Year
Cross Section 20
.08
59 ' Legeni:l-
58 ws PF 1
Gro=und
57
56 Bant Sta
55
54
53
52
51
0 50 100 150 200
Stalion (It)
McKenney Property Floodplain Plan: McKenney 100-Year
Cross Section 10 - Downstream End
....... 08 ....... >.< ...... 04 :,~ .................. 08 .......
56 ! --Eeg'eh-d
, WS PF 1
54 Gro~und
Bant Sta
52
50
48
46
0 50 100 150 200
Station (It)
ATTACHMENT 10
Wetland Delineation Report
NatureTech Consultant Services Corp.
Biological Assessment, Wetland Delineation and Mitigation,
Fish and Wildlife I-Iabimt Enhancement
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
NANCY MCKENNEY
PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
PREPARED FOR:
MS. NANCY MCKENNEY
SNOWMASS, COLO~DO 81654
May 24, 1999
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
NANC~ MCKENNEY
Pitkin County, Colorado
The McKenney'property is owned by Nancy McKenney, ~.e, Snowmass,
Colorado 81654, (970) 927-47,25o
The McKenney property is located approximately four miles northwest of the town of
Snowmass, Colorado. It is located north of Capitol
Creek
and
south
of Snowmass
Creek
Road. The pi-operty is approximately 1.2 acres in size and contains f significant mount
of jurisdictional wetland. The wetlands on the property run from North to South. Capitol
Creek forms the southern property boundary and is probably not a major source
of water
for the wetlands on the site.
Wetlands and waters of the U.S. were delineated on May 19, 1999 by Kyle D. Johnson of
NatureTech Consultant SerVices using the routine onsite determination method as
described in the 1987 Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional
Wetlands. The jurisdictional boundary was flagged by NatureTech Consultant Sercices.
Mike. Villa, President of NatureTech Consultant Services, supervised and reviewed the
delineation. Louis H. Buettner Surveying surveyed the wetlands and produced the
attached map.
.Vegetation
There are two distinct wetland types that occur on the property~ The Forested wetland
type and the Scrub-shrub wetland type are of approximate equal size.
The forested wetland is dominated by an overstory of thin-leaf alder (Alnus tenuifolia),
honeysuckle (Lonicera involucrata), and yellow willow (Salix lutea) with an understory
of beaked sedge (Carex utriculata), arctic ruch (Juncus arcticus), and wintergreen (Pyrola
rotundifolia). The transitional areas are dominated by Coyote willow (S. exigua), beaked
sedge, and Nebraska sedge (C. nebraskensis). The southeastem wetland boundary of the
forested wetland type ends abruptly at the toe ora very steep slope. To the east-
northeast, the forested wetland transitions to the scrub-shrub wetland which ends abruptly
at the gravel road (Figure 1). The dominant plant species of the upland slope area are
cedar (Juniperus scopulorum), servi~e-berry (Amelanchier alnifolia), big sagebrush
(Anemisia tfidentata), green rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus vjscidiflorus), Kentucky
bluegrass (Poa pratensis), and holly-grape (Mahonia repens). This wetland type appears
to be more wet than the scrub-shrub wetland. Table 1 shows a complete list of plants
encountered on the property during the delineation.
Figure 1: The gravel road forms the eastern wetland boundary.
The scrub-shrub wetland (Figure 2) forms the west and northeast boundary of the
forested wetland and is dominated by coyote willow, Drummond willow (S.
drummondiana), Nebraska sedge, beaked sedge, and arctic rush. The northern scrub-
shrub wetland boundary shows a gradual transition to upland grass-grasslike plants
including streamside bluebells (Mertensia ciliata), smooth brome (Bromus inermis),
shrubby cinquefoil (Potentilla fruiticosa), orchardgrass (Dactytis glomerata), and
buffaloberry (Shepherdia canadensis). The northwestern scrub-shrub wetland boundary
was determined by following the line of transition from sedges and rushes to smooth
brome and orchardgrass. The growing season for the area is from early May to early
October.
Figure 2: The wetland boundary transitioning from willows and sedges to smooth brome.
Hvdrolo_ow
The wetlands on the property are hydrologically intact and in excellent functioning
condition. An irrigation spring (Figure 3) located in the south central portion of the
property and surface water runoff and drainage associated with the slope provide the
majority of the water for both the forested and scrub-shrub wetland types. Up to eight
inches of surface water was found along the base of the slope. Numerous small ditches
nm throughout the forested and scrub-shrub wetlands. One ditch that connected to the
spring was filled with approximately four inches of flowing water during the site visiti
Capitol Creek has down cut approximately one meter, which explains the preponderance
of upland vegetation in the grass-grasslike community adjacent to the creek.
Figure 3: The irrigation spring is located at the toe of the slope along the southeastern
wetland boundary.
According to the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service Pitkin County Soil
Survey, Capitol Creek occasionally floods for brief periods from March to September.
The high water table is from 0.6 to 2.0 feet and occurs from MarCh to September.
Soils
The USDA Natural Resource Conservation ServiCe Pitkin County Soil Survey maps the
soils on the property as somewhat poorly drained to poorly drained Fluvaquents with the
soils of the steep slope as Jerry-Millerlake loams (well-drained Argic Cryoborolls).
I Eight study pits were dug by hand to ex, aluate the soils on the property. The results of six
of the pits were recorded on the routine onsight determination data forms. The other two -
pits were used in order to make a determination when there was a question. Soils in the
I wetland sites had mottles that were distinct or prominent. The wetland soils also had a
high organic matter content. The A horizons were 7.5YR 3/1 and B horizons were 2.5Y
2.5/1. The depth to free water was 16 inches and saturate~l soils occurred at 11 inches.
See Appendix A for complete data sheets.
Upland soils were also very dark but mostly unmottled or had very faint mottles (Figure
4). The A horizons were deep and were from 7.SYR 3/1 on the floodplain to 10YK 4/3
on the slope. The mottles present were few and ranged from 7.5YR 4/6 to 7.5YR 5/8.
The B horizon on the slope was 10YR 3/2. The depth to free water in the upland soils
was nonexistent to 18 inches. The occasional but brief flooding of Capitol Creek is
probably responsible for the mottling in the upland soils.
Figure 4: Upland study pit number 4 in the floodplain.
Sul'nmarv
The majority of the wetlands on the McKenney property occurs in the center of the
property and is bordered by a steep slope to the south, gravel drive to the east, and grass
dominated upland area adjacent to Capitol Creek to the north. The wetland extends
across the property boundary to the west. The final authority as to the mount of
jurisdictional wetland on the McKenney property rests with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.
ID Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Stratum
Status
I Carex nebraskensis Nebraska Sedge OBL H
2 Carex utriculata Beaked Sedge OBL H
3 Juncus arcticus Arctic Rush 7ACW H
4 Bromus inermis Smooth Brome NI H
5 Equisetum arvense Horsetail FAC+ H
6 Mertensia ciliata Chiming Bells OBL H
7 Dactylis g!omerata Orchardgrass NO H
8 Pyrola rotundifolia Swamp Wintergreen NI H
9 Taraxacum officinale Dandelion FACU+ H
10 Pod pratensis Kentucky Blue Grass FACU 'H
11 Senecio serra Butterweed FACU H
12 Carduus acanthoides Thistle NI H
13 Sophora nuttaliana NI H
14 Mahonia repens Holly-Grape NI H
15 Amelanchier alnifolia Serviceberry FACU- S
16 Artemisia ~dentata Big Sagebrush NI S
17 Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Green Rabbitbrush NI S'
18 Salix lutea Yellow Willow OBL S
19 Salix drummondiana Drummond Willow FACW+ S
20 Salix exigua Coyote Willow OBL S
21 Lonicera involucrata Honeysuckle FAC S
22 Picea pungens Colorado Blue Spruce F ACU S
23 Potenetilla fruiticose Shrubby Cinquefoil FACU S
24 Shepherdia canadensis Russet Buffaloberry FACU S
25 Juniperus scopulorum Cedar NI T
26 Alnus tenuifolia Thin Leaf Alder FACW T
-' [.
TABLE 1: Common Plants Found
DATA
ROUTINE v/ETLANO DETER,MINATION
(1987 COE Wedands Oeline=don
investigator: ~LF ~H~(gM S~ate:
Do Norm,I Circumstances exi,~ on Ih, si:e? ~ No Communiw
Is the site sionific~ndy disturbed IAtypic~l Situmdonl? Yes ~ Transect ID:
ts the ~rea a potential Problem Ar~? Yes
(1~ needed, explain on reverse.}
IEGETATION
6. 14.
8. 16.
P~c~nl pt Dominant Sp~c(~ 1h~ ~.09t. FACW ~t FAC
(cxciuding FAC-).
Other
Hydrlc $oil Indicators:
-- Histoso[ ~ H;~h Cr¢cnJc Con[e~t in Surface L~ycr
~ Aquic ~ois~ure Reglmc ~ Ustc~ on Loc=l Hydrlc So;Is Ust
R.duclng Conditions
WET.ND D~ERM1NATION
~ {CirCle)
Hydroph~ic Vcgctetion Present? ~ No (CJtclc)
V,'ctland Hydrology Prcscnt? ~ No
Hydrlc So~ls Pr~s~n[? c~ No Is [h~s Slm~Eng Point ~thin
ROUTINE ,wETLAND DFTERMINATION
( 1987 CeE Wetlands Oelin~Sen Manual)
Is [he site significantly disturbed (Aty0;cal Situsdon)? Yes No
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
~crc:n~ af Dominant 5pcci~ th~ ~r~.OBL. FACW or FAC
{c xcludlng FAC-].
HYDROLOGY -
--- R:cofdcd Da~.- (~$c~0o in R:~srks): P~mz~f
S~:am, L~kc, et T;~ G~u;= inund'zt:d
~No Recorded Oats Av.;labf: ~Or[~ ~nos ,.
.
HyC~r[c Soll Indicators:
R.duclng Conditions ~ L~s/sd on Netlonal Hydric Soils List
Other {~Dla~n in Ram~ks~
~ Gleyed or Low-Chrome Colors
Hy~oph~ic Vco~ion Present? Yes ~(Circl~}
Wttlnnd Hydrology Prcscnt? Yts ~
Hydrlc So[ts Present? ~ No Is this Sampling Point
"
OATA F
ROUTINE wETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wedands Oeline~5on
Normal Circumstances exis[ on the si:e?
~he ske significantly disturbed (Atypical Sku~dan)~ Yes ~ Transec~
Y~s
the ~rea a potential Problem
(If needed, explain on reverse.I
Oomlnan~ Plen~ So:ci;s . ~ ,,-
,g'~ ~~' ,_ ~_~ ,,. -
6. ' ~ 15. ~ -
7. ~6.
8.~ ~
pcrc~n( ol ~o~i~,~nt Species the~ era.O~L. FACW ot FAC
HYO~OLOGY
,, ,, ~ :~.~rolo~y IndLzztors:
' Acriel pb. oto~rsphs ~S=;urmt=d in 'Jpp~r i 2 Ir, thcs
~ Locai Sod Surv=y
' '' ~ '' O;hcr (Ex~la;r.
sOILS
Conlirm M~pc~ Ty~c? Yc: No '
pr o~ilc Description:
)cDIh Ma~z Colo~
0-7" A ~,5 Y~ ~ S~ Ci~ I~
Gleyed or Low-Chrome Colors Other (~ple[n
WETLAND DE'TERMINATION · ;"'
V,'tdend H~rology Prcscnt? ~ NO
]-G
ROUTINE wETLAND DETE~:,~INATION
{198? COE Wedands Oeline~5on
I~esdg~°r: ~'~ ~ ~ ~ Communky
Do Normal Circumstance~ exls~ on the s :-.
Is the area ~ potential Problem Area? ~ Plot ID:
(If needed, explam on re~) --
VEGETATION
Oom~nenr Plmn~ So~clcs ~a~um.
13. .
6.
15.
16.
{c xcludino FAC-).
Remarks:
Soll Indicators:
Hisdc
~ Aquic Moisture ~egimc ~ ~s~c~ =n Locel Hydric So;is
~ GIcyod or Low-Chrmmn Colors -- Othct (~p[min in Remarks)
V/ET~ND D~ERMINATION ' ·
Hydroph~ic Vc~ctoti~n Prcscn~?
~,'~[Iond Hydrology F~csent? Yts ~
"
DATA
ROUTINE wETLAND oETEB,MhNAT~ON
( 1987 COE Wetlands Oellne;:Jon Manuail
.... -,. project/Site: Count;y:
:' -'..'~" Applicant/Owner: ~r,~t,.~J /V/~,.c.c~ ~ 7
Do Normal Circumstances exist on (he si:e? ~ No Commun~w
Is the si~e significandy disturbed (Atypical Si~uadonJ? Yes ~ Transec~
~ Is the area a Dotendal Problem Area? Yes ~ PIo~ID:
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
IEGETATION
6.
'.
~ 6.
(:xcludlng ~AC-}.
~ HYDROLOGY ~
___ P,~cordcd O~: (C~sc~ba in R~m~tks): P~m~r(
~ S[;=~m. LAke, or Tld~ G~ug~ ;nund~[:d
~ No Rocardod Oa[~ Ave;leblo --Oei~t
-
. - -- F.z C-N~utr:l
{Sc~icS end Phase): U~/~ ~ ~ vl Ors~n~oa Class:
~ O~scri=~{on: ~.~ tcx{urc. Concretions.
~ Listod on N~tionnl H~ric Soils List
~ Reduc~no Conditions
WETteD D~ERMiNATIOH
Hydroph~ic Vegetation Prcs~n[?
.. ..
ADptovcC ~y HQUSA~'~ 2,'~2
3-~
.' '..'~
OATA
ROUTINE wETLAND DETERMINATION
( 1987 COE Wedands oeIine;-%n Manual)
proiec~lSi~e: County:
i~vesdga~or: .
~s ~e area a potential Problem Area? ....
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION ~
~ ' 16.
Pc[cone of ~omln~nt ~pcc{.s th~ 6r..O~L FA~W or FAC
[cxcludlng FA~-).
HYDROLOGY
-- V;.- d zr.d :-'..,~r olo ¢. y
, _S~;~a~' L~kc. o[ Ti~ O~ug: inund~t=~
t Act;.I Pho~o~ra¢;~s ~ S=turat=d in 'JeD~r i 2 Ir. ch:s
' O::lh of SU'.C, ,",to,: ~R .... :~10') ~'.",,c,.S,,in='
I, ~-3
soILS = f' ~
IScrleS znd Ph~sel:*.~_~,f(~AI F~eld Observations
p ~_~o dl c Oo$cr;~llon:
Ocl3th ~4otti~ Color f~,o~lc Colors :.:=.'~,,e Tcxlurc, Concoct;ohS.
· H;s[osol -- H;~h Cr[;~n~c Content in Surge:= L~ycr in Sandy Soits
Histic EpJpcdon ~ I_'
Sull'~d;c Odo~ OrgcNc 5L~'ceJcing in S~ndy Soils
Aquic ~o[sturo
. :L.
WET.ND D~ERMINATION :
Hydroph~ic Vcoct~tion P~cscn[? Yes ~Circlc)
Hydrology Present? Yes
ATTACHMENT 11
Section 404 Permit
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT .~?'
Permittee:
Nancy
McKenney
Post Office Box 715
Snowmass, Colorado 81654 ~r~~:~0 ~
Permit N~ber: ~0027~458 C~~'0
Issuing Office: U.S. Army Engineer District, Sacramento
Corps of Engineers - ~ '~
1325 "J" Street
Sacramento, California 95814-29~2 '
NOTE: The term "you" and ~ts derivatives, es used ~n th~s permit, ~ns the perm~ttee or any future
-transferee. The term "th~s off,ce" refers to the ~ropr~ate d~strict or d~v~sion off,ce of the Corps of
Engineers h~v~ng jurisdiction over the ~rm~tted ect.~v~ty or the appropriate official of that off,ce acting
under the authority of the c~a~ng off~cer.
You are authorqzed to perform work ~n ~ccordence w~th the terms and cond~t~.ons specified below.
Proj~t Description: To d~scharge f~ll ~nto 0.199 acre of waters of the U.S. for the ~rpose of a single
family residence ~t Lot 4,.Cap~tol Creek Su~v~s~on.
All work ~s to be completed ~n accordance w~th the attached plans, also reference F~gures A-Revised (dated
01/14/03) and C-Foundation Schematic (date 01/03/03).
Proj~t L~at~: Near the Town of Snow, ss, Cotora~ epprox~metely 2 m~les fr~ the ~ntersection of
Colorado State H~ghway 82 a~ Old Sno~ass Creek Road. The ne~gh~r~ng address for this undeveloped lot ~s
0199 Capitol Creek Road CLot 6-Zane Pro~rty) which shares a co,on driveway for th~s pro~rty, 1/8 m~le
west fr~ the T-~ntersection of Cap~tot Creek and old Sno~ass Creek Roads. The lot ~s Located w~th~n
Section 3, Township 9 South, Range 86 ~est, P~tk~n County, ~olorado.
Pemit C~.it~om:
General Conditions:
1. The t~me l~mit ~or completing the work authorized e~s on March 5, 2006. If you f~nd that you need more
t~me to complete the authorized activity, su~t your request for a t~me extension to this off~ce for
consideration at least n~nety days C90) before the ebove d~te ~s re~ched.
2. You ~st maintain the ~ct~v~ty authorized by this permit ~n good condition ~nd in conformance w~th the
terms and conditions of th~s ~rm~t. You are not relieved of th~s requ~re~nt ~f you abandon the permitted
activity, although you may make a good faith transfer to a third party ~n co~t~ance w~th General ~ond~t~on
4 below. Should you wish to cease to maintain the authorized activity or should you desire to abandon ~t
without a good faith transfer, you must obtain a m~f~cat~on of th~s ~rm~t fr~ th~s off,ce, which m~y
require restoration of the area.
3. If you d~.scover any previously unknown h~stor~c or archeotogic~l remains wh~le accomplishing the
activity authorized by this permit, you must ~ed~ately not~fy th~s off.~ce of wh~t you h~ve found. ~e will
~nit~ate the Federal ~nd state coordination required to determine ~f the remains w~rrant B recovery effort
or ~f the s~te ~s eligible for [~sting ~n the National Register of H~stor~c Places.
4. If you se~l the property associated w~th this permit, you ~st obtain the signature of the new owner ~n
the space provided and forward a copy of the permit to th~s off,ce to vat,date the transfer of th~s
authorization.
5. If a co~t~oned water quality certification h~s been issued for your project, you must co~ly w~th the
conditions specified in the certification as spec~a~ conditions to th~s permit. For your convenience, a
copy of the certification ~s attached ~f ~t contains such co~t~ons..
6. You must allow representatives from this off,ce to ~spect the authorized activity ~t any time deemed
necessary to ensure tha~ ~t ~s being or has been acco~lished ~n accordance w~th the terms and conditions of
your permit.
Special Conditions:
1. The permittee shall maximize the use of appropriate and effective methods to prevent excessive
sedimentation, erosion, and unauthorized discharges in waters of the U.S., including wetlands. Any straw or
hay used for these ~Jrposes shall be certified weed-free. The permittee shat[ employ a qualified wetlands
ecologist or similar professional, who shall be on-site during construction, for advice and prevention of
unnecessary and unauthorized discharges in such waters. Construction personnel shall be instructed and
supervised to avoid unauthorized work in the aquatic environment.
2. Within 30 days of completing the authorized work, the permittee shall submit a written statement to the
Corps of Engineers certifying that all of the authorized work has been constructed in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this permit. The certification shall be signed by the permittee.
3. The permittee shall purchase 0.2985 acre of wetlands credits from "Rocky Mountain Institute" for a
credit ratio equal to 1.5 to 1.0 for impacts to 0.199 acre of wetlands.
4. The permittee shall provide evidence of purchased credit in the form of a signed Irrevocable Certificate
of Compensatory Mitigation and Exhibit A-Compensatory Mitigation Summary Worksheet, prior to commencing
project construction in wetlands.
Further Information:
1. Congressional Authorities: You have been authorized to undertake the activity described above pursuant
to:
of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403).
(
)
Section
10
(X) Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1413).
(
>
2. Limits of this authorization.
a. This permit does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, state, or local authorizations
required by law.
b. This permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges.
c. This permit does not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others.
d. This permit does not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal projects.
3. Limits of Federal Liability. In issuing this permit, the Federal Government does not assume any
liability for the following:
a. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted od unpermitted
activities or from natural causes.
b. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof a~ a result of current or future activities
undertaken by or on behalf of the United States in the public interest.
c. Damages to persons, property, or to other permitted or unpermitted activities or structures caused
by the activity authorized by this permit.
d. Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work.
e. Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this permit.
4. Reliance on Applicant's Data. The determination of this office that issuance of this permit is not
contrary to the public interest was made in reliance on the information you provided.
5. Raeva[uation of Permit Decision. This office may reevaluate its decision on this permit at any ti.me the
circumstances warrant.
Circumstances that could require ~ reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
b. The informatio~ provided by you in support of your permit application proves to have been false,
incomplete, or inaccurate (see 4 above).
c. Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching the original
public interest decision.
Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension,
modification, and revocation procedures contained in 33 CFR 325.7 or enforcement procedures such as those
contained in 33 CFR 326.4 and 326.5. The referenced enforcement procedures provide for the issuance of an
administrative order requiring you comply with the terms and conditions of your permit and for the
initiation of legal action where appropriate. You will be required to pay for any corrective measures
ordered by this office, and if you fail to comply with such directive, this office may in certain situations
(such as those specified in 33 CFR 209.170) accomplish the corrective measures by contract or otherwise and
bill you for the coat.
6. Extens'ions. General Condition I establishes a time Limit for the Completion of the activity authorized
by this permit. Unless there are circumstances requiring either a prompt completion of the authorized
activity or a reevaluation of the public interest decision, the Corps will normally give favorable
consideration to a request for an extension of this time Limit.
Your signature below, as permittee, indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the terms and
conditions of this permit.
(DATE)
(PERMLTTEE)
This permit becomes e~fective when the Federal official, designated to act for the Secretary of the Army,
has signed below./
///~/~..~.~ed for ~n behalf of Colonel Michael J. Conrad, Jr-, District Engineer ~../_ ~
Ken Jacobson,i~/h~ef,~/o~ado/Gunnison Sasin Regulatory Office (DATE)
When the structures or work authorized by this permit are still in existence at the time the property is
transferred, the terms and conditions of this permit will continue to be binding on the new owner(a) of the
property. To validate the transfer of this permit and the associated liabilities associated with compliance
with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below.
(TRANSFERES) (DATE)
ATTACHMENT 12
Legal Opinions on Use of Easements
On Lot for Development
LAW OFFICES OF
B~OOKE A. PETER.SON 'I~'~TJ'~i'~.,A~I'~ & ~O~, ~.C. TELEPHONE
GIDEON I. ~UF~N* (~0)
TERRI J. ~FRISSEN 3~ 5 EAST HYMAN A~NUE, SUITE 305 FACSIMILE
OF COUNSEL' ASPEN, COLO~O 81611 [970)
~L$ DISHLER'~
- ~'~"'"'~ Apr[] 25, 2002
Ms. Nancy McKenney
PO Box 715
Snowmass, Colorado 81654
Re: I~ot 4, Cauitol Woods Subdivision
Dear Nancy:
As you have requested, I have examined the Plat of the Capitol Woods Subdivision. Based upon my
examination of the Plat and Louis Buettner's survey of your lot, as well as my conversations with you, I am
of the opinion that there are certain easements shown on either the Capitol Woods Subdivision Plat itsel£or
created by the passage of time, all of which would affect the be of certain portions of Lot 4. Specifically,
the Plat of the Capitol Woods Subdivision recorded in Plat Book 4 at Page 288 oft. he Pitkin County records
shows that there is a fifteen (15) foot water line easement to Spring Well No. 2 for the benefit of the owners
of Lots 5 and 6, which traverses Lot4, as well a~ a large leach field easement between Bean Way as shown
on the Plat and the driveway which ha~ been created for lhe benefit of Lot 6. Although not shox~= on the
Plat, this driveway appears to have been created by the owner, of Lot 6, and because of the passage of time,
I doubt very seriously that any type of legal challenge to the existence of the driveway would be sustainable.
Building upon the portiorm o£Lot 4 burdened by these easements would not be advisable.
Essentially, Colorado law provides that no e~ement shall be considered abandoned merely because
of non-use, but rather ma3, only be abandoned by an affirmative act, or may be taken over by adverse
possession. From your recitation to me of the history of Lots 4, 5 and 6 of the Capitol Woods. Subdivision,
I do not believe that an)' of the easements shown on the Plat or the ch'iveway easement may deem to be
abandoned, eveu if they have not been used for some period of time.
Hopefully, this informatiDn will be helpful to you in your discussions with the Army Corps 9f
Engineers. If i ma)' be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours very truly,
LAW OFFICES OF {
{~70) 9~ 180 ~
GIDECN I. ~UFM~' FA~IMILE
TERR~ J. P~K$ 315 EA~ ~ AVENUE, SUITE ~
ASPEN, COLO~O 81611 (97~) 925.~.. o~
OF COUNSEL:
~ 5. OlSH~R"
Au~st 29, 2002
Ms Nancy McK~y ~
PO Box 715
Sno~s, Colorado g1654 r -
Ae: Lot 4~ Clpitol Woods Subdi*~ion
Dear Nancy:
Subsequent to ou~ letter to you of ApH! 25, 2002, you have a~ked that our fu-'m examine certain othe~
issues with respect to yo~ prop~ ~o~ ~ Lot 4, Cap{tol Woo~ Subdi~s[on. We have exam~ed ~e
documents s~o~din~ ~ ~ea~on of~e Capitol Woo~ Sub~sion and ~e plat of the subdi~ion. We
~ve also co~dered ~e hc~ we have discussed ~ you ~ respect to ~e ~sto~ of~e ~pitol Woo~
Subdi~sion. B~ed upon ~e info~ation we have received ~d renewed, and ~ou~ spading ~ excessive
amo~t of time revie~ng this ma~, we believe it would be ve~ difficull (if not impossible) for you to
~ause any of~e easemen~ pres~tly sho~ on ~e Capitol Woods Subdi~sion phi Io be vacated. ~ere is
a general principle of ]aw ~at easemen~ may only be ab~doned by af~dve acdon, ~d we are aware
of no such fict~ which would suppo~ ~u~h a ~oncl~. G~y spea~ng; a private ink.dual ~ no
power to conde~ easem~ ~c~t in a li~ted ~e~e for in.ess ~d e~ess ~ a l~dlo~k~d p~el, whioh
is not ~ cas~ h~c. We do no~ believe, based upon our r~ew, ~at you ~ve any leg~l b~[~ for conde~ing
any or.ese eas~ which pres~ly ~cumber yo~ prop~, including, but not limimd ~o, ~e waler line
easement and ~e leach field easement ~y litigation which you wo~d ~ter into would be ex~emely
q~te exp~ive and ~ime co~uming.
~ could always c~s~d~r mo~ng ~e wa~er line e~ement ~d ~e water l~e pzes~fly loca~d
compensa~ on, Ag~i~ we believe lha~ ~is would be v~ e~sive Io you ~lh no ~azmtee of ~y ce~ainW
~a~ the beheaded prop~ o~ers would a~ee to th~s relocation.
We hope that ~is le~er s~e~ to answer yo~ questio~ re~ding these e~en1~. If we can
provide any f~h~ s~ice~, place do not hesitate zo con~ ~.
Yo~s ve~ ~ly,
B
B~jk .~ '~ok APet~son
~: Dasd ~ehan (~a facs{~la)
DENVER
2490 W. 26th Avenue Suite 100A
Denver, Colorado 80211
Phone: 303.480.1700
Fax: 303.480.1020
GLENWOOD SPRINGS
818 Colorado Avenue
P.O. Box 219
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602
Phone: 970.945.7755
Fax: 970.945.9210
DURANGO
1666 N. Main Avenue Suite C
Durango, Colorado 81301
PhOne: 970.259.7411
Fax: 970.259.8758
www.wrightwater, com
Wright Water Engineers, Inc.