HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sm.Neale Street Bridge.1985 MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office
RE: Neale Street Bridge - Stream Margin Review
DATE: February 5, 1985
Stream Margin Review approval was given for this project on June 19,
1984. Since the time of that approval, new information which was part
of recent floodplain mapping has shown inaccuracies in the earlier
application . Rather than the current bridge being at a clearance
level of 1 .8 feet over the 100-year flood, the new study shows the
underside of the bridge to be 1 .7 feet under water in that flood.
Since this work has received state funding, the City has applied for
and received additional funding to complete construction of a new
bridge, which will have a two-foot clearance above the 100-year
flood. This is the recommended clearance to allow for the passage of
debris.
In your earlier review, the existing abutments were going to be used.
With the construction now planned, the abutments will be removed and
replaced with new abutments.
All elements of the earlier review and commitments made will be
unchanged. There will be a pedestrian walkway on the bridge which
will be used as an extension for the Rio Grande trail. There is no
significant removal of vegetation and grade changes which could
produce erosion of the stream bank will not be made.
There may be some disturbance to the river during construction. The
estimated time for removing the old abutments and constructing -new ones
is three weeks . The trade-offs are a short period of increased
sedimentation in the river for a new bridge which is safer and can
accommodate heavy vehicles (e. g. fire trucks) .
The channel and its capacity must be altered in order to get the
bridge higher and out of the floodplain. The City' s consulting
hydraulic engineer has determined that erosion at the next downstream
bend will not be increased (see rationale in Item 5 of the attached
application ) . The reviewer in the Environmental Health Department
concurred with the water quality findings of the Engineer and his
consultant.
PLANNING OFFICE RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Office recommends approval of Stream Margin Review for
this amendment to the reconstruction of the Neale Street Bridge with
the understanding that the Engineering Department will monitor the
construction and make all efforts to keep disturbances to the stream
channel at a minimum.
CE.
JAN 3 01985
MEMORANDUM
TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office /114611lY
FROM: Robert F. Nelson, Environmental Health Officer
DATE : January 22 , 1985
RE : Neale Street Bridge Amended Stream Margin Review
Case No. 020A-84 - Re-Referral
There should be only a minimal short term impact to water quality
for the two referenced projects.
If the requirements of the Water Quality Control Division,
Colorado Department of Health 401 Permit are followed the sediment
loading should be minimized. Other water quality pollutants
(fuel, concrete, lubricants) are prohibited under the 401 (Water
Quality Certification) Permit. We would ask the cooperation of
the City Engineering Department in scheduling inspections during
the construction phase to monitor compliance with the State Permit.
RFN/co/NealeStBridgeReferral
I _
MEMORANDUM
\ TO: City Attorney
City Engineer
Environmental Health
FROM: Colette Penne, Planning Office
RE: Neale Street Bridge Amended Stream Margin Review
Case No, 020A-84 - Re-Referral
DATE: December 27 , 1984
Attached is an application submitted by the City of Aspen Engineering
Department requesting stream margin review for the reconstruction of
the Neale Street Bridge. This application is amending the application
submitted May 7th. Please review the material and return your referral
comments to the Planning Office no later than January 22 , 1985 in
order for this office to have adequate time to prepare for its presenta-
tion before P&Z on February 5th.
Thank you.
Oa
CITY4* ASPEN 00:44r€4 '41
130 Qs11 uth ga1e_na>osstreet
aspen; coloira=d,o‘—.8'1611
303z2 5„2,020
SECOND AMENDMENT
STREAM MARGIN REVIEW APPLICATION
NEALE STREET BRIDGE PROJECT
December 14, 1984
•
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Ladies and Gentlemen:
This letter constitutes the second amendment to the City
of Aspen application of May 7, 1984 , for permission to
reconstruct the Neale Street Bridge.
During the course- of the design work for this project,
there was a simultaneous project for a current floodplain
mapping ok . the City. It turned out that existing flood-
plain mapping was in error in the area of this bridge.
Instead of having a 1. 8 foot clearance -for the 100-year
flood, the new study showed the .underside of the bridge to
be 1. 7 feet under water for the 100-year flood event. So
we reapplied for increased funding from the state in order
to build a bridge with a two foot clearance above the
100-year flood, which is the recommended clearance for
debris.
The state awarded the City the increased amount, and we have
gone back to the drawing boards. The development plan has
not been revised because the project footprint has not
changed. However, the existing abutments will have to be
removed and new ones constructed.
•
Page Two
Neale Street Bridge Project
Planning and Zoning Commission
Responding to the review criteria of Section 24-6 . 3 :
1. This structure is a bridge and therefore must be in
the 100-year floodplain. The new structure will
provide clearance for logs and debris carried by a .
flood.
2. The. Rio Grande trail was extended this past summer
from its terminus at Herron Park to the Hopkins
Street footbridge. The new bridge will have an
eight foot pedestrian walk, whereas the existing
structure has no sidewalk. So we will be improving
the safety and use of the Rio Grnade Trail as it crosses
the Neale Street.
3. This proeect is to replace an existing structure. So
we are not making changes to the area which are
addressable. by the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan.
4 . There is no vegetation of diameter greater than 1 1/2
inches which will be removed, nor will any grade changes
be made which could produce erosion of the stream bank.
5. In order to raise the bridge above the 100-year flood
level, there must be .changes in the channel and its
capacity. For all floods of volume greater than the
50-year event, there will be more flow past the new
' bridge and less flow through the park. However, since
the water is not backed up by the bridge and therefore
' being. pushed' through, it will flow through at a lower
speed and therefore not increase erosion at the
downstream bend. This .information has been determined
by the City' s consulting hydraulic engineer.
There may an increase in sedimentation and suspension
loads during the construction. Although we will try to
avoid it, it may be necessary to work in the streambed
with .equipment in order to remove the existing abutments
and construct new ones. This phase of the project will
be about three weeks. The City Engineering Department
will have a representative at the site to insure all
possible efforts towards keeping dirt out of the water.
6 . We will make every effort to maintain the natural water
quality of the river. The new bridge will provide a
safer structure for public use, especially for heavy
vehicles such as fire trucks, which are currently
•
Page . Three
Neale Street Bridge Project
Planning and Zoning Commission
tine new 11
w
a1 be a s
v i �.� ►h^ ro
prohibited f m using the existing structure.
Furthermore, which will "enhance the value of the
stream as an important natural feature."
The consulting engineer for the City is handling .the other
public reviews: the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
Colorado State Water Quality Control Division and Wildlife
Division.
We hope that you will approve this amendment. Construction
of a new :bridge is part of the nation-wide. effort to upgrade
the deteriorating infrastructure. The existing bridge is
structurally deficient for current highway loading standards .
The existing bridge is posted for load restrictions, and
buses, trucks and fire engines are restricted from using
it.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
664 ilk- t(
Chuck Roth
Engineering Department
CR/co
) • -: 4, _y`i7 St :�` «3
4 `.t'..'..-..,,.....'-;'',,,*.":",',,,-...:',..., tL
....-
• -7 v- Wy r "1 na�' ; " '..7.,":-';'..;:',,,;;;,,,;.:;,,,,,,, ,,,:,.,..•.;„:'-�''2 : t p. n .! ;4;7" tx Y 4 :- i '
Y 7 4-
t' _
a 1' '',ii.'.-„..'A W � i. ;:::'=
` a W 'W
L, ,O z '� , }
a
o OD (,
11-4, 11., -',..,-.-z:-. _� a `p i.
[L LAC w W W,- �.o;.•
w
. . . : , . ,. . ., (f) >< (n LiJ a ,
� a
.; . -uj . .a;° W, '•
1
•
{
• CASELOAD •UMMARY SHEET /1���
/2-z7-FJ
Cit., of Aspen
CASE NO. 02-04 8 7
STAFF: e
PROJECT NAME: c.� _ - _
•
• APPLICANT: „,„ Phone: -5--�U £,t,, 9/9
REPRESENTATIVE: � Phone:
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (FEE)
•
I. GMP/SUBDIVISION/PUD (4 step)
1. Conceptual Submission ($2,730.00)
• 2. Preliminary Plat ($1,640.00)
• 3. . Final Plat ($ 820.00)
II. SUBDIVISION/PUD (4 step)
1. Conceptual Submission ($1,900.00)
•
2. ' Preliminary Plat ($1,220.00)
3. Final Plat ($ 820.00)
III. EXCEPTION/EXEMPTIOD;aREZONING (2 step) I ($1,490.00)
IV. SPECIAL REVIEW (1 ($ 680.00) '
• 1. Special Review (&)C.1)..)
•
2. Use Determination •
3. . Conditional Use •
•
4. Other:
•
P&Z MEETING DATE: 671
1 p 7 CC MEETING DATE: • DATE REFERRED: $l il�a
7/
/72yMa f
1g5"- I..,l.-' 7-
REFERRALS:
City Attorney ' Aspen Consol. S.D. School District
City Engineer Mountain Bell Rocky Mtn. Natural Gas
lJ Housing Director Parks Dept. State Hwy Dept. (Glenwood)
Aspen Water Dept. Holy Cross Electric State Hwy Dept. (Grd. Jctn;
City Electric Fire Marshall Building Dept.
Environmental Hlth. Fire Chief Other:
FINAL ROUTING: • • DATE ROUTED: to olo F
'1 •
.City Attorney . y City. •:.. gineer Building Dep .
Other: Other:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: v1C6E4 f(lF� - sPf G(ARA1,I rl ' 4-Le _
•
•
•
•
y
°l:' • •
i• DISPOSITION:
CITY. P&Z REVIEW: 411 Prc1Aa P4-7 6-n (o I�q kit l4.4607011-4-CM./ 440,-
e. Gd s Ort f e��c�— iii c i!amt,, P y�ci �
U c,, 1
;' .. •. .... . 0..; f)-Y 6%) Q...{_� 2 •I —. •)l''''' 0.e1 CI f.. 'I '•' 1L,
Si
1 ., ,u)�. 1_J _t� ), ,-
_: i _ t ..-A , is :,z , , r c._._..._ `1 u 27:: -,.);:f--
.):
0 A n`l.v-.1 i 1 c_5___.. , }. 1f.� 0.1 `' `" -(,-t-'•1 30-.. (c i:1 'r'` 1;") ) �. 1. ).,./'-\ [ I 1 h '(f r.;
1 1 o r-, ,.-\ f�, /'�1' ,.l 1� {�, "\-`l- .....'L`U ,� L.: 7.:::1.f ;) 1,'' " t\t,7 4 I ^'t���-
,�(k y \�( . -i ...I-y''t mil- kr l_�� y-\; °k i ! �k`,.) �.0 ;� "i s-` iTA ( 0 -
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW:
Ordinance No.
CITY P&Z REVIEW: '
. 4. .
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: -.
Ordinance No.
CITY P&Z REVIEW:
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW:
0
Ordinance No."
,.r.:aF..:-,,..t ,, .•a f., a r,>te ,..-.. ' , i.,: .4'�. �uM -.:7.1' .m. '::s**:, !4,sez•,.3Ya s+. . ,...,.4,-....0.,,,,,t...4. »xi_e.,.. s.ii„
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Colette Penne , Planning Office
RE: Neale Street Bridge Project - Stream Margin Review
DATE: June 19, 1984
The City Engineering Department is the applicant for a proposed upgrading
of the Neale Street Bridge. A grant has been obtained from the state
to help with the cost of improving the structural capacity of the
bridge so that its restricted load ratings can be eliminated.
The proposal is to use the existing abutments but to widen them.
The current structure is twenty ( 20) feet wide and one (1 ) lane .
The new structure will be thirty-six (36)- feet wide -with two ( 2 )
twelve (12) foot vehicular lanes and an eight (8) foot sidewalk.
The City Attorney' s Office reviewed the submittal- and found it to
comply with Section 24-6 .3 . They ask-that the record reflect commitments
to not interfere with the natural course of the stream or the quality
of the river .
In relation to the review criteria of Section 24-6.3 :
1 . The bridge is located w-ith-in the 100-year floodplain.
However, the Engineering Department submits that the added
width will not affect f--low downstream in the event of a
flood . The existing abutments are being utilized , only
widened . The elevation of the b-ridge will be the same
as at present (1 .9 ' above the 100-year flood water height) .
The flooding situation will not be improved but it will
also not be lessened.
2 . This bridge upgrading will also have a positive impact
on the trail system. The Rio Grande trail -(which currently
terminates in Herron Par--k) will connect-with the sidewalk
on the bridge . The sidewalk is on the upstream side and
the trail will be continued along the south side of the
river up to the Hopkins Street pedestrian bridge . This
trail link is proposed for construction by P. C. P.A. this
summer.
3 . The application includes- a -commitment to do any revegetat-ion
work in compliance with the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan .
However, they state that "there is no vegetation of diameter
greater than one (1). inch which will be affected. "
4 , 5 and 6 . Removal of vegetation was covered in the previous
item. The Engineering Department commits in their -application
to "no change to the existing floodplain characteristics--"
and "all efforts will be made to impact the water quality
of the Roaring Fork River as little as possible. "
,j The only - outstanding question is that of property ownership and the
City Attorney's Office is working on a determination. This obviously
must be resolved prior to construction.
PLANNING OFFICE RECOMMENDATION
The Planning- Office recommends approval �o� -Stream Margin- Review- for
the Neale Street Bride project as 'e-Ben N e'
g p j �-� � -with the condition that
the property ownership question be resolved prior to construction.
• -. Oa •
0
CITYi1PASPEN
0 \
13 O sq,ui h gale-n a).s=tree t
asp , co15 �o°a���8'1611
303=°92 52:02"0
MEMORANDUM
TO: Colette Penne, Planning Office
ID
FROM: Barry D. Edwards, Assistant City Attorney k. —
il �f
RE: Neale Street Bridge Project - Stream Marg n Review
Case No. 020A-84
DATE: June 8 , 1984
We have reviewed the application submitted by the
Engineering Department requesting stream margin review for
construction of the Neale Street Bridge, together with the
flood plain map and stream margin review development plan
submitted with the application and your memorandum of May
21 , 1984 .
Our comments are :
1. The development plan appears to comply with Sec.
24-6 . 3 (b) .
2. The Engineering Department represents that the
greenway plan will be complied with under Sec. 24-6 . 3 (c) (3) .
I assume that the Engineering Department has done its own
plan check in this regard, and it is satisfactory.
3. The record at the hearing on this application
should demonstrate that the construction will not interfere
with natural changes in the stream bed, and will not
unnecessarily affect the quality of the river' s flow in the
area. Since the existing abuttments are going to be used
for the bridge, with some minor expansion, the request,
all in all , seems appropriate.
Should you have any questions or comments, please notify
us.
•
• oa
• •
093, 9cITYJ1AsPEN
130 3rou=tch ga1ena,,s� re e t
a s p 'rc o ISM
3 3 °925 2 20 ;;, ;:' %if
)1 I
MAY 15 19841
May 7, 1984 ASPEN / PITKIN CO.
PLANNING OFFICE
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: Stream Margin Review - Neale Street Bridge Project
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Greetings.
This letter is a request for a Stream Margin Review purusant
to Section 24-6 . 3 of the Aspen Municipal Code , for the City
of Aspen' s Neale Street Bridge Project.
The Neale Street Bridge Project is being undertaken in order
to improve the structural capacity of the bridge . Currently,
• the bridge is posted for restricted load ratings. Heavy vehicles
such as fire trucks , school buses, trash trucks and dump trucks
may not use the existing structure . The City has received a
grant from the State to assist with the cost of providing an
unrestricted bridge.
As can be seen on the attached development plan , the bridge
is located entirely within the- 100-year- floodplain. The new
bridge will reuse the existing abutments . These abutments will
be extended in width to support a wider bridge . The current
bridge is a twenty foot wide, one lane structure. The new bridge
will be 36 feet wide allowing two twelve foot vehicular lanes
for two-way travel, plus eight feet for a sidewalk.
The size of the restriction to the river flow will not be increased.
That is, the flooding situation will not be made worse by the
bridge project. The underside elevation of the new bridge will
be the same as the existing bridge, which is one and nine-tenths
(1.9' ) above to 100-year flood water height. Nor will the restr-
iction be lessened. The flooding situation will not be improved.
Providing a longer bridge would require removal of .existing
Page Two
Stream Margin Review - Neale Street Bridge Project
May 7, 1984
abutments and construction of new abutments. This, in addition
to the increased cost of longer girders, would lead to a more
costly project and does not appear to be cost effective. The
intent of the project is to provide a bridge capable of use
by fire emergency vehicles , school buses , etc . There will be
no change to the existing floodplain characteristics.
All efforts will be made to impact the water quality of the
Roaring Fork River as little as possible . The work will be
done during the months of August , September and October which
is after the high water months of June and July.
There is no vegetation of diameter greater than one inch which
will be affected. Any revegetation required will be in accordance
with the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan.
The ownership of the property is unclear. Therefore, the boundaries
of the applicant ' s property are not shown on the development
plan . Two title companies have looked at the ownership. The
first declined to comment , the second sent us a memo stating
that title is clouded. The City does clearly own Herron Park
and the property across Neale Street from the park . The City
Attorney' s Office is being consulted for their legal opinion.
The consulting engineer will be obtaining a 404 permit from
the Army Corps of Engineers.
The Rio Grande trail currently terminates in Herron Park. The
sidewalk for the new bridge will be placed on the upstream side
to facilitate interfacing with the proposed continuation of
the trail along the south side of the river up to the Hopkins
Street pedestrian bridge. This section of the trail is scheduled
to be constructed this summer.
The Engineering Department requests that you approve this stream
margrin review application so that we may provide a bridge without
load restrictions for public and emergency use.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
(26744:tc,4n
Chuck Roth
Engineering Department
CR/co/SMRNealeStreetPZ
•
411 ����NEQODANDUN --
TO: City Attorney
City Engineer
FROO: Colette Penne, Planning Office
RE : Neale Street Bridge Prw eot - Stream Margin Review
City Case No. 020&-84 /
DATE: May 21 , 1984
======__-_-=_-_-_--=====================================-___-========
Attached for your review is an application submitted by Chuck Roth
of the City Engineering Department requesting stream margin review
for the .construction of the Neale Street Bridge . Please review the
attached materials and return your referral comments to this Office
no later than June 5 , 1984 in order that the Planning Office has
adequate time to prepare for this case ' s presentation before the
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on June 19 , 1964 .
Thank you.
•
'
`