HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sm.Enloe.58.83 CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen
No. SC '83
Staff: - Re/ma
PROJECT NAME: � SihQF 4+rem Acuvo1M l¢lJ
APPLICANT: I i4' O(11F)f Phone:
REPRESENTATIVE: ' rrsvn dC Phone: gd5-"1Sn
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (Fee)
I. GMP /SUBDIVISION /PUD (4 step)
1. Conceptual Submission ($1,840)
2. Preliminary Plat ($1,120)
3. Final Plat ($ 560)
II. SUBDIVISION /PUD (4 step)
1. Conceptual Submission ($1,290)
2. Preliminary Plat ($ 830)
3. Final Plat ($ 560)
III .EXCEPTION /EXEMPTION /REZONING (2 step) ($1,010)
IV. SPECIAL REVIEW (1 step) 61-5464
1. Special Review
2. Use Determination
3. Conditional Use
REFERRALS: Date Referred: 10113In-
Y Attorney Sanitation District __School District
V Engineering Dept. Mountain Bell Rocky Mtn. Nat.Ga
Housing Parks State Hgwy. Dept.
Water Holy Cross Electric Fire Chief
City Electric
Fire Marshall,:uilding 1:5t. Other
FINAL ROUTING: Date Routed: Z4g154
Attorney X. Engineering
'( Building Other
DISPOSITION:
CITY P &Z REVIEW: ►t croup it - 3 Subject a.rQAI-la`t- 6 r o-c
• 51-t ' xis 41(1-41-1-a .ail- — 4 X i c. YYLe ti 14. • 1. C ice'
SOIS JFC 'fO sclr3rntss lop) of Qlf}rN,W /PJO-re. ON PU4&S
�s
sifrrbo of vnar\o ft{ ficHeD HtPtVo. To uucrou6Eluc
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW:
Ordinance No.
CITY P &Z REVIEW:
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW:
Ordinance No.
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office
RE: Enloe Stream Margin Review
DATE: November 8, 1983
The attached letter of application from Tom Wells requests Stream
Margin Review approval for an addition to the Enloe Residence,
formally the Sheldon Gordon Residence on Lot 1, Gordon Subdivision.
We will not quote in this memo the intent and criteria established
in the Code for Stream Margin Review since that information was
included in our memo on the Molny- Eubank Stream Margin Review, also
on this agenda and included in your packet.
This proposed addition will be located entirely on the bluff where
the existing residence is located, 20 to 30 feet above the road.
A site inspection was conducted by the Planning Office in order to
verify the applicant's assertion that there will be no adverse im-
pacts on the river or stream margin. We do believe that to be the
case.
The City Engineering Department also conducted a site inspection and
concluded that there will be no adverse impacts resulting from the
addition. Chuck Roth requested that more definite language be added
to the development plan. That language is reflected in the Planning
Office recommendation which follows.
The City Attorney's Office had no comments.
The Planning Office recommends that you approve the Enloe Stream
Margin Review subject to the addition of the following language
to the development plans:
"NOTE: The construction procedure to be used will in no way
impact the stream. There will be no change in the channel
or its capacity, and there will be no construction
activity which will increase stream sedimentation and
suspension load."
THOMAS WELLS & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS
330 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE 303 925 -781 7
October 11, 1983
Mr. Alan Richman
City of Aspen
Planning Office
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Alan:
I am enclosing four copies of the site plan for an addition to
the Enloe Residence, formerly the Sheldon Gordon residence
on lot 2, Gordon Subdivision. Mr. Enloe's check for $465.00
for the stream margin review fee is also enclosed.
As the addition is on the high bluff above the river and no
closer to the river than the existing residence, there should
be no adverse impact on the river or the stream margin.
No trees or existing vegetation will be removed and no grading
will be done that will affect the river or the slope.
Because of the late notice of the stream margin review
requirement, we would appreciate being included on the
October 19 P &Z meeting.
Very truly yours,
■
Thomas O. Wells
Enclosures
MEMORANDUM
TO: Richard Grice, Planning Office
FROM: Chuck Roth, Engineering Department at
t
DATE: October 17, 1983
RE: Enloe Stream Margin Review
Having reviewed the above application and have made a
site inspection, the Engineering Department has the
following comments:
1. The application letter for this stream margin review
contains an apparent error in the legal description of
the property being reviewed. The existing residential
structure is located on Lot 1, not Lot 2, of the Gordon
Subdivision.
2. The language regarding impacts on the stream should
be more definite than that in the application. The
Engineering Department suggests that the following
language be on the development plans:
NOTE: The construction procedure to be used
will in no way impact the stream. There
will be no change in the stream channel
or its capacity, and there will be no
construction activity which will increase
stream sedimentation and suspension load.
CR /co
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Attorney
City Engineer
Building Department
FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office
RE: Enloe Stream Margin Review
DATE: October 13, 1983
Attached for your review is an application by Thomas Wells on
behalf of Ted Enloe for stream margin review. This item has
been scheduled for review before the Planning and Zoning
Commission on November 8, 1983. Please have your comments
to the Planning Office by October 25, 1983 in order for the
Planning Office to have adequate time to prepare for its
presentation before P &Z.
Thank you.
1' n� _ I� ti l�{'., it
Y�
lV_ �tal -u RJ «W
Q- - t o.Ay
i\O V 2v\w 1
IVClOkR'^y
s". QtfletrA--S