HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sm.Lee 1106 Waters.22A-88 AO
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
/11: City of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: 7b0o%O C L D AND CASE NO.
DATE COMPLETE: p2, Zo? 4/Doz -(Fe
-1/61n STAFF MEMBER: �
PROJECT NAME: k.,/ Or o o leep-u,��'�
Project Address: / / 63
Di
APPLICANT: ,././_/11/
Applicant Addres: : /eeM// I,///_AMAII/. i.//I'M/MIWA/
REPRESENTATIVE: Y
Representative Address/ hone: A`iN WI ► &.V,
PAID: NO AMOUNT: '-7�D• (2 C
1) TYPE OF APPLICCATION:
1 STEP: V 2 STEP:
2) IF 1/STEP APPLICATION GOES TO:
✓ P&Z CC PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO K.
3) PUBLIC HEARING IS BEFORE:
P&Z CC,(� N/A
DATE REFERRED: ( U INITIALS:
REFERRALS:
/ City Attorney Mtn. Bell School District
V. City Engineer Parks Dept. Rocky Mtn Nat Gas
Housing Dir. Holy Cross State Hwy Dept(GW)
Aspen Water Fire Marshall State Hwy Dept(GJ)
City Electric Fire Chief Bldg:Zon/Inspect
Envir. Hlth. Roaring Fork Roaring Fork
Aspen Consol. Transit Energy Center
S.D. Other
FINALL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: INITIAL:
V/
City Atty v City Engineer Bldg. Dept.
Other: ,:----.--17)17/ 1 /1
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
• S
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
LEE STREAM MARGIN REVIEW (1988)
TO: FILE
FROM: CINDY HOUBEN, PLANNER
RE: LEE STREAM MARGIN REVIEW (1988)
On July 5, 1988 the Planning Commission approved the Lee Stream
Margin Review with the following conditions:
1) All representations of the applicant shall be considered
conditions of approval.
2) Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the deck, the
applicants shall plant 5 cottonwoods along the east side of
the house. In addition, 3 spruces shall be planted on the
slope between the house and the river.
3) The following shall be supplied to the Engineering
Department and Planning Office prior to issuance of a
building permit for the deck:
a. The high water line shall be placed on the plat.
b. The proposed deck needs to be shown clearly on the
plat.
c. Written confirmation from a landscape company that the
four caisson foundations proposed for the support of
the deck will be placed so they will not damage the
root systems of the trees that currently penetrate the
existing deck.
d. The design of the anchoring of the new deck at the
river shall be approved by a professional engineer.
Condition # 2 has been satisfied by the applicant. This
condition was checked for compliance by the project planner in
July, 1988 . In September 1988 the applicants builder requested a
minor amendment to the location of the lower deck. This was
approved by the Planning Office. The amendment was to move the
lower deck 4 ' downstream. See approval in file.
ch. lee2
ir)
. •
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Cindy Houben, Planning Office
RE: Lee Stream Margin Review
DATE: July 5, 1988
REQUEST: Approval of a Stream Margin Review to enlarge an
existing deck and add a lower deck adjacent to the river.
APPLICANT: Harlan Lee.
LOCATION. Lot 12 Calderwood Subdivision, 1106 Waters Ave.
HISTORY: The Planning Commission has approved two other stream
margin reviews for this parcel. The most recent review was in
October of 1987 for additions to an existing house. Prior to
that review, the applicants were granted stream margin review
approval in 1978 for additions to the original house.
The following were conditions of approval for the 1987 review:
1) Revised foundation and site coverage plans shall be prepared
which continue to leave the steep slope of the river bank
undisturbed and eliminate the need to remove more than the
four cottonwood trees identified.
2) The applicant shall replant, or replace with new trees the
four cottonwood trees prior to occupancy of the addition. A
revised site plan showing relocation of three cottonwood
trees, specifying the caliper at a minimum of 2 1/2" - 3" ,
and planting one blue spruce a minimum of 8 ' tall shall be
submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Office priori
to issuance of a Building Permit.
3) The lower deck shall either be removed or anchored for the
purpose of not breaking loose in case of a flood. Design of
the anchoring shall be approved by a professional engineer
and it shall be installed prior to occupancy of the
addition.
4) Excavation and construction techniques shall be specified in
the Building Permit application to ensure to the
satisfaction of the Building Department, that no undue
disturbance of the stream bank or to the Roaring Fork River
will result.
•
The applicants are now in the process of putting on the additions
which were approved in 1987 and are in the process of satisfying
the conditions as listed above. During this review process the
applicants requested that we review condition number 2 above. The
size of the required trees have a larger root base than can be
placed next to the house. In addition, the approved location of
the 8 ' spruce tree is situated on a steep slope down to the
river. In order to place the tree in the approved location the
bank would have to be disturbed and revegetated. The Planning
Office has determined that due to site constraints the applicants
may substitute 5 smaller cottonwoods for the 3 larger cottonwoods
to be placed along the side of the house. The Planning Office
has also determined that it is more appropriate to locate 3
smaller spruce trees on the slope rather than the one 8 ' tree.
The smaller trees can be hand carried and planted thereby causing
less damage to the bank.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
The applicants are proposing to construct a 610 square foot deck
on the back side of their house along the Roaring Fork River.
This deck is above the 100 year flood boundary. The applicants
are also proposing to reconstruct a deck which is adjacent to the
river along the 100 year flood boundary line.
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
1) Engineering Department: Jim Gibbard of the Engineering
Department notes the following concerns in his attached
memorandums:
a. The high water line needs to be drawn and labeled.
b. The proposed addition to the deck needs to be shown
more clearly on the plat.
c. The four caisson foundations proposed for the support
of the deck should be placed so they will not damage
the root systems of the trees that currently penetrate
the existing deck.
d. The design of the anchor of the deck at the river shall
be approved by a professional engineer.
STAFF COMMENTS: Section 24-6. 3 (e) of the old Code requires that
the application for stream margin review respond to the
following criteria:
1) Criteria: No development shall occur within a special flood
hazard area unless it can be demonstrated that there will be
no increase in base flood elevation as a result of the
development, as shown by an elevation certificate prepared
2
• •
by a professional engineer registered to practice in the
State of Colorado.
Response: The proposed decks are located outside of the 100
year floodway boundary. An attached letter by Dean Gordon,
a registered engineer states that the lower deck can be
constructed in the proposed location with minimal impacts on
flood characteristics.
2) Criteria: In the event there is a trail designated by an
approved trail plan within the development site, such trail
shall be dedicated for public use.
Response: No Trails or proposed trails are located in this
area.
3) Criteria: All attempts should be made to implement the
recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan prepared
by the Roaring Fork Greenway Committee.
Response: There are no site specific recommendations from
the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan for this location. In
general, the application conforms to the plan since no
vegetation will be removed along the river corridor.
4) Criteria: Vegetation shall not be removed nor any slope
grade changes made that may produce erosion of the stream
bank.
Response: No vegetation will be removed. Existing trees
will be allowed to penetrate the deck. All areas disturbed
during construction will be revegetated and proper
construction methods will be used during construction to
prevent erosion of the stream bank.
5) Criteria: All efforts shall be made to reduce pollution and
interference with the natural changes of the river, stream
or other water course, and to enhance the value thereof as
important natural feature.
Response: As noted earlier, all disturbed areas will be
revegetated and no pollution to the stream is anticipated.
The natural course of the river will not be changed by this
proposal.
6, 7, 8) Criteria: Written notice shall be given to the Colorado
Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration or
relocation of the water course, and a copy of said notice
shall be submitted to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
Criteria: In the event a water course shall be altered or
3
• •
relocated, the applicant and applicant's heirs, successors
and assigns shall provide maintenance to assure that the
floor carrying capacity is not diminished.
Criteria: Copies shall be submitted of all necessary federal
and state permits relating to work within the one hundred
year floodplain.
Response: No federal permits are required for this proposal
and no alteration of the stream will occur as a result of
this proposal.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval of the
Stream Margin Review for the Lee parcel with the following
conditions:
1) All representations of the applicant shall be considered
conditions of approval.
2) Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the deck, the
applicants shall plant 5 cottonwoods along the east side of
the house. In addition, 3 spruces shall be planted on the
slope between the house and the river.
3) The following shall be supplied to the Engineering
Department and Planning Office prior to issuance of a
building permit for the deck:
a. The high water line shall be placed on the plat.
b. The proposed deck needs to be shown clearly on the
plat.
c. Written confirmation from a landscape company that the
four caisson foundations proposed for the support of
the deck will be placed so they will not damage the
root systems of the trees that currently penetrate the
existing deck.
d. The design of the anchoring of the new deck at the
river shall be approved by a professional engineer.
CH.LEESMR
4
• •
MEMORANDUM
TO: Cindy Houben, Planning Office
FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department C
DATE: June 30, 1988
RE: Amendment to Lee Stream Margin Review Application
The Engineering Department has the following comments in refer-
ence to the above amendment:
1. The reduction in size of the proposed deck is acceptable.
2. The design of the anchoring of the new deck at the river shall
be approved by a professional engineer.
jg/leeamend
cc: Jay Hammond
Chuck Roth
411 S TT
JUN 1 0 1988
-
MEMORANDUM
TO: Cindy Houben, Planning Office
FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department 90
DATE: June 6, 1988
RE: Lee Stream Margin Review
Having reviewed the above application and made a site inspection,
the Engineering Department has the following comments:
1. The high water line needs to be drawn and labeled.
2 . The proposed addition to the deck needs to be shown more
clearly.
3. The four caisson foundations proposed for the support of the
deck should be placed so they will not damage the root systems of
the trees that currently penetrate the existing deck.
jg/leestmrl
cc: Jay Hammond
Chuck Roth
§
��
h� 110Grand Avenue, Suite 212
SCHMUESER GOR i EYER INC. , ��\�� G iwood Springs, Colorado 81601
(303) 945-1004
June 24, 1988 IRIB►T->A.1111
IOW Pi
V��ItUii• CONSULTiNG ENGINEERS&SURVEYORS
Mr. Sunny Vann
Vann & Associates
P.O. Box 8485
Aspen, CO 81612
RE: Harlan Lee Residence - 1106 Waters Avenue
Dear Sunny:
The purpose of this letter is to summarize my observations about the
feasibility of construction of an exterior platform at the above-refer-
enced residence located at 1106 Waters Avenue. This feasibility letter •
is based on examination of Preliminary Site Plan, as well as a brief •
site visit to the area.
The platform will need to be constructed outside the floodway. It
would appear that the flood fringe area in the vicinity of the resi-
dence is very narrow and that it will most likely be possible to con-
struct the platform outside the flood fringe area, as well. In the
event the platform were to extend into the flood fringe area, it is my
opinion that the effect on the flood elevation in this portion of the
river would be extremely negligible if there were any effect at all.
That preliminary observation is based on the following:
•
1 ) The total volume displaced by the entire structural slab would
be on the order of 100 cubic feet. That portion which would ex-
tend into the flood fronge would only be a portion of that and
would negligible with respect to the flow of the river.
2) It. is estimated that any back water created would be less than
0.01 feet. That amount of back water would be dissipated before
reaching the upstream property line and, therefore, would have no
effect on any neighboring properties.
•
3) The gradient of the river, consequently the velocity and carrying
capacity, in this area is significant; therefore, again minimiz-
ing the effect of any obstruction of a minor nature which might
extend into the flood fringe.
Obviously, at the time of actual design, it is appropriate to analyze
the specific proposed construction. As stated above, it is my opinion
that any such construction will have minimal, if any, impact on the
flood characteristics of the Roaring Fork River at this property
location.
•
Respectfully submitted,
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
-7-D4 •
•-an W. •rdon, P.E.
es iden
G:1ec
•
x:
••
i,1 ; Z = > n C o r 0 1 O x- q�(� - •
> r t DOD f p < 0, O O it 6,
> A -1T7O - 4` V-J-
�J
'a u • moo. Ti l p C N )- 6 ,0 D < p I4 - m T O Z L / o D N <o a o .A. r El t < ® S / o O O Z Z T 2 m , < o P v O - <
r y v f
P
z
3 y P % Z o Z n Z 4 11•
om 000 . -O{ 1 N f -1 0 ® O ' ~• f •
0
o C !n g �vt..� °� .0
z C Am O o G ER ' A
A Z U v Ap2 p O a - - � O ? rpu . m
• , ,-- O -i o
A L n PAy Ol.0 .c' i t n' ' - • .. , L Z Z
< On -1 pp - I a
;2 p A Y -o `\• c p e i
---
• r t
s° • i ° ,
a
j
' O 11
U �t t,4
2 1•
• n 0 4 v c
. p p r L c* „c:
• A i4, 9 1/40 4
' ".�i O C G E •`
m :. .�. 6 3 a-
pOQTmm '°t - I N 14 s;; rx r
• p��mDO -�A of o a \ '` W
P�rt�rin G w 1 00 -1 t.^ % o
r.'tntnffl00 a rn % � TN Z ` �l� — .....
N2 n
60 b20A_ W r . . . _ o•
• n 021N0 �0 ,o '`•'t r , .- t- I-ia?. ��
5
�.v. r.233-INOv �d ,p
zm mP0r0Z ,.e ..
C o '�i `
vD vsn
a2- 5� -\ �p •
�m04n➢��z-f1 ® O 9�/ Q• f
• lz,d, 100 I O O —'/ V5
•Di�mm2 -10 I ��O •� i r.�// •
OmNGm �p� 3is °L3itli--1 R- ^'-^��� 1 1 mat ry= \ra Z0113
Z �SI( ��F �- JZ%�n _.•f tEl�O0" N
lD -C[-P�r- r - -o
A .� 1
• C.. -""/ tr1, t
m.
0 0 tr
Jm Y
›% 0
r o0 •
m
N -
.j
r n
N
p
i •
, . ' • '',: , , ,;,-
• .,,,
________ • • :_.'
. . . ,
, . .
.,.
. .._
- •
----------7----7-..7-'7MT-77-F7, - • . . ' '
, - ' • ' •• ,,„,1 \ ' , ' ; ' ' . - iii
ro
. OA
I % 0
I.I 1
1
d ( .
1 \ • ) 1,'
1 1 • -._____,
l•
-1 -4 ll
Liii
- • Li, • 1
r -
i •
•A \ : . ,,,,
• I.
A.,
\ •t 9 gi .
• I
]lip \
„ \,, \
.7.,, \ 9 • 0
)7 . . •
. . • -•• .
• 1
... \
111 ...if. i - 1 ea
--i-- . ,- - • , )
50
.F7— ..---11.................11 . i J
r 0
(/
I
o 0
I 0 '
0
0
1/ ,
rn N
1
,• K 0-4
1 es
P.D . • cli, A. ' I am
r.-1 Zjil
.115.1„tri ' Ma
ti 111111 `0,
..... MN ---11
. tltp.4
saii ?%1
. .
as t•
■./ ,
■Il I /
• 113
• .,
, b> ' El . ,, ..•
:. . ..
' 7111 11,i i !, •
,, 1 1 : :i •)
2 ,: ., : , - •
,. . . ..
.. . . . ..
_ 1: 1: : :• : .,.,
„ .. • v-
• .: • r ..-,_
v._ ----0---,,,
- - •• n' ..j . ' ,-. . . ;.1:
1 i . . R,A •- t • .
-z •
r.,u -,-, .•
ittb
1 L,IH./. t7A
( ',
VANN ASSOCIATES JUN 2 8
1988
Planning Consultants (j -
June 27 , 1988
HAND DELIVERED
Ms. Cindy Houben
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Lee Stream Margin Review
Dear Cindy:
As we discussed last week, Mr. Lee wishes to amend his
application for stream margin review prior to P&Z con-
sideration on the fifth of July. Specifically, he would
like to reduce the size of the proposed deck reconstruc-
tion and to include in his request a second deck to be
located adjacent to the river.
Existing Deck Reconstruction
The current deck reconstruction proposal is essentially
the same as discussed in our original application dated
April 25, 1988. Mr. -Lee, however, would like to reduce
the size of the deck from approximately 680 square feet to
610 square feet so as not to obstruct his views of the
Roaring Fork River from the residence. All other repre-
sentations of the original application (e.g. , foundation
details, the retention of trees, etc. ) are to remain
unchanged. The revised deck configuration is illustrated
on the accompanying drawings.
New Deck At River
As the drawings also illustrate, Mr. Lee would like to
construct a second deck below the residence and adjacent
to the river. It should be noted that a wooden deck was
previously located in essentially the same area and was
approved by the P&Z on October 6, 1987 in conjunction with
a prior stream margin application (see attached caseload
P.O. Box 8485•Aspen, Colorado 81612.303/925-6958
• 411 O
Ms. Cindy Houben
June 27, 1988
Page 2
disposition summary) . A condition of the approval,
however, was that the deck be securely anchored or
removed. Given its questionable condition, Mr. Lee
elected to remove it.
The approximately fourteen ( 14) foot by seven ( 7) foot
deck will be located outside the floodway, the high water
line and the flood fringe area. No significant impact
upon the natural changes normally experienced by the
river, therefore, are anticipated (see attached letter
from Schmueser Gordon Meyer) . The deck will not require
the removal of any vegetation or any significant disrup-
tion of the river bank. Concrete grade beams will be used
for structural support. This construction technique will
permit the deck to be lower and, therefore, less visually
intrusive than a more typical wood joist system. Access
to the deck will be via a series of recessed timber steps
integrated into the river bank' s existing rock landscape.
Based on the above, we believe that the requested revis-
ions are consistent with the requirements of Section 7-504
of the Aspen Land Use Regulations and, as such, will have
no adverse impact upon the Roaring Fork River. Mr. Lee,
therefore, respectfully requests stream margin review
approval for the proposed revisions as depicted on the
accompanying drawings.
Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any
assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Again, thank
you for allowing Mr. Lee to amend his application without
delaying its review by P&Z.
Very truly ours,
VANN ASSOCIATES, INC.
Sunny Va AICP
SV:cwv
Attachments
} • o
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
( City of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: 9h>/J>'7 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
DATE COMPLETE: �``-k c."1 2 ,3 -/g/--.2z/-1(f01 307,4- a.7
STAFF MEMBER: <-At---K-
PROJECT NAME: L ' ' S -, ii �, i-. a I P' V/ e
Project Address: //0( LUa,fers 'eve . /2cpe n
APPLICANT: /la p-/a h X ?e b
Applicant Address: 3/0 , 0 , . i�a ,..S.->L • S, 7 T2 II i a- c�21/t ,eig
' 90a9✓
REPRESENTATIVE: \-...S-6(/9 UCZ- 7,-)
Representative Address/ hone: 73 o,r ?VFS Ayes -- 6958
TYPE OF APPLICATION: 5-1771/-40a /9,) /R'r ivy /I e (ii e‘+J
PAID: YES NO AMOUNT: 4- 442?: d o
1 STEP APPLICATION:
P&Z MEETING DATE: Dc-k . PUBLIC HEARING: YES 0
DATE REFERRED: `1 -7- P- INITIALS: ./11X,_,/
(
2 STEP APPLICATION:
CC MEETING DATE: PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
DATE REFERRED: INITIALS:
REFERRALS:
A/ City Attorney Mtn. Bell School District
\Z City De
Rocky Mtn Nat Gas
Cit Engineer P
ky
Y Dept.
Housing Dir. Holy Cross State Hwy Dept(GW)
Aspen Water Fire Marshall State Hwy Dept(GJ)
City Electric . Fire Chief Bldg:Zon/Inspect
Envir. Hlth. Roaring Fork Roaring Fork
Aspen Consol. Transit Energy Center
S.D. Other
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: p)-(644---- INITIAL:---fiP_.P/
•
City Atty City Engineer . Bldg. Dept_
Other:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
CASE DISPOSITION
( LEE STREAM MARGIN REVIEW
On October 6, 1987 the Planning and Zoning Commission approved
the Lee Stream Margin Review subject to the following conditions:
1. Revised foundation and site coverage plans shall be pre-
pared which continue to leave the steep slope of the River
bank undisturbed and eliminate the need to remove more than
the four cottonwood trees identified.
2 . The applicant shall replant, or replace with new trees the
four cottonwood trees prior to occupancy of the addiion. A
revised site plan showing relocation of three cottonwood
trees, specifying the caliper at a minimum of 2 1/2" - 3",
and planting one blue spruce a minimum of 8 ' tall shall be
submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Office prior
to issuance of a Building Permit.
3 . The lower deck shall either be removed or anchored for the
purpose of not breaking loose in case of a flood. Design of
the anchoring shall be approved by a professional engineer
and it shall be installed prior to occupancy of the addit-
ion.
4 . Excavation and construction techniques shall be specified in
the Building Permit application to ensure to the satis-
faction of the Building Department, that no undue distur-
bance of the stream bank or to the Roaring Fork River will
result.
sb. lee. sm2
•
•
SCHMUESER GORDO' YER INC."AWN 151 rand Avenue, Suite 212
A`� ;,MS`�N Gle ood Spring, Colorado 81001
111ffilimull1111 (303) 945-1004
June 24, 1988 11��►=°'ium
'f,/iil CONSULTING ENGINEERS&SURVEYORS/
Mr. Sunny Vann
Vann & Associates
P.O. Box 8485
Aspen, CO 81612
RE: Harlan Lee Residence - 1106 Waters Avenue
Dear Sunny:
The purpose of this letter is to summarize my observations about the
feasibility of construction of an exterior platform at the above-refer-
enced residence located at 1106 Waters Avenue. This feasibility letter
is based on examination of Preliminary Site Plan, as well as a brief
site visit to the area.
The platform will need to be constructed outside the floodway. It
would appear that the flood fringe area in the vicinity of the resi-
dence is very narrow and that it will most likely be possible to con-
struct the platform outside the flood fringe area, as well. In the
event the platform were to extend into the flood fringe area, it is my
opinion that the effect on the flood elevation in this portion of the
river would be extremely negligible if there were any effect at all.
That preliminary observation is based on the following:
1 ) The total volume displaced by the entire structural slab would
of 100 cubic feet. That portion which would ex-
tend be on the order f po
tend into the flood fronge would only be a portion of that and
would negligible with respect to the flow of the river.
2) It. is estimated that any back water created would be less than
0.01 feet. That amount of back water would be dissipated before
reaching the upstream property line and, therefore, would have no
effect on any neighboring properties. .
3) The gradient of the river, consequently the velocity and carrying
capacity, in this area is significant; therefore, again minimiz-
ing the effect of any obstruction of a minor nature which might
extend into the flood fringe.
Obviously, at the time of actual design, it is appropriate to analyze
the specific proposed construction. As stated above, it is my opinion
that any such construction will have minimal, if any, impact on the
flood characteristics of the Roaring Fork River at this property
location.
Respectfully submitted,
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
0,an W. e.rdon, P.E.
$residen
G:Lec
rid K. t r .} . r 7 �- *
H rl
} q (` \ > .
cry } y, a
4 Y h I�
..,.,.,.:•:.:...,:,,,.•,•••,.:..,,. .......„..::.:.c.i.,;••,,,,,:.,...:.„ ,...:•,•::,..:::;,•,..... ...?1,•:..•,: :„ . ... • ,• •.., ,, ::, ! :. . •..... ... . ,.. 41 ....— . •:-.4, .........%.,.::: .. -, _.:4-.....g. ,1,:... • : . :•;.:;;;•..:.,..::::,..,..... .....„
::„.„„7!::.:•:,,,.,,•,•.i.•..-..::::::,.;,,..,::::,.. .•:;•,•.:,... :,......•••:::,.....:::,./i•;.,•,•.r. z.:, ., • ..: ,.. .... ••,......4, ic. ,,... . ,•,• S %if_ '...fx64::,;,, :.,'...f. ,izs.......4....,...4,..,,,t.... V) \n: ,,.. ...(3 ..•.,:f.:,...,--..-...,....,.......,;.,.......,
:-I,'-,',:?.',-.--,is.c-,,,,i:'i:::::;::::.•,::,•;.-•!:-:s:.::,,,, , •. :,.4. ,..., . ,. ::. .,. .. ,
...ii.‘_,-"-,,:.•-•„„:„ ..,..,•:-•••:•„,- ---•:••_,_ •, .... - , • , ••-,• : ,..; •.:1 .. • , . .•0•..x . - ;;;,.,...„-- ,-.'!\.,,;(---.,. • • i , ! -. • : --,-• •-•-•-
,:,,,,.:-: ,..:-...--..,-,.,,-,....:.,,' ,,,,:,,,•• .1 ., .... . . . •,•a,, '
Q I \ \' v �r
•
h
}
�. eY I.•jy ' ,vt t
):1-.c. . ., . : .
Its Xt } 1�1
. ..
I . .' . 4 • . . • '. .. ' •'.•..., .::: 140..400 . •.
'ri:•PL;,j ...i...: ''.r;..,..'...L••••.'_:.;:**.*. .!,..'..• •.: '.* ill : * ." . .. ., •• .. , •,,.‘ ,.,; •. * te . .. .
t k tl 7 Y�
,
1 •
•
1 t ��
•
jam,k i { I
b
. S '[t • •
I' 'iL f. / fh I I I f - t f r f�l t r y F •
A 'z � fr .t
t y',, - 1`1�7f y*
rya 1 •' ,
i
T` /�� {n'V/µhr , }
.... E$,'v.+,"ar S rite `� c -I
l ,�s rti i
E' ♦t r''� r J' F r
yl ,tali P y ,,. ]r ••
Y; Zyv� `' v ja. v Y "y
tv"! nYLiR9f b't I V 1 t } T - J l - •,,,,...:_:.:3,-...,„,..,,,
•ak'�:: L��r?1''4,6•4".•;,•4"...:`,,:.,--;." :',;!".."''...;''.•r S -/ ,i',.,'•'',..;..'•.: y T I ` �a r I i '��
u* � ,':•,‘,..'.�1 i ) i" 4!
a
ham•" x� ,� I t 1 - I =.:::,..,,, I .,„ t1 i ),:t....:.,...:••',:,;:,.'...‘;r:;:-..,::.;,•:..
pv}.0 ?, uf.,ej,1. '�* 7 . t i r r r I - t > 4t' r r'"-Ir/ ai { ,
-.v;"` E •4y, A f i f }µ !' .,a4 E ® K t• a ?3" { S i }>s Ctt ; ti
`?4, J1F. a�E.�1 lfi `Sa ix.s E _.�' / ✓,E ♦ .. t 'fh 1�f '• 1, "yk ti,,.,� .ts i ly L 1 . C S
, zt.1(" ,,,:,faX;. s M ds E',.� } �r , y}t 5)r)�a �' S +a ,r � .,,, 4. i{ -t {S r r.
b 3fEd, f.:,'i} fa�,,;,;,-;; (A.� I� h F.i `, y .;•;:.('':•".•:.•.:.•••••••..•,:"' 1 f % F 4� FIT( Av >t
".>M ,. 't'yniEy�a7 rE4 r f -O tr 4 ty� ` ',4.f Jk j }, awe r 7 r
Yv r r {l.,: (iT d :`N e: i " 1 i -I
��rj-- ���. wry�• 0.n � � E t r !f ,F..+� t Y -��} i� t"°'y•
¢.ter , `A`�a¢�' Li i �S H , a � /4' f,Jw ."r + z ' fi''}r _ 4,�;
t{ -. , 'fix h'� r,! t } .r -. 1 ry Y•
,. i`j�wce'S,',.f. 1:113,;r(:r.s,4, ,f*l:•',J t' . ✓ I: -.,+ � Et..AI .c .. ' .r. L !._ r... ...,.., ., '
•
G i s
1' L____________„;,)l Y R 2 8 S 988 Ai`.1s'T F sJ1� �Y�!,,Ty. itEt
VANN ASSOCIATES
�
Planning Consultants ;1 ,r :� Fx�'�°'
%
/1 ,�/'� ! S Ag jf April 25, 1988 (-'44- 1 AWN�,fit 1�-•^•,� �'�. � {[a' _ _ Wf.1�vY�f'�€t 1jd.
v`l i
Ms. Cynthia Houben ilONP— t,
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
130 South Galena Street '
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Lee Stream Margin Review
Dear Cindy:
Please consider this letter an application for stream
margin review for the replacement of an existing residen
tial deck located at 1106 Waters Avenue in the City of frr`:
Aspen, Colorado. The application is submitted pursuant to
Section 24-6 . 3 of the Municipal Code by Mr. Harlan Lee,
the owner of the property. A commitment for title . °.=
t� { T F;
insurance evidencing Mr. Lee' s ownership is attached .;: ; , r;v�
hereto as Exhibit A. Permission for Vann Associates to -'. '.`,
represent the Applicant is attached as Exhibit B. ` f,' t
t ,,,,;--,-,q, ,
Project Description t„,,, -,:
,
As the accompanying improvement survey and architectural
drawings illustrates, the Applicant wishes to replace an
approximately 500 square foot deck attached to an existing --: :' .=
two story residence located on Lot 12 of the Calderwood a
Subdivision. The new deck will total approximately 680 `"' `'`' "
square feet, an increase of approximately 180 square feet.
The existing residence contains approximately 2, 500 square
feet while the lot, which is zoned R-15, contains ap-
proximately 8,700 square feet. While a portion of the new
deck will probably count as additional floor area, the
resulting structure will be well within the maximum
allowable floor area of approximately 4, 000 square feet
which is attributable to the lot in question. While the
residence may constitute a non-conforming structure, the
proposed deck will comply with all applicable area and
bulk requirements.
Y
It should be noted that the property was subject to two .:
( 2) previous stream margin review applications. Approvals i,
were granted in April of . 1978 and in October of 1987 for
P.O- Box 8485 •Aspen, Colowlo 81612 •303%925-6958 r
t
qt-
1,1+
y Y '
(r.'ref
Ms. Cynthia Houben
April 25, 1988
Page 2
miscellaneous additions to the existing structure. The
conditions of these two approvals have been met or are in
the process of being addressed. The addition which was c
approved in 1987 is currently under construction. y{
Review Requirements
With respect to the specific review criteria of Section
24-6. 3 (e) , the following comments are provided in support
of the Applicant' s request for stream margin review . .
approval.
1. As the accompanying improvement survey il-
lustrates, the proposed deck is located outside the 100 iii;':;:
year flood boundary. = >
2. To the best of the Applicant' s knowledge, no
trail has been designated across the property in question.
Similarly, no requirement for the provision of a trail was
imposed in connection with the previous stream margin 4f
review.
3 . The Roaring Fork Greenway Plan contains no site
specific recommendations with respect to the property in
question.
4. The proposed deck will not require the removal
of any vegetation nor any changes to the River bank.
Caisson foundations will be used to support the deck (see
Exhibit C) , and the number of supports will be reduced
from seven (7) to four ( 4) . The four ( 4) trees which
penetrate the existing deck will be retained as well as
three ( 3 ) additional trees which will penetrate the
addition. Appropriate safeguards will be used during
construction to prevent sedimentation of the River, and '.
all disturbed areas will be revegetated as may be re-
quired.
5. The proposed deck will have no adverse effect
upon the natural changes normally experienced by the
Roaring Fork River. As noted _ previously, all disturbed
areas will be revegetated to preclude erosion and ap-
propriate safeguards will be utilized to prevent pollution
of the River during construction.
} Y
- - AMO
:171
• .
it
,1{f
Ms. Cynthia Houben
April 25 , 1988
Page 3
6. No alteration or relocation of the water course
will be required as a result of the Applicant' s proposal.
7. To the best of the . Applicant' s knowledge, no
federal or state permits are required to construct the
proposed deck.
Based on the above, the Applicant believes that the
proposed deck is in compliance with the intent and
requirements of Section 24-6. 3 and, as such, will have no
detrimental impact upon the Roaring Fork River. The
Applicant, therefore, respectfully requests stream margin
review approval for the construction of a new deck at the
Lee residence as depicted on the accompanying improvement
survey.
Should you have any questions regarding our application,
or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not
hesitate to call. As the Applicant wishes to commence
construction as soon as possible, any assistance you might.
be able to provide in expediting our request for approval
would be sincerely appreciated. LL.
Very truly yours Ls
VANN ASSOCIATES, INC.
>ct".11.4111/
Sunny Van ' `AICP
SV: jlr
Attachments r'
cc: Harlan Lee
•
i;c
411 411 aG 7'7;
,4
s
EXHIBIT B.:-'4;-: .,;
April 22, 1988
Mr. Alan Richman
Planning and Development Director
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Permission to Represent
Dear Mr. Richman:
Please consider this letter authorization for Sunny Vann
of Vann Associates, Inc. to represent me in the processing
of all required applications for the addition of a deck to '
my residence which is located on Lot 12 of the Calderwood
Subdivision. Mr. Vann is hereby authorized to act on my
behalf with respect to all matters reasonably pertaining
to the aforementioned applications.
Should you have any questions, or if we can be of any
further assistance, please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours,
/1,4 i'/(q///( (- 6-/Harlan Le t,
SV:cwv C� 6 /T CT. ) ,
f,`
EXHIBIT C ,1;;.
_ ./At7,E
-_ 3", �/P Got
ON ',8R . p44-77e..-
z SoN. -7Z/ . .: _..
•¢S
•
i
N
Nr- , i
Zt° cP MIN / T No r h4/\// /
4
Ar x /A V,4;'/cal∎( . .......
P6K ENO -74/17:`,15
-4/41, _ p
I
//,4 LAN t ..15F? !
yN,g TI?YK0-/Z !/?C"H%7', 7"
/,o r / �9/ ASPFN , Go. 376i Z
(30 072) y�5--2z5 __ - -
' " • • • EXHIBIT A •
SCHEDULE A
•
• Order Number: L 5 3 9 3 Commitment Number:
t. effective date: August 19 , 1987 At 8 : 00 A.M.
2. Policy or Policies to be issued: Amount of Insurance Premium
490 ,000. 00 $1 , 257 . 00
ALTA Owner's Policy $
roposed Insured:
. I. ' ' r . . t
p4gL.".A) z7 LEE , O Tax Cert. $ 5. 00
\ALTA Loan Policy $
Proposed Insured: r gi �:
C. $
•
3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this commitment and covered herein is fee simple and title thereto is at the effective date hereof
vested in: ,
Luis Sneider and Sylvia Sneider aka Slvia Sneider aka Sylvia.
Leizarek aka Sylvia Sneider Leizorek
4. The land referred to in this commitment is described as follows:
Lot 12
CALDERWOOD SUBDIVISION
County of Pitkin, State of Colorado .
4-------(14(.;. ; - ,
Authorized countersignature Page 2 STEWART TITLE
GUARANTY COMPANY
1652(25M 3/86)
•
•
• •
SCHEDULE B — Section 1
Order Number-
1`;393 Commitment Number:
Requirements
The following are the requirements to be complied with:
Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest
to be insured.
Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record,
to wit:
1 . Release of Deed of Trust dated June 26 , 1979 , executed by Luis
/ Sneider , Sylvia Leizarek. to the Public Trustee of Pitkin
� -f1\ ( County , to secure an indebtedness of $200 ,000. 00 , in favor of
t. s'. _ First Western Mortgage Corporation of Texas , recorded July 2,
V' ''':' 1979 in Book 371 at Page 736 as Reception No. 215902.
NOTE: The beneficial interest under said Deed of Trust was
assigned of record to Fort Worth Mortgage Corporation, Fort
Worth, Texas by First Western Mortgage Corporation of Texas
recorded July 2 . 1979 in Book 371 at Page 742 as Reception No.
215903 .
NOTE: The beneficial interest under said Deed of Trust was
assigned of record to Crawford Savings and Loan Association,
Chicago, Illinois by Fort Worth Mortgage Corporation recorded
August 16 , 1979 in Book 374 at Page 294 as Reception No.
217187 .
2. Trade Name Affidavit and Partnership Agreement of Harlan Lee
and Associates , disclosing the names of the partners and the
other information required by ' 63 CRS 141-2-1 ( 1 ) , evidencing
the existence of said partnership prior to acquisition of
title.
3. Deed executed by Luis Sneider and Sylvia Sneider aka Slvia Sneider
aka Sylvia Liezarek aka Sylvia Sneider Liezorek, vesting fee title
in purchaser( s ) .
NOTE: Deed must be signed by each name shown above, and each
signature properly acknowledged, exactly as spelled above. This
is necessary because of discrepencies in previous conveyance of
the subject property.
STEWART TITLE
1653(25M 3186) Page 3 GUARANTY COMPANY
SCHEDULE B— Section 2
Exceptions
Order Number: 15393 Commitment Number:
The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the
satisfaction of the Company:
1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records.
2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records.
3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct
survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records.
4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law
and not shown by the public records. -.
5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public
records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires
of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment.
6 . Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments and any unredeemed
tax sales.
7. The effect of inclusions in any general or specific water
conservancy , fire protection, soil conservation or other
district or inclusion in any water service or street
improvement area.
8. Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority
of the United States as reserved in United States Patent of
record.
9. Restrictive covenants , which do not contain a forfeiture or
reverter clause , as set forth in document recorded August 2 ,
1962 in Book 198 at Page 436 and document recorded December
17 , 1962 in Book 200 at Page 263.
10. Easements for Underground Utilities Distribution system as set
forth on Plat recorded in Ditch Book 2A at Page 285.
NOTE: Policies issued hereunder will be subject to the terms ,
conditions , and exclusions set forth in the ALTA 1987 Policy
form. Copies of the 1987 form Policy Jacket, setting forth
said terms , conditions and exclusions , will be made available
upon request.
Exceptions numbered are hereby omitted.
Page 4 STEWART TITLE
1654(15M 3/86)
GUARANTY COMPANY
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Attorney
City Engineer
FROM: Cindy M. Houben, Planning Office
RE: Lee Stream Margin Review
Parcel ID# 2737-181-24-002
DATE: May 9, 1988
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted
by Sunny Vann, on behalf of his client, Harlan Lee, requesting
Stream Margin Review for the replacement of an approximately 500
sq. ft. existing residential deck located at 1106 Waters Avenue
in the City of Aspen. The two story residence is located on Lot
12 of the Calderwood Subdivision and is zoned R-15.
Please review this material and return your comments no later
than June 9, 1988 in order for this office to have adequate time
to prepare for its presentation before P&Z .
Thank you.
II
,II
• •
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen
pp�
DATE RECEIVED: gA2, O •C L D AND • E NO.
DATE COMPLETE: p?, a -1 j-
STAFF MEMBER: C-'
PROJECT NAME: Yai #I I / *O (
Project Address: ;1
-/
APPLICANT: A
Applicant Addres: _ ,/D1 I1J ffaffi.lfsl. i OTE MP),TI1)7/
REPRESENTATIVE: j �[ _
Representative Address'•hone: ,�• ,ii', Ir1a awyt, / /p
PAID: NO AMOUNT: D• 0 d
� I
1) TYPE OF APPLICATION:
1 STEP: V 2 STEP:
2) IF 1 STEP APPLICATION GOES TO:
'� ✓ P&Z. CC . PH'BLrt HEARING DATE:
VESTED; RIGHTS YES NO )C
3) PUBLIC HEARING IS'. BEFORE:
P&'Z CC N/A
it
DATE, REFERRED: 51 4(�1',Q�
INITIALS:.
RE RRAIS
/ City Attorney Mtn. Bell School District
✓: City Engineer Parks, Dept. Rocky Mtn Nat, Gas
Housing Dir. Holy Cross State Hwy Dept(GW)
Aspen Water Fire Marshall, State Hwy Dept(GJ)
City Electric' Fire Chief`. Bldg:Zon/Inspect
Envir. Hlth.. Roaring Fork. Roaring Fork
Aspen Consol.. Transit Energy Center
S.D. Other
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: INITIAL:
City Atty- City Engineer Bldg. Dept..
Other:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
• •
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
(3 03) 9/25-2020
Nil
J 4 925-/22 0 20
Date 4017 �
Nag 11E11 I .
Dear /n/X.{
Thi is to i form you that the Planning Office has completed its
preliminary review of t captioned application. We have determined
that your application of t
eompl ete.
Additional items required include:
Disclosure of Ownership (one copy only needed)
. Adjacent. Property Owners List/Envelopes/Postage (one copy)
Additional copies of entire application
Authorization by owner for representative to submit applica-
tion
Response to list of items (attached/below) demonstrating
compliance with the applicable policies and regulations of the
Code, or other specific materials
A check in the amount of $
1-- A. Your application is complete and we have scheduled it for
review by the QXy' on "5"(-41.5" We will
call you if we need any additional information prior to that
date. Several days prior to your hearing, we will call and
make available a copy of the memorandum., Please note that it
IS NOT your responsibility to post your property with a
-_• sign, which we can provide you for a $1.06 feel:
B.
, •our ' applica�tiou: is incomplete we have not scheduled it
review at this time. When we receive the materials: we have
requested, we, will place you on the ,next a'liable- agenda..
If you have any questions, please call ,
the planner assigned to your case.
Sincerely,
ASPENIT IN PLA OFFICE
r