HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.1120 Black Birch Dr.A65-94
.--
1'""'\
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
city of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: 08/26/94 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
DATE COMPLETE: 2735-013-07-011 A65-94
STAFF MEMBER: KJ
PROJECT NAME: Morrow Stream Marain Review
Project Address: 1120 Black Birch Drive
Legal Address:
APPLICANT: Darrell C. Morrow - suite 2500. First citv Tower
Applicant Address: 1001 Fannin Street. Houston. TX 77002-6760
REPRESENTATIVE: Bill Poss & Assoc. 925-4755
Representative Address/Phone: 605 E. Main
Aspen. CO 81611
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
FEES: PLANNING
ENGINEER
HOUSING
ENV. HEALTH
TOTAL
$ 978
$ 96
$
$
$ 1074
# APPS RECEIVED
# PLATS RECEIVED
5
5
TYPE OF APPLICATION: STAFF
P&Z Meeting Date-lO/tf
,
APPROVAL: 1 STEP: -L 2 STEP:
PUBLIC HEARING: YES ~
VESTED RIGHTS: YES
PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO
CC Meeting Date
DRC Meeting Date
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
REFERRALS: ~
City Attorney /' Parks Dept. School District
>< City Engineer Bldg Inspector Rocky Mtn NatGas
Housing Dir. Fire Marshal CDOT
Aspen Water Holy Cross Clean Air Board
City .Electric Mtn. Bell Open Space Board
Envir.Hlth. ACSD Other
Zoning Energy Center Other
~~:~_~~~~~~~~~~_________:~:::~~~~___~_______~~~~_~L~~____
;i;i~-~~~;i;~~----------------~i;~-~~~;~~~-/~~~?I~f7i;i;ii~~~?J"
___ city Atty
___ Housing
___ City Engineer
___ Open Space
___Zoning ___Env. Health
Other:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
I~'
i-'
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Planning and Zoning commission
FROM:
Kim Johnson, Planner
RE:
Morrow stream Margin Review
DATE:
October 4, 1994
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
SUHHARY: The Planning Office recommends approval of the Morrow
stream Margin Review with conditions.
APPLICANT: Darrell C. Morrow, represented by Chris Ridings, Bill
Poss and Associates
LOCATION: 1120 Black Birch Dr., Lot 12 Black Birch Estates
ZONING: R-15, PUD
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: stream Margin Review approval for the
enlargement of a residence along Castle Creek .
PROPOSAL: The applicant wishes to expand an existing 4 bedroom
residence from 2,489 s.f. to 4,320 s.f. Included in the proposal
is a new spa, rebuilt deck and relocated irrigation ditch. The
gross lot size is 15,113 s.f. with a net lot area for FAR purposes
of 13,338 s. f. (1,775 s. f. lies below high water line.) The
building site lies within 100' of the high water line of Castle
Creek. The proposed building footprint meets the City'S required
setbacks. The homeowner's association has approved variances to
the subdivision's more restrictive side yard setbacks and height
limits. A new garage will be incorporated into the proposed
addition. Please refer to Exhibit "A" for the application
information.
The project has gone through special review for the FAR overlay as
the structure is proposed at 99% of allowable FAR for the site.
The special review was advisory only because the parcel is over
9,000 s.f.
REFERRAL COHHENTS:
Engineering: The blueprints for construction must
relevant information concerning drainage, erosion
construction techniques.
contain all
control and
Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant must
submit a letter from an architect or engineer that certifies the
elevation of the proposed addition's lowest floor, including
basement, versus the elevation of the 100 year flood and certifies
1
."....,
.-,
that any relevant floodproofing requirements of the small portion
of the addition that is located in the 100 year floodplain
(compliance with Ordinance 62 of 1985 and Ordinance 32 of 1987),
and includes a revised survey with the 100 year floodplain
indicated as shown on the FEMA map. Also, a letter of
certification of as-built conditions shall be required prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy
Because of the limited area between the building and the waterline
and the riparian vegetation within this space, there shall not be
construction activity outside of the building footprint and the
mean high water line.
The applicant shall consult city Engineering for design
considerations of development within public rights-of-way, Parks
Department for vegetation species, and shall obtain permits for any
work or development, including landscaping, within public rights-
of-way from City streets Department.
Parks: In conversations with Parks staff, the proposed ditch
relocation is acceptable. Tree relocation permits are required for
any tree over six inches in diameter.
STAFF COMMENTS: Section 7-504 outlines the criteria for stream
Margin Review as follows:
criteria.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 proposed expansion and site improvements are located
above the 100 year flood plain so the base flood elevation will not
be affected.
criteria 2: Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan: Parks/Recreation/open Space/Trails.Plan map is
dedicated for public use.
Response: The City-owned Meadows Open Space is located across the
river. No trail has been designated across the subject parcel.
criteria 3: The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan
are implemented in the proposed plan for development, to the
greatest extent practicable.
Response:
The Plan makes no specific recommendations for this
2
~
~.
site. However, staff is increasingly concerned with riparian and
wetland vegetation on riverside parcels. Parks staff identified
a small wetland patch where the garage will be located. This
appears to be the result of the irrigation ditch system. Upon
further review by a consultant and Mike Claffey of the Army Corps
of Engineers, it was determined that a Nationwide Permit #26 would
be issued for purposes of placing fill in this area. This permit
is valid for two years from August 29, 1994.
criteria 4: No vegetation is removed or slope grade changes made
that produce erosion and sedimentation of the stream bank.
Response: The application states that existing vegetation will not
be disturbed along Castle Creek and that barriers will be placed
around tree trunks. The revised deck will allow the existing trees
to remain through the deck. Staff has conditioned the project that
excavation shall take place from the "inside out" of the building
footprint (away from the river) and that a barricade must be
erected just outside of the building footprint to prohibit
construction activity (ie. grading, filling, materials storage)
between the footprint and the river. During construction the
applicant has committed to placing straw and erosion control fabric
to prevent sedimentation into the creek.
Any disturbed areas adjacent to the structure on the river side
shall be revegetated with native riparian species.
criteria 5: To the greatest extent practicable, the proposed
development reduces pollution and interference with the natural
changes of the river, stream or other tributary.
Response: The improvements will be mitigated by revegetation.
Care will be taken to prevent pollution of the river. The natural
changes of the river channel will not be adversely affected.
criteria 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: Not Applicable
criteria 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: The applicant has provided a letter to this effect
although the water course is not affected by this project.
criteria 8: Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state
permits relating to work within the one hundred (100) year
3
,.......,.
..-,
floodplain.
Response: Not applicable.
STAFF RECOHHENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval of
the Morrow stream Margin Review with the following conditions:
1. A tree removal permit must be obtained from Parks prior to
issuance of Building Permit for any trees removed over 6"
diameter.
2.
The blueprints for construction must contain
information concerning drainage, erosion
construction techniques.
all relevant
control and
3. Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant
must submit a letter from an architect or engineer that
certifies the elevation of the proposed addition I slowest
floor, including basement, versus the elevation of the 100
year flood and certifies that any relevant floodproofing
requirements of the small portion of the addition that is
located in the 100 year floodplain (compliance with Ordinance
62 of 1985 and Ordinance 32 of 1987), and includes a revised
survey with the 100 year floodplain indicated as shown on the
FEMA map.
4. A letter of certification of as-built conditions prepared by
the architect or engineer shall be required prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
5. There shall not be construction. activity outside of the
building footprint closer to the mean high water line.
6. The Nationwide Permit #26 for purposes of placing fill in the
wetland area is valid until August 29, 1996. Any work taking
place in the wetland beyond this date must receive an
extension of this permit
7. Excavation shall take place from the "inside out" of the
building footprint (away from the river) and a barricade must
be erected just outside of the building footprint to prohibit
construction activity (ie. grading, filling; materials
storage) between the footprint and the river. During
construction straw and erosion control fabric must be placed
along the barricade to prevent sedimentation into the creek.
8. The applicant shall consult City Engineering for design
considerations of development within public rights-of-way,
Parks Department for vegetation species, and shall obtain
permits for any work or development, including landscaping,
within public rights-of-way from city streets Department.
4
,-,..
~
RECOHHENDED MOTION:
with the 7 conditions
October 4, 1994."
"I move to approve the. Morrow stream Margin
of approval presented in the staff memo dated
Exhibits:
"A" - Application Information
"B" - Referral Memo
"c" - 8/29/94 Letter from Army Corps of Engineers
5
-..
,-
-'
PLANNING , ZONING COMMISSION
EXHIBIT ---12-, APPROVED
19 BY RESOLUTION
,
MEMORANDUM
To: Kim Johnson, Planning Office
From: Chuck Roth, Engineering Department QiC...
Date: September 16, 1994
Re: Morrow Stream Margin Review
(Lot 12, Black Birch Estates Subdivision; 1120 Black Birch Drive; SW 1/4 Sec. 1, nos,
R85W 6PM)
Having reviewed the above referenced application, and having made a site inspection, the
Engineering Department has the following comments:
1. lOO-year Flood{>lain Line - There is a substantial difference between the 100-year
floodplain line shown in the application packet and the line shown on the FEMA map
(Engineering Department Drawing No. 832-35). However, even with the corrected
floodplain line, only a small portion of the addition would be located within the lOO-year
floodplain. I have met with the applicant's representative, and it appears that the
planned floor elevation is already above the base flood elevation. The addition is planned
to have only a crawl space and not a basement. Therefore, the only necessary mitigation
is that the portion of the addition located within the floodplain must be f1oodproofed.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant must submit a letter stamped
and signed by an architect or engineer that itemizes compliance with applicable sections
of Ordinances No. 62 (Series of 1985) and No. 32 (Series of 1987) and a revised survey
with the 100-year floodplain line indicated as shown on the FEMA map.
The blueprints for construction must contain all relevant inform.ation concerning
drainage, erosion control, and construction techniques from the stream margin review
application and from the above referenced ordinances.
2. Riparian Vegetation - It is questionable how much existing, riparian vegetation is
acceptable for removal under the guidelines of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan. It is
recommended that existing riparian vegetation between the building footprint and the
mean high water line be preserved and that no construction activity be permitted between
the building footprint and the mean high water line. This. is a very small space. The
addition is about 20' from the mean high water line at its greatest distance and about 14'
at its least distance. This is very little riparian vegetation to preserve.
i'""'
,t.~"\
3. Work in the Public Ri,ht-of-way - Given the continuous problems of unapproved work
and development in public rights-of-way adjacent to private property, we advise the
applicant as follows:
The applicant shall consult city engineering (920-5080) for design
considerations of development within public rights-of-way, parks department
(920-5120) for vegetation species, and shall obtain permits for any work or
development, including landscaping, within public rights-of-way from city streets
department (920-5130).
cc: Cris Caruso
M94.334
.,....,
!"""\
MEMORANDUM
To: Kim Johnson, Planning Office
From: Chuck Roth, Engineering Department (!'-f!-
Date: September 28, 1994
Re: Morrow Stream Margin Review - Addendum
(Lot 12, Black Birch Estates Subdivision; 1120 Black Birch Drive; SW 1/4 Sec. 1, nos,
R85W 6PM)
I have reviewed item one of my previous memo which discusses floodplain issues. I am
attaching a copy of the ordinances that are referenced.
The letter of certification by an architect or engineer will certify the elevation of the
proposed additions lowest floor, including basement, versus the elevation of the 100-year
flood and will certify any relevant floodproofing requirements of the small portion of the
addition that is located in the lOO-year floodplain, such as anchoring "to prevent flotation,
collapse or lateral movement of the structure," construction with "materials and utility
equipment resistant to flood damage using methods and practices that minimize flood
damage," and related floodproofed construction information as specified in the ordinances.
Additionally, please add a condition of approval that a similar letter of certification for as-
built conditions will be required prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy to ensure
that the structure is built as designed.
M94.341
SENT BV:COE WEST COLD REG
~-29-94 2:36PM:
312132~S6'"
CCITT G3:1* 1
,
--~.'.'.."':-
-~
_Tnt
.n...."""".
DEPARTMENT OF THE AAM~ING , ZONING COMMISSION
U.S. ARMY INOINIIIR DISTRICT. SACRAl.iiiIT 6, APPROVED
;OfINOflINGINQflI 19 _ BY RESOLUTION
,... ITRUT
IAC:RAIIINTO. CAU_NtA .,..uaz
,
August 39, 1994
"qQ1ato~ ..~1on (199415217)
-
JO:. Lea RClsenatein
Bill P088 ~chit~.
605 last Main auaat
Aspen, ~olora40 11'11
Dear JO:. Rosenateut:
I ... r_pondinq to your reque.t for . Department of the Army
permit to d1.eh~. fill ..terial into 200 square te.t of
bolatad vetlanc!8 in Aspen, Colondo. The project. is loeatae!
near Castle Q'8elC in section 1, TOwnahip 10 South, Ranc;. 85 wast,
<:i ty of At\pen, 1'1 tkin County, C:oloradc .
The Chief o~ Engineera h.. issued a nationwide general permit
n\Ullber26 which authorizes the cli.chuqe ot c!zoed.;ad or till
material in waters of the t1I\itacS States for pz'ojectll located.
a>>ove the headwaters or in isolated. wetlan4s. Your project can
be constructed undu this authority provided. the worle meets the
conditions liated. on the enolose4 information aheet.
Thia panit verification will be valicl for a pe:-ic<1 of two
years from the 4ate of this letter unle.. the nationwide permit
is lIlCld.ified., rsiaaue4, or revoked.. You should contact this
office if work will extend beyond this 4.te.
We have aasi;ne4 number 199475287 to your project. Please
ret" to thia number in any correspondence wi~ tM.s aUice. It
you have any qu..~ion., ple..e Clont&Clt HZ'. x1=..l ~laffey of
this office or telephone n"-har (303) Z43-l1g9.
Sincerely,
~~
Grady ~cRu2:'e
Chiet, Western C:olozoac:to 1la9Ulatory
OfUCl.
402 Rood. Avenue, 1looa 142
Gr&ft4 Junction, C010Z'aclo 81501-2563
Enclosure
~.
~
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
EXHIBIT /Jr ,APPROVED .
19 BY RESOLUTION
,
MORROW RESIDENCE
STREAM MARGIN REVIEW PROJECT DESCRIPTION
AUGUST 26,1994
As stated on the Land Use Application Form, the proposal consists of a single story
addition on the south side of the existing house, second floor addition above the
existing single story, remodel of the existing deck, exterior spa, paved driveway,
relocation of ditch and new landscaping. Compliance with Stream Margin Review
Guidelines are as follow:
1. Erosion Control. Snow fence with a minimum of 10" straw and erosion
control fabric will be located along Castle Creek. Culverts will be located in
existing ditches and covered with erosion control fabric 'auring construction.
2. Vegetation. Existing vegetation along Castle Creek will not be disturbed.
Barriers will be placed around tree trunks. Vegetation removed during
construction will be replaced with native plants and grasses except for areas
at the edge and center of the driveway which may include flower beds.
3. Setbacks. The existing structure lies within the front setback. This non-
. conformance will be reduce with partial demolition of the existing structure.
Approval from the homeowners association has been granted to exceed
neighborhood association setbacks which are more restrictive than city codes.
4. Building Height. Approval from the homeowners association has been
granted to exceed neighborhood association height limits which are more
restrictive than city codes.
Please refer to the attached Item #11 for explanation of compliance with review
standards as a response to Attachment 4 of the Stream Margin Review submittal
requirements.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ITEM 8
u
-J:e
\it
Y
I
,
I?
/k!
I
...:/
......
-..
\
\
\
\
I
I
,
,
I
I
/
../
......
--
1"'--
\
\
\
\... --"'\
- \
\
, ...-
'----
~
L
i
...~
--
--
()
-"
c'
!
r
0\\
I::-~
i
...~
....
-----:'---
"r--
I
-____1
.
,
,
i
"i
J
~
~
~
~
,-.,
.'-"
,
y ~
.
~ ,
" ~
~
= "-
~
*
I
.
.
.
~
s
~
~
~
,
~
~
<
.
,
~z
.If ::r'~1 '.,.
..:tc:zYj"
. :;^~
,J.,," .
-r)
.. ,~',
z
<
~
~
.. .
;-1t~~~--_::~
<"
"<
?
"'c,' ...
~~~~Ji'
'~A"~ ,
"...... ~~~- - ---
. .~..~~~'f:l..~~.
G~:',,"'~ ~-.-;. ''':2.
-i~ _~',.:Y
...'
~ -..,.......
!. ~- :~:i
;4,'
,,, ~
-;: ....,.,.
~~'~b
;.-;<~
..-:..':%'Y
~
',-,
),,\
.1'.
\
\(
I
I "
-" !
-.1
, ,,' -' \
\ t..< "/
" ! "-
//11 ~ :::'-..... .
/ . '0; ----/s;
'- ,<<
'"
'v'
....
E-
O
,;;;
"Sf'
'~.'-
Ii'(. .,
'if.- '"
;<i~"it
/6).
-
-",:.~..",.
~~'~;~ !
~
,
"
-'
'.
-p
\
,
,
/,
-<i
,
/,
"
/
~ . ',"
-. -.
- , -
..g~: -: ~..~~.(.';<, "
!;A",,<'~~~ ~/"
,
,
-
------ .
~
~
-,
.........,
....
.
U
~
i!.
,
,
,
.i
'<
,
.,
,
'-
!
-i
,
i
"
?
2<1/
ij(J
......
,
'.
....
'.
I .
'1 ')~. .).
.J" C
r
'f/
-.
.,
~ ~~
'..
-1
.\1),.
,
,
,
\
!""".
1""'\
:~sz.
/
\.
"'-
'\. '" .
.,,\>I
/
/
I
I
I
~':;'1" {,
llltO
./
-;~,,~
~~'"
-- -t..:- \
~ '," '.' / / '~K. :1
/, ','
Hj
\
~I
m
~~\
~ :
i~ I
~ ,:
I
. ,
':!'.. I :
'.,(,.. I .'
II. !
, . .
II .
. i> l Ii (
. : tr:
\ / -./ '/ '
'-.. \" .'.I..', ~'l\
I \ 'l "
\~-::x '\ 't:' ,q \
I:;: /~, ,\ '~
\'d....APPrflON. " I \ \ :, .'l' \
NO- ~ \ _ j \ I, ~< \
,'- --." \ Yi:l f::.l \
\/ '" .A' ,
.\" -,-'--. '. \:
~l ..;,::..=---:c..::"_~_ .,~~" _. 'QL.i,'"
-1:::.- ::::::---: , ," ( . ,,/' I I
' ,.. " - -. ./ . I
' /,' (' -...... 1.. \ .
I;: ,', , ,'.:- -T f , ,y : ': J ...t
. - -- -, . /} ,.. .".
/ I ....... --: . , '. ^ ",.01-< "51
.,. '~.. .' "~.. !>l1N'\P,.,..t.l-l'~ioJ~ '
li~ . ~ ~Nj; -r~ ~ 1'~ ,).l.;.l~ ~ '~f'\.t<:>L' J'lAdN
.:;QV~--' HI ~Iot-I .
;::~~
\~
.p
',,'y. .
"\,.:1 ",
~^~- .
- ~'
~iOOf- ---
~-'" o~joW.l'i
\
Wi'11
~
.
\
\111>1
I
I
/
I
;~ I I I
l, ~", - , ' ;7'; .- _ :?~
" " I '~'~~~
". , /" ~~f~
. ____ ,I '\ .' .
. . I'
,
.. \l<ll-l-.
- " :. .I~1~-r10N.,
'" ~-.if- '-! - ,
/ .. ~iu~"- -
_ ;/ . t:07.~'i/,?~,.
- - ~} .
:'j' ',I . .: '1 .
/1, .. /. ,:j" .;.~ -
. ~, ~it ' r\ .
... / :6~~ '.'
. ,: ;1....r1' . \ \ Ii II;
\~-t;f:. i . :.-. ,: \l&l~'~;. '.
'(", ,.'.. '1/.I'lh~t '/. i -'__ \
. , : I 'I, -::....'. . J. ...~......."" : . - -. .
. .' , '" ...... ". - , ~..r .-:/'..,....
/ -~ \>" J; - 'J \ ) ~V!'~y ,"1t:J',
I." ," ~~.---/ f~2\\ ~
'f / ,,-'\ ! /f (/l'\ . '. -\tK 'il"l. II' .'.'..
. \' / ) ',. ok.J.::t.,
". \' .... 'I::"' """",' ' .,...... I
/ f---..:... _\' \ _r.- _~'- ,:/,. ~
\ . - '-- . "- .
(7 I~~~ f~Y;~.. \:. =~;'i" ~ \ .
I ./ /;'~ Nf"k- AWrrJoN.
: I zs' ~~ \\,' ~ ---
- l,/"-' jJ )l~ "
I ,,1 (;1\ " "-
. ,,( I ",/' I)', _ .,
./ \1 .... -----r \\ 0 - . --=- ~ -ti ,,' ~ \
/' r- -ri- .:1:.'::="=' ( -c...... - J:::.:::::- - '-"-----.'_
I I>'~~ I ) I,. '" 0 0 ~ . ,
IO'~~ \ //'.' .~. -' _~..:- -. ,-:~,-~
\- - / ,.-- \ ! . /1
T'~ llSZ ll>z" . .
~U~ -
V~A11ON- '7'''1'~1W V~~
t..;)~~.-(lo~.;,.--fO~~ ~~e.~
y..,;: \'.A11'~ ?~-rj:S ~ ..:;t.~.s-e:..
,-..,.
~
\
I
, ,
l
M
-\,0
.of'
"1
.
.
.
\
Wl 1\
:a
.'
..
C" <;
,
J
~.
.
(
\J
r
I (~
L( ~
~-l
I:l
~
~
lJ
,...."
~1
8
~
\ll
....i
~
~
<:l
'-!\
. ,-
"',
,-,.
~
b\
~
~
\1.
~
N
~
1 t
1 I
I
j
t..
n
j
:'..;;.. M~
". ~
,..' ~'"
. .....:: 1~ ~
1
~
5
\..IJ
~
~
z
C)
~
-1
\ll
~-
\.l\
~
~
.-
~
''l(;,. -'J> ',.y.
'~, -~
605 EAST MAIN STREET
ASPEN. COLORADO 81611
TELePHONE3031925-4755
FACSIMILE 30:31920-2950
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Kim Johnson
City of Aspen Planning Department
FROM:
Chris Ridings
DATE:
August 26, 1994
RE:
MORROW RESIDENCE, 1120 BLACK BIRCH DRIVE, ASPEN
This is the Stream Margin Review application package for the-Morrow Residence
located at 1120 Black Birch Drive, Aspen, Colorado. Please review the following list
of application items.
1. Preapplication Conference Summary
2. Deposit of $1 ,074.00
3. Land Use Application Form
4. Applicant Payment Agreement
5. Letter Authorizing Representation of Applicant
6. Disclosure of Ownership
7. Vicinity map
8. Project Description
9. Zoning Analysis
10. Homeowners Variance Approval
11. Explanation of Compliance
12. Letter from Civil Engineer on 100 Year Flood Plain
13. Water Course Guarantee
14. Wetlands Delineation Report
15. Site Survey
16. Site Plan: 1" - 1 0" scale
17. Floor Plans: 1/8" scale
18. Elevations: 1/8" scale
19. Existing Plans and Photographs
If you find anything missing or needing further information please call.
,
\<'
_"'r'-
. _.~-_..
, .J
'-
~:-~"
~:lri
~1
"'~"l
:"--..,1
~~,' :
~.,.,
;.,~"l
~, :
).:.4
;:1
~:!
t.ii
~'.-;
5~<'
,-~~
~
ii~
':~
;r-~<." ,./,r;~::~-i~~-,.(':>-'
:: .-.1i,.......-:...?-"-'.. 'r
t:;. ~~~~a~~~'f
.,.. ,--iN...".ti..
r~~':~~J{;
". -'''''' ~I,,',; }":i~:,.
rJ~~~l~I~U.
~:'..~.~I:~1~j~~'
\, . '.; .~.~.~:;(;~ ,\
ii':'."}'i~~:~~~t
.., ..
i hl,~
r M~,;~~;:~j':F'~~'~1': };~:
Thereviewis:~(CCOnly)(P&.Zl\l1dCC) ~;' .~.. '.:irjn::::~:~~":
I'ublicllcnriug: (Ye3)@ C1 :;.-: .... .'J:,'...., ~~J:
[)cp(J.~il for Ihe ^rl'lic~tiol1 Review: I 7'3 '. ;:,~~t~ '::%?
.1~geg~'L~f~;~Snl~I{.rccs: ~~ <,()7~ :') {'- '"d~~;:"':" ..;.0i,r
{Addltlunal hours are bllleu 1i a rale 01 ~16Jfhr.) ;::' " ;:;r,~:-" ~~,~!-;,
::u ^"~~~;;,~~;;;;;;;:";"'I"r"....ml;"''' :;;;t~!:f ;1..::....i~~:,;~];..
J. ^pl'liL';lIlI'S l1;\tlic. ;'Iddtc~s find lclcllhune Illllnher in aleller ~igned by the: applicant " "-. .
5ftr::~~~~}~,;~~~~f:\1:~~11~i~~\;~~~~i~j;~~~~~;:~~~~~~ ~r;';Si.~l;;jjit
8. She plan ~hal1 inclmle property boundaries, lot size, propuscd access, and physical ~,; \:=':~"~:'.':~,Af~f:~~:j;t~,;
~o. T?~~~~s. streal1l~, rivers. eIC.):.~__. ?l~~.";VA~~;
111CSC ilcll1snccd lobe submitted if circlctl:
a. U~t of adjacent property owners wilhin 300 feet of the subject property with addr~ses.
b. Sile Jlhoto~.
c. Proor or legal acce'ls II) the parcel.
d. Historic .Preservation Commission review/approval.
,,.:''It'~_'''~:'~''-n,''.d.~ :,,','
J
,.....,.,
,.....,.,
", .....".
:~:rt~;~ ,~~:,~ .~IfLi~~:~::;t~..
"'i~' ." ~ i"! ,"":1;. .j'i1,\'i."
:~~~~!~:i~:': ., J ': .'
',...~:..,..,'
}~!Z>fi~~:.';t;'i
"'-~'i~~'''' "J
.:'.?~...'.:P(:.'~;.:li
'; ';_:"::~I#:'C:T;;~,:
~~~~l~; r:
. '1.~; ..-'~ "J' 'l'. '
',' "'I....,,,.,.,
;~.~'~tif;;
i,...!.)f~7~,!', ..r-
.,..",'
;.
or'
1 '!!tea"
~_.. i5f,:.,,:
I ~. ,.. v.,~ .
i(~:,y~;~:':!;: ;
, ~~'" . . i
'i<"'~:-:"" ,~':
'.~:,'~.~~::~~...~' :
'm,tf
{~~2~~~.,:,f,.'i
..".'f......1 '
{}[f~~3~~
f.~
t;l~ !f!!:iJ:~r;-t
~'jf'!!rtt~'ffii,~'lT',i,~12'r.:.'f"~F;. _.~
:..:=-'.......".
, ''':,'
Cily or ^spcn
Pre-Applicalion Conference Summary
f..LM
Proj,,' ~~~~~ /~O<-eJ::1 ~
Applicanl's. epresenlatlve C .. . I
Reprtsentatlve's Phone . '5'- ~Z-r
Owner'sNamc M1I11l,""""'--
Type of ApplicntiQll S~ d-
Description of the proJe<: eve oplllelll emg t ties
TIle applicanth<lS l~en rel.luc.~tcd 10 respond \0 the following itemsano IIrovide the following
reports:
Land Use Code Sed 1011
CQIlIlIIenls
~~
7"'"..../ ,.p.. P47< - 4'Q ~
-
'i1~,<~?
'f''''r'''~ .
PREAPPLlCATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
-gh
IYolte
ITEM 1
~
-
-.
MR. OR MRS; DARRELL C. MORROW
213 KENSINGTON CT. 783-n97
HOUSTON, TEXAS n024
1548
~::.-::Jl' .~::
$
-Z5..~,'fff.____
-
~ Texas. NATIOHAt.ASSOCIATtON
. Commetce 712 MAIN
Bank ~gy~~~EXAS 7m2
W/fJ4{j~tlfl/P#1h)
I: l. l.3000 bO gJ: l. b 1.,811'30 1.O 50 B l.1., bll'
M_
DolI~.
..
. .::~:;:~
.,
.DEPOSIT OF $1,074.00
. ' ..... .." .:~. - ..'
'...... ..... ..
.. . .
-.--......" -..
"
-::"".:: ..- .~~-.
ITEM 2.
.' ,
,- .,.--,.," .. ~-'~'._-'-"--'-."-_. ..-.-.....-.....,. PO.
. "-
'" J
."'"'"
,...-..,
ATTACHMENT 1
LAND USE APPLICATION FORM
1) Project Name Morrow Residence
2 )
Project Location Lot 12. Black Birch Estates
Black Birch. Asoen. CO 81612
Addrress: 1120
3 )
Present Zoning R - 15 PUD
4) Lot Size 15_113 total-13.338 usable
5) Applicant's Name, Address & Phone # Darrell C. Morrow - Suite 2500. First Citv Tower. 1001
Fannin Street. Houston. TX 77002-6760. (713) 758-2222
6) Representative's Name, Address & Phone # Bill Poss & Associates. 605 E. Main Street. Asoen.
CO 81611 (303) 925-4755
7) Type of Application (please check all that apply):
Conditional Use
__ Conceptual SPA
Conceptual Historic
Development
Special Review
Final SPA
Final Historic
Development
8040 Greenline
__ Conceptual PUD
Minor Historic
Development
"
..l\:
Stream Margin
Final PUD
Historic
Designation
Mountain View Plan
Subdi vision
GMQS Allotment
Condominiumization
Text/Map Amendment
GMQS Exemption
Lot Split/Lot Line Adjustment
8) Description of Existing Uses (number and type of existing structures; approximate sq ft;
number of bedrooms; any previous approvals granted to the property).
Onetwo-storv wood-framed house. 2489 sa. ft.. four bedrooms. one wood
deck facina Castle Creek cravel drive for oarkino.
9) Description of Development Application
Sinale storv addition on south side of existina house. second floor addition above existina
sinale story. remodel of existina deck. exterior soa. caved drivewav. relocation of ditch
and new landscaoina.
10) Have you attached the following?
~ Response to Attachment 2, Minimum Submission Contents
~ Response to Attachment 3, Specific Submission Contents
~ Response to Attachment 4, Review Standards for your Application
LAND USE APPLICATION
ITEM 3
. --
.-
,
...[
r-\
.~
ASPENlPITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees
CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and lJA'RRr;-LL ~-t ;V{'FJfS f1m/
(hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance
No. 77 (Series of 1992) establishes a fee structure for Planni.I!g Office 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 to allow APPLICANT
to make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to
be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. 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 City Council to enable the PIl1nning Commission
. and/orCity Council to make legally required findings for project approval, unless
. current billings are paid in full prior to decision.
-- i
-[
r-,
:~
5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's
waiver of its right to colIect fuII fees prior to a determination of application
completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $
which is for _ hours of Planning Office time, and if actual recorded costs
exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shaII pay additional monthly billings to
CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned
above, including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be made
within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay
such accrued costs shaII be grounds for suspension of processing.
CITY OF ASPEN
APPLICANT
By:~rn~
Diane Moore
City Planning Director
BY~~'~ ~
Mailin.g,Addr~s:
'2.13 K€iRING~N COURT
Hr,1)SmAJ 7)r t7()'2f
Oat., ~'I23 {qqf
2
,
.;; ,~,
J.
,-..
~
June 7, 1994
City of Aspen
Planning Office
Aspen, CO 81611
Gentlemen and Ladies:
I, Darrell C. Morrow, will be making certain applications for consent to modify and
expand my home at Aspen which is situated at 1120 Black Birch on Lot 12, Black
Birch Estates, being a part oUhe southwest quarter of Section 1 , Township 10 South,
Range 85 West of the sixth prime meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado. Set forth beiow
are my current addresses and telephone numbers. At present, my primary address is
the one set forth first.
.-
Darrell C. Morrow
Suite 2601, First City Tower
1001 Fannin Street
Houston, TX 77002-6760
(713) 65H176
Darrell C. Morrow
1120 North Black Birch Drive
Aspen, CO 81611
(303) 925-8621
The name, address, ancj telephone number of the representative authorized to act for
me on all matters with the respect to my applications are set forth below:
Bill Poss and Associates
605 E. Main Street
Aspen, CO 81611
(303) 925-4755
Sincerely,
~L
Darrell C. Morrow
LETTER AUTHORIZING REPRESENTATION OF APPLICANT
ITEM 5
. -," "',;"r.;:~::"
iil<" ~:~";::::":::;~::m~"" ,,:,,~ '-"
~;Ir~.~ HEREBY CERTIFIES f,om n smcl~:~::~:~O::~~~h:ro:::::~tl~,:'owne' of
:~,'........~ .~, O'Y"'~'.;;!';"_
~:})j:.i.t7 ~~t;fi;',
'E;~~~f~:~~
...~~"\1 }~~{~.~
-'i,''-;'9:~ ,:;.'
';,<~~.-
;rJf~}J;.~'~
~1" ..... ~
. 1 ~
,':j
"".H,
.::~~~.~~;~~{~
I:;:';!
i.\';~
"'~".~,:~ :':~]1
,':,
.:,j
:'~'~~~~:, ';'~+-;~,
.:,~-.,\,,'" ':.1"..'
H~
''-~-;;'""''' '.,
'.;;',""!
. '-~~',
~-.
$100.00
Lot 12,
BLACK BIRC~ ESTATES BUBDIUISION
County ot Pitkin,
St3te of Colorado
Situ:ued in the County of Pitkin, S~;'\tc of Color:l.do, appears to be vested in the n:lme of
Darrell C.
Morrow
:lnd chat the nbovc described property appears to be subjecc to che following:
A Deed of Trust dated July 12~ 1985~ executed by Darrell C.
Morrowr to the Public Irustee ot Pitkin County, to secure an
indebtedness of $316,OOO.OO~ in favor of First National Bank in
Aspen, recorded July 12, 1985 in Book 489 3t P3ge 661 as
Reception No. 269609.
NOTE: The beneficial interest under s~id Deed of Trust was
~ssi9ned ot record to Residential .Fundin9 Corporationr
a-Delaware. Corporation by First thtional B:;mk in Aspen ro::~cSLJ'd~':1
A1J~IJSt 8, 1985 in Book 492 :~t P:3'3e 648 .;)Sr<ecl~ptiort No. 2704.25.
NOTE: The beneficial interest under said Deed of Trust was
assigned of record to First Wisconsin Trust Company as Trustee
by Residenti31 Funding Corporation recorded February 24, 1986
in Book 505 ~t Page 882 as Reception No. 275B28.
EXCEPT ::111 easements, right-o[.ways, rescriccions :lnd reservations of record.
EXCEPT any :lnd nil unpatt1 C:lxes :lnci assessments.
This repOrt does noc reflect ilny of the.following mllcters:
1)
Uilnkrupccies which, [rom dace of adjudication ofthe mose_recent bankruptcies, :lntedilce the report
by more ch:'1n four.c.~,cn (14) ye:lrs.
2)
Suics :lnd judgments which, from dace of entty, :lnted:lte the report by more than seven (7) ye:l.Is or
uncil ehe governing stacuce of limic:ltions has expired, whichever is the longer period.
3)
Unpaid tax liens which, from date of payment, ancedate the reporc by more ehan seven (7) years.
Alchough we believe che facts stated are crue, this Certificate is nOt to be construed as an abstract of dde,
nor an opinion of tide, nor:l guaranty of dele, and it is underscood and agreed thac Stewart Tide of Aspen,
Inc.. neither assumes, nor will be charged with any financial obligation or liability whatever on any state-
menc conC:lined herein.
D:lccd nt Aspen, Colorndo, this
day of
A_D. 1939:lc
October
8:00 A.M.
17th
STI:\VART TITLI: OF ASPI:N. INC.
BY
.J.e?Z.fl~
Autho,i.ed Sign",u,e 1-
rnsC.U)6\;.\RE.QF. Q,WNERSHIP
'" ,~':;..:/~' ,:.
"I"
.",";
,,':::,;~;:.'
,_^___",,_,~_ ".___-'c...:.'-.___,
:':_~':...'",;
,,' ~,..
~Kf~41~~:
I,,~-",..,...~~,J.'-::<~t-'-""""'K
II
~~:i~;~) ...}:-r:.}.
.
'i~j~:~:';'
;.."!.;,-,,
.",>
;~~~ .
"tt..,
I
!.
~)~":
"4,,;i,l-;. ':i!t,....r:;,o~',',;.,'
,}.:",.~...:i!;.n~~}~~.
, ..' - .. ':~~-':;:'.
"'C.,!'
~". ..'
'.';."!-
I
I .'
I
" .,;~~,:!r
:~,\:":'
;~iJ~;::,'
_"'f".
"--'~" "...
. '. r;"j',--" . .. ~
I j~ft~l
I fi~l;
I'~i~t:~' "~;
t.,,:ioi>_:''';;' 1~
'"
, ~
,
,
,
.-.
-
, ,
605 E'AST MAIN STRE'ET
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
TE'LE'PHONE'3031925-4755
FACSIMILE' 3031920-2950
August 26,1994
City of Aspen
Planning Office
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: MORROW HOUSE ADDITION, STREAM MARGIN REVIEW
Explanation of compliance with the substantive development review standards-
response to Attachment 4, Stream Margin Review standards:
1. The proposed development will not increase the base flood elevation. See
letter from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, dated 10/09/89.~
2. There are no trails dedicated for public use.
3. Recommendations for the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan do not apply.
4. The new development will not cause any erosion or sedimentation of the
stream bank: removal of vegetation or change of slope grade along the river
will not occur. See letter from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, dated 10/09/89.
5. The new development will not affect the stream margin in any way in terms of
pollution or interference with the natural changes of the water.
6. A written notice to the Colorado Water Conservation Board is not required.
7. For a guarantee to ensure the flood carrying capacity please see the attached
letters from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, dated 10/09/89, and from the owner
Mr. Darrell C. Morrow, dated 12/12/89.
8. The proposed development does not require work within the 100 year flood
plain. A wetlands delineation report was requested by the City of Aspen Parks
Department. Please see the attached report (Item #14) from Aztech
Environmental, dated July 29, 1994. At the time of this application submission
the Army Corp of Engineers had given oral approval of this project. A written
will be submitted by the Army of Engiqeers at a later date.
~(/!f /)
EXPLANATION OF COMPLIANCE
.--- -.--:.. _.~
~
j.-
.
,
1,~ Grand Avenue, Suite 212
G. .iwood Springs, Colorado 81601
(303) 945-1004
SCHMUEseR GORt.
O::tober 9, 1989
CONSULTING ENGINEERS' SURVEYORS
Mr. Johannes Kastner
239 E 33rd Street, Suite 4B
}.'ew York, NY 10016
Dear Mr. Kastner:
This letter is to address some of your concerns regarding the proposed
addition to the existing house on lot 12, Black Birch Estates in the
City of Aspen, Colorado.
The proposed addition to the south of the existing house will require
the relocation of the irrigated ditch shown on our survey maps. '!:he
ditch relocation will not affect any water rights of ditch owners as
the size and carrying capacity of the relocated ditch will be the same
as the existin<j ditch. Easements for the ditch relocation should be
obtained from the Black Birch Homeowners Associations who, as I under-
stand, are the. owners of the ditch.
The proposed addition is above and, therefore, outside the JOO-year
floodplain and, as such, will not increase in any way the base flood
elevation or impact the flood carryinq capacity of the property. The
prop:lsed addition also does not interfere with the natural channel of
Castle Creek, nor is it close enough to cause deterioration of the
stream bank:. The area disturbed during construction will be landscaped
and drainage away from the building will be designed in such a way as
to eliminate or reduce to historic rates any runoff or sedimentation
into Castle Creek.
Since the existing structure and proposed addition are within 100-feet
of Castle Creek, a Stream Margin Review application to the City will be
required. '!:he addition may be exempt from review, however, provided
the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 7-504B.1-5 (attached)
can be met. .
I hope this letter answers your concerns. Please call if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
SCEMUESER (DRJX)N MEYER, INC.
dliVl
Ken Wilson, R.L.S.
Survey Manager
RW:lc/9185
-.-
~
,
,
.
,-..,
~
,. ,
WATER COURSE GUARANTEE
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I, Darrell C. Morrow, the
owner of Lot 12, Black Birch Estates, being a part of the southwest
quarter of section 1, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th
prime. meridien, Pitkin County, Colorado (the "Land"), the street
address. of which is 1120 North Black Birch Drive, Aspen, Colorado
81611, hereby agree and guarantee, on behalf of myself and my
heirs, successors, and assigns, that if in connection with any
development that may occur on the Land a water course is altered
or relocated, such alteration or relocation will not diminish the
flood carrying capacity of the Land.
.This.Guarantee shall be
shall be binding on the
successors, and assigns" ..
a covenant running with the Land and
undersigned, party and his heirs,
IN WITNESS _ WHEREOF, '. this Guarantee hereby is executed
effective as of. and from.December 12, 1989.
~H~,~ 0 11G-\At'-\:)
DELL C. MORROW
.-0-
STATE OF TEXAS
9
9
9
~
COUNTY OF HARRIS
~~~7T:i~~~i~:;f~;{:;~"--:
,~' ,,\! v.......' ....r,"'trcO("T~,v\;,),
"J \:-,..,;<..:/ '.1
(~. ....--' My Comm ... ,.. f~{
(.".,,~.....~~._~..,,~~ . ~I). J.m. 19, l:,~
.'~'7.;.~~..
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
12th day of December, 1989 by Darrell C. Morrow.
/~- *~J\ / .
.L...--.I.-(;1/ A o-<)t(//!.//ff-:/7{I///LLL-J
Gisele LaFrance Tisserand
Notary Public in and for
Harris County, Texas
My Commission Expires: 1/19/92
WATER COURSE GUARANTEE
ITEM 13
;.,"'
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
-:' t" /
1"'"'\
~
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
MORROW RESIDENCE
ASPEN,COLORADO
PREPARED FOR
MR. LESLIE ROSENSTEIN
BILL POSS & ASSOCIATES
605 East Main Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925-4755
(303) 920-2950 (FAX)
PREPARED BY
MARTIN MILLER
AZTECH ENVIRONMENTAL
2277 EI Verano Court
Grand Junction, Colorado 81503
(303) 243-9565
JULY26,1994
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
RECEIVED
AUG 0 4 1994
W~LLlAM JOHN Pass & ASSOC.
A&i'EN. COLOI'lADO
;
ITEM 14
I , ,. ,
, .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
;"
""
.-..
I. INTRODUCTION
A. OBJECTIVE
The objective of this report is to detennine the presence and extent of federal
jurisdictional wetlands on the subject property for the purpose of satisfying
requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
B. GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION
The subject property is located adjacent to Castle Creek at 1120 Black Birch Drive,
Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and within Section 1, Township 10 South, Range 85
West, 6th P.M. A location map is included in this report.
The property owner is Morrow, 1120 Black Birch Drive, Aspen, Colorado 81611.
The principle contact is Mr. Leslie Rosenstein, Bill Poss Associates, 605 East Main
Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611, (303) 925-4755.
C. WETLAND DEFINITION
The following definition of wetlands is used by the Corps of Engineers and other federal
agencies for administering the Section 404 permit program:
-.
"Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under nonnal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions."
D. REGULATORY AUTHORITY
Jurisdictional wetlands which occur on the property fall under the regulatory authority of
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Federal
Register, 1986, 33 CFR Parts 320 through 330). Section 404 requires that any
individual or entity proposing to discharge dredged or fill material into waters of the
United States, including wetlands, obtain a Department of the Anny pennit prior to such
a discharge.
The jurisdictional wetlands on this property are isolated; the wetlands are not a part of a
surface tributary system to interstate or navigable waters of the United States.
Therefore, the discharge of dredged or fill material into these wetlands is subject to
authorization under Nationwide General Pennit #26, Headwaters and Isolated
Discharges (33 CFR 330).
" . I
f:O;~~..-h --I-=-
co." ."~
::.::; (
. .'. I
I .....:: i ,
u . ~).=
L r.rnL-,
!.:~.~~.
j., i'-
J ....'.
I
I':...
. .... / ,J'
I . '~-~- ~
! ?' ,i.~~J::
{I
',i;' ,<
... ,/
~J ~ ....'" tj\
:~ .-,,---.-'." ! ~....,,/ ~{(.'...~~..""
..., \ II
;;...... ' ..',' .
~ //: .-.,_..l .'<f"
...."'r/ I ./ ,,;,;;v ;'"
. ,)~#, .;- ~ ,: ".
....-;:..;~.".r .?~. '"
......~. ,., .,.,......
..~.'" g3f. .. L !' j\ !\- -::;-.:,;
" ,~~,. L:'~:,Lij'\ J;p-...:"'c' "
,,' :E. ~' "~. I \----,
..:( ,"'i'f ,,- 1._- ~
01 . ,'f" ...[.
. \ // .-:.
. .'
)
~ :;::- $'.'.1;;
~_ --.Lt:: ....r;.,..""," ...y.i y/
- - .":._,..~ c::.. ,,---, /" j~ / ."
,,_\..___"'Z-:::::"--;~'''' ,I"
...~~........> /j-......,: { f' ~.
0"_' \ ,.".::;.~ '~,." .._,~::~;:iI:~') !!z,rn) i
",,- _ _r~. =IS_~$'
~.~:,,,, ',_; .~ ""..\ ~...'--" ~. _~<Il ,
~...>. .' -". ~ ~ --,.
".';".', .,ot....... ", -r, -,..\"'
-, ..-... .........., '" ..\ .- ~ ;/
. ".~::;;:; :C'
;.~:,:~~.,;.__.-:.:..~~~..... --',- ~'I'~ ,-1/. ~ \'
. -- " '......,.,;'( .;'
I---....~ ""'~'~:';<:';:":'J'" . rz.;f;;:",;:. ' ' =- /f}c- .:' Iv I,
\""""""""" _I. t..>"" i' <,.D
..' .' _ :. ,. e b
..... FO. ~ ... ,,,,,,,,.. ," ;.:j"
{~ R, E'S.T. _ \. ':.......... 1 ~.. I~.'.'("
_,,;_ . ;'-. ,__..."Qf11~:;:: lii ".".:::.- Ii
t.,:..::/""~. \'.,." T 1 ,,'
'._"_ ~. -,'t....... . ')~~ !J _l).i'.~
., ,,>_'.~'~:'="""" -F-
1 .,- "- \. ."1 '~~ (' fr= ..')
. .'__ ,,,__ ,,',; .. f >.'" .",,~ (~"iJ! .
~ :..,.......<Sr. ; ,~: J . .!'::~~~~ ....... j1r{
~\ ":;,~~5-~'/ /' ""'1''' 1lOIqo...~~G- -....., (,:
._ ".=~'_ \, .,7", \ . =-1 ... '
_ /-;.::r:::.~,/',.),,:?
.,... '__ '''~.L.!' '.' "'-" .. .. '"
'._ .~ .,,;:"'_ . ~U"'_ i/ . ,.... '-r, .";
'f';l~"";-<''' '- _ ~~<S" r_~.:"J~
J'~ \ \:.~-- ......, ,~ ,... ...---- ' '~
,..~t:..//"""- ~'10' \.~ .c.C'c,~';';";--.
,__ ( 6-..~...' "I:;; s.o.Tlo.v.L -to....."'"; ..-.
, t ....~...".. '. ,,~ FORtSi' '_~':Jo._ ,'*,
.. .1'1'~~ ,i;.
@ DeLonni':::;(l,:~~..c.Q~'-'
t'
t,~
~
..
,,'T
l
,
HIT E
.,..
~
~
t '.
_.'~~.,
-,;~::-.
w<7;\
......-,..<,
,.~ "
t.
.....
~
...:
t .,'
'...' .-;,
. .,
..
".;-......
'.',-
f
,
'''~'::..~.
.
.'
"
."
\ ~~~:::f"\.~,~
"
'>
.'
(
1..'.1'.
(".C:;:
./
r,
<1:~
/./"<
':;-, <s.
"';'-
-,
~"
:l
,tr:;:::."
c;::;:
r"'~~:'''>
~
,,.,,
'"'
........
(1,.l!6/.1W
--
.".<
0.'
-~
~..~~~:,' "-;:;" /
~r'
,I.t
"
,-\\~ ~-
':.:.<-: ~"'~2
\';, - ' ~
" -:-,.;.~.
<<
,
r...
..
",~~_ COLLEG
'<--:::"(.;..
- '
"........---.,~
i
,
...
l
.'
.~~
N AT 1'0 N A L "--
~
."
Ii
"-./
,./
p
~"
.
..
,
'\
,
...
,
,;:;;<.'
:/~;
ii ,'\" IIUlI) ~::.-
~
'J' \. ,-;E._
t~""'I--: ...~.....
p \ ~
"" ,.~
~~ =-\ <>,~.d
{ ~-~;.
&! eo--
.'f -
,ic_ ..
c-J/-- II~=
..... ,!1:" ,,- \
.~= \ '"
...
\"':.,
..
'- '\. -
~-
.~-
-
-
{'"...n
II~'''=-
-
-
Continue on Page 58
KILOMETERS 0 2
3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10
MILES 0
2 3 4
5 6
~,~-,.;,.~
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
;
I
i
I
r
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.'
,
.
.-.
,-.
The scope of this wetland delineation report Is limited to a recommended detennlnation
of the area of federal jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The
delineation was perfonned In confonnance with the procedures specified In the Corps
of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual dated January 1987 (the "1987 Manual").
This report is not an official detennination of jurisdictional wetlands under Section 404
of the Clean Water Act until verified In writing by the Corps of Engineers.
As stated in Regulatory Guidance Letter Number 90-6 (RGL 90-6), Issued by the Corps
of Engineers on August 14, 1990, wetland jurisdictional delineations, once verified, are
valid for three years from the date of submission to the Corps of Engineers by a
consultant to the project proponent or property owner unless new Infonnation warrants
revision of the delineation before the expiration date. RGL 90-6 also stipulates that
complete and accurate documentation (data sheets, maps, and drawings) accompany
the delineation to allow a reasonably accurate replication of the delineation at a future
date. Guidance for wetland delineation consultants issued by the Grand Junction
Regulatory Office of the Sacramento District Corps of Engineers also requires similar
documentation. This report was designed to s1iltlsfy these requirements. Once verified
by the Corps of Engineers in writing, this reportwliI be valid until July 1997 and can be
duplicated with the same results within that time frame by reference to test sites and
corresponding maps and data fonns Included In this report.
II. METHODS
The method used In this study is the "three parameter" approach to wetland
delineation. The three parameters used as delineation criteria are: the presence of
wetland dependent vegetation, the presence of saturated or hydric soils, and evidence
of inundation or surface saturation for significant time periods. This report was
compiled by closely following procedures specified In the Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual dated January 1987.
~
The method used identifies the presence and geographic extent of aquatic and wetland
areas on the site by using multiple. indicators of aql,latic and wetland soil, hydrology,
and vegetation conditions. Based on the regulatory definition of wetlands (33 CFR
Section 328.3 and 40 CFR Section 230.3), the following general diagnostic
environmental characteristics or parameters are evidence of the presence of
jurisdictional wetlands:
1. Wetland Vegetation Conditions: The prevalent plant species associated with the
plant community are typically adapted for life within habitats that have penn anent or
periodically inundated or saturated soil conditions. Wetland plant species are
organisms that, because of morphological or physiOlogical adaptations and/or
reproductive strategies, have the ability to achieve maturity and reproduce in an
environment where soils within portions of the root zone become anaerobic (without
oxygen) during the growing season. A check list of plants characterized on a wetland
to upland ecological spectrum has been developed by a technical committee of the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The "National List of Plant Species That Occur In
Wetlands: Intennountain (Region 8)" was used for this study.
, ..._,_._..._._m',......
-
[ .' ,
.
(
I
I
I
(
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t"""
.~
2. Wetland Soil Conditions: The soils within portions of the root zone become
saturated pennanently or periodically during the growing season. A list of wetland soil
types (hydric soils list) has been developed to augment field identification criteria. The
local USDA Soil Conservation Service County Soil Survey and Hydric Soils List were
used for this study.
3. Wetland Hydrological Conditions: The area is inundated or saturated by surface
or groundwater pennanently or periodically during the growing season. The local
County Soil Survey was used to obtain any hydrological information recorded for the
study area.
Evidence of at least one positive indicator for each of the above three parameters must
be found before a positive detennination of wetlands can be made. Evidence may be
developed from historical data, recent existing data and/or observations made in the
field.
Remote data sources used in this study include the U.S. Geological Service quadrangle
maps and the USDA Soil Conservation Service county soil survey. Direct field study
included vegetation inventories, soil sampling and hydrological analysis.
.--
A. VEGETATION SAMPLING:
Transect baselines were located on a property boundary parallel to the nearest
watercourse or hydrological gradient. The number and position of transects were
detennined in accordance with the Corps of Engineers manual procedures modified by
specific site conditions. One transect was established at the mid-point of each baseline
increment. All vegetation communities on the property were included in the transects.
Representative observation points in each vegetation community along each transect
were selected, and dominant plant species were determined within a five foot radius of
each observation point. Transect locations and observation points or test sites are
depicted on the attached delineation map. Dominant plant, wetland soil conditions and
hydrologic evidence were recorded on the .appropriate field data sheets (Appendix A) to
correspond with each of the transects and observation points depicted on the map.
_'._ ___.."...~.,__..~__"_._ ~_"" ....c...
I , {
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
,.
\
.1
~
-~----------
,,-..
,-.
B. SOIL SAMPLING:
Climate, parent material, topographic relief, biological processes and time affect the
characteristics of wetland soil. However, it is the hydrologic regime that is the
overriding factor in the formation of identifying characteristics. The unique
characteristics of hydric soils result from the influence of periodic or permanent
inundation or saturation of sufficient duration to create anaerobic conditions. In an
oxygen depleted state caused by water saturation, chemical reductions of some soil
components, primarily iron, lead to the development of soil colors and other physical
characteristics that are usually indicative of wetland or hydric soils. The soil series and
phase on the property were identified from maps contained in the County Soil Survey.
The soil type identified on the property by the soils maps was compared with the local
list of hydric soils.
At each observation point in the transects established for vegetation sampling, a soil pit
was dug circumscribing a one foot diameter area to expose eighteen inches of the soil
profile.
Color is often the most diagnostic of soil characteristics. Soil color was compared to a
Munsell Color Chart to determine how closely the colors match a "gley" index. Gleyed
soils develop when anaerobic conditions result in a pronounced cheplical reduction of
iron, manganese and other elements, thereby producing a gray color.
The soil was also examined for the following indicators of hydric soil: organic material;
upper organic layer (histic epipedon); sulfidic material; aquic moisture regime; and the
presence of mottles. Mottled soils are marked with spots of contrasting color indicative
of a fluctuating water table and are characteristic of a wetland soil.
~
The soil information was recorded on the appropriate data sheets (Appendix A).
C. HYDROLOGY SAMPLING:
Bore holes in the transect area were examined for evidence of standing water and soil
saturation. Bore holes approximately 18 inches deep were made and depth to standing
water was recorded. Evidence of surface inundation such as drift lines, water marks,
sediment deposits, drainage, pattems, and scour areas was recorded.
The property and surrounding areas were examined for the presence of dams, levees,
ditches, or other structures that might affect hydrology on the site. The area was also
examined for evidence of upstream diversions, channelization, or groundwater
extraction which might alter drainage pattems on the site.
The information was recorded on the appropriate field data sheets (Appendix A).
fI' <. l'
I
I
I
I
I
I
[
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
III. RESULTS
~.
-,
An investigation of the site was conducted on July 25, 1994. The property is a
residential lot within an established subdivision approximately 30 years old. A house,
driveway, parking area, and other usual amenities exist on the property. Castle Creek
fonns the east boundary of the property, and Black Birch Drive forms the west
boundary. Houses exist on the adjoining lots to the north and south. A small irrigation
ditch crosses the property along Black Birch Drive and another outlets into Castle
Creek at the southeast comer of the property. The information on vegetation, soils,
and hydrology collected at the site and a discussion of this information follows:
A. VEGETATION:
The following list includes the dominant plant species found at test sites and the
wetland indicator status of each species:
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Equisetum laevigatum
Equisetum arvense
Lonicera involucrata
Rubus idaeus
Rosa woodsii
Populus acuminata
Oactylis glomerata
Streptopus amplexifolius
Heracleum lanatum
Epilobium angustifolium
Agropyron sp.
Taraxacum otticinale
COMMON NAME
STATUS
Scouring Rush
Field Horsetail
Bearberry Honeysuckle
Red Raspberry
Woods Rose
Lanceleaf Cottonwood
Orchard Grass
Twisted Stalk
Cow Parsnip
Fireweed
Wheatgrass
Common. Dandelion
FacW
Fac+
Fac
FacU
Fac-
Fac+
FacU
FacW
Fac
FacU
FacU?
FacU+
"......
"
The wetland vegetation community at Test Site #1 occupies a small depression which
was a previous channel of the irrigation ditch before the ditch was moved approximately
10 feet to the west. This community consists primarily of Scouring Rush with
Cottonwood, Honeysuckle, Twisted Stalk, and Rose along the perimeter. A narrow
fringe wetland community exists adjacent to portions of the irrigation ditches. This
fringe wetland community includes Sedge in addition to the species found at Test Site
#1.
The upland vegetation community at Test Sites #2,3, and 4 which surrounds the
wetland community is dominated by Cottonwood, Field Horsetail, Raspberry, Rose,
Orchard Grass, Cow Parsnip, Fireweed, Dandelion, and Wheatgrass.
" < T
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
""""'
^
B. SOILS:
The soils observed in the wetland area at Test Site #1 was dark brown, 10YR2I1 to
10YR 212, without mottles. The soils observed in the upland areas at Test Sites #2,3,
and 4 were also dark brown, 10YR 212, without mottling. The wetland soil was
saturated to the surface whereas the upland soil was dry. None of the soils showed
signs of recent deposition. Much of the site was likely cleared and graded at the time
of construction of the house. The wetland area can be considered to be an area of
previous soil disturbance because it occupies an area of the original location of the
constructed irrigation ditch.
C. HYDROLOGY:
Castle Creek borders the property but appears to have no influence on the hydrology of
the surface soils. The property is approximately three feet above the high water line of
the creek and the 100 year flood plain line approximately follows the top of bank of the
creek. No signs of recent flooding were observed on the property. A narrow band of
fringe wetlands exists along the creek below the 100 year flood plain boundary and is
supported by the streamflow.
.",
The source of hydrology for the wetland is likely seepage from the irrigation ditch
approximately 1 0 feet west of the wetland. Because the wetland occupies an old
channel of the irrigation ditch, the elevation of the bottom of the wetland depression is
about the same as the bottom of the ditch. Because the irrigation ditch is below the
surface of the adjacent ground and because the soils are relatively course textured,
seepage from the irrigation ditch appears to have no influence on the surface soil '
hydrology of the remaining portion of the property.
D. WETLAND DETERMINATION:
The jurisdictional wetland boundaries determined by ~his study are shown on the
attached drawing titled "Wetland Map, Morrow Property" dated July 29, 1994. The total
area of the small pocket of jurisdictional wetland located at Test Site #1 was
determined to be approximately 200 square feet (0.0046 acre). The fringe wetlands
associated with the irrigation ditches were determined to be non-jurisdictional.
I ~, {
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.r, ~.
APPENDIX A
.-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t t "l
~
(....",
OATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSlTE DETERMINATION METHOO'
F..ld lnvestiQat~r(s): ;4/"//'/er Date: 7-Z5=f'~
Projec:!/Sae: C!!.~ Y/'tTk/ Stale: C <7 County: /'/7"A',-;'
~r: Plant Community '!Name: I
Note: W a more detajled sae desc:rlption is necaSS3lY. \1$8 the badt of data form or a fi41d notebook.
---------------------------------------------------
Do normal environmental CXlncfrtions exist a1 the plant CXlmmunity?
Yes -L.. No _ (II no. explain on badt)
Has the ~~etation, soils. andIor hydrology been si;jniflCal1Jly cflSt1Jtb<!d? /
Y8<I~No_{lIyes.explainonbac:k) <7// .//7<-&/1 ch"-/7ne
----_._------------'---------------------------------
VEGETATION
IncflCa10r
Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Spec;es
1. - viJI'elv... ft, ,,"v,' ... .. ';:a.~JV // 11.
2. ""'?i"d'eJ'" ;'nl/<c~I'''7<:<. ra.,; J 12.
3. JrJo/?rcrff "'''''p~,r.- ,"..... ;::;"cW /;1 13.
4. J'f<>f" 1'0,,,,,,<&';" Ai c- -;.- 14.
s. ~P"I"':f'. a~VI",,'Jra.A ra.C I- 15.
L lL
~ 1~
L lL
L lL
10. 20.
Pereant of dominant species that are OBL FACW. and/or FAC:;r::::;;> erO
Is the hydrophytic VIllletation criterion met? Yas -L No _
Rationale:
;;-.rv %
Indicator
Status Stratum
."'."
.'
SOILS
S<orieslphase: Subgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes _ No _ Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes _ No v H"lStic opipedon present? Yes No ~
Is the soil: Mottled? YeS~~O~GleYed? Yes_ No V- .
MalID: Color: 10/ Y /? :< ~~ Mottle Colors'
. Other hydric SOg indicato'rs: /'0. 1/1''';0'-1.'''11 - .
Is the hydric SOg criterion met? Yes ~ No_
Ratlonale:
/1:'1"",:'),"'<:'*"'..
,... ""-j>v/'c _",::rTr/I'C' /'t"<?'')#'"
v. v
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surlace inundated? Yes _ No...:::::i- Surlace water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yas v' No ~
o..pth 10 free-st.andir>;l water in pit/soil probe hole: <//t,,/'e/.
IJst other field evidence of surface inundation or soa saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes"'/ No
Rationale:
h~vy,,-j,~.n
JURISDICTIONAL DETEmlINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant CXlmmunity a wetland? Yes -L No_
RatioQale forjuriscflClional dec;i.sion:
Cf../I J pa.rc<;we~f p",.:r,
/ /
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric SOg Assessment Proeadilre and the Plant Community
Ass..~ment Proceduril.
2 ClassiflC:ation ac:cordlng to 'Soa Taxonomy."
B-2
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
,
t
--
--
DATA FORM
ROfJ'TINE ONSlTE DETERMINATION METHOD1
rl81d Investigatot(s): /7,?//kr Date: 7-2f"-'?71
f'rcjedlS~e: ~~/'I'I7JV State: Co CoulJ!Y: /'/f,lo /1
Appllc::ant.'Owr: Plant Community 'Mame: Z >' ~
Note: If a more detailed site description is necassaty, use the back ot data lonn or a field notebook.
--------------------------------------------------.
Do normal environmental c<mcrtions exist at the plant community?
Ves ~ No _ (If no. explain on back)
Has tM vegetalio", soils. and/or hydrology b<>en signif~tJy c:flSturbed? J~ L.
Ves _ No ~ (If yes, e"Plain on back) /',,/Y);t/e,/'"I'.....It/:1 ""-T0,;Y JvI7l!')y
,kL~ ,Jv//r
---------------------------------------------------
VEGETA nON
IncICalor
Dominant PI""t Species SlattJs Stratum Dominant Plant Species
1. .;:ra,wc"....:>' (2/ "'f5./ { 11.
2. ::l"t/:r,,- CVht d /(:"i),;.,.e ,F...,,;//r /;/ 12.
3. V"W"'''H J'ft ;:::;a.t:t/..'" /J 13.
4. ~t: //~. <>/~A#~~a.J'c.. .n.c i/,)I 14.
5. ---yJt'.:>"' /'Cf/-rel/./ P"'c to' ,.7 15.
~ 1~
~ 1~
8. 18. -~-
L 1L
10. 20.
Percent ot dominant opedes that are OSL, FACW, and/or FAC 1,1/1
Is the hydrophylic V8'Jetalion criterion met? Ves No L-
Rationale:
-<C.f"'CJ?,.
lndic::alor
Status SttattJm
SOILS
.,
Subgroup:2
Yes No Unootermined
No U-H'lStic epipedon present? Ves No ~
NoZGleyed? Ves_ No V-
Mottle Colors:
Series/phase:
Is the soil on the hydric soils list?
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes
Is the soil: Mottled?.. .Yes --;--
Matrix Color: {!: Y R 'Y z.
. Other hydric soff indicators:
Is the hydric soa criterion met? Ves
Ratl09ale:
/? /9' /! C/1/'6'IHa..
.v
NOL-
HYDROLOGY
No L- Surface water depth:
Is th.. ground surlace inundated? Yes
Is th.. soilsattJrated? Ve.s _ No-L..
o..pth to Ire..-standino walsr in pitlsoil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or sou sawration.
No~
Isth.. watland hydroJooy aiterion met? Ye.s
Rationale:
,/VI? f&..;o'-V;-";r/7:?h
JURlSOICT10NALDETERMlNAnON AND RAnONALE
Is the plant oommunity a wetland? Yes _ No ~
RatioQaj" forjuris<flCtional decision:
A'// J p<v~a.~~7"C'/'...:r ~'?
t /
Thb data torm can be used for the Hydric soa Ass..ssment Procedure and the Plant Community
Ass..ument Proceduril.
2 Cla.ssif'lCa:tion accotdlno.to "SoaTaxonomy."
8,2
"t" f: ~
.........
.-,.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSlTE DErERMlNAnON METHOD1
r>8ld lnve3tir;~~~: ~//,kr . Date: 7-25""-/7
ProjedlSite: V /'(7 State: CO Cour /'/r-A'IP/
Appru:ant.<:lwner: Plant Community l!Name:
Net.: It a more de1aJ1ed site description is necaSSaJY, use the back ot data form or a field nctebcclc.
---------------------------------------------------
Do normal environmental conditions exist <It the plant community?
Yes -=:::.... No _ (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation. sciIs; and/or hydroic9Y been signifi~t!y cflSlurbed?
Yes _ No..L (If yes, explain on bade) /'" fflp/e ,.fFad'y
/NAt'".bfe~"y'/~ .
----------------~---~------------------------------
IncflCator
Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species
,. v/~rl/-'" "",KIN');-;-e r'u:'" #
1. _ 11.
2. _"'P/'?C'I'~ ~V... ",/,,,- r"'-r:. of 12.
3. R",~ /Yd f// r<2.C - of 13.
4. #t'I'4.t:/e v,... /cvra.;rv/'l /'a;c? IT 14.
5. /9 '1/1'" ":pt'.17 .7';: r"-ci/. /:0' 15.
6. 4P.'.id~/"'''''' ~ fif7'71"~l/Jtt Ac!/ /-I 16.
~ 1~
L lL
L lL
10. 20.
Peresnt of dominant spedes that are OBL FACW, and/or FAC f'C>
Is the hydrophytic veg<rta:tion crilerion met? Yes L- No
Rationale:
:z..,?7 ~
VEGETATION
lncfoc::ztor
Status Stratum
SOILS
~rieslphase:
Is the soil on the hydric: soils list?
Is the soil a HiSlosol? Yes
~~~: S~~~o~yA'~Y;=
. Other hydric' soa indicat~rs:
Is the hydric:: so. criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
/?/'fA "./;,oI",/Pt"'-
t/
Subgroup:2
Yes No Undetermined
No -v'rflStic epipedon pl'8SSnt? Yes No V
No V- Gleyed? Yes _ No ~
Mottle Coiors:
No~
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No L- Surlace water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No -;:7"""
Depth to fre<MtandillQ water in pit/soil probe hole:
List other field 8'Iiclence of surlace inundation or soa saturation.
No~
Is the wetland flydrology criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
/1/(7 f=rW'<%.;hQ~
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINA nON AND RATIONALE
Istheplantccmmunilya.wedand? Yes_ No~
Ration~e}orjurisdictional dec:i.sion:
:z (?r...f P'</f~erel'.f 4e'f',
, v
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric soa Assessment Prcc:edUre and the Plant Community
.Assessment Prceeclurit.
2Classifoc::ztion =ralng to "Soil Taxonomy:
- .
..
..
8-2
':.-> 'f.- i
r'\
'-',
',JIvfl
,,1
,. /
'-'
,
" ... ...
" ..'"
",<,/
, /
, / /
, / /
v/
<
, ;;;.: ,
" .~
'<,;/ <-
,
,
, / /
" /
1m
,.,..",,.i~
,
"f,'"
, "
. "
, "
, ,
," ! -' ""....,
", ;..[)" " ,
',' ~- "',
,-;:: . ... " ~...~~
" ---':l."",,~., """,, ~/
" , 1''''- (," " , ~
" "" ,,-- I ," " "
"" "," y "'... "
. --.:-....' ,,' ,
,. '----...' ,,' . "-
'I' 'I. (IJ'I" " , ,
! I \J'E:STI5ULs'llilll!! '~~, <~'" ! '"~,,
\ I I Ii I, ",,- ... "I
i""'---.-,=..;..l---------~--------...., ";,,,
'----rcs---------c------------' "
'6 I' , ' " ."
; . 5 I I I ',,' ~ ""
\ 1 I I 'I"
r t I : . /
r-- - " ------.------
~--..:----
0J
,,11"
: 1:1 ill' : -------------J I
i "~__ _m}~~~_~~Qj
i -----Illru-r-------- j"
i~=::=~==:==~=:=:===~====-i
i ====: ,I C;o:;:tt<;;:~~!;1::::==- -.
: ~$ '-1 i
: ::~=::::. '--;::::F==========:'~
1 . U ;~lTGHEN L~I]1
t ------.H~----------------..,;;';;;;O
, -----" -,-:::---,----------]: "I'.
I 'I' "j r~j;
i . '-<-1 i I :;;;;:::: ~
1.-____
I -,r--
, "
I "
, "
I "
~!::~.....1;:.,::
r
~
it,8J111
Kt'iU2Dk.\
~;Q~"'/)J"
12eG1 r:::eJ.u..e
~ /.$VeL pWJ
~
EXISTING PLANS AND PHOTOGRAPHS
ITEM 19/1
Y8"= I'...D1(
..,{
... ~- tf
;I.
=...~
~
^
/
/
~
~,
;,// '~
;';';' ""
,\\..
'~
/'-
;' ""'l<,
,1,1" ,,~
"" ,~
, '\...
~ ,~
I ! ....z~.
ii"
i I' ,~\
I 0,
. ' ,
, I "-..
1".[ . .'~
!) . .'" "
j. ". '~
J 1 i" " -0
I i [==1;~======- "~ /' ''':.~
I :J;:' " AJ ~ ~~?~~~", /",,}':.~
1 r, ,'~. . ^' ,," ,," ,,~
[--*----- - ''...~ /;, '\' ~,.' ',--
j.L,i " "I" ".~ "9
--;1: -----, " jl~, :t?" '\\ ~ ;,~\" //
II t ,I" " ,'<4 ,/" ",~,../
--l----E- I '~~ ,1,1,," v, ..,..
[--1<--- V"'.~" / , ~~ ':.,/
1'1 ...u~~,,~u- ,>""<" \, y/"I;,1
U r-\~rr-t ""'" -0 /~. . ,,"
---~-~- I___~) . '\', / /
--tf~-S- ---, Y" ,~~,//,~"...
I~l ~ 1 t-.. ~,
Il, .at ) [ ... . /
f~, 0 [I ":::-::-':-,:- "
-~jl-\1 ! I ,~"
==r=~~ ::-------Tj Y
I [I 1
11 I 1t;€p'R,COM; I
C~J5~===J ===l ~========~ m:1
: [==~jl!~~~== ===~ ~========~ ={
I II II ii.l; I
r~==I(==:-1 ===d ~--------.4-J
L. .~____j ._n_.lt__-=.-:=-"~:.:-.-::__,,: \-,
1-:.[]7-'--:~"::---- illll:
: [=::In''t::::======-1 r=====::::=::t:;;;:III' ':1: =~
I. "bet> ~"'M ;1 :
I II 1.1
I __~::"________...J l.. I!: :
: -7----------) )==:===-:'--111/1) =;
L, r II , I
l- :&iiimBI~ - ,__~.....-_-_,
: i ; i ------f
rl II I
I: II I
II . II r J
~;~=.;:;;..::;;;::;-- .;;-=~---;:;...J..;--;::~:;i
I
I
I
I
I
I_
I
I
I
I
~
-
/-'t02,l20j..,j ~ lP ~AJ~
8"us./1).U, i.J ppe1Z.. L/AleL PLM.I
Y8"-: il'd"
ITEM 19/2
,.. ,"f/'.;
e
"""
,-.,
:
...~~~..'
c.~! :
ITEM 19/3