Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sm.1490 Red Butte Dr.1979-1 A 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Dan McArthur, City Engineer Ron Stock, City Attorney FROM: Sunny Vann, Planning Office RE: Sullivan Stream Margin Review DATE: December 7, 1979 Attached please find application for stream margin review submitted by P.L. Sullivan. This item is scheduled to come before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, January 22, 1979. Therefore, may I please have your written comments concerning this application no later than Monday, January 14, 1979. Thank you. , MEMO_RANDUM • TO: Sunny Vann, Planning Office FROM: Jay Hammond, Engineering Office Date: December 31, 1979,,E • (1 Having reviewed the survey plat for the above Stream Margin Review and having made a site inspection the Engineering Department recommends the following: That the Sullivan application be approved subject to the . following construction considerations: 1) That no fill material be placed so as to affect the character - 5f the flood zone streambed. Since the proposed construction is almost immediately adjacent to the 100 year flood hazard line this means that no filling may be done to permit placement of the footers that would extend even 12 inches from the concrete in the direction of the river. 2) That cutting of brush and trees in the area be kept to a minimum to prevent possible bank - erosion in a flood situation. I J:,ould be noted that this Stream Margin Review abwli..“Li.iaa has posed some new problems with respect to the review criteria. The flood potential in this particular location is extremely broad "; such that Mr. Sullivan's home, although outside the 100 year flood plain is completely within what the Army Corns of Engineers calls the Standard project flood zone. The Standard project zone is that area subject to flooding given optimum conditions (snowmelt, rain- fall, ground saturation; etc.). Confusion is created in the Muni- cipal code in that it restricts construction in the "flood hazard area" but does not designate which one. Conferring with our City Attorney as well as a couple of insurance firms in Denver it would • appear that under Colorado law the area of most concern is that within the 100 year flood zone and not the hypothetical Standard Project. I also feel that some note should also be made of the conditions creating the wider flood zone at this location. A notable restric- tion on the streambed is caused by the Slaughterhouse bridge imme- diately downstream of the Sullivan property. Under full flood con- ditions this restriction could be further compounded by tree trunks and debris in the flood waters causing a significant damming effect at the bridge. The owner should be aware of this potential hazard. • • /, A� / t� ��_ A;t / �/ if///) ,_____ _______ 7 , i j ,0 \\, \:), \ ) / _ .___ „ 1 ! ( / .:30 \‘‘.\\' \\ ,-, ! - -' V\ P. 1 , , („a, ! , 7 \ \\ )i ///: \\\\\\ i dp lb."j 1 1 . ,(-\ -) c.' . `, ' \ I I a / � �% ii v oaf • ± .i o /\ �i�� c ,gi. . , : // I ' ' V 4 I/ 1 Fif 11 ,_T /c-sc'N / / - v % ' B Hi/ , ti ? /2 - / %,. . / i ::',:.)„',..,,;;;, I , // * / k, ( -,,- ,; ,i, , cra : , 0 0 / � A 2 / /7 ::-____------------ Lim � I �" � I � i -<, . 3 _ ,;" 9 ,/ / g c a._ t it , li I i t A. Ir i / / .///,,,,_ II �. / .. / / / 4 ' /' I I I i • i I I o a I I I ■ � i � II I i ill � I II .Q1 1 (1.1 i ./ / j/ ' ' / l/ h k\t• H I \\ 1 �� 1 � \,i it iv i \ I I \\ i G. 1 hh y I I I� 1 , \�. \\ \ \ , : I A 4 l' \ 1 I I . I I, " \ k l iq 1 - i // 1 i ■ i 1 1' 1 \\\\ A :\ \ ,.\\$, ' .‘\ \', ',, . ,t; V A ' ' ‘‘.11,. - c i i l l ! ) ' :14 \;:* \.\' \\\\\\\\‘‘\\\\\\\\: November 28, 1979 City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Mr. Sunny Vann Planning Department Dear Mr. Vann: On behalf of my client, Mr. P. L. Sullivan, I address your department in request that due Process be initiated for a "Stream Margin Review" for our proposed improvements on the single family dwelling which exists on Lot 1, Block 1, Red Butte Subdivision. We have designed, and propose to build a three car garage adjoining the existing house, with the intention of creating a harmonious connection between the two, with respect to the nature of the existing conditions, and the character of the land. The area in which the proposed improvement is due to occur, (see improvement survey) is relatively flat, grass covered ground, and contains no large trees or shrubs. Upon the acquisition of a building permit, we will execute the following construction procedures: 1. Remove existing metal storage sheds. 2. Stake -out building perimeter. 3. Excavate footings. 4. Tour footings and foundation walls. 5. Construct wood superstructure and roof as per construction documents. 6. Pour concrete slab after the building shell is completed, and it becomes a heated space. I trust this information will serve adequate in your review of this proposal, but if further information is necessary do not hesitate to call my office. Cordially, Engle E. Sae Designer `` ' n 1 244.2 ASPEN CODE 5 246.3 (b) Reuiew criteria. In reviewing the development plan, ' the zoning commission shall consider the following: I (1) Whether there exists sufficient water pressure and other utilities to service the intended development; j i - - (2) The existence of adequate roads to insure fire 41 fi protection, snow removal and road maintenance; � 4 r (3) The suitability of the site for development considering the slope, ground instability and possibility of mud y a flow, rock falls and avalanche dangers; ,, (4) The affects of the development on the natural watershed, runoff, drainage, soil erosion and conse- quent effects on water pollution; ! i I (5) The possible effects on air quality in the area and city wide; (6) The design and location of any proposed structure, r ' ,/, roads, driveways or trails and their compatibility with the terrain; i. . ; (7) Whether proposed grading will result in the least disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land features; (8) The placement and clustering of structures so as to minimize roads, cutting and grading, and increase the i I open space and preserve the mountain as a scenic resource; (9) The reduction of building height and bulk to maintain /".." i the open character of the mountain. (Ord. No. 11 31) y , Sec. 24 -8.3. Stream margin review. i (a) intention. To guide development and encourage tai appropriate use of land in proximity to designated natural * water courses, to promote safety from flooding, to prevent impediment of natural water flow, and to insure provisions ! for adequate protection and preservation of the designated natural water courses as important natural features. MI ,' lands and air space within one hundred (100) feet, measured ;, _ i Supp. No. 14 1478.2 ( , • i 4 f l • : I . 1 • I t . § 24-6.3 ZONING § 24-6.3 i i horizontally from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, shall meet the following requirements prior to the issuance of a building permit or any grading, filling or excavation of said lands. (b) Plan specifications. A development plan shall be submitted to the building inspector which supplies the • following information: (1) Boundary of the property for which building is requested; (2) Two (2) contours; five -foot intervals for grades over ten (10) per cent; ) (3) Existing and proposed improvements; . (4) Construction procedure to be used; and r l (5) Existing trees and shrubs. ' (c) Review criteria In reviewing the development plan the zoning commission shall consider the following guide- lines and standards, and impose the following conditions for permit approval: • h (1) No building shall be located so as to be within a flood hazard area designated by the U.S. Corps of Engineers Flood Plain Report for the Roaring Fork River. - ' (2) In the event there is a trail designated by an approved trail plan within the development site, such trail shall I $,i be dedicated for public use. 1 .` (3) All attempts should be made to implement the ' ? recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan I- � , ' .- prepared by the Roaring Fork Greenway Committee. (4) Vegetation shall not be removed nor any slope grade changes made that may produce erosion of the stream bank. -- ' I (5) There shall be permitted no changes to the stream channel apci, d nci shall be I allowed w hich its will c increase aty stream an o sedimentation and ' suspension loads. ;• 3app. No. 11 ' 1479 , a ' + ' , 4 * • .. 4 Li , M I a m i m I • 1 24.63 ASPEN CODE § 24.6.4 0 , ., e ' " (6) All efforts must be made to reduce stream pollution i and interference with the natural changes of the stream, and to enhance the value of the stream as an I f . I important natural feature. (Ord. No. 11 -1975, § 1) M Sec. 24 -6.4. Mountain view plane limitations and re- 4. i v ' i (A) Intention. To protect from obstruction mountain views 1 from designated parks and other public places to increase the beauty of Aspen and the enjoyment of its residents and - ,: visitors, to strengthen the city's environmental heritage, 1 enhance its tourist industry and maintain property values, { promote the general prosperity and welfare of the commu- k nity. # shall be { (B) N la nd shall be used and no building 2 erected, constructed, altered or changed so as to invade any P` area designated as an area necessary for the preservation of f j any mountain view. 1 (C) Whenever any use or building lies partially within and s • i partially without an area designated as an area necessary "- for the preservation of any mountain view, the restrictions of this section shall apply. (D) The commisaion,of any act prohibited by this section shall constitute a violation of Chapter 24 of this Code and s i - $ remedies provided therein may be had by any person 1 s f aggrieved by any violation of this section. ,';'` (E) When any view plan hereinabove established projects " ('. at such an angle so as to reduce the maximum allowable 1 ! building height to below that otherwise provided for in this 1 code, all development of areas so affected shall proceed according to the provisions of section 24 -8.1, et seq., for 1 i maximum flexibility in building design with special " ` ' consideration to building bulk and height, open and *. t I pedestrian space, and similarly to permit variations in lot area, lot width, yard and building height requirements, t + including view plane height limitations. Provided, however, Al the zoning commission may exempt any applicant from the requirements above enumerated whenever it shall determine Sapp. No. 11 i I, 1480 s 1 • I I - i 1 f '_ • .,J . _ n..