HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.501 Sneaky Ln.A014-02
1"""\
CASE NUMBER
PARCEL ID #
CASE NAME
PROJECT ADDRESS
PLANNER
CASE TYPE
OWNER/APPLICANT
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE OF FINAL ACTION
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
PZ ACTION
ADMIN ACTION
BOA ACTION
DATE CLOSED
BY
r'\
A014-02
2735-122-20002
501 Sneakv Lane Stream Marcin Review
501 Sneakv Lane
James Lindt
Stream Marcin Review
501 Sneakv Lane LLC
Alan Richman
3/19/02
Reso. #11-2002
Approved
3/20/02
J. Lindt
,
I
I
I
!
,
,I
I
,
!
,
I
I
~
t"'\
5;V\~\e-~ Q<:\W\:)y
Lot s/e:e 4"0 1+Lfra c:;6
R ~ sq ~L;\ V-) .
A-dd,.hDV\ O~ ~~01= .
:2fv<e-OuA MQv~1 V\ A-fJjJr/0vgfs
10/6--s - ~e:> i/' h 0US
19 q'-L - {-+J VV\/''^- ~<e 1M J0 fcYV" GclJ/?/cJt1..
\
2S~ bock a>0 rO "> ~ Tas IS; ~EYf1
- 11\ c> W'<2-esV\Q V1 0 Ll~ oil
- V';Q.J CJ~J--bur 0 (2 Wq flC(/Ic CJ U lA",
r ~<Qs
f"""\
("')
DEVELOPMENT ORDER
of the
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section
26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights",
of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific
development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein.
. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date (If a three-year vested
property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third
anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved
pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a
revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of
vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any
growth management allotments granted pursuant to Secti(ln 26.470, but shall be subject
to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order.
This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific
development plan as described below.
501 Sneakv Lane LLC.. 501 Sneaky Lane. Aspen. CO 81611
Property Owner's Nam.e, Mailing Address and telephone number
Lot 2. Parry Subdivision
Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Properly
Stream Marl!in Review Approval for Bedroom and Dining room additions totaling 836 SF
Written Description of the Site Specific Plariaridlor Attachment Describing plan
Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution #11-2002.3/19/02
Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions)
March 30. 2002
Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.)
March 31. 2002
Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration
and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen
Municipal Code.)
Issued this 30th day of March, 2002, by the City of Aspen Community
Deyelopment Director.
son, Community Development Deputy Director
t""'\
..
(")
IV-A.
MEMORANDUM
To: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
THRU:
Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director A
Joyce Ohlson, Community Development Deputy Director~'V
~..
FROM:
James Lindt, Planner(fL
\J~0
~\
RE:
501 Sneaky Lane Stream Margin Review
DATE: March 19,2002
Applicant: 501 Sneaky Lane LLC.
Representative: Alan Richman,
Richman Planning Services
Zoning: R-30 PUD
Lot Size: 47,446 Square Feet
Land Use: Single-Family Residence
Request Summary: The applicant is
requesting a Stream Margin Review
Approval to make an addition of
approximately 836 square feet to the
existing single-family residence.
Area of proposed
n:ar addition
BACKGROUND:
The Applicant is proposing an 836 square foot addition of a dining room and a bedroom to
the existing single-family residence at 50 I Sneaky Lane. The existing residence contains
approximately 4,579 square feet of FAR. In 1983, stream margin review approval was
received to construct the existing residence on the subject parcel. Subsequently, in 1992 a
stream margin exemption was approved to allow for several small additions to the existing
structure. The subject parcel is located within 100 feet of the high water line of Castle Creek
and requires Stream Margin Review approval. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.435,
Environmentally Sensitive Areas, the Planning and Zoning Commission may approve,
approve with conditions, or deny an application for development within 100 feet of the high
water line of Castle Creek.
I")
(')
STAFF COMMENTS:
The proposed addition meets all of the review standards set forth in Section 26.435 of the
City Land Use Code. The applicant, in consultation with the City Engineering Department,
has determined that the top of slope of Castle Creek on this parcel is :identical with the 100
year floodplain. Stream Margin Review Standard 26.435.040(C)(8) requires all new
development to be setback fifteen feet from the top of slope of Castle Creek. The closest that
the proposed addition is to the top of slope is twenty-three feet.
The applicant is proposing that no trees are to be removed and no regrading is to take place as
part of the construction of the additions. Staff has identified during a site visit that the area
being proposed for the addition is fairly flat and currently contains a landscaped yard area.
There is really no natural vegetation existing where the addition is proposed. The applicant is
proposing a building envelope be established as is shown on the plat entitled "Improvement
Survey and Stream Margin Review" that is attached as Exhibit "C".
The building envelope that the applicant has proposed does not appear to contain any natural
vegetation. The area within the proposed building envelope mainly consists of planted blue
grass for landscaping purposes. Staff approves of the proposed build:ing envelope and feels
that confining construction operations to within the proposed envelope will limit any
disturbance to the natural riparian area. Staff is requiring a condition of approval (Condition
No.3) that a plat showing the building envelope be approved by the Community
Development Director and City Engineer and then recorded at the Pitkin County Clerk and
Recorder's office.
The Parks Department has reviewed the proposed application and requests that the applicant
place barrier fencing around the proposed building envelope and silt fencing on the river side
of the barrier fencing during construction to protect the riparian area from run-off erosion.
City Forester, Stephen Ellsperman is also requiring that the applicant place upland fencing
around the driplines of existing trees to be saved that are near the building envelope. A
condition (No.2) is proposed that requires the applicant to provide the City Forester with a
construction fencing plan at the time of building permit and that the City Forester do an
inspection of the fencing prior to commencing construction activities. A condition (No.2)
has also been proposed that requires the applicant to mitigate in the form of re-vegetation for
any disturbance to the riparian zone identified within the proposed builiding envelope.
Staff feels that the proposed addition will not have a major impact 011 the riparian area. An
existing tree line (as shown on the survey attached in Exhibit "C") that runs along the river is
a good natural boundary that prevents expansion into the riparian area. The line of trees
prevents development in the sensitive natural area. Staff believes that the proposed addition
meets all of the Stream Margin Review Criteria.
STAFF RECOMMENDA nON
Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve this Stream Margin Review
application with the conditions listed in the resolution.
t'}
~
\"'" ./}
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"{ move to approve Resolution No.lL Series of2002, approving with conditions, a Stream
Margin Review request for additions to the existing residence of up to 836 square feet for the
addition of a bedroom and a dining room at 501 Sneaky Lane."
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A -- Review Criteria & Staff Findings
Exhibit B -- Referral Comments
Exhibit C -- Application
1""'\
~
EXHIBIT A
REVIEW CRITEJUA & STAFF FINDINGS
A. STREAM MARGIN REVIEW STANDARDS
The proposed development is located within an environmentally sensitive area described as a
Stream Margin and is subject to Stream Margin Review Standards. No development shall be
permitted within the Stream Margin unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a
determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements 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.
Staff Finding
Staff finds that the proposed addition to the single family residence is to be constructed
entirely within an established building envelope which is located on a developable portion of
the lot, and which is not located in the Special Flood Hazard Area and in no way will
increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for development. Staff finds this
standard to be met.
2. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan: ParkslRecreationlOpen
Space/Trails Plan and the RQaring Fork River Greenway Plan are implemented in
the proposed plan for development, to the greatest extent practicable. Areas of
historic public use or access shall be dedicated via a recorded easement for public
use. A fisherman's easement granting public fishing access within the high water
boundaries of the river course shall be granted via a recorded "Fisherman's
Easement."
Staff Finding
Staff finds that this proposal is directly consistent with Goal E "Protect and enhance the
natural environment," in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP). The proposal does not
encroach on any existing native riparian area and does not affect Castle Creek's watercourse.
Staff finds this standard to be met.
3. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope gradl~ 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 Certificates of Occupancy.
f"""'\
Staff Finding
The Applicant is not proposing to remove any trees or alter the existing grade of the site. The
Applicant, the City Engineer, and the Planning Staff have agreed on where the proposed
building envelope should be located and it is shown on the survey attached as Exhibit "C".
Staff has required, as a condition of approval, that the applicant place silt fencing around the
building envelope for the entirety of construction until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued.
Staff has also required the Applicant to provide tree protection fencinE in the form of Panel
Fencing around the drip line of all vegetation to be saved on site. The Applicant shall call the
City Forester for an inspection of this fencing before any construction activities begin. No
excavation, storage of materials, or any other use will occur within this zone during
construction activities. Staff finds this standard to be met.
4. 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 ofthe designated building envelope.
Staff Finding
The proposed development itself will not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the
river. The Applicant shall be required, as a condition of approval to place Construction and
Silt Protection Fencing along the Stream Margin area, around the established building
envelope, for protection of the Castle Creek Corridor before any construction activities are to
begin. The Applicant shall submit a detailed riparian fencing plan detailing the protected
area along the riverbank prior to the application for building permits to the City Parks
Department for review. City Forester must be called for an inspection before any construction
activities begin. The Applicant acknowledges that pools or hot tubs cannot be drained outside
of the designated building envelope. Staff finds this standard to be met.
5. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any
alteration or relocation of a watercourse, and a copy of said notice is submitted to
the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is not proposing to alter the watercourse in any way. Staff finds this standard
to be met.
6. A guarantee is provided in the event a watercourse 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.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is not proposing to alter the watercourse in any way. All structural
development will be restricted to the proposed building envelope. Staff finds this standard to
be met.
~
,
rl
, '..J
......'",./
7. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work
within the one-hundred-year floodplain.
Staff Finding
There is no proposed development within the one-hundred-year floodplain. Staff finds this
standard to be met.
8. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting taking
place below the top of slope or within fifteen (15) feet of the tOI~ of slope or the high
waterline, whichever is most restrictive. This is an effort to protect the existing
riparian vegetation and bank stability. (See Figure "A" below for illustrative
purposes).
Staff Finding
The Applicant is not proposing any landscaping within fifteen feet of the top of slope or the
high water line. The area affected by the proposed development is landscaped with planted
grass. No native vegetation exists in the area of the proposed addition. Staff finds this
standard to be met.
9. All development outside the fifteen (15) foot setback from the top of slope does not
exceed a height delineated by a line drawn at a forty-five (45) degree angle from
ground level at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and determined by the
Community Development Director using the definition for height set forth at Section
26.04.100 and method of calculating height set forth at Section 26.575.020 (See
Figure "A" below for illustrative purposes).
Staff Finding
The Applicant has designed a building envelope that is set 15 feet back from the top of slope
coincides with the 100 year floodplain) that has been verified by the City Engineering
Department. The applicant has also provided a "profile sheet" as shown on the improvement
survey in the Application (Exhibit "C") that shows the proposed addition is located back
from a line drawn at a forty-five (45) degree angle from ground level at the top of slope. Staff
finds this standard to be met.
10. A landscape plan is submitted with all development applicaltions. Such plan shall
limit new plantings (including trees, shrubs, flowers, and grasses) outside of the
designated building envelope on the river side to native riparia,n vegetation.
Staff Finding
The Applicant has not provided a landscape plan because they are proposing no new planting
outside of the building envelope. The Applicant is also not proposing to remove any trees on
the site. Staff finds this standard to be met.
11. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river
or located down the slope and shall be in compliance with sectiion 26.575.150.
~
I)
Staff Finding
The Applicant has committed to comply with the City of Aspen Outdoor Lighting Ordinance
and that all exterior lighting is low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or
located down the slope. The City Zoning Officer has concluded that the Applicant may
provide a lighting plan and cut sheets can be submitted at the time of building permit
submittal. This has been included as a condition of approval. Staff finds this standard to be
met.
12. 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.
Staff Finding
The Applicant has provided site sections showing all existing and proposed site elements, the
top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea level. These are attached to the application in
the plan sets. In addition, the City of Aspen Engineering Department has verified the top of
slope for this property. Staff finds this standard to be met.
13. There has been accurate identification ofwetIands and riparian zones. (Ord. No. 47-
1999, ~3)
Staff Finding
The Applicant has indicated that they are not aware of any wetland areas on the subject site.
t'l
n
MEMORANDUM
To: Development Review Committee
From: Richard Goulding, Project Engineer
Reference DRC Case load Coordinator
Date: March 1, 2002
Re: 501 Sneaky Lane Stream Margin
The Development Review Committee has reviewed the 501 Snealky Lane Stream
Margin at their February 27, 2002 meeting, and has compiled the following comments:
General
1. Sufficiency of Submittal: DRC comments are based on tlhe fact that we
assume the submitted site plan is accurate, that it shows all site features, and
that proposed development is feasible. The wording must be carried forward
exactly as written unless prior consent is received from the Engineering
Department. This is to alleviate problems and delays relat"d to approvals tied to
"issuance of building permit."
2. R.O.W. Impacts: If there are any encroachments into the public rights-ofway,
the encroachment must either be removed or be subject to current encroachment
license requirements.
Site Review
1. Site Drainage - Requirement -. The foundation drainage system should be
separate from site storm drainage system. Rain and snow melt runoffmust be
detained and routed on site. These facilities must be shown on drainage plans
and submitted for approval prior to application for building permit. The drainage
may be conveyed to existing landscaped areas if the drainage report
demonstrates that the percolation rate and the detention volume meet the design
storm
Information - The City drainage criteria needs to be implemented completely.
This includes but is not limited to erosion control, soil stabilization, and re-
vegetation in disturbed areas. Also, there needs to be an analysis of where the
drainage will flow
2. Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter - Requirement- sidewalk, curb, and gutter must be
designed using the City of Aspen design standards, which are available in the
City Engineering Department.
3. Fire Protection District - Requirement-
Fire Protection District requests the following revisions be made:
~
n
Page 2 of 5
March 1, 2002
501 Sneaky Lane Stream Margin Review
a. No comments at this time
4. Transportation - Requirements- The information were forwarded by
Transportation department:
a. No comment at this time
5. Building Department - Requirements - The following requirements were
forwarded by the Building Department:
a. No comment at this time
6. Parking - Requirement - The following requirement has been forwarded by the
Parking Department:
a. No comment at this time
7. Engineering Department - Requirement- The following requirements have
been provided by the Engineering Department:
a. The top of slope is an accurate for that particular area and coincides with the
100 year flood plan
Information - The following information has been provided by the Engineering
Department:
a. The submittal of the construction plans to Engineering Department for
reviews prior to application for building permit will benefit the developer and
will facilitate timely processing of the Building Permits.
8. Streets Department - Requirement- The following requirements have been
provided by the Streets department
a. No comment at this time
9. Housing Office - Requirements - The following requirements have been
provided by the Housing Office:
a. No comment at this time
Page 3 of5
March 1,2002
50 I Sneaky Lane Stream Margin Review
10. Community Development - Requirements - The following requirements have
been provided by the Community Development Office:
f""'i
!
1'"'\
t,;.,/1
a. The applicant complies with the land Use code in regard to the stream margin
review
11. Emergency Management Disaster Coordinator - Requirement _ The
following requirement has been provided by the Pitkin County Disaster
Coordinator:
a. No comment at this time
12. City Environmental Health Director - Requirements- The following
requirements were made by the Environmental Health Director:
a. No comments at this time
13. Parks - Requirement- The following requirements have been made by the
Parks Department:
a. There are no detailed design standard submitted for the stream margin
protection barricades referenced in the report. Where will this fencing be
situated and by what means? How will this fencing" protect residual run-off
and erosion"? This fencing shall consist of a barrier fencing at the edge of the
building envelope. Beyond this barrier fencing shall be silt fencing installed to
the City of Aspen standards. Additional erosion control measures may be
necessary depending upon the site.
b. Along with a stream margin barricade system, there also needs to be an
upland native vegetation and tree protection fencing installed. This will protect
other areas on the property outside the stream margin form construction
damage. There should be a location and standard for !lis fencing denoted on
the plan. There will be no storing of construction materials of any kind beyond
this fence.
c. Despite the applicant's intent, to not cut or disturb any trees, two trees
denoted on the report and site plan are indeed in the construction area and
will be impacted around section A. The root systems of the adjacent trees is
of paramount importance and some of the construction and landscaping
boundaries proposed will affect root zones. An approved tree removal permit
is required prior to construction.
d. Mitigation in the form of re-vegetation will be required f()r any disturbance to
the riparian zone identified to be outside of the 15' set back.
e. All disturbed areas around section A of the development will be required for
re-vegetation of an approved native seed mix based on site evaluation by the
City Forester or his designee. This will require a follow up site visit after the
spring thaw before any construction activity.
14. Utilities:
.
Page 4 of 5
March I, 2002
501 Sneaky Lane Stream Margin Review
Water:
(""'\,
Q
City Water Department - Requirement - As a request of the City of Aspen
Water Department, revisions need to be made as follows:
a. All uses and construction will comply with the City of Aspen Water System
standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water
Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Asplsn Municipal Code
Wastewater:
Aspen Consolidated Waste District - Requirement - The following was
provided by the Aspen Consolidated Waste District:
a. No comment at this time
Construction:
Work in the Public Right of Way
Requirement - Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and
development in public rights-of-way adjacent to private property, we advise the
applicant as follows:
Approvals
1. Engineering:
The applicant receives approval from the City Engineering
Department (920-5080) for design of improvements, including
grading, drainage, transportationlstreets, landscaping, and
encroachments within public right of way.
2. Parks:
The applicant receives approval from the Palrks Department (920-
5120) for vegetation species and for public trail disturbance.
3. Streets:
The applicant receives approval from the Streets department
(920-5130) for mailboxes, finished pavement, surface materials on
streets, and alleyways.
4. Permits:
Obtain R.O,W. permits for any work or development, involving
street cuts and landscaping from the Engineering Department
.
Page 5 of5
March I, 2002
501 Sneaky Lane Stream Margin Review
~
.t""\
DRe Attendees
Staff: James Lindt
John Niewoehner
Brian Flynn
Richard Goulding
Applicant's Representative: Alan Richman
~
()
MEMORANDUM
TO:
James Lindt, City Planner
FROM:
Sarah Oates, Zoning Officer -Sc>
RE:
501 Sneaky Lane Stream Margin Review
DATE:
February 22, 2002
----------------------------------'---------------------
----------------------------------------------------
501 Sneaky Lane is located in the R-30 Zone District which has the following
dimensional requirements:
Setbacks:
Front Yard - 25 feet
Side Yard - 10 feet
Rear Yard - IS feet
The 47,446 square foot lot has an access easement and areas under the high water line
which must be deducted from the lot size for the purpose of calculating FAR. Based on
the application, the lot size is 30,438 square feet and the allowable floor area is 5,426
square feet. The lot reduction calculations as well as floor area calculations will be
verified at the time of building permit application.
Residential Design Standards
The applicant appears to meet the Residential Design Standards for the proposed
additions based on the elevations submitted with the Stream Margin application.
Stream Margin Review
Exterior lighting is required to meet Section 26.575.150 of the Landi Use Code. Per the
Section 26.575.150, the applicant is required to submit a lighting plan with the ESA
review. Staff feels a lighting plan, with cut sheets, can be submitted at the time of
building permit submittal.
The proposed additions to 501 Sneaky Lane are sufficiently outside the fifteen (15) foot
setback from top of slope.
All of the dimensional requirements will be verified at the time of building permit.
'c
_' r"\.
, rltaH- ~~.
~7
r-:~
'P~eUe? s~
2l~ S61S A~, ~ ~1612
'P~'9M: (97()} 92().,1125
February 14, 2002
Mr. James Lindt, Planner
City of Aspen Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: 501 SNEAKY LANE LLC STREAM MARGIN REVIEW APPLICATION
Dear James,
This is an application for stream margin approval to modify the existing single family
residence located on Lot 2 of the Parry Subdivision, City of Aspen, more commonly known
as 501 Sneaky Lane. The Parry Subdivision is a two lot subdivision, approved by the City
of Aspen in 1978. The final plat for the subdivision is recorded at Book 6, Page 124 of the
Pitkin County records (see attached copy of plat). Lot 2 consists of approximately 47,446
square feet of land, and is zoned R-30 (PUD), making it a conforming-size lot of record.
This application is being submitted by 501 Sneaky Lane LLC, the owner of the property
(hereinafter, "the applicant"). Proof of the ownership of the property is provided by
Attachment #1, the title insurance commitment and the special warranty deeds.
Authorization for Alan Richman Planning Services to represent the property owner for this
application is provided by Attachment #2.
A pre-application conference was held with you on 11/28/01 (see Attachment #3, Pre-
Application Conference Summary). Based on this meeting and subsequent contacts with
City staff, you confirmed that the following land development approvals are required by the
Aspen Land Use Regulations to accomplish this project:
Stream Margin ReView for an addition of more than 10% to the floor area of an existing
structure located in proximity to the Roaring Fork River; and
Vested Rights for the project.
The following sections of this application identify the standards of the Aspen Land Use
Regulations that apply to these development approvals and provide a response to each
standard. First, however, an overview description of this development proposal is provided.
t""\
I
A
.J
Mr. James Lindt
February 14, 2002
Page Two
Development Proposal
This is an application to make an addition of approximately 836 sq. ft. to the existing single-
family residence located on Lot 2 of the Parry Subdivision. The existing residence contains
approximately 4,579 sq. ft. of space that counts as floor area pursuant to the Land Use
Code. The maximum allowable floor area on the lot is 5,426 sq. ft., meaning that 847 sq.
ft. of floor area remains to be developed on this property.
This lot has been subject to stream margin review by the City of Aspen on two prior
occasions. Following is a brief summary of those land use applications.
In 1983 the owner of Lot 2, Mr. David Han, requested stream margin approval to develop
a single family residence on the property. Stream margin approval for Lot 2 was granted
by motion of the Planning and Zoning Commission on August 16, 1983. The only condition
applied to the approval was that construction of the house was required to comply with the
standards of the stream margin regulations (see memo to City Planning and Zoning
Commission, included as Attachment #4).
In 1992, a subsequent owner of the property, Ms. Sandra Read, applied for stream margin
approval to make some small additions to the existing residence. Because the additions
would increase the floor area of the residence by less than 10%, the application was
approved administratively, by the Planning Director, on March 24, 1992. The only conditions
applied to this approval were that disturbed areas be re-vegetated, and construction runoff
into Castle Creek be prevented by implementation of a site drainage plan (see staff approval
memo, included as Attachment #5).
The applicant proposes to make some further additions to the existing dwelling on the
property. These additions are shown on the site plan and can be described as follows. First,
the applicant proposes a small addition (509 sq. ft.) to the south side of the house, which will
be used for a new bedroom. Second, the applicant proposes to make an addition on the
west side of the house (327 sq. ft.), and to extend the remaining deck in this area. Floor
plans have been provided in this application booklet.
Table 1, on the following page, provides an evaluation of the lot area, floor area, setback
and other zone district standards that apply to this property. It shows that the proposed
additions will be in compliance with all of the underlying dimensional standards of the R-30
zone district.
The following section of this application demonstrates how the application will comply with
all of the applicable standards of the stream margin review section of the Code.
1""'\
A
, j
Mr. James Lindt
February 14, 2002
Page Three
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF PROJECT'S COMPLIANCE WITH
R.30 ZONE DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIRJ8:MENTS
30,000 sq. ft.
30,000 sq. ft.
100 feet
5,426 sq. ft. (based on a net
lot size of 30,438 sq. ft., after
required deductions)
2 spaces per unit
47,446 sq. ft.
47,446 sq. ft.
+ /- 196 feet
+/- 38 feet
+/- 44 feet
+ /- 80 feet
25 feet
Not applicable
Not applicable
5,415 sq. ft.
2 spaces
f"l
n
.,' '.~
Mr. James Lindt
February 14, 2002
Page Four
Response to Criteria for Stream Margin Review
Because the applicant proposes development that is located within 100' of the high water
line of Castle Creek, this development is subject to stream margin review. The applicant's
.responses to the standards of Section 26.435.040 C. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations are
as follows:
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 site plan depicts the limits of the 100 year flood hazard area, as scaled from
the 1987 Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) study. This mapping
illustrates that the 100 year flood hazard area (which corresponds to the top of the stream
bank) is located approximately 25 feet from the edge of the proposed deck expansion area.
Based on this mapping, we were informed by the Community Development Department that
it would not be necessary for us to obtain a report from a professional engineer responding
to this standard.
2. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Comprehensive .Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open
Space/Trails Plan and the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan are implemented in the proposed
plan for development, to the greatest extent practicable. Areas of historic public use or
access shall be dedicated via a recorded easement for public use. A fisherman's
easement granting public fishing access within the high water boundaries of the river
course shall be granted via a recorded "Fisherman's Easement".
Response: A pedestrian and recreation easement was previously granted along Castle Creek
for the length of this property, and is shown on the plat of the Parry Subdivision and on the
site plan.
The Roaring Fork Greenway Plan recommends that trees not be cut along the Roaring Fork
River, that the River not be filled in, and its banks not be graded. It also recommends that
disturbed areas be brought back to as natural a state as possible, including the use of native
plant species. The proposed additions to the existing house will comply with these policies,
in no trees will be removed along Castle Creek (or anywhere 011 the property), and the
Creek and its banks will not be altered in any manner. Although the perimeter of the
property is covered with many trees, the applicant has carefully planned the proposed
additions so that no trees and no area along the stream bank will be aflfected by the construction.
~
("")
Mr. James Lindt
February 14, 2002
Page Five
3. 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 pennits. The barricades shall remain in place until
the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy.
Response: The proposed development will not involve the removal of stream bank
vegetation, nor will stream bank slope grade changes be made.
The area of the proposed house additions has been shown on the site plan. The applicant
will barricade around this area to prevent disturbance of the rest of the site and will leave
those barricades in place until a certificate of occupancy is issued for the development.
4. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the
river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and 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: The development will not interfere with or change the river course, nor will it
cause pollution of Castle Creek. There will be no changes to the existing grade of the
property, nor new paved areas developed. Drainage from the new roof and deck area will
remain on the site and will not be routed toward the river. The hot tub will be drained
within the building envelope.
5. 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 such alteration or relocation is proposed, so no written notice is required.
6. 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: Since no alteration or relocation is proposed, no guarantee is required.
7. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state pennits relating to work within the
one hundred (100) year floodplain.
Response: No work is planned within the 100 year floodplain, so no such permits are
necessary.
r'\
^
;/!
-.
Mr. James Lindt
February 14, 2002
Page Six
8. There is no development other than approved 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. This is an effort to protect existing riparian vegetadon and bank stability.
Response: The site plan identifies the top of the stream bank, which corresponds to the 100
year floodplain line. This delineation was confirmed in the field during a site visit with the
applicant's surveyor and a member of the City Engineering Department. The site plan
shows that the entire addition to the house will occur outside of the 15' setback. The
addition will be no closer than 25' from the top of the slope.
9. All develapment autside the 15 faot setback from the top af slape daes nat exceed a
height delineated by a line drawn at a 45 degree angle from ground level at the top af
slape. Height shall be measured and determined by the Cammunity Develapment
Directar, utilizing the definitian af height set farth at Section 26.04.100 and methad af
calculating height set farth at Sectian 26.575.020.
Response: A site section is shown on the site plan, as required by criterion #12, which
demonstrates that the proposed addition will not exceed the height delineated by a line
drawn at a 45 degree angle from ground level at the top of slope. The site section shows
the top of the bank, the 45 degree angle from ground level and the proposed residence.
This drawing shows that all of the proposed addition will occur beJow the 45 degree angle.
10. A landscape plan is submitted with all develapment applications. S,uch plan shall limit
new plantings (including trees, shrnbs, flowers and grasses) outside af the designated
building envelape an the river side to' native riparian vegetation.
Response: This property is already quite well landscaped, with many mature trees,
considerable shrubbery, and established ground cover. The areas where development is
proposed to occur are presently yard areas, covered with planted grass. Measurements
taken on-site by the project architect and project planner demonstrate that no trees will be
affected by the proposed additions.
Given these facts, the applicant has not produced a separate "landscape plan". Instead, the
site plan contains a note that states: No trees are to be disturbed. No grades are to be
changed. All grass (outside of the perimeter of the new building footprint) is to be replaced.
Those statements represent the applicant's landscaping commitments/landscape plan.
11. All exteriar lighting is law and downcast, with nO' lights directed taward the river ar
lacated dawn the slape and shall be in compliance with Sectian 26.575.150.
Response: The applicant agrees to comply with these standards.
,,-,.,
t}
d:)IV 'mnul[:Jm uuW
Sa:lIAlI:iIS {)NINl'Nld NVWH:lnI NVIV
'smoA A[Ul! ArgA
'lgUUBIII AIglII!l U U! PUOdSg1 lI!h\ gM pUB :l[SB Ol gglJ IggJ gSBg[d
'U!glgl[ gpBIII SlUglIIglUlS gl[l JO UOpB:J!JPUj;) 10 'UOPUIII10JU! IBUO!l!PPB AUB gl!nbg1 nOA n
'SPUdlII! Sl! JO lIU glUg!l!1II l1!M lUglIIdOI;JAgp pgSOdOld gl[l lUl[l gmSUg Ol
19p10 U! SlUgIIIHUlUIO:J gpUIII SBl[ lUB:J!lddB gl[l pUB SplBPUBlS P!BS l[l!h\ g:JuB!ldlIIm S,pgfOld
gl[l JO pgp!^Old Uggq SBl[ g:JUgp!^g lUg!;J!JJns 'SgU!l;JglII UOPU:J!lddU-g1d gU!mp lUglIIllBdgQ
lUglIIdo[:JAgQ Al!unIIIIIIO:) gl[l AqUgAFl UO!pg1!P Ol lUBnS1nd 'pgfOld gl[l Ol gjqu:J!lddB
;JpO:) ;JSn pUB! Ugdsv gl[l JO Sp1UpUUlS glqU:J!lddU gl[l Ol pgpUOdS;J1 SUl[ luu:J!lddB gl[l.
uo!snpuo:l
'snlUlS Sll[g!l pglSgA pglUBlg gq lUglIIdO[gAgp S!l[l
lBl[l slsgnbg1 Aqg1gl[ luu:J!lddU gl[l 'gpO:) red!:J!unW UgdSV gl[l JO 80\:'9<;: UO!pgS ollUBnsmd
SJlIlfrn p3JS3A
':l[g;Jl;) glll l[HM pglB!;JOSSB glU lUl[l SBglB uBpudp10 PUBjlgM AUB JO glBMB
lOU glU gJv\ ':l[g;Jl;) gl[l JO ggpg gl[l JO UOPB:J!J!lUgp! uu Sgp!A01d UB1d gHS gl[l. :3sUOdsall
'sauoz uVJ.lVdJ.l puv spuvpaM fa uopv:J.ypuap! alVJn:):JV U33q sVlf 3.131j,L 'n
';JAOqB '6 #
UO!lgl!l:J 19pUn pgqp:JSgp uggq gAl'll[ pUU pgp!^Old Uggq gAUl[ SUO!pgS gHS gSgl[l. :asuodS311
. . .. "[aila] V3S
ailoqv SUOPVi\a]3 lU3up.lad pUV ado]s fa dOl 3lfl 'SllJ3U1a]3 31!S pasodo.ld puv 2upSJX3 llV
SU!MOlfS pal1!Ulqns a.lv .l33UpiU3 .10 J:Jal!lf:J.lV adv:Jspuv] pa.lalspia.l v tfq UMV.lP suop:Jas 31!S 'U
UgAgs ggud
ZOOZ 'vI ArUUlqgd
lP1l!'1 SglIIBf '.JW
1"""\
tJl
EXHIBITS
')
ATtACHMENT #1
(""I)
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE A
1. Effective Date: November 1, 2001 at 8:00 AM
Case No. PCT16365F
2. Policy or Policies to be issued:
Proposed Insured:
MICHAEL WERNER
Amount$ 2,600,000.00
PremiumS 2,412.00
Rate: Re-lsslJe
(a) AL T A Owner's Policy-Form 1992
Proposed Insured:
TO BE DETERMINED
Amount$ 0.00
PremiumS 100.00
Rate: Companion
(b) ALTA LoanPolicy-Form 1992
Tax Certificate: $10.00
3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the
effective date hereof vested in:
H. MONTGOMERY LOUD and PAULA LOUD
4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is
described as follows:
LOT 2,
PARRY SUBDIVISION, according to the Map thereof recorded June 28,1978 in Plat Book 6 at Page 124
as Reception No. 205766.
PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC.
601 E. HOPKINS
ASPEN, CO. 81611
970-925-1766
970-925-6527 FAX
AUTHORIZED AGENT
Schedule A-PG.1
This Commitment is invalid
unless the Insuring
Provisions and Schedules
A and B are attached.
r")
~
SCHEDULE B SECTION 2
EXCEPTIONS
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, 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. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer
service or for any other special taxing district.
7. Right of the proprietor of a ve,in or lode to extract or remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found
to penetrate-or intersect the ~remises hereby granted as reserved in Unitl;)d Slates Patents recorded in
Book 55 at Page 32 and 35.
8. Easement and right of way for waterline as set forth in Deed recorded December 10. 1959 in Book 189 at
Page 320.
9. Easement and right of way for roadway as set forth in Deed recorded Feb'ruary 18, 1963 in Book 201 at
Page 180.
10. Right of way for ingress and egress 40 feet in width as dl;)scribed in Deed recorded August 19, 1964 in
Book 208 at Page 512.
11. Easement granted to Aspen Metropolitan Sanitation District recorded May 17, 1978 in Book 348 at Page
112.
12. Easements, ri9hts of way and all matters as disclosed on Plat of subject property recorded June 28, 1978
in Plat Book 6 at Page 124.
13. Overlap of adjacent property as disclosed on Survey by Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. dated October,
2001 as Job No. 23022
14. Any rights, interest or easements in favor of the riparian owners, the State of Colorado, The United States
of America. or the general public, which exist, have existed. or are claimed to exist in and over the waters
and present and past bed and banks of the Castle Creek River.
OJ}'1
~
~
~
---..:
h
<:::L
J..ill y vi-- M;PEN
HRETT PAlP
1:1'1'<: ,P NO..
I/W02---- 0- 137ft---
~"" , ..... .......,r..::"1
- WRETT PAlD
I"i I F't'" ,"p. NO.
. / IYoJ--- IfL B;rIJ--
SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED
~00.,,{)
, '"
THIS DEED, Made January 8, 2002
between H. MONTGOMERY LOUD AND PAULA. lOUD
of the County of PITKIN and State olCO,
of the first part, GRANTOR and MICHAEL B. WERNER
HUG
/ . {,:..
:,.. x;. ~
...
whose legal address is: 1111 LINCOLN ROAD, MIAMI BEACH", FL 33139
of the County of -D(I ~ i State of FL,
of the second part. GRA TEE
WITNESSETH, That the said parties of the first part, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten dollars and other
good and valuable considerations, to the said parties of the first part, in hand paid by the said parties of the
second.part, the receipt whereof is hereby confessed and acknowledged, has granted, bargained, sold and
conveyed and by these presents do grant, bargairT;' sell, convey and confirm unto the said parties of the second
part, its successors and assigns forever, all the following described lots or parcel of land, situate, lying and being
in the County of PITKIN and State of COLORADO, to wit:
LOT 2,
PARRY SUBDIVISION, according to the Map thereof recorded June 28, 1978 in Pial Book 6
at Page 124 as Reception No. 205766.
462629
TRANSFER DECLARATION RECEIVED 01/08/2002
Together with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances there-unto belonging, or in anywise
appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and proflts thereof; and
all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever, of the said parties of the first part, either in law or
equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances; TO HAVE AND
TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described. with the appurtenances, unto the said parties of the
second part, its successors and assigns forever. And the said parties. of the first part 'tQr themselves, their heirs
and assigns do covenant, grant. bargain and agree to and with the said parties of the second part, their
successors and assigns, the above bargained Ptemises In' the quiet and peaceable possession of said parties of
the second part, its successors and assigns,. against aU an~ every person o~ persons lawfully claiming or to claim
the whole or any part thereof, by through or under the said parties of the first part to WARRANT AND FOREVER
DEFEND. The singular shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of gender shall be applicable to
all genders. .
'i
IN WiT02ss WH.E REOF, pe s~'d parties of the first part ha~e her~"n.t;,settheirh~~and seal(s).
.. , I>" ! ../. ,- '. ,
. . /'1 /..C Ie /\ . {7'
H. MONTGO/V1E Y LOUD , PAULA LOUD .
'--
STATE OF _COLORADO.,)
ss
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 :~~~~~:~: 1 : 25.
SIL.VIA DIWIS P1TKIN COUNTY CO R 5,00 02:60.00
COUNTY OF ]ITKIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 7 day of JANUARY, 2002. By:
H. MONTGOMERY LOUD and PAULA LOUD
WITNESS my hand and official seal
J1..-
r:ny. commission expires;
1\11105
'S,INA 11
~")..~\ .......!If//.
~4bTA4-;:.~
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
\P;....<lfJ \o...~o
f'. Bt.... ~
", '/z~ 0....... ~1'
\~,~:?!= (;0\-0
-""<0
Return to:
JOHN KELLY
:JATES KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ
533 E. HOPKINS 3RD FL
4SPEN, co 8161'1
My Coii;;fli~~i~:, 8qJi:as11JOII2003
I""'\,
~ r:::b+<--' Ib CJ "2.......
/2au:r<f6.:J-?S-? ~,
SPECI,AJ;. WARRANTY DE)!:D
THIS SPECIAL WARRANTY DE)!:D, made this '& ~j!ay of January, 2002 between
MICHAEL B. WERNER REVOCABLE TRUST RESTATED JULY 18, 1991 and DANA
WERNER ("Grantors") whose legal address'is l11/Lincoln Rd., Suite 400. Mia",i Beach, Florida,
33139 and 501 SNEAKY LANE, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company ("Grantee") whose
legal address is M ~'l~i",lzv":>>:"S'~"~~~:-U ~t.J :f!niltlJl.. .
WITNESSETH, That the Grautors, for aud in considerat~ff' JA3e sum of Ten Dollars
($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is here?y
acknowledged, have granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, .and by these presents do grant, bargam,
sell, convey and confirm, unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns forever, all the real property,
together with improvements, if any, situate, lying and being in the County of Pitkin, State of
Colorado, described as follows: .
LOT 2 PARRY SUBDIVISION, according to tm; Map. thereof recorded June 28,1978, in
Plat Book 6 at page 124 as Reception No. 205766,
N\
'"
"
-::r
lt~i
l10iV
~:o: .
tU
Together with any and all 'water and well rights situat~ on, used ~:m, or appurtenant to -the:
above described property. .
, SUBJECf TO AND EXCEPTING: Real Property taxes for 2002 payable in 2003, all othelt
matters of record affecting title to the above"described real property.. .
E ~ I" c;\, . TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto
o a ~ "'" belonging, or in anywise appertaining, an~ the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders,
r>l 0 :. rents, issues and profits thereof; and all the estate, righ~ title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever
. of the Grantors, either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the
hereditaments and appurtenances;
l'"\
~ TO HAVE AND TO 'HOLD the said premises above bargained and described with the
\: d appurtenances, unto the Grantee, its successors and assigus forever. The Grantors, for themselves,
1! z their heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns, do covenanland agree that theyshall and
ii:l:(j will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above-bargained premises in the quiet and
~ ~P.. peaceable possession of the Grantee, its successors and assigns, against all and every person or
15 It it persons claiming the whole or any part thereof, by, through Qr under the Grantors.
~ li: <:! . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantors have executed this deed on the date set fQrth
6 ~ ~~ above.
lil~-
~;r~~r
t ['lOA.............
MICHAEL B. WERNER REVOCABLE TRUST
RESTATED JULY 18, 1991
BYoo-r~
Michael B, Wemer, Trostee
STATE OF COLORADO )
)
COUNTY OF PITKlN )
The foregoing instrument was acknQwledged before me this 2-~ay January, 2002 by Dana
Werner and Michael B. Werner as Trostee of the Michael B. Werner Revocable Trost Restated July
18, 1991. .; ,
/
-,
~~(~'-"i&-
~_ y:t- .Lf tP;2- '7 ? g-
.~
SPECIAL w~DEEl)
. THIS SPECIAL wARRANTY DEED, made this ~day of January, 2002 be~ee~
MICHAEL B. wERNER, ("Grimtor") whose legal address is ll1tLincoln RQ., Suite 400, MiamI
Beach Florida 33139 and MICIiAELB. WERNER REVOCABLE TRUST RESTATED JUL Y 16,
1991 ;nd DANA WERNER (collectively "Grantee"), whose legal address is 11ULincoln Rd., Suite
400, Miami Beacb, Florida, 33139.
WITNESSETH, That the Grantor, for and in consideration of tbe sum of Ten Dollars
($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby.
acknowledged, has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain,
sell, convey and confirm, unto the Grantee, their heirs, personal representatives, grantees, successors
andilssigns forever, all the real property, together with improvements, if any, sitnate, lying and being
in the County oU'itkin, State of Colorado, described as follows:
LOT 2 PARRY SUBDIVISION, according to the Map thereof recorded June 28, 1978, in
. Plat Book 6 at page 124 as Reception No. 205766.
~
"
.,..
li~
.~~~
6~~ '.
~ ~ STATIj: OF COI,ORADO
Together with any and all water and well rights situate. on, used on, or appurtenant tQ the
...I above described property.
~
~
t -=r SUBJEct TO AND EXCEPTING: Real Property taxes for 2002 payable in 2003, all other
i:l ~ ~. matters of record affecting title to the above-described real property.
~ lE: ~. TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto
o ~ belonging" or i'Q. anywise appertaining, and the reversion and rev~rsions, remainder and remainders,
~ e: ~ rents, issues and profits thereof; and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and dejDand whatsoever
>< ~ "of the Grantor, either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the
~, ~ ~ hereditaments and apImrtenances; . . '
<J E<_ '
<__ .u.~ . '
~ t:l - TO HAVE AND TO HOJ;,D the said premises above bargained and described with th"
appurtenances, unto the Grantee, their heirs, personal representatives, grantees, s'Upcessors and
assigns forever. The Grantor, for himself, his heirs, personal representatives, and assigns forever,
agree that he shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVE;RDEFEND the above-bargained premises
in: the quiet and peaceable possession of the Grantee, their heirs, personal representatives, grantee!;,
successors and assigns, against all and every person or persons. claiming the whole as any pad
thereof, by, through or under the Grantor..
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this deed on the, date set forth abov".
~
Michael B. Werner
COUNTY OF PITKIN
)
) ,
)
. The foregoing instrument w~ acknowledged b~fore me this f'liday January, 2002 by
MIChael B. Werner..
dt~ ~ d~d?I"py--
Notary Public
My Commission expires: '7/; 0/07
5"3'N~: 1I~i:.>- /1vi; I "7n,:-, -7'7""",
jh~1 (lCJ Y/61i
^
t"""\
\ ;J
ATTACHMENT #2
Mr. James Lindt, Planner
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: 501 SNEAKY LANE LLC STREAM MARGIN REVIEW
Dear James,
We hereby authorize Alan Richman Planning Services to act as our designated
representative with respect to the land use application being submitted to your office for our
property, located at 501 Sneaky Lane. Alan Richman is authori2:ed to submit a stream
margin application for an addition to the existing house. He is also authorized to represent
us in meetings with City of Aspen staff and the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission.
Should you have any need to contact us during the course of your review of this application,
please do so through Alan Richman Planning Services, whose address and telephone number
are included in the application.
Sincerely,
Michael B. Werner Revocable Trust, Member
Dana Werner, Member
501 Sneaky Lane LLC
1111 Lincoln Road, Suite 400
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
305-538-8558
t""""\
A'ITACHMENT #3
(")
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PLANNER:
PROJECT:
REPRESENT A TrvE:
OWNER:
TYPE OF APPLICATION:
DESCRIPTION:
James Lindt, 920.5104
501 Sneaky Lane Stream Margin Review
John Kelly
DATE: 11.28.01
1 Step. Stream Margin Review
Proposed addition to existing house within 100 feet of the river.
Land Use Code Section(s)
26.435.40 Stream Margin Review.
26.710.80 Low Density Residential Zone District (R-30)
26.410 Residential Design Standards
Review by:
Staff for complete application, Development Review Committee for technical considerations,
Planning and Zoning Commission for Approval determination.
No.
Engineering, Parks
Planning Deposit $500
Engineering Referral $180
$680
Public Hearing:
Referral Agencies:
Planning Fees:
Referral Agency Fees:
Total Deposit:
. To apply, submit the following information:
1. Total Deposit for review of application.
2. Applicant's name, address' and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant statbg
name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.
3. Signed fee agreement.
4. Pre-application Conference Summary.
5. A site improvement survey with topography at two foot contours, and the river top of slope (consult with City
Engineering Department for determination method) and one hundred year flood plane.
6. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcels within the City of Aspen.
7. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development
complies with the review standards relevant to the development application.
8. A copy of the recorded documents which affects the proposed development.
9. Proof of ownership.
10. Additional materials as required by specific review. Please refer to the application packet for specific submittal
requirements or to the
code sections noted above.
11. 12 Copies of the complete application packet (items 1-10)
Process:
Apply. Planner reviews case for completeness and sends to Engineering for referral comments, often taken to Design Review
Committee. Case Planner takes to staff meeting for recommendation. Case planner writes memo of recommendation to the Planning
and Zoning Commission. Planning and Zoning Commission makes final determination on application.
/"
. ~Disclaimer:
'_.' The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is
subject to change in the future, and. upon factual representations that mayor may not be accurate. The summary does not create a
legal or vested right.
7
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
f;":~
\~ . ATfAI7""'"<~T #4
f',,!\
~~
tj
MEMORANDUM
Aspen P~anning and Zoning 'Commission
Colette Penne, Planning Office
Han/Eastern Winds Stream Margin Review
August 16, 1983
....-
Loca.tion:
Zoning:
Applicant's
Request:
Referral
Comments:
Planning
Office
Review:
Lot 2, Parry Subdivision (the first lot north 'of
Castle Creek on Sneaky Lane, across from the 'City
Shop Building). .
R~30 PUD.
Special review approval to construct a.dwelling
uni t wi th;in 100 feet of, the high wa t,er line of the:
Roar~ng Fork River.
No comments were receiyed from the City Attorney's
Office.
The Engineering Department reviewed the application
and made a site inspection and has several suggested
plat. changes. Stream margin review does not require'
the filing "o,f a pla1; however. A nm... development
plan must be submitted shO\"ing the 100 year flood~.
pla;-n. No existing vegetation within the 100
year floodpla.in shall be removed or disturbed in
the cours.e of construction, and no construction
techniques shall ,be employed i.,hich could contribu1:e
sediment to the stream.
The building site is very flat and wi.ll require
almost no gr.ading. All existing vegetation is be~.ng
retained. There will be no effect on the stream
channel or sediment loads in the stream. The site
grade \vill not alter existing grade points of the
lot, so the existing drainage conditions will be
retained.
A pedestrian easement is shown on the plat along 1:he
river's edge, useable for fisherman and hiking pur-
poses.
The criteria' of Section 24-6.3 are as follovls:
(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.
This proposal is outside the flood hazard area.
It is no closer than approximately 30 feet to
the 100 year floodpl~in line.
(2) In the event there is a trail designated by
an ,approved trail plan wi thin the, developmenl;:
site, such trail shall be dedic~ted for public
use.
There is no trail in the trail plan that involves
this property and the easement along the river bank
is indicClted on the plat.
"
'"
t-
"
,
"---
I" 'f
~,.,. .
~-""
Memo: Han/Eastern
Page Two
August 16, 1983
Winds
(3)
All attempts should be made to implement the
Roaring Fork Greenway Plan.
This property is along Castle Creek and is not
affected by the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan.
(4) Vegetation shall not be removed nor any
slope grade changes made that may produce
erosion of the stream bank.
As mentioned earlier, all existing vegetation is
being retained and site grades will not be altered.
(5) There shall be .permitted no changes to the
stream.channel or its capacity, and no activity
shall be allowed which will incJ:ease stream
sedimentation and, suspension loads.
Again, the hous.e is being built on an open, flat
area of the lot. Grading will be very minimal,
with no effect on the stream channel or sediment
load. .
(6) All efforts must be made to reduce stream
pollution and interference with the natural
changes of the stream, and to enhance the
value of the stream as an important natural
feature.
This is a very buildable lot with all vegetation
located away from the buildi.ng site and.near the
stream bank. The stream is not being adversely
affected in any apparent way and the provision of
pedestrian access will allow more than just the
property owners to enjoy this. segment of Castle
Creek.
Planning Office
Recommendation:
The Planning Office recommends approval of construction
of this single family house on Toot 2 of the Parry
Subdivision as presented with the condition:
1. Compliance in the construction phase with the
criteria of Section 24-6.3.
,/'t
," A'ITACHMENT #5
RCL,.~ T
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bill Drueding, zoning Officer
THROUGH: Diane Moore, city Planning Director
FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner@~
RE: Read stream Margin Exemption
DATE: March 20, 1992
===============================================================
SUMMARY: Planning staff recommends approval of stream Margin
;:xempt;.ion for the enlargement of an existing residenr,::e, with
conditions.
APPLICANT: Sandra Read
LOCATIbN:,~neakY ~
ZONING: R-30 -
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The Applicant wishes to make several additions
to her home. Along the river side of the house a portion of the
first floor wall will be moved out 4', a second level wall will be
moved.out 6', and new deck will be added. On the northwest side,
one portion of the wall will be extended 4' from its existing
location. The garage on the northeast corner of the house will be
reconfigured and expanded. Because portions of the at grade
expansions fall within the stream margin review area (100' from
the high water line), the Planning Office must approve the proposal
prior to issuance of a building permit. Some of the new floor area
within the home will be accomplished .by adding second level area
within the existing vaulted volume of the home. See site plan and
application text, Attachment "A"-.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: The Parks Department states that no tree
removal permits are\.required for this project.
Engineering made requests for the establishment of a building
envelope on this site, revegetation, dedication of a fisherman's
easement, and historic run-off protection. In a March 18 response
to Engineering's comments, the applicant stated that she does not
wish to create a building envelope. As establishment of a building
envelope is not a code requirement, Planning will not include this
in the conditions of approval.
The applicant offered to remove an existing pedestrian/recreational
easement in exchange for a fisherman's easement, but staff does not
believe this to be advantageous to the city. She does acknowledge
that - revegetation will occur on disturbed ground and that
,/'"\
~
/'. ..,
I.
construction run-off will be prevented from going
Creek. Additionally, a 1,000 gallon-dry well will be
handle on-site drainage. Please refer to Attachments
into Castle
installed to
I1BII and I1C".
STAFF COMMENTS: Portions of.his project take place within 100' of
the high water line of Castle Creek. However, exemption from full
stream Margin review is possible when the following standards are
met:
1. The proposal does not add more than 10% floor area of the
existing structure or more than 25% of building exempt from
floor area calculations.
RESPONSE: As mentioned above, portions of the floor area
expansion take place within the existing foundation by the
intrusion into upper level vaulted ceilings or raising the roof.
The foundation coverage (building foot.print) is approximately 2,800
s.f. The proposed foundation expansion within the 100' review area
is approximately 220 s.f., or an 8% increase. Based on the intent
of the stream margin reviews and exemptions within the code, staff
believes the foundation or site coverage expansion should be the
crucial limiting criteria.
The application points out that within the review criteria for
stream margin exemptions, two applications of expansion are used.
In section 7-504 B.!. uses the term "floor area" and Section 7-
504 B. 5 uses the term "ground coverage". Understanding the intent
of the exemption allowance, which places rea:sonable'. limits on
stream margin development not requiring full review by the planning
commission, the impacts of ground coverage expansion should bG
considered in addition to the raw floor area expansion of a
proposal. Existing floor area on the parcel is approximately 3,250
s.f. with proposed floor area expansion of 1,500 s.f. Please see
page 2 of the application.
2. No trees will be removed, or required removal permits are
granted.
RESPONSE: No trees will be removed within the 100' review area.
However, one pine will be relocated without requiring a permit.
3. No portion of the expansion, remodeling, or reconstruction
will be any closer to the high water line than the existing
development.
RESPONSE: The closest existing development to the river is decking
at 31.5' from the bank. No portion of proposed structural
addition, either deck or foundation, is closer to the .river than
this distance.
4. The development does not fall outside of an approved building
envelope, if one has been designated through prior review.
RESPONSE: There is no approved building envelope for this site.
/"'"';
--
r~1
5. The remodeling or expansion will cause no increase to the
ground coverage within the Special Flood Hazard Area.
RESPONSE: The proposal is located completely outside of the 100'
floodplain as determined by Rob Thomson on March 20, 1992.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: staff recommends approval of Stream Margin
Exemption for the Read Residence expansion as represented in this
application with conditions.
I hereby approve the stream Margin Exemption for the Read
Residence expansion as proposed, with the following
conditions:
1) Revegetation is required for any disturbed soil on the
site. This shall be inspected by Planning or Engineering
staff prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy.
2) construction run-off into castle Creek shall be
prevented by implementing a site drainage plan approved
by Engineering staff prior to issuance of a builiding
permit.
'2-
D~
Attachments:
"A" - Application Text and site Plan
"E" - Engineering Referral Memo
"e" - March 18, 1992 Response to Engineering Memo
I"'"'j
(")
MAPS AND DRAWINGS
, \
\ \
\. ~
\, (" f\ \U''',s
\ \,P, . ~ ---.. ~ I \ ~
~"" "', ...., :7.t:.'...,~ .... __ ..,~,~_ J " ,
'boh. '"'i .,'" "- NI. ....... "-...' Jil;:::;-..{
. ~~'<':"'-:i.. '. 3! r- '" :g'htll"",.t :--- " eq ~ "
\;"~4>" "';:~: \, '--J...~ " ,~~ 1.<'\ ')~
q. 'r-...t~ " L~<~ \...;"q.,-s: '::--.. /-.> ~~, \
\~). \; ?-' ~:~'" 4;;;;4' ~~ 'I;.}, ';'\ '\~~
11'" I i' 'I;'" C). ~ ~~i ...~.,~\ ,">-" Rd
\ r b;'... ,.0 ""'~~, ", ~~ ~. ("' "-S>~"'\'~
'MOUntJJinV1eWDr'i~'"i\ ..-.... \ "'o-s>~~~ \ ~\ \
$170", (f ,#.~ I '... "\ .~ \,''''0' .tri,~, \.
'/711i1t.n ' -a ,.' .''\........ 0' V-
. Snow1aunny Ct .' \.
~ I f
~ ,
~ ' \~
' ~
I
n
I
r"j
I
~
9'
~
"'"...
...
'"
". ",
"'-'V
tj~'?94-
b',
;:~'~'
I' %....-....,... \
"f ~"4= \
Qt
~.~/
S~~\
":)~,
.'t;
<a.'-'~.
. .p
tI
I
I
"I~'"
,--
'\
I
i
,
Aspen
West
..
()
V'
.,.
~
/.......;
~~!
filS
.~l!i
>A
""~. .~.
~~""""~
~=)
~O;.,...
f:fJj.
I>l .
...... ~ ,
I"; p, II
~~lJjliil..'"
~. ~!!HfJ
-"""* ~.'\l'~.'
~ ~"l\ii
~ ~.~..
-
..
, j~t
-w'
~ ~
~
H~'
. g
. " I-
~... .
e~
i
!J!
IiI
g~~iil
'I j,
~~I~l
"').
....I~t
ij~
b' b
, I;~ ~.~ ~;
il ~... !~
b'II'~~: II
. 'I~ ~~I II .
,I ~f!~J ~ ~. ~
I b I I
..1~2ll. ; . !
II~il~1 ~~;i~~iQ
!;~~~~~ ~~!~<;I~~~
. ~!;i1 i!ldi~ ~ ~ !
<II!
....~,
~
i
. ~ '.
. ~
~ ..
~ i
I~l
...I,i
~'.~.' .~.. . ~ 'I'~'"
h . _..i.,.', ...... e.. '.. II. .
~'~~d,.
~ ~~~ ~~!ni
"
"
~p III
o I~
hlil ~I"
ili
ClVO~ J;N'V7o'
i
i
I
,.
,
\ ~ ,:,0<\
"
.~
~~J
""I
II
Ii
,
If,
~Ib
t
~
~ Q ~~
.. ~I
,
II~'~ 'l~
--
l~W t
............... -.--.....--..)
II ~'L:::;' I db'O...I .gi;jo:><;:\
!~E .
~~Bt
. ~2~~1:..
~
!~& !
~~ .~
'I~~
~iI
k
J~
1M
~
~
i}
. I'
I
I
r
,.....
~
_-------1
I
I
I
I-
i'
1<
i:
i" I
I' I
I I
I 1
I I
'"
'"
...
0 ;
z .
. ;~ 0
Q !
z
~ ~ ~~11;~
u.......,-
~ 0-
Q "'I
Z . -%"'>-
~8 ,~
'" . ~ ~zi..
_ 0
<.' . ...
'" ~ . :~3~
~ ,
...., . c
00
---
-------
---
--'I
...
o
....,
.
~
.
ii
"'(j
['I
"
l
L ,. ~ 'O!~J~
,........'i' -.'..-.'.+.'.1-. 1.___1.'_.'__'_'
. .~t:
C d'"1 .,..,-: .
-.~ '
~
~
..~
I:
,i"
z
o
...
~
u
i
J':, "I
~ 'r:;~',},
~
.-;;;.-
"
U
~
~
I
I
"
'''"
""
""
~' "" 'a
-~
, '-.
'"
"-. '.
'"
'-.q .. 5"';
to
\I"""",,,...;ro..IOL~ ~..
,
.~',Ja:!ll~<a ;1 I
IJ
~
I -
....
\J
i .u
Il)
...
.,:
'"
u
~
~
,
"
""
.-
,
~
~
h
j\j
il1
~
:i
,
-<l
"!J-lO'lO;'...""'~=_. ~
.::_,.'Wa.l.YM...I.G>..;l~i1.
i
i
~
~~~
;~;~
g~."
",:;",~
';;:;::"'~
:~g~
"'.. ~..
.
(11.-.
O<v
. 0
~ '"
o~
AI . O,~L
(-/- :IS ~St' II)
::,i 19~~~W~s!;!llr!n
"..(IV "~V^!ijd
.~O'~i1.00'~S.fON
--..
'~
',-
~~-t.~
'.
"'" "'.,...,
~"b
, .,.
,,:i13}~"
'-. ",
, \po.
, "I-
'- /)}:
" /" 1'-.
'--/# '
:/ I..
,;/" .>,".
'if '/' .,
'i/
<l3~"'d lfN
. V1 AJr. V
llNs
--.....
"
~j
'---
'-
'-
'z..
i ti
'- : ~~I
'~I
~ir
hil
, "
~\0
U
l'
- - ~ - ~rt~1INQ1ELer~OTELlNes
10 'IIII)'< eMEl'IE1ll" FOIl OVERlIE\. ~____
-- - - '\ '--f!l:l//
, 0 'W.
, ' ~i i
" <"'....
Rgt
, m
\. ",,,,3
,'" .~ "".
. ,~,
, <.
<",r~)~}
, "
":::/"-
'"
~
g ..
S ;
~ ~
o'
<
<
"
/
/
/
it
I/~~ I
V~; I
/1 ~I i
<y Ii' i
~#p :i
v,
.i ; 1
$. 'I
'$:ci;. i '
. . I
' "
I
I
'~ .
..0).>..
"'"
~~..
" .
ILl
Kl
Z
iU
o
II)
\ll
~
iL
;1J
rz:
k:
g
o
z
~~
"',
><~
"'>
>'"
.,:.,:
::>
"'z
...<.'
zo:
"'~
;:;;;:;;
'"
>;:;;
O~
.,:'"
"'0:
;:;;...
~ '"
u
z
~~
8~
~i
.~~
~~
~:
~~
i~
~8
,.
i~ ~o
:; ffi@~
~~ ~:8
) ~~:
.:~_ .g~,S~~
<
,;.. -~ ~ ~
ffi ~- ~ '7 '"
':M .. ... ~
iD ;;,2 :
z .. ~ (I>
w ~ ~ ~
>- .: '-' ~
~ ~ ffi !t
~ .. '
=> ~ ::! :i! UI'"
<Jl'" ..!< lit
o "
z
w
~
~
<
'-
!
~'z.
W-l:J
.~~.
<<
COp-<
/""'"
r-
~ , ,
Ii "
,: ,
r
B
i'
i!
1""""',
I""""'
; l
;
II ~ HI !t~ d~2J lo. ~ ~
~ <S i
~ ,
"I !i~: · dhlh~1 · . I ~
i '" ~ ~
I !.H ~!"~ ,I.~ ~ ~ J ~
-. . p" ~
. "
. ::::;~=';"'jt.:::::::"_""
.
~
"
"
~
";-)1' . .,
I
I.
n_. .L, ____:_.._...,. ,'.__._.
. .
II"
,
I
I~
&<.'
'Q
ii "~=
i-~\
,!
II
:i
,
"---,- '
'--. ..~ "~. "..~- ---., -''''-'-, 0::;::,"
..-q.' ......
'"~-. ~ "';:0"'
"
~
~
,
I'
~
i 'i~,. '.'
I',:
~!
'-i~*--
,
~
'1;1
1'1
..I....I;~..' ' ,
~~ '
"
II
,.
I
j
I
i'
"1
j - _n
I
k--
"
;!
'I
I, ,
Ii ~
'i ~;
'.
:: i
;
'~
1l
~l-_. :ii
,
,.
",
.:. "-':;P~?"'.I: ." :.~ -. "
J ' "
~ ~)~~'~
'iI
fl
,
I
,
,
:1 i I
II
II'
11:-.. ...
:i 11W.....'
.! 'I'~i .'
~.. &l
tlft
r'
t.,!
I
ii
~.
1i
ij
"
"
"
Ii
I
'-~';>";C;- -- .'
"1' ;~
t7
-~O~;l.1-' ,., '~":':: "'.~_~:__ :" '':'':~~'" . ::." ..,..- .':" -:.:;;c:t\ _
.1'
II
,
II
ii-
"
1.1
I
!:
I
~
('l
<
iC
\)
J
!0
~
I
I
~
;
I
N
~
U (j. t
tL H ,\ f 1j
~ H il.1
o ;'0 \L;
, ! ; \' .
. q tzJ ~-'
.'1. I, \ j '.'
" n- D F
i i : ' [
~ ti i"-i ~
;. .~. i-.
1'\. LJ I =! 'f-..:
\J ., lU ,)
~ 1/: ;;;
;I, irIS
<l ""
) I :1
;' '")
JJ lL '
" ' )-
~ .~l1Ji
i N z'. .q
h (j: i .'11..'
i i1 i. ~
~ Mlu~'
I H.,'
. r H ~ ~
. ---r-r---*rr--~
I
k
II
II
'i'
I
I
I
c..,,"jZ
~~
.~~.
.,-'-<
-.,-'
"'I"'; fr'-<
~,~
-
-
ff'.
I'
'e".
II IIII 111111.1'
II~ !~<" · du Ui~i ·
~ 1m ~~"~.~i"~l.
o
i
, .
I ,
-b
-I~I
I
'M
~
'"
~
\i
L_._...~_, ..
I
i
[]~
~ '
~Ei
J i
.~ ' I
;1
,
I I
, ....~..II..,i.
81;--
I'
~,
. Ii" ,~
i: ~
L
:i:. ,
II I~
~~ ..... .... -'-.-- ..f4ij
I.
,
i
! "
!
i'
---q
~iJ
, ; j
~--fl
: I
: I
: I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"'1-~
I
I
- I
I
---t1
-;+
I
I
~ I
I
I
I
I
11
II
.'
I
-~
r
. II
II
.1
+
II
II
I
-I:
II
Ii
-I...
. !
II
l-
I!
c:i
,
'"'-!
i
i
H
I
, <l
i : i
, '
!
C::i
I
,
Jj
I i
W !
~ :
. ,
. ILl
i -j
I ! : :i
! , 1)
H~
Ii'
N~
kj t'l
, ,
,
I'
I'
, I
,.
r
ff
" 'I'
, ,
"r!!>
II
[J
a
iI
'. ..~!.r;.." . .
- .
I
i l!'
i ~ ~.' ~
.! ~ I~ J
~
I
i I .' f
I I .
I I .1<...
,
- - ' ,,"
4- /'.-'"'''__''' . ,.,'
. . .
, . .
IF '
i~,
181.
. .':-,...\?Ati,kL:_='" .
I I I
'.J~'_
w
'-j
I c;:;;
.~
._---,;~
I i
i'l.: i
r!
,1/ i
: i ~
I-I 1:,_
ill
II ~" .
. \\l
I .
d , .
'I, '
I j , ,
I
I
il . .'
I
i I
I
--~n .
I:
II
II
I
!
I
I
, I
I
I
1
. 1
. II
II
II
,1,\ .
-"1-4
. . 1
I
I
I
I
,:,)
II
i I
II
, .
. I[
- -H
-I ..
i
I
1
~
,
,
I
I
!
i,
Ii
Ii
I I
, .
: !
! !
, ,
tJl !
~ Ii
I I I
.lf1 !
" Iii
~. ,
gj II
~ .~
~.""'~.",'
.~. H-
,~ ~
Ii F4
I ~'
~r
JI
I!
UI
I i I
J I !i
) 1)1
! i'il
'Hllil
I: r!
N~
l I
. , .
i \ ~
.~..., .
II'
I ,
,
, i
f""; i i
I I
11
. I
-J I
II
I I!
, I Ii
11
:!.r.I
~
I ~
rii
,
,
I
- ~ , I
I . i Ii
{~' i i
,,/ Li
I
,
II
f"";. Ii
~
l"_.
I r
I
I k. i'
I
, }"'. ,
[
I
i
I I
i
i
I
,
I
I
i
I
/ , ~I
/
, / I
.' I ,
I :i
I, ' I I
, f--- .i r
Ii . ' if'
frl
I'
I
H
I
i ^~<
I 1 !'
,- I
,
I
:I
,
I
....j
I
,..~z
Gj
. ~ ,.
'/.Io-o\
.:2128
,
~I . I
~~ ~ ~~" ~~ "1
!i~ I~o.~!.. Illi 1111' ·
I !~H ~I.~, gl.~ .
-.
',r;'" .",.".'...
~
I
~
I
'. ~
..
~ I ~
i ~ ~
g il
j
~
. __"m_"_."'.'.
,
.-" ....
-
f"'"'),
.~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Plans were routed to those departments checked-off below:
X ........... City Engineer
X ........... Zoning Officer
o ........... Housing Director
X ........... Parks Department
X ........... Aspen Fire Marshal
0........... City Water
o ........... Aspen Consolidated Sanitation Distlrict
o ........... Building Department
o ........... Environmental Health
o ........... Electric Department
o ........... Holy Cross Electric
o ........... City Attorney
o ........... Streets Department
o ........... Historic Preservation Officer
o ........... Pitkin County Planning
o ........... County & City Disaster Coordinator
FROM:
James Lindt, Planner
Community Development Department
130 S. Galena St.; Aspen, CO 81611
Phone-920.5095 Fax-920.5439
RE:
501 Sneaky Lane Stream Margin Review
DATE:
2/20/02
DATE OF DRC MEETING: 2/27/02
REFERRAL SCHEDULE
APPLICATION SENT OUT TO REFERRAL AGENCIES'
WRITTEN REFERRALS DUE
2/20102
3/6102
Thank you,
James Lindt
',,"
t'")
(""~
ATTACHMENT 1
ASPENIPITKIN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
City of Aspen Development Application Fee Policy
The City of Aspen, pursuant to Ordinance 57 (Series of 2000), has established a fee structure for
the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is collected for land use applications
based on the type of application submitted. Referral fees for other City departments reviewing
the application will also be collected when necessary. One check including the deposit for
Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made
payable to the AspenlPitkin Community Development Department. Applications will not be
accepted for processing without the required application fee.
A flat fee is collected by Community Development for Administrative Approvals which
normally take a minimal and predictable amount of staff time to process. The fee is not
refundable.
A deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff review is required,
as hours are likely to vary substantially from one application to another. Actual staff time spent
will be charged against the deposit. Several different staff members may charge their time spent
on the case in addition to the case planner. Staff time is logged to the case and staff can provide
a summary report of hours spent at the applicant's request.
After the deposit has been expended, the applicant will be billed monthly based on actual staff
hours. Applicants may accrue and be billed additional expenses for a planner's time spent on the
case following any hearing or approvals, up until the applicant applies for a building permit.
Current billings must be paid within 30 days or processing of the application will be suspended.
If an applicant has previously failed to pay application fees as required, no new or additional
applications will be accepted for processing until the outstanding fees are paid. In no case will
Building Permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid.
When the case planner determines that the case is completed (whether approved or not
approved), the case is considered closed and any remaining balance from the deposit will be
refunded to the applicant.
Applications which require a deposit must include an Agreement for Payment of Development
Application Fees. The Agreement establishes the applicant as being responsible for payment of
all costs associated with processing the application. The Agreement must be signed by the
party responsible for payment and submitted with the application and fee in order for a
land use case to be opened.
The current complete fee schedule for land use applications is listed on the reverse side.
~
"
f""">.;
(~
.'
ASPENIPITKIN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Agreement for Pavment of Citv of Aspen Development Application Fees
CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) andS" \ S '" "'''' """\ LA "''- L \.... <-
(hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: .
L
APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for
'S~A,^", ~,~ (LW\"'-.J
(hereinafter, THE PROJECT).
2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000)
establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent
to a determination of application completeness.
3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it
is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application.
APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an
initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis.
APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he
will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the
CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty
of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application.
4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete
processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or CiDj Council to enable the Planning
Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings
are paid in full prior to decision.
5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect
full fees pr~~termination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the
amount of $ '><lO which is for ~ ~-.,. hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual
recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse
the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above,. including post approval review at a rate of $205.00
per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date.
APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing,
and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid.
CITY OF ASPEN
APPLICANT
By:
Julie Ann Woods
Community Development Director
BY:~~
Date: j \ :.. "-j \ d :z...
Mailing Address:
\ \\\ LW..ifi\" IL"", I ~v,~l{.o"
\tv', \A,,",', f"lxAu,", , ylc {'.Ao.! ~"3 \ ~9
.
g: \support\forms\agrpayas.doc
1110/01