HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.19960423j AGENDA
ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
TUESDAY, APRIL 23, 1996 4:30 PM
SISTER CITIES ROOM, CITY HALL
I. COMMENTS
A. Commissioners
B Planning Staff
C. Public
II. NEW BUSINESS
A. Stream Margin Review for Rio Grand Park, Suzanne Wolff
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Aspen Mountain PUD, Lot 5 (Grand Aspen Site) Continued from
04.09.96, Dave Michaelson
IV. ADJOURN
VeSl 7' 04 aE-rr�i J
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Suzanne Wolff, Planner
RE: Rio Grande Park Stream Margin Review
DATE: April 23, 1996
SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting approval to repair and stabilize areas adjacent to Rio
Grande Park and the Rio Grande Trail which were damaged by the flooding of the Roaring Fork
River in 1995.
APPLICANT: City of Aspen Parks Department, represented by George Robinson & Rebecca
Baker
LOCATION: Roaring Fork River adjacent to Rio Grande Park
ZONING: Public/Specially Planned Area (SPA)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The erosion of the river bank during the flooding in 1995 removed
a section of the Rio Grande Trail. Emergency repairs were performed to stabilize the bank and
maintain the trail. The Parks Department proposes to re -work the rock embankment to improve the
structural integrity of the bank, and to extend the rock embankment upstream and downstream of
the failed area to provide reinforcement. Repairs are also proposed to the inlet to the island and
along the channel of the kayak course. Rock work will be completed this spring before high water,
and revegetation will occur after high water. Alan Czenkusch, Colorado Division of Wildlife, will
supervise the project. The application and drawings of the proposed repair work are attached as
Exhibit "A".
REFERRAL COMMENTS: Detailed comments from the City Engineering Department are
attached as Exhibit "B", and are included in the staff comments below.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Stream " argin Review: Pursuant to Section 26.68.040, the criteria for stream margin review are
as follows:
A. No development shall be permitted within the floodway, with the exception of bridges or
sP'iictures for irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, which may be permitted by the
City Engineer, provided plans and specifications are submitted to demonstrate that the structure is
engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during peak flows, and the Commission
determines that the proposed structure complies, to the extent practicable, with all the standards
set forth below.
B. No development shall be permitted within 100 feet, measured horizontally, from the high
water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or within the Special Flood Hazard
Area where it extends beyond 100 feet from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its
tributary streams, unless the Commission makes a determination that the proposed development
complies with the standards set forth below:
1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed development which is in the Special Flood
Hazard Area will not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for development.
This shall be demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a professional engineer registered
to practice in the State of Colorado which shows that the base flood elevation will not be raised
including, but not limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or off -site which compensate for
any base flood elevation increase caused by the development.
RESPONSE: The repairs will not increase the base flood elevation.
2. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area Community Plan, Parks/Recreation/ -
Open Space/Trails Plan map, or areas of historic public use or access are dedicated via a recorded
easement for public use.
RESPONSE: The repairs will prevent further damage to the existing Rio Grande trail.
3. The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan are implemented in the
proposed plan for development, to the greatest extent practicable;
RESPONSE: The repairs proposed in this application are consistent with the Rio Grande Master
Plan (1993), which incorporates recommendations from the Greenway Plan.
4. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut or fill) made
outside of a specifically defined building envelope. A building envelope shall be designated by this
review and said envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuance of any demolition, excavation or
building permits. The barricades shall remain in place until the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy.
RESPONSE: The applicants propose to revegetate the areas with native plants to control further
erosion after the rock work is completed. The re -built embankment will have a less severe slope
than the existing embankment, and the Parks Department is proposing to relocate the pedestrian
trail farther away from the top of the new embankment.
0
5. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the
river, stream or other tributary, including erosion andlor sedimentation during construction.
Increased on -site drainage shall be accommodated within the parcel to prevent entry into the river
or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be drained outside of the designated building envelope;
RESPONSE: Silt fencing shall be used to prevent any erosion or sedimentation from entering the
river. Provisions shall be made to ensure that the work areas are fully stabilized prior to high water
to minimize damage before the areas are revegetated after high water.
6. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration
or relocation of a water course, and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency;
RESPONSE: No alteration or relocation is proposed.
7. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated, that applies to
the developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that ensures that the flood carrying capacity on
the parcel is not diminished;
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
8. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work within the
100 year floodplain;
RESPONSE: The repair work is authorized by Army Corps of Engineers nationwide permit
number 13 for bank stabilization. The erosion at the kayak course is authorized as part of the
maintenance required under the permit issued for the course. A letter from the Corps of Engineers
is included in the attached application.
9. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting taking place below
the top of slope or within 15 feet of the top of slope or the high waterline, whichever is most
restrictive.
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
10. All development outside the 15 foot setback from the top of slope does not exceed a height
delineated by a line drawn at a 45 degree angle from ground level at the top of slope.
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
3
11. A landscape plan is submitted with all development applications. Such plan shall limit new
plantings outside of the designated building envelope on the river side to native riparian
vegetation;
RESPONSE: Only native vegetation (dogwood, roses, willows, serviceberry, alders) is proposed,
as shown in the drawings in the application packet.
12. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no lights) directed toward the river or
located down the slope;
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
13. Site sections drawn by a registered architect, landscape architect, or engineer are
submitted showing all existing and proposed site elements, the top of slope, and pertinent
elevations above sea level;
RESPONSE: The Engineering Department has required the applicant to provide 3 cross sections
of the work area prior to and at completion of the work: one at the approximate centerline of the
work, and the other two 100 yards upstream and downstream of the centerline. Engineering also
requests before and after photos of the work area and of the opposite river banks.
14. There has been accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones.
RESPONSE: Once completed, the work will improve the riparian area through and restoration of
native vegetation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the stream margin review with
the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall inform the property owners of the adjacent and opposing river banks,
upstream and downstream of the work to coordinate work to minimize disturbance in the
river (specifically the Moore family and the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District).
2. The applicant shall provide 3 cross sections of the work area prior to and at completion of
the work: one at the approximate centerline of the work, and the other two 100 yards
upstream and downstream of the centerline.
3 . The applicant shall provide before and after photos of the work area and of the opposite
river banks to the Engineering Department.
4. The applicant shall restore the Rio Grande Trail to its present condition or better by October
1, 1996.
5. Silt fencing shall be used to prevent any erosion or sedimentation from entering the river.
6. Provisions shall be made to ensure that the work areas are fully stabilized prior to high
water to minimize damage before the areas are revegetated after high water.
11
7. The Engineering Department shall approve the access route to and from the river bed prior
to issuance of a construction permit.
8. Access to the work area shall be delineated and controlled to prevent unauthorized entry
into the work area.
9. All representations of the applicant are considered conditions of approval.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the stream margin review for the repairs to
the embankment and the island in the Roaring Fork River at the Rio Grande Park, with the
conditions as outlined in the Community Development Department Memo dated April 23, 1996"
Exhibits:
"A" - Application Packet
"B" - Referral Comments
9
March 25, 1996
Stan Clauson
Community Development Director
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Stan,
We are requesting approval for a stream margin exemption for the purpose of
repairing the trail and inlet channel near Rio Grande Park on the Roaring Fork River.
Both of these areas were damaged by the high water events in the spring/summer of 1995.
The repairs will include re -working the rock embankment to improve the structural
integrity of the bank and then re -vegetate the slopes with native plants to control future
erosion. We will be doing similar work at the inlet to the island, as well as stabilizing
and re -armoring a few areas along the channel and island.
We have received Army Corps of Engineers approval under a nationwide permit
number 13 to complete this work. We have attached a copy of their letter, dated
November 21, 1995. We will also send a duplicate of this letter and the Army Corp of
Engineers letter to the Colorado Water Conservation Board and the Federal Emergency
Management Agency detailing our intentions.
Julia Marshall of Mt. Daly Enterprises has prepared illustrative drawings of the
areas for the repairs that are attached for your review. An 8 1/2 x 11 project location map
is included as well.
In conjunction with this project we will be doing other upgrades and
improvements to the Lower Rio Grande River park and realigning the trail through the
park, per the recommendations of the Rio Grande Master Plan and the City Council.
Since some of this cosmetic work is within 100 feet of the river, a full stream margin
application will be submitted for approval. However, in order stabilize the banks and the
island for high water this year, we are requesting a separate application for exemption for
the rock work in the river to be completed in April and May. An 11 x 17 drawing of the
overall Rio Grande plan is attached as Exhibit `C', to show the general plan for the area.
The following are some of the items that may be reviewed under the forthcoming stream
margin review:
* Realignment of the trail to improve sight distances and even the grade of the
trail.
* Enlarge the sand filtration ponds and improve their general appearance.
* Replace the Oklahoma Flats Bridge for clearance of high water events.
As stated above, these improvements were recommended in the Rio Grande
Master Plan, except for replacing bridge which is being done for safety reasons. We have
also presented these plans to the group working on the trolley to ensure the changes can
work with a possible trolley layout.
The delay for the stream margin application is to determine the status of the
Oklahoma Flats Bridge abutments. We are hoping an engineer will be available to
inspect it in the next week or so. We believe the full stream margin application will be
ready for submittal within the next 2-3 weeks.
Thank you for taking the time to review our. request. If you have any questions
regarding the proposal, please contact myself or George Robinson at 920-5120.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Baker
Assistant Parks Director
City of Aspen
Attachments: Exhibit `A' - Army Corp of Engineers Letter
Exhibit `B' - Project Location Map
Exhibit `C' - Rio Grande Park General Plan
Exhibit `D' - Illustrative Drawings of Repairs (6)
Exhibit `E' - Letters to FEMA & Colo. Water Conservation Board
SMR_LRG.doc
Exhibit 'A'
yr`�a�ATES Of�P,REPLY TO
ATTENTION •
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SACRAMENTO
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
1325 J STREET
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814-2922
November 21, 1995
Regulatory Branch (199475278 & 199200308)
Mr. George Robinson
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Mr. Robinson:
We are responding to your request for authorization for the
repairs to the Rio Grande Trail embankment along the Roaring Fork
River just upstream of the kayak course inlet. The river bank
eroded away at high water this year removing portions of the
trail and creating a significant safety hazard for the public.
You contacted this office by telephone and we approved the repair
of the river bank to maintain the trail. The project is located
along the Roaring Fork River in the City of Aspen, Pitkin County,
Colorado.
On August 19, 1995, Mr. Michael Claffey met with you, your
staff and Mr. Alan Czenkusch of the Colorado Division of Wildlife
to review the emergency repair work at the Rio Grande trail. The
work involved the discharge of less than one cubic yard of
material per running foot of bankline below ordinary high water.
As such, the repair work is authorized by Department of the Army
nationwide permit number 13 for bank stabilization. However,
when viewed from the opposite side of the river, Mr. Claffey
agreed with the group that the rock work appears unstable due to
the amount of voids between rocks and the use of rounded rock in
some locations. Due to the safety considerations involved with
the use of the trail, you are directed to rework the rock to
create a more stable bank. In addition, you must remove some of
the soil placed on the top of the bank or stabilize this soil to
prevent the release of sediment into the river. The reworking of
the rock below ordinary high water is authorized by nationwide
permit number 13 and additional approval from this office is not
required.
The group also reviewed the erosion to the entrance to the
inlet of the kayak course and the river bank at the midpoint of
the course. You are authorized to repair the erosion at the
course as part of the maintenance required under the Department
of the Army permit issued for the course (199200308). You should
submit a set of drawings, on how this work will be accomplished.
During the same site visit, the group reviewed the Oklahoma
Flats pedestrian bridge upstream of the repaired river bank. Mr.
Claffey agrees that the bridge does not have sufficient freeboard
above the high water elevation and presents a safety problem for
trail users during high water events. We suggest that the City
raise the bridge elevation to reduce this safety hazard. If the
repair work to the bridge requires the discharge of fill material
below ordinary high water for construction or temporary access, a
Department of the Army permit will be required. There are
several nationwide permits available for this type of work.
If you have any questions, please write to Mr. Michael Claffey at
the address below or contact him by telephone at (970) 243-1199.
Sincerely,
Gr y McNure
Chief Northwestern Colorado
Regulatory Office
402 Rood Avenue, Room 142
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-2563
Copies Furnished:
Mr. Paul von Guerard, Subdistrict Chief, U.S. Geological Survey,
402 Rood Avenue, Room 223, Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
Mr. Alan Czenkusch, Colorado Division of Wildlife, 453 Mountain
Laurel, Aspen, Colorado 81611
2.
hXnlD1L b
cn
y �i ?i ''T': z brN - - �—_—
"5-t, oo�a�FS 4� ` � ; Creek
CD
a i Go m
�T clsatfNJdR ��
b'S
�y 7 err tsS3PM
-
u u N v. v. W xn o. +r a... ;. W ;, b• bC Y 3
J s -.. 4 ax" a i y, t l J c,n f, -�
i
tj
33 r
T1vin Ridge
n
c.
— L'tiSV in C) tnSu2'T7Si...
+P O+ UPN W b N UN Iw dUPUu-,�P JPUW .� .a.• �J
a
e �- BSo�cii ''
t
3 -E^.� s29 �.�'�irs���'� H So •p �� 3 -. s sz°� OR
:n `n v_rr ��• g : tnIE C Q- E.T; E tEy c'F
<A7C �• i2t i' ss*^8 ..{T� :f bb.,
�n< a
a
W ..
otns o�tn�' cs� - o \ i4w 2
1. OO : W 6, 6, 1cn
af
UL
�^3- �n5.5.N�, a i�, G
r o appuoJ O / D n
n uaanp JaN!S�c H teed >m aw D o� a�� J
J D t 1 v r' - p ed Mo Qs \
L h m
a s i �°
t d t o Gx �Q
a/ t ti 8J 1 5
13
`nm�n�
d o a
m
St
eta d O < Raoe ~
lb
� cvro o
q,
U77
art �a
W.
� s
<� � -offDr
• .yN�PU PP v � aY' d p+l� � � � dC
: b
ly,o
�� , i omcm
m as
Z1. CD
O r {
m000m () O r.
m W mwc�o
td� '
c)
0 rt
hxhibit 'B'
7,17
G;aff�m&�^ `ERR cR�S � m o• -..; �, �.����� A,
,z2 Mdfcxln �---
m n
�� S� ^,� ms Cow : i
n,. �t C'rcek
�Q: m n C'
Cl a -FLn
INS
P 1cl'"as.r2a.'�• b _ ^�°' Af i Y i'bt .ya..y 'E.' ss _ ,�
.�Ps.
T1 tln R{dge _ xi0 v
�>n £ Ox �y�Sr< rtt+' � •Y�� ei• t -r< � fig-. Lr .-:a •.,C: b fib, 0
� 7
astl re o ly,
Or
6. oo' IA. d
a =mi `���� SOs19 6
.. a ZYSu Cal C) MSuS•-nS L SP.P A pN •
•
w,
q�
IR*
-env ��p;.<gG: y•C> ES: dEE ECnA�� � . �.+n+-,...,�� :'„�T
inn
a
i
z
7 vn X n:
- .nNUUN LU b P POD �+U JQi �••F L (:. �� � � '?
a
lb Q
� m a
uaanp iaNlSm f1! few 0
D J� 1
Red Mo-nta/n Rd o Q
�c oc•immc�� " w t � o o pa �\ � y� ��g�
y
J /
Race -
'-
tG O O IY.e , 0 (n
° ' S St
z c r n y i a \ 9a
' n M/d/and AV J d ��ttll
O o x
Dr S41
o
o M egg Qa b
o
L V
mom�m C) p /.
m nn,,
4z a G 3 p J-��
. n a
Ot1�� Y 3 O p1 O y z1
o � m � f-t
CII i
Exhibit 'CI
r
ROARING FORK RIVER-
TO ART MUSEUM /
/ PATH TO RIVER
1- 'SOD
NY RIVER
'\ Area # I
}
r " COTTONwooiis. \\
RFC: ALONG PATH \
e '\ \ Area #2
o ARF.�: �
0. Q
rIf
• { � '� // f ply \� �.\ �\.SOD AREA
\• tY RIVER `
"y • ^ t rt1;rU4/ / - ' CI.UDEEi..EEED TO 6 0
POND -�^ A Area #3
ASP
7IIRt AREA
1 CZ�` - .\` v. .
rotta - -- i ris j _.._`\''; ` Area #4
41
• / / ` POND
/ .\ .1 �• SOD. „.J :J-i �/ -i _F,•
/ \ \ ` •/. • 1 i ..�1 tANDRESESLOPE
� :" % _//•'••_ t'. AND RESEED WITH
o . i• -.Z\ r _'_' - - _ I TALL GRASSES
POND
0.
! \ ; - - Area #5
�`------- ATED Tf�{h_ '-`�:`'� REALIGNED DRCI{
/ � j-.1 : /. ` - i.:.✓1. F��. �� . �.r�c�i� � . AREA: N
/_urDAS 1�
`.�Ymnow
ttIt1SMs• eson .r
\.` _` \ \ \ / - - _ _ _ • / _\• // '-LOCK SEATING
f COURT
0.
BASKE
t V"JCULARGATE
, lHLy(i1NNHJG OF"
GRAVEL PATH -
`ASPEN
Area #6 ---
SKETCHES
AREA A:
Entrance to Park by Bridge
AREA B:
Seating Area Near Bridge
AREA C:
Seating Area Along Path
AREA D:
Grotto Area
AREA E:
Silver / White Garden
AREA F-
Entrance to Park From Tent
AREA G:
Rockery with Shrub Planting
AREA H:
Kayak Access Area
AREA I:
Fritz Benedict's Waterfall
SYMBOLS
0
E:fisting Deciduous Trees
Existing Evergreen Tree
Cairns
(l)
Spruce to be Transplanted
Transplanted Spruce
titp
FIStAone is Gavel or Sod
Cobbles.in Gavel or Sod
\ ?
Ar"s Of.RO& Retning ufor
Grades Over Its
�L�M
MARGIN F.XFxRarrnr.r Fyn K
AREA Of :
Add Boulders to Control Erosion
AREA a2.
Add Boulders, Redtwig Dogwood d• Wild Rose
AREA 93.
Add Boulders Above Existing
AREA 04
Add Boulders do Wild Rose
AREA 95:
Inlet - Add Boulders & Wild Rose
ARE,,: 116
Rc-work Rocks, Fill Gaps, Plant Willow. Scrviccbcrry
Redtwig Dogwood & Wild Rose
1.
\,1 - \
\
- -
LOWER RIO GRANDE PM4C
Schematic Landscape Plan
Prewrrd By-
ML Daly Enterprises
P.O. Box 5010
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phan 970-925-1624
Fax 970-M3816
Scale: I' . NY PrortA: '
D•b= 11rn9s RN;,bnz' t2/ts/ss
VI.
Exhibit 'D'
ADD ADDITIONAL BOULDERS
TO CONTROL EROSION
i
LOWER RIO GRA.NDE PARK
EROSION CONTROL ON KAYAK COURSE
AREA #1
Prepared By:
Mt. Daly Enterprises
October 25, 1995 N . T. S .
`SEED WITH NATIVE GRASSES
AFTER PLACING TOPSOIL
AROUND ROCKS
r-
t
LOWER RIO GRANDE PARK
EROSION CONTROL ON KAYAK COURSE
AREA #2
prcparcA By:
Mt. Daly Enterprises
October 25, 1995 N.T.S.
0
t f
ADD BOULDERS
ABOVE EXISTING . . . . . . . . .
TO CONTROL EROSION
*SEED WrM NATIVE
GRASSES AFFER PLACING
TOPSOIL, AROUND BOULDERS
LOWER RIO GRANDE PARK
EROSION CONTROL ON KAYAK COURSE
AREA #3
Prepared By:
Mt_ Daly Enterprises
October 25,1995 N.T.S.
ROSES TO BE PLANTED IN
AND AROUND BOULDERS
ADD ADDITIONAL BOULDERS
ABOVE EXISTING
*SEED WITH NATTVE GRASSES AFIF
PLACING TOPSOIL AROUND ROCKS
LOWER RIO GRANDE PARK
EROSION CONTROL ON KAYAK COURSE
AREA #4
Prepared By:
Mt_ Daly Enterprises
October 25, 1995 N.T.S.
i!
Iy\.r 1
Am,
ROSES rT' OSES 4c'J a E. ► + r.. , ?� jr
ADD BOULDERS
ABOVEEXISTING.
RESET ANY BOULDERS
DISTURBED BY SPRING
RUN -OM KEY ADDITIONAL-�-
BOULDERS INTO BASE
BOULDERS. ADD TOPSOIL,
THEN SEED WITH NATIVE GRASSES
USING EROSION CONTROL
NETTING ABOVE BOULDERS. -'' �i1 '_ �� '•' r' —
PLANT ROSES AMONGST BOULDERS
AS INDICATED.
LOWER RIO GRANDE PARK
EROSION CONTROL BEGINNING
OF KAYAK COURSE
AREA #5
Prepared By:
Mt_ Daly Enterprises
r'k-rn F*-r %t l()G\ ^I T C
LOCATION OF
PROPOSED
COTTONWOODSCOTTONWOODS1,, L",
TRAIL
r; V N 1,113
L
n
L
EXI G IL
\r
DOGWOOD r 1,; �I.
DOGW
REDI MG
7
G
S
SERVICi�BERRY ERVICEBERRY
OSES
ROSES
Ir
WILLOW ALDER
wal-ow
LOWER RIO GRANDE PARK
RECONSTRUCTION AND REVEGETATION
OF ERODED AREA BELOW TRAIL
AREA #6
Prepared By:
Mt. Daly Entcrpnscs
October 2.5. 1995 N.T.S.
Exhibit 'E'
March 265 1996
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Region 8
Denver Federal Center
Building 710, Box 27657
Denver, CO 80225-267
To Whom it May Concern,
The City of Aspen Parks Department has submitted a Stream Margin Exemption
application to our Community Development Department for the purpose of repairing a
stream bank and diversion channel island that were damaged by the high water event of
1995. The repair work includes re -working the rock embankment to improve the
structural integrity of the bank and then re -vegetate the slopes with native plants to
control future erosion. We will be doing similar work at the inlet to the island, as well as
stabilizing and re -armoring a few areas along the channel and island. We are proposing
to begin work in May before high water for this year. We have received Army Corp of
Engineers approval under a nationwide permit number 13 to complete this work.
Attached are the following:
l . Letter to Stan Clauson, Community Development Director Requesting
Stream Margin Exemption
2. Army Corp of Engineers Letter, dated 11 /21 /95
3. Project Location Map
4. 11 x 17 General Plan Map
5. 6 Illustrative drawings of repair work
If you have any questions regarding the information provided please contact us at
(970)920-5120. Thank you for your time to review this material.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Baker
Assistant Parks Director
City of Aspen
March 26, 1996
Colorado Water Conservation Board
Division of Water Resources
50633 Hwy 6 & 24
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
To Whom it May Concern,
The City of Aspen Parks Department has submitted a Stream Margin Exemption
application to our Community Development Department for the purpose of repairing a
stream bank and diversion channel island that were damaged by the high water event of
1995. The repair work includes re -working the rock embankment to improve the
structural integrity of the bank and then re -vegetate the slopes with native plants to
control future erosion. We will be doing similar work at the inlet to the island, as well as
stabilizing and re -armoring a few areas along the channel and island. We are proposing
to begin work in May before high water for this year. We have received Army Corp of
Engineers approval under a nationwide permit number 13 to complete this work.
Attached are the following:
1. Letter to Stan Clauson, Community Development Director Requesting
Stream Margin Exemption
2. Army Corp of Engineers Letter, dated 11 /21 /95
3. Project Location Map
4. 11 x 17 General Plan Map
5. 6 Illustrative drawings of repair work
If you have any questions regarding the information provided, please contact us at
(970)920-5120. Thank you for your time to review this material.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Baker
Assistant Parks Director
City of Aspen
DRAFT
MEMORANDUM
To: Suzanne Wolff, Planner
Via: Nick Adeh, City Engineer
From: Ross C. Soderstrom, Project Engineer
Date: April 18, 1996
Re: Rio Grande Park Stream Margin Review Exemption
(Rio Grande Park, Rio Grande Subdivision, City of Aspen, CO)
After reviewing the above referenced application and making a site visit I have the following comments:
Discussion:
Through conversations with the City Parks Dept. I understand that the original proposed scope of work
has been reduced due to timing of the work with the spring snowmelt and availability of consultants to
review the Oklahoma Flats pedestrian bridge. At present the proposed scope of work to be begun
immediately (prior to the snowmelt) is the reconstruction of the boulder rip -rap embankment on the south
bank of the outside curve of the Roaring Fork River immediately below Rio Grande Place (and Recycle
Center) in work area 6, and select bank reconstruction, armoring, erosion preventative rock features and
limited bottom dredging to remove flood deposited materials in work areas 1 through 5. Re -vegetation
with native riparian species shall be performed in these areas following the spring snowmelt this year. If
permissible by timing and coordination with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD),
additional spot re -construction work may be performed upstream of work area 6 extending to the
Oklahoma Flats pedestrian bridge.
In consideration that;. 1) the proposed work re -constructs previously existing features; 2) makes
permanent repairs of the emergency repairs performed' during the flood event of spring 1995; 3) provides
preventative measures to damaged areas and areas likely to be damaged; 4) is in conformance with the
previously approved Rio Grande Park Master plan; and 5) will effectively increase the flow capacity of
the water channel and remove obstructions, the applicant is permitted to fulfill an abbreviated selection of
the requirements for work in a water course. The applicant shall fulfill requirements 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11,
12, and 13 in full. h
In lieu of requirements 1, 3, 8 and 10, the applicant shall provide three (3) cross sections of the work area
prior to and at completion of the work (at the work area 6, and 100 yd upstream and downstream of the
1 OF 5
DRCM0896.DOC
Memo - Rio Grande Park Stream Margin Review Exemption
work); a color photograph series of all the work areas before and after the work; a color photograph series
of all the river bank areas opposite of the work areas; and the complete benclunark information used in
establishing the cross -sections. If any previously unidentified utilities are uncovered during the work,
these shall be reported to the respective utility, and the location, depth and type of each shall be recorded
and presented to the respective utility and the Aspen/Pitkin County Data Processing Dept. Erosion and
sediment transport control will be provided for the duration of the project. No soils report will be
required since the entire soil mass behind the rip -rapped wall is imported fill material which will be
partially replaced and re -compacted in this project.
1. Topographic Improvement Plat Survey & Flood Elevations: Prior to issuance of the
construction permit, the developer of this project shall show the ribbon of the stream, mean edge of water,
mean edge of high water, 50 year, and 100 year flood elevations (mean sea level; provide the name of the
datum used) on a topographic plat survey of the river section where the work is proposed. The
topographic plat survey shall conform to the requirements for an Improvement Plat Survey as defined in
Title 38, Article 51, C.R.S. with additional topographic information as described below. The surveying
will be performed by a land surveyor currently licensed in Colorado. The survey will include the area of
the work, extend 100 yards upstream and downstream of the approximate centerline (transverse to the
river flowline) of the proposed work and extend at least 100 ft (horizontally) beyond the limits of the 100
year flood plane on both sides of the flood course. The maximum contour interval shall be 2 ft. except in
areas having slopes equal to or greater than ten percent (10%) where the maximum contour interval shall
be 5 ft. The topographic map will be drawn at a scale of 1 inch equals 50 ft. or larger.
The applicant shall also provide three (3) surveyed cross -sections of the river channel prior to and after
completing the work in area 6. One (1) cross-section shall be made at the approximate centerline of the
work and the other two (2) cross -sections shall be made 100 yards upstream and downstream of the
approximate centerline of the work. In areas I through 5 the applicant shall provide color photographs of
the river channel prior to and after completing the work.
HEC II analyses depicting the existing and proposed new water course geometries performed by a
currently licensed Colorado civil engineer shall be provided to the Engineering Dept. In the event that the
finished work varies substantially from the proposed cross -sections, length, width or depth of the work
area, the applicant shall provide additional topographic information and HEC II analyses to accurately
depict the actual water profiles downstream, at, and upstream of the work area(s). If the finished work
adversely affects the water profiles in a manner that would cause flooding of previously un-impacted
areas, the applicant shall remedy the conditions at his own expense.
2. Utilities: The submitted site plan does not indicate locations for these facilities however the
applicant shall contact each utility prior to commencing work to verify utility locations and field 'locate
those which are within the proposed work area(s).
2OF5
DRCM0896.DOC
p
Memo - Rio Grande Park Stream Margin Review Exemption
Any new utilities or utilities disturbed by the work shall be constructed or repaired with materials and
utility equipment resistant to flood damage using methods and practices that minimize flood damage.
3. Site Drainage: The restoration work shall not release more than historic storm run-off
flows from the site. A copy of the soils report performed by a Colorado licensed geotechnical engineer
must be submitted to the City Engineering Dept. prior to issuance of the construction permit.
4. Pedestrian Path Area: The applicant shall be required to restore the Rio Grande Trail to
its present condition, or better, before October 1, 1996. The trail cross-section shall be approved in
writing by the Parks Director prior to issuance of the construction permit. The pedestrian trail space shall
be shown on the final development plan.
5. Erosion and Sediment Control: The construction plan shall explain the means and materials
to be used to minimize sloughing of the bank, (both new and existing soils and rip -rapping materials),
during and following construction. Since the construction is intended to be phased, with the first phase to
occur in May, 1996, prior to the annual snowmelt and high water, provision shall be made to ensure that
the work areas and adjacent areas are fully stabilized and protected against normal high water levels
which may occur during the spring run-off to minimize further erosion and damage to the work in
progress.
Prior to the beginning of work, a non -disturbance line shall be erected with fencing to delineate the work
area boundaries as shown on the construction plans submitted with this application. The non -disturbance
line shall be securely maintained until written sign -off of completion for the project.
Completion of the project shall include that work areas and all areas disturbed by the work, shall be
compacted, stabilized with previously approved rip -rapping materials and re -vegetated with plant species
previously approved by the Parks Dept.
6. River Bed Access: The access route(s) to and from the river bed shall be approved in writing
by the Engineering Dept. prior to issuance of the construction permit. The applicant shall obtain prior
written authorization from the property owner(s) who's property provides access to the river bed for
personnel, materials and machinery, and loading and dumping operations.
7. Public Safety: Access to the work area shall be delineated and controlled to pmvent the
un-authorized entry of pedestrians, fishermen, and other people in the river bed or on the river banks in or
near the work areas from the beginning to the end of construction. The area shall be clearly posted with
signs prohibiting entry of un-authorized people.
3 OF 5
DRCM0896.DOC
Memo - Rio Grande Park stream Margin Review Exemption
8. Surveying Standards: The Topographic Improvement Plat Survey needs to have the
following items corrected or shown prior to issuance of the construction permit:
A. Complete a Topographic Improvement Plat Survey as outlined in section 1 above. The
topographic improvement plat must be properly titled as such; signed in the Surveyor's certificate which
evidences supervision of the survey and compliance with Title 38, Article 51, CRS, 1973; and stamped by
a surveyor currently licensed in Colorado. The survey shall include the title insurance certificate number,
date of issuance and name of the issuing title company. (Or in lieu, a letter from a currently licensed
Colorado attorney certifying the ownership of the property and no changes of property rights nor
encumbrances since the last title report may be accepted.) The title insurance certificate must have been
issued within one (1) year prior to the date of the topographic improvement survey and application date.
(If submitted, a letter from an attorney must have been authored within one (1) month prior to the date of
application.)
B. Provide a record topographic survey showing the final contours, elevations, improvements
and conditions (e.g. size and type of rip -rapping by location, utilities, structures, plant species by
location). Include any utilities located, relocated, constructed or uncovered during the work.
C. Use distinctive line types and labels to indicate the ribbon of the stream, mean edge of water,
mean edge of high water, 50 yr. flood contour and 100 yr. flood contour.
D. Provide full identifying information for the monuments used to establish the basis of bearings.
Also provide the bearing and distance of the tie from the nearer basis of bearings monument to the
property boundary, if applicable. Use two (2) City monuments within same city block, two (2) recorded
subdivision monuments, other recorded monuments, or solar observations to establish the basis of
bearings.
E. Clearly and completely identify the type of survey monuments found and set by type and
recorded identifier, (i.e. "PLS #####" or "LS #####") along with defining distances and bearings, both
record and field measured.
G. Provide the existing benchmark information including location, elevation, benchmark
description and location to the City Engineering Dept. before completion of the project.
9. Regulatory Licenses and Permits: Prior to beginning work, the applicant shall obtain the
required licenses and permits from the Army Corps of Engineers, the Colorado Water Conservation
Board (CWCB), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Colorado Division of
Wildlife (CDOW)i, and any other pen -nits required to work in the water course. The applicant shall
provide a copy of each license or permit to the City Engineering Dept. and fully comply with all
4OF5
DRCM0896.DOC
Memo - Rio Grande Park Stream Margin Review Exemption
DRAFT
requirements of each license and permit in addition to those requirements of the City. In the event of
conflicting requirements, the more stringent requirement or standard shall control.
10. Record Drawings: Prior to final sign -off of the project, the applicant will submit to the
Aspen/Pitkin County Data Processing Dept. record drawings for the project showing tlic property lines,
contours and elevations above mean sea level (provide datum information), building footprint, easements,
encroachments, locations of utilities in the work area and any other improvements.
11. Adjacent and Opposing River Bank Impacts: The applicant shall inform the property
owners of the adjacent and opposing river banks, upstream and downstream of the, into rided. work for the
purpose of coordinating bank stabilization work and minimizing adverse impacts. As possible, river bed
and bank stabilization and restoration work shall be coordinated between adjacent properties to minimize
disturbance in the water course, reduce the number and frequency of water course work, activities, and
minimize conflicting results.
Work which adversely impacts adjacent property owners will not be permitted without mitigating
measures.
Specifically, provide copies of correspondence with the Moore family and Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
District documenting the coordination efforts for this proposed work.
12. Rip -Rapping: Rip -rapping materials shall be angular, not spherical, to provide
interlocking and greater friction surface areas, and of sufficient mass to remain in their placed positions.
The loose pieces of concrete slag left from the former concrete plant and lying immediately in the work
area(s) shall be removed from the site or covered with natural rock to improve the aesthetic appearance of
the project area.
Spherical boulders may be used in areas 1 through 5 individually and in clusters to create pockets, back-
waters and other water features where structural integrity is not the controlling consideration for
placement of the boulders.
13. Embankment Slopes: To the extent feasible, the re -built stone embankment shall be
constructed with a slope not exceeding IV : 1 H and preferably a slope of IV : l 1 /21-1 or batter, or in a
terraced configuration, and/or with vegetation pockets for riparian landscaping. Tbc existing emergency
rip -rapped embankment has a slope greater than 1 V : 1 H for the portion above, I]) c in can lit gh water line
which is the portion of the embankment intended for re -construction.
5OF5
DRCM0896.DOC
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Dave Michaelson, Deputy Director
DATE: April23, 1996
RE: As Mountain Subdivision and Planned Unit Development -
Conceptual PUD for Lot 5 (Grand Aspen Site), Continued Public
Hearing
SUMMARY: On April 9, 1996 the Planning and Zoning Commission conceptually
reviewed the proposal for Lot 5 of the Aspen Mountain PUD. At that time, staff
identified several conceptual issues that should be restudied, including the height and
bulk of the primary structure on Dean Street, as well as the potential for modifying
allowed uses on Lot 6 (the Ice Rink).
Progress: Staff has had a series of discussions with the applicant and the consulting
team regarding potential design modifications that would reduce the height and mass of
the structure, as well as changes to the Ice Rink site. Potential solutions that have been
discussed in reference to the Dean Street Building included the relocation of two units to
the rear of the parcel, attached to the proposed townhomes that face Galena and Mill.
Preliminary drawings and elevations have been submitted to the owners of the property
for consideration, but have not been approved for submittal to staff. The applicant has
indicated that these elevations and site modifications will be presented to the Planning
Commission on 04.23.96 following review and approval by the owner.
Staff also has meet with the project's design team to discuss the Ice Rink site. Staff has
developed conceptual ideas for reinforcing the public nature of the site, and will present
design concepts for the Commission's review on 04.23.96. Concepts currently being
discussed and refined include improving and expanding available public seating,
particularly near the Mill/Durant intersection, as well as allowing some level of
commercial/food service/retail activity as a permitted use.
A primary constraint to outdoor seating, regardless of additional uses, is the lack of noise
buffering from the adjacent Ruby Park Transit Station. If light rail terminates at this
point, the need to insulate the site becomes even more important. In addition, potential
modifications to the constraints placed on the site by prior PUD approvals have been
discussed, but no agreements have been reached between the applicant and staff. Staff
feels strongly that the site is extremely underutilized, and does not reflect the public -use
potentially, Vailable in the future due to expansion of the pedestrian nature of Dean
Street.
I
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission allow the applicant to
present any proposed refinements that the owners have approved, and make a
determination on the conceptual issues outlined in Staff s April 9, 1996 memorandum
MEMORANDUM -
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Dave Michaelson, Deputy Director
RE: Aspen Mountain PUD Lot 5 (Grand Aspen Site) Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Conceptual Review
DATE: April 9,1996
SUMMARY: The Planning Commission has established two public hearings (04.09.96 and 04.23.96) to
review the conceptual PUD Plan application for Lot 5 of the Aspen Mountain PUD. Lot 3 (Top of Mill)
will not be presented to the Commission until a later date. Due to the complexity and importance of the site
in the context of the central core of the City, staff has used the first staff memorandum to address conceptual
issues that should be addressed by the Planning and Zoning Commission in the early stages of review.
Issues staff feel are appropriate to frame at this point include the proposed use, mass and scale, the general
relationship to the existing neighborhood, and the sensitivity to the critical nature of linking the site with the
Little Nell and gondola area. These issues are summarized in the context of the applicable criteria for
conceptual PUD review. As consensus is reached on the broader aspects of the project, staff is suggesting
that the review become more detailed in scope.
PROCEDURAL OVERVIEW: The project is being processed as a four -step application, with reviews
occurring at different steps. Staff has summarized the timing of specific requests below.
Step 1 - P & Z Step 2 - Council
Conceptual PUD Conceptual PUD
Subdivision f l) Subdivision (1)
Notes: Italics represent public hearings
(1) Subdivision for only Lot 3
Step 3 - P & Z
Step 4 -Council
Final PUD
Final PUD
Text Amendment
Text Amendment
Rezoning
Rezoning
Conditional Use
8040 Greenline
Viewplane
APPLICANT: Savanah Limited Partnership, represented by Sunny Vann and John Sarpa
LOCATION: Lot 5, Aspen Mountain PUD. Lot 5 is located on Dean Street south of the ice rink between
Mill and Galena Streets, and extending south to the Alpenblick condominiums. The parcel includes a
portion of the Dean Street right-of-way, which was vacated in connection with the original PTJTD approval.
ZONING: L/TR PUD, (Lodge/Tourist Residential, mandatory PUD review) A small area of the vacated
Dean Street right-of-way is zoned CL, Commercial Lodge.
LOT AREA: 86,605 gross square feet. When the vacated right-of-way is subtracted from the total lot area,
the net lot area for the purposes of calculating FAR is reduced to 73,070 s.f.
The PUD agreement (page 39) also makes the applicant responsible for net new employees for he Lot
employee housing requirements as may be deternther
uned during the amended approval process
5 component of the PUD.
Staff has attached all of the background material submitted by Alan and referenced in his comments.
STAFF COMMENTS
PUD
CONCEPTUAL REVIEW: Pursuant to Section 26.84.030 of the Aspen Municipal
CodeStaff
development application for PUD review shall comply with the following standards and requirements.
has framed the responses in the context of the conceptual issues identified in the summary.
General Requirements
A. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
address
Responsg
e: Althou h it is true that the 1993 Aspen Area Community Plan did not specifically For example
5
of the Aspen Mountain PUD specifically, several, policies appear to be relevant to
areas in the downtown
under "Design Quality and Historic Preservation includes a policy to y
core could be developed in order to attract social activity in specific places." A thoug hehRi Dowtz-Gntown
dola
Enhancement Plan effort has just begun,
the critical relationship of Lot 5 with
bothRink emphasizes the public nature and future potential of the site.
corridor along Dean Street and the Ice
e project currently proposes a curvilinear landscaped plaza along the vacated night-of-wayofDean Street
a
� P J
to provide an enhanced pedestrian path from the Ritz to the Little Nell Dean Street linkage
i k g pedestrian mall as
priority for the City for some time. Staffs concern with the propose
ed is the private nature of the proposed project, in the context of the public setting adjacent uced be the
Ice
proposed is
Rink and proximity to Ruby Park and the downtown core. The projecabandoning lansblo use SOthoteUlodge credits
applicant's intent of only using free market allocations and aband b p
approved with the original PUD.
the mall b including first floor commercial development, and allowing for
The possibility of animating Y
some fo
rm of outside seating to encourage public use of the area is an issue worthy of discussion. o Staff
n
recognizes that additional GMQS all for commercial development verould sion bactor between either the
that could potentially overcome this constraint would be to develop a co
or free market credits to allow for small-scale street level commercial uses without competing through
lodge
the GMQS system.
proposed
B.e
The development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the
surrounding area.
nse: Neighboring development includes the Ritz -Carlton hotel and numerous mixed use o slti-ffr from Respo -- Neighboring is
condominiums, commercial and public uses. The Dean Street building
to residential rnature of the project
ice rink and the Rubey Park bus station. As discussed above, the private
a ears to conflict with the public setting, particularly in light of enhancing the pedestrian pathway along
PP
vacated Dean Street.
3
C'. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the facture development of the surrounding
area.
Response: Lot 5 represents the last significant development opportunity in the immediate area. Although
the area is essentially fully developed, that redevelopment can be expected in the general area. Staff would
suggest the proposed height variance request, if approved, will impact the viewplanes from these properties,
or set precedent for future development. In addition, the proposal would place passive, private land uses
adjacent to an active public space and transit center.
D. Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments
are obtained by the applicant.
Response: As discussed at length at the work session and described in the application, no GMQS
allocations are required for the development. Thirty-nine of the forty-seven residential units proposed for
Lots 3 and 5 are to be developed utilizing reconstruction credits which were previously approved the City
and confirmed in the Amended PUD Agreement. The remaining eight residential credits were obtained via
the GMQS process. Final approval can be granted to the project following the completion of the PUD
review process. Staff notes that the GMQS allocations are maximum ceilings for development of Lot 3 and
5, and in no way should be considered approved densities on either parcel.
Additional PUD Standards
1. Density: The L/TR zone district requires 1,000 square feet of lot area per bedroom. The project
proposes 72 bedrooms, which requires 72,000 square feet of lot area. Sufficient lot area is available
to accommodate this density. No reduction in density is necessary due to the presence of slopes in
excess of 20%. Staff notes that the net lot area is 73,070 s.f. The proposal represents the maximum
number of bedrooms that can be placed on Lot 5.
Land Uses: Multi -family dwellings are a permitted use in the L/TR zone district.
3. Dimensional Requirements
4. Off-street Parking: 72 parking spaces will be provided in a sub -grade parking garage, which
slightly exceeds the minimum number of 60 required spaces (one off-street space per bedroom, or
two per unit).
5. Open Space: The L/TR zone district has a minimum open space requirement of 25 %. The
applicant represents that approximately 39% of the undeveloped area on Lot 5 meets the open space
definition. Staff notes that the proposed design leaves sufficient open space to provide visual relief
to adjacent properties by breaking up the structures and providing east/west corridors parallel to
Dean Street, and north/south between the townhome structures.
6. Landscape Plan: A detailed landscape plan will be provided and reviewed with the final PUD Plan
application. Staff has suggested that the eventual configuration of the passage way on Dean S11'reet
is a critical component of the project, and should be refined at this stage of the process.
5
�767 Fl- t ►D qZ y 3 Fr-
Steven and Debra Falender
712 South Galena Street
Aspen Co 81611
April 19, 1996
Sara Garton, Chairperson
Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission
RE: Grand Aspen Site, a part of the Aspen Mountain PUD
Dear Ms. Garton,
My name is Steve Falender. My family and I are full-time Aspen residents living at
712 South Galena Street, a duplex directly across Galena Street from the Alpenblick.
I have the following concerns about the proposal for the Grand Aspen site, all relating
to the four townhomes proposed along Galena Street:
(1) The maximum height of the two most -uphill townhomes, as indicated by
the marker pole placed on the top of the existing hotel, is much too high. The
proposed roof appears to block even our distant view of Red Butte. The
above -ground height of the building, that is, from the exposed lower level to
the roof peak, seems to be taller than other recently constructed townhomes in
Aspen.
(2) The setback from Galena Street for the proposed townhomes appears to be
significantly less than the setbacks for other buildings along the street,
including the recently constructed Galena Place condominiums.
(3) Although the proposed "Chicago -style, articulated" design of the
townhomes is attractive, and appears to be of the highest quality, the design
style results in tall and boxy buildings. In order to better preserve views, and
to lessen the corridor feeling along both Galena and Mill Streets, I wish the
developers would consider another an architectural style that is lower and
lighter in feeling that the proposal. Even the rounded roof lines of Galena
Place are more view -friendly than the proposed design concept for the Grand
Aspen site.
In order to reduce the height of all the condominiums on the site, including the
townhomes and the main Dean Street building, I suggest that some of the open space between
the Dean Street building and the northern -most townhomes be reduced. Although the
developer has suggested that this open space would be available to the public, I believe that
the pedestrian traffic through the site from properties such as the Ritz and the Tippler would
ultimately result in the closing of that pathway to the public.
Grand Aspen Site, April 19, 1996 letter, page 2
Overall, I am impressed by the developer's site plan and obviously high quality
project. If the roof heights could be reduced and the setbacks increased similar to Galena
Place, I think the development would be more friendly to the neighborhood, and better
preserve the view of the mountains.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Steve Falender
712 South Galena Street
Phone: 920-1816
CC: Dave Michaelson, Planner
Savannah Properties
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE RIO GRANDE PARK STREAM MARGIN REVIEW
Resolution No. 96-17
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.68.040 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning
and Zoning Commission may grant approval for development within 100 feet, measured
horizontally, from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, if the
development is determined to be in conformance with the requirements of said Section; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the
City of Aspen Parks Department for Stream Margin Review approval to repair and stabilize areas
adjacent to Rio Grande Park and the Rio Grande Trail which were damaged by the flooding of the
Roaring Fork River in 1995; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineering and Community Development Departments reviewed
the proposal and recommended approval with conditions; and
WHEREAS, the Commission reviewed and approved the Stream Margin Review with
conditions by a 5-0 vote on April 23, 1996; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that it does hereby
approve the Rio Grande Park Stream Margin Review with conditions as follows:
1. The applicant shall inform the property owners of the adjacent and opposing river banks,
upstream and downstream of the work to coordinate work to minimize disturbance in the river
(specifically the Moore family and the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District).
2. The applicant shall provide 3 cross sections of the work area prior to and at completion of
the work: one at the approximate centerline of the work, and the other two 100 yards upstream and
downstream of the centerline.
3. The applicant shall provide before and after photos of the work area and of the opposite
river banks to the Engineering Department.
4. The applicant shall restore the Rio Grande Trail to its present condition or better by October
1, 1996.
5. Silt fencing shall be used to prevent any erosion or sedimentation from entering the river.
6. Provisions shall be made to ensure that the work areas are fully stabilized prior to high
water to minimize damage before the areas are revegetated after high water.
7. The Engineering Department shall approve the access route to and from the river bed prior
to issuance of a construction permit.
Access to the work area shall be delineated and controlled to prevent unauthorized entry
into the work area.
9. All representations of the applicant are considered conditions of approval.
APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on April 23, 1996.
ATTEST:
#k-ie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
Sara Garton, Chair