HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.315 Park Ave.A39-96
CAS&~AD SUMMARY SHEET - CITY O~PEN
DATE RECEIVED: 5/24/96
DATE COMPLETE:
PARCELID# 2737-181-58-002
CASE # A39-96
STAFF: Suzanne WoW
PROJECT NAME: Winnerman Stream Margin
Project Address: 315/317 North Park Avenue, Aspen
APPLICANT: Larry Winnerman
Address/Phone: 317 North Park Avenue
REPRESENTATIVE: Jay Hammond, P.E., of Scchmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc.
Address/Phone: PO Box 2155, Aspen 81612 ----- 925-6727
FEES: PLANNING $450 # APPS RECEIVED 12
ENGINEER $0 # PLATS RECEIVED 4
HOUSING $0
ENV HEALTH $0 . TYPE OF APPLICATION:
TOTAL $450 Staff Approval
AMT. RECEIVED $450
P&Z
CC
CC (2nd readin )
REFERRALS:
o City Attorney
".2SI City Engineer
o Zoning
o Housing
o Environmental Health
181 Parks
o Aspen Fire Marshal
o City Water
o City Electric
o Clean Air Board
o Open Space Board
o Other:
,
DATE REFERRED: ~13 L
INITIALS:
APPROVAL:
OrdinanceIReso1ution #
Staff Approval
Plat Recorded:
o CDOT
o ACSD
o Holy Cross Electric
o Rocky Mtn Natural Gas
o Aspen School District
o Other:
DATE DUE: fol13
Date:
Date:
Book
,Page
CLOSED/FILED
ROUTE TO:
DATE:
INITIALS:
.i-\
^
CONTACT SHEET
City of Aspen
Tele.~Location_kQlI'l1ee~_~M1fjg)ate _ OJ !~!9.ZTime _t1:tJR~lI:1_
Subject: M1tK ~E.'SmrH'Tlm_..... __..______... m...__
Contacting Party:
Notes: .s /7e g?.ls.J1JLJ1l:.-.__ _._.
I 1 I f
__...l,-}5/% tJHIf'<AE'Uf L'; I'~. pi 112...- 2 .n- .s~_+_~...__
_.._~ tJF PttPJrPA!IVrs / /J/~__,;:. If/t) A.I.11'itH.rr~~
I
IAJ t;.~/JL+ Cot /l7VR .
Ctu t1d!#-e77LJ1i1.----
AJt; A ~iS , SrtYJL s~~I"IL-c t7.L ;JUsnc J/lN75/-L-
~~~..?)
.~~~~ -~h!ir M31P~~.:
.f /j> tF e?F ~~.LJL~__
$/.QC
1/15/ L.L'-. 4'H S tJ ~_tJE. Hoz../S F, MMt/-jU.,_
7f) R/vc/t. A//~...7{J bE .z2;_?!Zi#(~
Action :. Jtj1at!!.T 7tJ P,:I ~
....._____tqpfIs:.. J3cr;~ t:1{J
J/?7'G 7l#s ~
Ld~IU/~ ~,,(!.IIA??4d...kl~
~L__ZJ!..!!!.'P ~ &_~'.$~
~..' b~ ~;
-~4+H"~ n
~c~
Signed
M124.94
r.
.~
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO
TO
Engineering
Sara Thomas
TO
TO
Parks
Suzanne Wolff
From: Ross Soderstrom
Postmark: Oct 28,96 4:26 PM
Status: previously read
Subject: Winnerman River Bank Restoration
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message:
Larry Winnerman left a message that the river bank restoration work
will begin in the next few days and we may stop by whenever to review
the work. Larry Winnerman @ 920-1851, His contractor is Gary
Carmichael @ 963-1436. .The message was left this afternoon at
approx. 3:50p.m. 10/28/96.
-------========x========-------
~.
.-,
September 30, 1996
II
ASPEN . PITKIN
Larry Winnerman
317N. Park Ave.
Aspen, CO 81611
COMMU:-lm' DEvELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Dear Larry:
With regard to the monitoring of the project required by the Planning Commission's approval of
the Stream Margin Review, Conununity Development, Parks and Engineering staff request the
following:
I. Provide a written construction schedule to Ross Soderstrom with the City Engineering
Department prior to conunencement of any work.
2. Notify George Robinson at 920-5120 at least 24 hours before pouring any concrete. George
will notify the Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of Wildlife.
3. Complete all work prior to May 30,1997.
.
Please contact Ross Soderstrom at 920-5087 if you have any questions. Ross and George will
monitor the project as requested, since I will be out of town.
Sincerely,
,.--.
YU...'*-I--"--
t/- '1'
Suzkne Wolff
Planner
cc: Jay Hammond
Ross Soderstrom
George Robinson
130 SoUTH G,\LEN'A STREET' ASPEN, COLORADO S1611-1975 . PHONE 970.920.5090 . FAX 970.920.5439
['rmlOO "n Recvd..-d Paper
~
~
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO
TO
Suzanne Wolff
carcs
TO
CC
George Robinson
Dave Michaelson
From: Ross Soderstrom
Postmark: Sep 26,96 8:54 PM
Status: Previously read
subject: Winnerman Restoration Work
Message:
In thinking about the monitoring of the winnerman river bank
restoration work after our meeting, I came up with a couple specific
conditions: 1) That Winnerman provide us with a written schedule of
the work before beginning; 2) all the work must be done before high
water of spring 1997, that is, by Friday, May 30, 1997; 3) that he
must give George Robinson at least 24 Hr notice before using any
concrete so George may contact the Army Corp & DOW since each has
regulatory interest in that portion of the work, ie. concrete in the
water course. S.W., can you relay this to Winnerman before leaving?
-------========x========-------
1"'"\
~.
btc1VJ!~L..-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning and Zoning Commission
TIlRU:
Dave Michaelson, Deputy Director }:/, Jv\
Suzanne Wolff, Planner
FROM:
RE:
Witmennan Stream Margin Review
DATE:
September 17, 1996
SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting stream margin review approval to repair and stabilize the river
bank which was damaged by the flooding of the Roaring Fork River in 1995. No work is proposed below
the nonnal high water line. The application packet is attached as Exhibit A. Staff recommends approval of
the stream margin review with conditions.
APPLICANT: Larry Witmennan,represented by Jay Hammond
LOCATION: 315-317ParkAve.
ZONING: R-6 PUD
BACKGROUND: Stream Margin Review approval for the Whitcomb duplex was granted by the Planning
Commission in August of 1990. City Council also granted Final PUD Development Plan approval by
Ordinance No. 64, Series of 1990. These approvals allowed relocation of the irrigation culvert and
revegetation to stabilize the bank. A stop work order was issued in June of 1993 for work which was not
consistent with the approvals: the location of the culvert did not correspond with the approved location and
boulders were placed on the stream bank. A stream margin amendment was subsequently approved by the
Planning Commission by Resolution No. 93-20. It was detennined that removal of the boulders would
cause additional damage to the river bank, therefore, the boulders and the culvert remained in place subject
to specific revegetation requirements.
REQUEST: The proposed repair work includes stabilizing the existing large boulders and keying in
gabion baskets in the deeply eroded areas which will then be covered with soil, stabilized with a temporary
erosion blanket, and revegetated. Concrete will be used to fill the voids behind the boulders to increase their
stability. No work is proposed within the channel of the Roaring Fork River. All of the work is proposed to
be done by hand or by using light equipment from the top of the bank, rather than accessing the bank with
heavy equipment from the river.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: Comments are attached as Exhibit B.
Engineering Department: Since this application was first submitted in June, Engineering has spent a
considerable amount of time reviewing the restoration plan and the damage to the bank in an effort to
detennine whether the proposed repairs will adequately stabilize the bank and to ensure that the flood
carrying capacity of the river channel is not impacted. Engineering has requested a restoration plan signed
and stamped by a current Colorado registered professional engineer. - f.. 4 ~ ~ d..L d
Parks Department: John Krueger, in his comments dated June II, notes that the proposed scope of work
does not seem sufficient to adequately stabilize the bank and prevent future damage, and suggests that
working from the river may be necessary to repair the damage. George Robinson, in a meeting with the
applicant and Planning staff on September 3, noted his concern with the use of gabion baskets filled by
hand. He noted that gabions have failed and that the smaller material necessitated by handwork to fill the
gabions would be less stable than larger boulders that could be keyed in to the bank, ifheavy equipment
was used in the river. Robinson also spoke with Mike Claffey of the Army Corps of Engineers, who noted
that he prohibited work below the nonna! high water line but that he did not and could not comment on
whether or not the applicant should access the bank from the river. The applicant would be required to get
pennission from the City to enter the river above the Neale St. bridge.
Robinson recommended willows as the best protection against erosion, and suggested that at least two
-levels of willows be planted and that the willows be at least 5 gallon size. The applicant shall submit a
landscape plan to the Parks Department prior to issuance of a building permit for the bank restoration.
STAFF COMMENTS: Pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B), "No development shall be permitted within 100
feet, measured horizontally, from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or
within the Special Flood Hazard Area where it extends beyond 100 feet from the high water line of the
Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, unless the Commission makes a determination that the
proposed development complies with all the standards set forth below:"
1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed development which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area
will not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for development.
RESPONSE: The applicant has represented that no work will be done below the normal high water line,
therefore, no increase in the base flood elevation should occur as a result of this work.
-
2. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area Community Plan. Parks/Recreation! Open
Space/Trails Plan map, or areas of historic public use or access are dedicated via a recorded easement for
public use;
RESPONSE: A 5 foot fishing easement was required by the original PUD approval.
3. The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan are implemented in the proposed plan
for development, to the greatest extent practicable;
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
4. There is nO vegetation removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut or fill) made outside of a
specifically defined building envelope. A building envelope shall be designated by this review and said
envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuonce of any demolition. excavation or building permits. The
barricades shall remain in place until the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
RESPONSE: Engineering requires fencing to delineate the boundaries of the work area.
2
r-,.
,-"
5. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the river,
stream or other tributary, including erosion and/or 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 carmot be drained outside of the designated building envelope;
'.
RESPONSE: Silt fencing shall be used to prevent any erosion or sedimentation from entering the river. A
temporary erosion blanket will be placed over the revegetated areas. The applicant proposes to complete
the work by hand and using light equipment, and does not propose to utilize heavy equipment in the river in
order to avoid any disruption to the river channel. George Robinson has suggested that the applicant
consider accessing the bank from the river since disruption would be minimal if the work was done this fall
during low water, but did not require access from the river as a condition of approval.
6. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration or
relocation of a water course, and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency;
RESPONSE: No alteration or relocation is proposed.
7. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated. thot applies to the
developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel
is not diminished;
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
8. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work within the 100 year
floodplain;
RESPONSE.: A letter from Grady McNure of the U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers is included with the
application. The Winnerman's bank stabilization project is authorized under Regional General Permit No.
GP37. Alan Czenkusch of the Division of Wildlife will review and approve the riparian vegetation that is
reintroduced. .
9. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting taking place below the top
of slope or within 15 feet of the top of slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive.
RESPONSE: The existing duplex was constructed prior to adoption of this standard. The proposed repair
work will occur below and up to the top of slope.
10. All development outside the 15 foot setbackfrom the top of slope does not exceed a height
delineated by a line drawn at a 45 degree angle from ground level at the top of slope.
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
11. A landscape plan is submitted with all development applications. Such plan sholl limit new
plantings outside of the designated building envelope on the river side to native riparian vegetation;
3
t"""\
-,
RESPONSE: A landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks Department prior to building
pennit approval. George Robinson recommends providing at least two levels of native willows (at least 5
gallon size) on the lowest portion of the slope adjacent to the river. Additional native riparian vegetation
shall be used to revegetate the rest of the bank.
12. All exterior lighting is law and downcast with no light(s) directed taward the river or located down
the slope;
RESPONSE: Ordinance No 64, Series of 1990, requires that "Any outdoor lighting on the rear half of the
lot be downcast, low wattage fixtures. If detached from the structure, light fixtures shall not exceed four
feet in height."
13. Site sections drawn by a registered architect, landscape architect, or engineer are submitted
showing all existing and proposed site elements, the top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea level;
RESPONSE: A site plan and site section are provided with the application.
14. There has been accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones.
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
The applicant has requested to be allowed to perfonn minor repairs to the river bank without further stream
margin review by the Commission or the Community Development Department. Staff is currently
processing a code amendment to reinstate the stream margin review exemption, which would allow the
Community Development Director to review and apprQve such repair work, therefore, staff does not support
this request. *" ho 4J.. C<- ""' ~ f-o r "-,,.L-
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Winnennan stream margin review
with the following conditions:
I. Prior to issuance of a building pennit, the applicant shall provide to the City Engineer three wet ink
original blueline prints of the restoration design signed and stamped by a current Colorado
registered professional engineer.
2. Prior to the commencement of work, fencing delineating the boundaries of the work area shall be
installed. Fencing shall be maintained until completion of the project
3. A landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks Department prior to building pennit
approval. Only native riparian vegetation is allowed.
4. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings
with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of
approval, unless amended by other conditions.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the stream margin review at 315-317 Park Ave. with
the conditions as outlined in the Community Development Department Memo dated September 17, 1996".
_ &w-. ().vV; .
~ . kp--pM-c. 7~ ~MC~ . W:; ~} h e(o-k fA/&o1.~ <AA--t/~u..
4s~:~ '~Js~"1~
/-'
Exhibits:
"A" - Application Packet
"B" Ref,
- erraI Comments
N~Vv\JI-. D~ ~ ~~W
~ CkQ~~~L
5
,.-..,
"') 'T"1i'"'- IN'-~
1""\. ~ IE C IE ~ V 1E \OJ
5EP 0 9 '996
Lorrie and Larry Wi loerman-------
1""\
317 Park Avenue
Aspen, CO 81611
Date: September 6, 1996.
To: Suzanne Wolff - Planner
From: Lawrence J. Winnennan
Re: Winnerman Stream MarginReview
Dear Suzanne,
Telephone (fJ7rJ) 920-1851
Fax (970) 920-1853
After our recent meeting, I am notifying you that we are reinstating our stream
margin review application for the repair of the riverbank at 315-317 Park Avenue in
Aspen.
Thank you for your attention in this matter.
LJW/jk
Sincerely yours,
Lawrence J. Wmnennan
---
,
,--
--
MEMORANDUM
To:
Suzanne Wolff, Planner
Thru:
Nick Adeh, City Engine~~
Ross C. Soderstrom, Project Engineer 1.6..
August 21, 1996
From:
Date:
Re:
Winnerman Stream Margin Review
(315/317 North Park Avenue, Riverside Subdivision, City of Aspen, CO)
After reviewing the above referenced application and making a site visit with other City staff
members, I am reporting the combined comments made by the members of the DRC:
Recommendation:
1. Signed Plans: In light of the history of this property and the recent request to repair the
river bank erosion, we will accept a restoration design signed and stamped by the applicant's
engineer who is a current Colorado registered professional engineer. We request three (3) wet ink
original blue-line prints; the plans do not need to be drawn on mylar. The performance of the
designed improvements and the bank stability will rest with the applicant's engineering consultant.
2. Erosion and Sediment Control: Prior to the beginning of work, a non-disturbance line
needs to be erected with fencing to delineate the work area boundaries as shown on the construction
plans submitted with this application. The non-disturbance line must be securely maintained lU1til
completion of the project.
3. Regulatory Licenses and Permits: Prior to beginning work, the applicant must obtain
the required licenses and permits from the Army Corps of Engineers and any other permits required
to perform the work on the river bank.
4. Public Safety: Access to the work area needs to be delineated and controlled to
prevent the un-authorized entry of pedestrians, fishermen, and other people in the river bed or on
1 OF 2
DRC13a96.DOC
...
Memo ~ Winnerman Stream Margin P~'''''''v
'-.
the river banks in or near the work areas from the beginning to the end of construction. The area
shall be clearly posted with signs prohibiting entry of un-authorized people.
Discussion:
An original stream margin application would typically contain more infOlmation however due to
the limited intent of this project, plans signed by the design firm's licensed professional engineer
will suffice.
1. Topographic Improvement Plat Survey & Flood Elevations: Typically we would
ask for cross-sections of the water surface elevations prior to and following proposed water channel
work to confirm the flood carrying capacity of the channel and to comply with FEMA regulations
however this application is for repair work that is to occur above the indicated 100 yr. flood plain.
2, Site Drainage: The restoration work can not release more than historic storm run-off
(pre-development) flows from the site. A drainage plan prepared and certified by a Colorado Civil
Professional Engineer for the lot would be included as part of the application package.
3. Construction Plan: A construction plan depicting the sequencing of the construction,
time duration, special procedures, and compliance with all conditions of the stream margin permit
would be submitted to the Community Development Office. Any new utilities or utilities disturbed
by the work which lie in the flood plane should be constructed or repaired with materials and utility
equipment resistant to flood damage using methods and practices that minimize flood damage.
2 OF 2
DRC13a96.DOC
/,,"''',
ENGINEERS
SURVEYORS
.,-,
(970) 925-6727
FAX (970) 925-4157
SG
M
SCHMUESER
GORDON MEYER
P.O. Box 2155
Aspen, CO 81612
August 20, 1996
IRllE C IE ~Vl rE iDJ
AUG 2 3 1996
Ms. Suzanne Wolff
Aspen/Pitkin County
Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO. 81611
---------------
RE: Winnerman Prooertv, Roarina Fork River Bank Reoair and Stabilization Proiect,
Withdrawal of Stream Marcin Aoolication
Dear Suzanne:
This letter is being presented to withdraw the Stream Margin Review Application for a plan
to repair the embankment adjacent to the Roaring Fork River at the Larry Winnerman property
at 315/317 North Park Avenue in Aspen. Colorado. As you know, we had submitted a
Stream Margin Review application back in May to undertake the repair of the river bank along
the Roaring Fork River adjacent to Larry Winnerman's home which was damaged by the high
runoff in the Spring and early Summer of 1995.
As I have noted in our various conversations and as reflected in the application letter dated
May 21. 1996, I had been of the understanding, pursuant to a conversation with Chuck Roth
of the City Engineering Department in the Fall of 1995, that this project to repair damage to
the river embankment resulting from the high runoff would be eligible for a staff-level
administrative sign-off for Stream Margin Review purposes. We learned prior to submitting
the actual paperwork that the administrative level sign-off of minor Stream Margin projects
was inadvertently left out of the current regulations and would require an approval by the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
While it remains Mr. Winnerman's desire to repair the damage to the embankment and restore
the vegetation along the river corridor, and while approval of the project by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers was promptly obtained in early May, recent conditions required by the City
Engineering Department are unacceptable to our client. The City Engineer's office has
indicated that a registered professional engineer must provide certification of the resulting
structural integrity and stability of the embankment below the Winnerman home for any flow
condition in the river channel. Our analysis of this requirement is that the existing dry-stack
boulder wall cannot be certified and that a new structural wall would have to be constructed
to below the scour depth of the Roaring Fork for the entire length of the Winnerman property
along the river. Such construction and the resulting need to access the river channel with
heavy equipment is directly contradictory to the concerns and requirements of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and Colorado Division of Wildlife with respect to the proposed bank repair
(that work not occur below the water line of the river) and represents far more expense and
impact than our client is willing to bear. We also question whether construction of a
118 West 6th, SUite 200 . Glenwood Sprrngs, Colorado' (970) 945-1004
August 20. 1996
Ms. Suzanne Wolff
Page 2
structural wall along the river is in fact what the Planning and Zoning Commission or citizens
of Aspen would want to see at this location.
At this point in time, concerned that we may already have lost the Fall construction season
after nearly three months of review by the City, we are simply withdrawing our request for
Stream Margin approval.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter, please feel free to contact me if I may provide
additional information or comment.
Very Truly Yours.
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
1U'(]Vr
----- ----.,
~
Jay . Hammond, P.E.
Principal, Aspen Office
JH/jh 96049SW2
cc: Gary Carmichael
Larry Winnerman
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
~ /JulJ-u4 - b
o J9'1C-
~~
Aii_ ./V 0\,
1tJ; /_~ UJaL5. t: "' \
. AI. A /Jhl ~ J -'~.' 4A~~./ I' f0".;'cX'. f
~,r~ d- 1"? . V I...)~ \ ,..' .'
'/em<: ;lJoam" '" t ~ \:..~~~i
. ~~ a~ro;; ~ ~ to fia-
(?&n~ ~ 7 - ~ w/'" ~ f'<;
~ F "j)~ th ~ ~/f~
~r ;dd.~ ~~A$~ ~YIk
MA.?; ~. ~ f) ~ ~ ~ OWN<E~
1L- ~' ;X;:::~ :;;;:::
iuo-Ef ~M ""'- ~ . . w4.
~ >,2~.h a~~(-d.d;}
~~~~ 7Y2aA~~)~'
rr!J:~ cJ~~- c:2~
~ 1-e ~ ;to ~ ft QJ42L /'1V1 ~ ~
~. ~ .fhA.~ ~ tJw~> ~ vu-k~,.2r
~ Yo ~:dw..u~~ ~. we <'v<-
a~ ;tk ~a./.- $tYe,e.v/e.ur ~.5:. ~..;.t-
~.-i4 A:<-~ 'I/z7 /..be; (<:::' ~ ~ ~t:. $ J) C/J_
ocr ,AJ~y:~~
1"""\
--
--
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO
CC
Suzanne Wolff
carcs
cc
Nick Adeh
From: Ross Soderstrom
Postmark: Aug 01,96 8:29 AM
Status: Previously read
subject: Reply to: Winnerman
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply text:
From Ross Soderstrom:
Yes, Jay & I spoke for about 15 min. yesterday about my concerns for
the river bank repair work, the house and river. I explained that the
presence of the house makes the river bank a structural building pad
for the house - to date not enough info about stability. Also
drainage & irrigation, both now in bank & maybe contribute to
instability.Anchorment of culvert & gabbian baskets into bank so as
not to pull free. Top soil is aesthetic dressing. Jay understood my
pt & is doing more research on structural aspect. No mtg time set yet.
Preceding message:
From Suzanne Wolff:
Has Jay Hammond been in touch with you?
-------========x========-------
r-,
~
XlI. 6,
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning and Zoning Commission
THRU:
Dave Michaelson, Deputy Director
FROM:
Suzanne Wolff, Planner
RE:
Winnerman Stream Margin Review
DATE:
June 18, 1996
SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting stream margin review approval to repair and stabilize the river
bank which was damaged by the flooding of the Roaring Fork River in 1995. No work is proposed below
the normal high water line.The application packet is attached as Exhibit A. Staff recommends approval of
the stream margin review with conditions.
APPLICANT: Larry Winnerman, represented by Jay Hammond
LOCATION: 315-317 Park Ave.
ZONING: R-6 PUD
.
BACKGROUNJ): Stream Margin Review approval for the Whitcomb duplex was granted by the Planning
Commission in August of 1990. City Council also granted Final PUD Development Plan approval by
Ordinance 64, Series of 1990. These approvals allowed relocation of the irrigation culvert and revegetation
to stabilize the bank. A stop work order was issued in June of 1993: the location of the culvert did not
correspond with the approved location and boulders were placed. A stream margin amendment was
subsequently approved by the Planning Commission by Resolution No. 93-20. It was determined that
removal of the boulders would cause additional damage to the river bank, therefore, the boulders and the
culvert remained in place subject to specific revegetation requirements.
REQUEST: The proposed repair work includes stabilizing the existing large boulders and keying in
gabion baskets in the deeply eroded areas which will then be covered with soil, stabilized with a temporary
erosion blanket, and revegetated with native willows and Red Osier Dogwood. Additional native riparian
plants will be used to revegetate the river bank. No work is proposed within the channel of the Roaring
Fork River, and all of the work will be done by hand or by using light equipment.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: Comments from the Engineering Department are attached as Exhibit B.
Engineering Department: Engineering is concerned that the erosion of the bank is a result of the previous
"improperly designed and completed work". Specifically, the culvert was completely undermined and is
not structurally restrained, and it appears that several of the boulders in the river bed have settled there as a
result of the bank erosion and may be disrupting the historic river flow patterns. Concrete shall not be used
to stabilize the boulders on the bank, and the rebuilt embankment shal\-not exceed a slope of I: I.
Engineering will require more specific information from the applica~prior to issuance of a building
permit, including a detailed construction plan, three cross-sections of the river: one at the approximate
~.
~
centerline of the work, and the other two 100 yards upstream and downstream of the centerline, photos of
the river channel prior to construction, aD. embankment stabilization plan, and a drainage plan. Cross-
sections and photos will also be required after completion.of the work. (Draft comments are attached to this
memo; final comments will be available at the meeting.)
STAFF COMMENTS: Pursuant to Section 26.68.040(B), "No development shall be permitted within 100
feet, measured horizontally, from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or
within the Special Flood Hazard Area where it extends beyond 100 feet from the high water line of the
Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, unless the Commission makes a determination that the
proposed development complies with all the standards set forth below:"
1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed development which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area
will not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for development.
RESPONSE: Cross-sections of the river channel shall be provided before and after construction to
verify that the base flood elevation is not increased by the repairs.
2. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area Community Plan, Parks/Recreation! Open
Space/Trails Plan map, or areas of historic public use or access are dedicated via a recorded easement for
public use.
RESPONSE: A 5 foot fishing easement was required by the original PUD approval.
3. The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan are implemented in the proposed plan
for development, to the greatest extent practicable;
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
4. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut or flll) made outside of a
specifically defined building envelope. A building envelope shall be designated by this review and said
envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuance of any demolition, excavation or .building permits. The.
barricades shall remain in place until the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
5. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the river,
stream or other tributary, including erosion and/or sedimentation during construction. Increased on-site
drainage shall be accommodated within the parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its banks. Pools
or hot tubs cannot be drained outside of the designated building envelope;
RESPONSE: Silt fencing shall be used to prevent any erosion or sedimentation from entering the river.
The construction plan shall explain the means and materials to be used to minimize sloughing of the bank.
The applicant proposes to complete the work by hand and using light equipment, and does not propose to
utilize heavy equipment in the river.
2
r-.
.~.
6. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration or
relocation of a water course, and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency;
RESPONSE: No alteration or relocation is proposed.
7. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated, that applies to the
developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that enswes that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel
is not diminished;
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
8. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work within the 100 year
floodplain;
RESPONSE: A letter from Grady McNure of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is included with the
application. The Winnerman's bank stabilization project is authorized under Regional General Permit No.
GP37. Alan Czenkusch of the Division of Wildlife will review and approve the riparian vegetation that is
reintroduced.
9. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting taking place below the top
of slope or within 15 feet of the top of slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive.
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
10. All development outside the 15 foot setbackfrom the top of slope does not exceed a height
delineated by a line drawn at a 45 degree angle from ground level at the top of slope.
RESPONSE: Not applicable.
11. A landscape plan is. submitted with all development applications. Such plan shall limit new
plantings outside of the designated building envelope on the river side to native riparian vegetation;
RESPONSE: A landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks Department prior to building
permit approval. Only native riparian vegetation is allowed.
12. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or located down
the slope;
RESPONSE: Ordinance No 64, Series of 1990, requires thai "Any outdoor lighting on the rear half of the
lot be downcast, low wattage fixtures. If detached from the structure, light fixtures shall not exceed four
feet in height."
13. Site sections drawn by a registered architect,landscape architect, or engineer are submitted
showing all existing and proposed site elements, the top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea level;
3
\
\
\
\
r-.
,-
RESPONSE: Cross sections of the work area prior to and at completion of the work shall be
provided to Engineering.
14. There has been accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones.
RESPONSE: Once completed, the work will improve the riparian area through and restoration of
native vegetation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the stream margin review with the
following conditions:
I. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide the following information for
approval by the City Engineer:
. Detailed construction plan;
. Three cross-sections of the river: one at the approximate centerline of the work, and the
other two 100 yards upstream and downstream of the centerline, including the mean edge
of water, mean edge of high water and flood elevations;
. Photos of the river channel prior to construction,;
. An embankment stabilization plan stamped and signed by a Colorado licensed geotechnical
engineer;
. Drainage plan.
2. Cross-sections and photos shall also be provided to the City Engineer after completion of the work.
3. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall comply with all requirements
provided in the fmal referral comments of the City Engineering Department.
4. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings
with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of
approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the stream margin review at 3'15-317 Park Ave. with
the conditions as outlined in the Community Development Department Memo dated June 18, 1996".
Exhibits:
"A" - Application Packet
"B" - Referral Comments
4
~
-
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO
CC
cc
Suzanne Wolff
Nick Adeh
John Krueger
TO
CC
Rebecca Schickling
ross soderstrom
From: Ross Soderstrom
Postmark: Jun 14,96 4:41 PM
Subject: Boulder Removal
Message:
In thinking about how to remove the boulders from the river below the
Winnerman property which may not be accessible thru the river, a
contractor may use a pneumatic hammer powered by an air compressor on
the river bank to bore holes in the boulders. An expansive plastic
resin like Bristar may be injected into the holes to crack the
boulders into smaller chunks that can be removed or moved about in
the river or on the bank. I think the cost is competitive w/ blasting
but w/o the explosion and flying debris hazard. The broken boulder
chunks could then be used for a rip-rap foundation at foot of bank.
-------========x========-------
."'"
.-.
Exhibit B
DRAFT
MEMORANDUM
To: r/Suzanne Wolff, Planner
Thru: Nick Adeh, City Engineer
From: Ross C. Soderstrom, Project Engineer
Date: June 12, 1996
Re: Winnerman Stream Margin Application for Bank Stabilization and Repair
(315/317 North Park Avenue, --- Subdivision, City of Aspen, CO)
After reviewing the above referenced application and making a site visit I have the following comments:
Discussion:
In reviewing the site and previous files regarding this property, it is apparent that the present damage is a
result of the previous improperly designed and completed work. I believe the work involved to properly
stabilize and restore the river bank profile and vegetation will be more extensive than depicted by the
material submitted in support of the application.
We observed:
A. The 18 inch CMP was completely undermined at the southern angle point nearest the river;
the culvert had been previously bedded in native soil with only four (4) inches of cover rather than bedded
in a select bedding material with known structural properties; there is no visible evidence that the culvert
is structurally restrained with thrust blocks or tie backs at the angle points which were placed in the
irrigation line during its previous unauthorized relocation. The culvert lies within five (5) ft of the
foundation ofthe house patio.
B. There are several large boulders on the remains of the eroded bank and in the river at the base
of the bank. By their placement and size its apparent that these were moved to the river bank and either
placed in the river or have settled there as a result of the bank erosion. The boulders in the river bed are
disrupting the historic river flow patterns.
1. Topographic Improvement Plat Survey & Flood Elevations: Prior to issuance of the
construction permit, the owner of this property shall show mean edge of water, mean edge of high water
and flood elevations at three (3) cross-sections, with equal scales for the horizontal and vertical axis,
DRAFT
I OF 4
DRCMI396.DOC
~
.-,
Memo * R;u ch....d.. Poul.. Stream Margin Review EJH::......l:....11"
(mean sea level; provide the name of the datum used) of the river cross sections where the work is
proposed. The surveying will be performed by a land surveyor currently lIcensed in Colorado.
Three (3) cross-sections of the river channel must be prepared prior to and after completing the work.
One (1) cross-section shall be made at the approximate centerline of the work and the other two (2) cross-
sections shall be made 100 yards upstream and 100 yards downstream of the approximate centerline of
the work. The applicant shall provide color photographs of the river channel prior to. and upon
completing the work.
In the event that the finished work varies substantially from the proposed cross-sections, length, width or
depth of the work area, the applicant shall provide additional topographic information and HEC II
. analyses to accurately depict the actual water profiles downstream, at, and upstream of the work area. If
the finished work adversely affeqts the water profiles in a manner that would cause flooding of previously
un-impacted areas, the applicant shall remedy the conditions at his own expense.
2. Utilities: The submitted site plan does not indicate locations for these facilities however the
applicant shall contact each utility prior to commencing work to verify utility locations and field locate
those which are within the proposed work area.
Any new utilities or utilities disturbed by the work shall be constructed or repaired with materials and
utility equipment resistant to flood damage using methods and practices that minimize flood damage.
3. Site Drainage: The restoration work shall not release more than historic storm run-off
flows from the site. A drainage plan for the entire lot shall be prepared as part of the application package.
During the field visit I observed that an irrigation system had been installed in the embankment above the
river. While this probably not the primary caUse of the bank failure which is now to be repaired, the
introduction and channeling of water on and over this steep embankment is a critical consideration in
. stabilizing the embankment and preventing future erosion and collapse of the embankment.
Noting that the cross-section provided with the application is not drawn to scale, it does not accurately
depict the actual field conditions. The embankment is approximately 2V:IH which exceeds the
commonly accepted maximum stabile slope of IV:IH. The proposed embankment stabilization plan
must be stamped and signed by a Colorado licensed geotechnical engineer, submitted to and approved by
the City Engineering Dept. prior to issuance of the construction permit.
4. Construction Plan: A detailed construction plan depicting the sequencing of the construction,
time duration, special procedures, periodic review by City representatives, and compliance with all
conditions of the stream margin permit will be submitted to the City Engineering Dept. for approval prior
to issuance of the construction permit. .
DRAFT
2 OF 4
DRCMI 396.DOC
r-..
..-,
Memo Rin ~J atl~~ P .kIkSloI eam Margin Review E.......,UIH;VIl
The submitted proposal appears to call for concrete cementing of the pockets around the boulders to
stabilize them. The boulders which were placed or have settled below the 100 Yr. flood elevation shall be
removed from the water course if they interfere with the flow capacities of the river and cannot be
stabilized in the river bed or embankment. Concrete cement will not be used for stabilizing the boulders.
At the time of the field visit the boulders requiring stabilization were at the water line where a coffer dam
would be needed to prevent concrete cement from entering the river. (In turn, a coffer dam would require
working in the river bed itself and would be difficult to erect without large mechanical equipment.)
To the extent feasible, the re-built embankment shall be constructed with a slope not exceeding I V : I H
and preferably a slope of I V : 2H or flatter, or in a terraced configuration, and/or with vegetation pockets
for riparian landscaping. Rip-rapping materials shall be angular, not spherical with not less than two (2)
fractured faces, to provide interlocking and greater friction surface areas, and of sufficient mass to remain
in their placed positions.
5. Erosion and Sediment Control: The construction plan shall explain the means and materials
to be used to minimize sloughing of the bank, (both new and existing soils and rip-rapping materials),
during and following construction. SilK"l: tllll e8H3ffiletiall is iRt1!R8@8 ta ge ll11asl!a, ?\itll the first Fll~op to
Of'('11r iR~4ay, 1999, flrierte the anntldl snowm.dt ana higk '<Nat@f, fre\qg;iQR ghaIl b€ maQ~ 19 ep~l1rp tb.?t
till! WG!k areas ana aajllecul "''''''' are fully stablhzea ana protecteCl agamst normal high waler I"vdg
:which m~y O{'('l1T tinTing thp 'i'}n=iBg nm effta mh~1~1~L,", fwthca 1;;1v::>iullCllld daJ.UClO\'- to the .,verk iIi
pregreos.
Prior to the beginning of work, a non-disturbance line shall be erected with fencing to delineate the work
area boundaries as shown on the construction plans submitted with this application. The non-disturbance
line shall be securely maintained until written sign-off of completion for the project.
Completion of the project shall include that work areas and all areas disturbed by the work, shall be
compacted, stabilized with previously approved rip-rapping materials and re-vegetated with plant species
previously approved by the Parks Dept.
6. River Bed Access: The access route(s) to and from the river bed shall be approved in writing
by the Engineering Dept. prior to issuance of the construction permit. The applicant shall obtain prior
written authorization from the property owner(s) who's property provides access to the river bed for
personnel, materials and machinery, and loading and dumping operations.
7. Public Safety: Access to the work area shall be delineated and controlled to prevent the
un-authorized entry of pedestrians, fishermen, and other people in the river bed or on the river banks in or
near the work areas from the beginning to the end of construction. The area shall be clearly posted with
signs prohibiting entry of un-authorized people.
DRAFT
3 OF 4
DRCM I 396.DOC
.
~
Memo -~ uf<tJlOe rarK Stream Margin Revjew~XempuulI -
~
8. Regulatory Licenses and Permits: Prior to beginning work, the applicant shall obtain the
required licenses and permits from the Army Corps of Engineers, the Colorado Water Conservation
Board (CWCB), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Colorado Division of
Wildlife (CDOW), and any other permits required to work in the water course. The applicant shall
provide a copy of each license or permit to the City Engineering Dept. and fully comply with all
requirements of each license and permit in addition to those requirements of the City. In the event of
conflicting requirements, the more stringent requirement or standard shall control.
The applicant will provide the required mapping and construction plans to each of the above agencies for
approval after preliminary review and approval of the City Engineering Dept. Plans submitted to these
agencies without prior City Engineering review will not be accepted.
DRAFT
4 OF 4
DRCM1 396.DOC
,-,
.~
IR/ECIEOVIEID
.;1)/11 18 1996
MEMORANDUN
TO:
Suzanne Wolf-Community Development
----------
-----
FR:
John D. Krueger-Parks Department Trails Supervisor
DATE:
June 11, 1996
RE:
Winnerman Property Stream Margin Application, Roaring Fork River
Bank Repair and Stabilization Project
After reviewing the Winnennan application and a site visit to inspect the bank area we
offer the following comments:
We think the damage to the river bank is underestimated by the applicant in size and
scope. The eroded area is larger and more severe than represented in the application and
a proper repair will take more material than in the application. Small equipment and
handwork will not be able to repair the damage. A track hoe with a skilled operator
working in the river channel will probably be needed to repair the damage. The operator
will probably need to access the river downstream to get to the bank damage and perfonn
the work. A foundation oflarge boulders need to be placed in the river and then worked
back up to the house.
It would appear that the original design and bank work was insufficient The steepness of
the bank, location of the house and IS" culvert required a more substantial boulder wall
to retain the bank. The boulders al!d rocks useg. were round and not sharp and angular so
that they would interlock properly. As a result, several of the large boulders and many
smaller rocks that were used in the bank have fallen into the river and are diverting some
of the river flow creating a potential future problem. If the original retainage to the river
bank had been properly designed the high water would not have had an effect. The
properties on both sides of the applicant have not sustained any damage from last years
high water event.
1"""'...
ASPENIPITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 920-5090 FAX# (970) 920-5439
~
June3,1996
Jay Hammond, P.E.
Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc.
P.O. Box 2155
Aspen, CO 81612
Re: Winnerman Stream Margin Review
Case A39-96
Dear Jay,
The Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have
determined that this application is complete. I have enclosed an' Agreement to Pay form, please
complete and return it as soon as possible.
We have scheduled this application for review by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on
Tuesday, June 18, 1996 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. Should this date be inconvenient for you
please contact me within 3 working days of the date of this letter. After that the agenda date will be
considered fInal and changes to the schedule or tabling of the application willlnlY be allowed for
unavoidable technical problems. The Friday before the meeting date, we will all_to inform you
that a copy of the memo pertaining to the application is available at the Planni g Office.
If you have any questions, please call the planner assigned to your case, Suzanne W olfl', at 920-
5093.
Sincerely, .
;(A~
Rhonda Harris
Administrative Assistant
1""',
'NGINEERS
SURVEYORS
^
(970) 925.6727
FAX (970) 925-4157
SG
M
SCHIIIJS8l
GORDONMeYER
. .. u..' .
P.O. Box 2155
Aspen, CO 81612
May 21,1996
Ms. Suzanne Wolff
Aspen/Pitkin County
Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO. 81611
RE: Winnerman Prooertv Stream Marain Aoolication. Roarina Fork River Bank Reoair and
Stabilization Proiect
Dear Suzanne:
Attached for your review and approval are twelve copies of a Stream Margin Review Application
for a plan to repair the embankment adjacent to the Roaring Fork River at the Larry Winnerman
property at 315/317 North Park Avenue in Aspen, Colorado. I direct this to you simply because
we've had a couple of brief discussions regarding this project recently.
As I have noted in our conversations, I had been of the understanding, pursuant to a
conversation with Chuck Roth of the City Engineering Department in the Fall of 1995, that this
project to repair damage to the river embankment resulting from the high runoff in the Spring and
early Summer of 1995. would be eligible for a staff-level administrative sign-off for Stream Margin
Review purposes. From our more recent conversation, it is my understanding that the
administrative level sign-off of minor Stream Margin projects was left out of the current regulations
and will require a, hopefully expedited, approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
As I indicated in our phone conversation of this morning, I am submitting the most complete
Stream Margin Review package that I am currently able to provide for the Winnerman bank
stabilization and repair project. As I noted this morning, Mr, Winnerman is currently out of the
country and unavailable to us for a few weeks yet in providing items such as written authorization
to apply for this review. Mr Winnerman did authorize our design work and submission of the
permit request to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. I am currently assisting his Contractor, Mr.
Gary Carmichael, in pursuing approval for the construction of the stabilization and repair project.
In furtherance of our application and in response to the various requirements of the Stream
Margin Development Application Package Contents document, I offer the following additional
information;
1. Land Use Aoolication Form: Enclosed as Attachment 1.
2, Minimum Submission Contents
Owner:
Mr. Larry Winnerman
317 North Park Avenue
Aspen, CO. 81611
(970) 920-1851
118 West 6th. Suite 200' Glenwood Springs, Colorado' (970) 945-1004
-
r ,
May 21,1996
Ms. Suzanne Wolff
Page 2
As noted above, I do not have a written authorization to submit this application on behalf
of Mr. Winnerman at this time. Larry has certainly authorized our design work and efforts
to date in acquiring the permit from the Army Corps.
Proiect Site: 315/317 North Park Avenue in Aspen, Colorado. The property is located
in Section 18 of Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th P.M. in
Pitkin County and is a condominiumized duplex under the name of
315/317 Park Avenue Condominium as recorded at Book 33, Page 50 of
the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
-
Given the minor nature of this approval request to repair river bank damage covered
under a General Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, I have not requested a
full ownership disclosure statement from a Title Insurance Company at this time. Should
you determine that such documentation is required, please let me know.
VicinitY Mao: Attached
Written Descriotion of the Proiect: I have attached a copy of the cover letter dated April
24, 1996 that accompanied our application to Mike Claffey of the U.S, Army Corps of
Engineers, This letter, along with the attached plan and section drawing, serve to
describe the project. I should note that my initial application was under General Permit
# 96-07, the Corps' approval, however, as the attached approval letter dated May 6, 1996
from Grady McNure indicates, was issued under General Permit # GP37 (since GP 96-07
has not yet been finally issued). City Engineering should have a copy of GP37 with
regard to its general provisions, if not let me know and I can provide a copy.
3. Soecific Submission Contents
Proiect Plan: Attached. The project plan depicts the 1 aO-year flood elevation and
existing as well as proposed grades at two-foot intervals. The plan also. demonstrates
that this project is to restore the river embankment (and improve its vegetative cover and
erosion resistance) and wilt not place habitable structures in proximity to the flood hazard.
Construction Techniaues: As noted in the letter to Mike Claffey, construction wilt utilize
handwork and small equipment due to the access limitations to the work area. At Chuck
Roth's recent suggestion, the Contractor wilt also place temporary erosion fencing above
the high water line to prevent the introduction of sediment into the Roaring Fork River.
I would stress that no work or disturbance is planned below the normal high water line.
4. Review Standards: For Stream Margin Review under Current Code Section 26.68,040,
I think the attached materials address the various criteria, Generally;
a. No increase in the base flood elevation wilt occur as a result of this bank
restoration work,
b. No alteration or relocation of the water course wilt occur.
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC.
~
May 21, 1996
Ms. Suzanne Wolff
Page 3
c. Our General Permit approval from the U.S, Army Corps of Engineers is attached.
d. Riparian vegetalion pursuant to the recommendations of Alan Czencusch of the
Colorado Division of Wildlife is being reintroduced into the slope area as part of
the project. I should note that our inClusion of riparian species per Alan's
comments was the result of a phone conversation I had with him on April 24,
1996. At that time, Alan told me he was leaving town and was not able to provide
written comment on the project,
5. Public Hearina Notice Reauirements: Not Applicable.
6. Submission Fee: $450.00 staff approval deposit attached.
I hope these items will be sufficient for an expedited Stream Margin Review approval through the
Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department and City Planning and Zoning Commission.
Please feel free to contact me if I may provide additional information or comment.
Very Truly Yours,
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
tU(7j~ ~
Jay W. Hammond, P.E. .
Principal, Aspen Office
JH/jh 98049SW1
cc: Gary Carmichael
Larry Winnerman
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC.
,,-
,,-
REPLY TO
AnENTlON OF
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT. SACRAMENTO
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
1325 J STREET
SACRAMENTO. CALIFORNIA 95814-2922
May 6, 1996
Regulatory Branch (199675212)
Mr. Jay Hammond
Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Incorporated
Post Office Box 2155
Aspen, Colorado 81612
Dear Mr. Hammond:
We have reviewed your plan for a bank stabilization project
on the Winnerman property on the Roaring Fork River at 317 North
Park Avenue in Aspen, Colorado. The project site is located in
Section 18, Township 10 South, Range 84 West, pitkin county,
Colorado.
The Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District, has issued
Regional General Permit Number GP37 to authorize certain limited
discharges of dredged or fill material associated with streambank
and streambed stabilization projects. Based on our review of the
information submitted, the project is authorized by this regional
permit subject to the enclosed permit conditions.
This authorization is valid until May 11, 1999. We have
assigned number 199675212 to your project. Please refer to this
number in any correspondence with this office. If your plan to
work extends beyond May 11, 1999, you ~ust contact this office to
receive an extension. If you have any' questions concerning this
general permit, please contact Mr. Michael Claffey of this office
at (970) 243-1199.
1
, ~&<!ZLlv,-
){\Gr d L. McNure
6' c' ,Northwestern Colorado
\~egulatory Office
4&tRood Avenue, Room 142
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-2563
Enclosure
f~
r-
ENGINEERS
SURVEYORS
(970) 925-6727
FAX (970) 925-4157
~G
M
SCHMUESER
GORDON MEYER
P.O. Box 2155
Aspen, CO 81612
April 24, 1996
Mr. Michael Claffey
U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers
Sacramento District
Western Colorado Regulatory Office
402 Rood Avenue, Room 142
Grand Junction, CO. 81501-2563
RE: Winnerman Prooertv. River Bank Reoair and Stabilization
Dear Mike:
Attached for your review and approval are three copies of a plan for the. repair of the
embankment adjacent to the Roaring Fork River at the Larry Winnerman property at 315/317
North Park Avenue in Aspen, Colorado. You may recall that we had a brief discussion regarding
this project back in November of last year. The duplex residence at 315/317 North Park Avenue
is a little over two years old. At the time of its original construction, work was done along the
river embankment and large boulders placed on the slope in an effort to stabilize the stope area.
High runoff conditions in the Spring of 1995 eroded the embankment and caused some
sloughing of the slope up to the level of the residence, Since the residence is now in place,
access to the embankment area is restricted with regard to the further use of heavy equipment
We are proposing a repair scheme whereby the large boulders would be stabili-zed and gabion-
baskets would be placed in the deeply eroded areas. The baskets would be filled with rock with
handwork and, possibl~, light equipment ,and then covered over with soil, revegetated and
stabilized with a temporary-type erosion control blanket. Final grade conditions will be
comparable to the grades that existed prior to the high runoff last year and no work is proposed
within the channel of the Roaring Fork River itself.
We are applying to you under General Permit # 96-07 for Army Corps permission to undertake
this repair and stabilization work resulting from flood damage in the Spring of 1995. In
furtherance of our application, I offer the following additional information;
Proiect Site:
315/317 North Park Avenue in Aspen, Colorado as shown on the attached
Vicinity Map. The property is located in Section 18 of Township 10 South,
Range 84 West 01 the 6th P.M, in Pitkin County.
Owner:
Mr. Larry Winnerman
317 North Park Avenue
Aspen, CO. 81611
(970) 920-1851
118 West 6th, Suite 200' Glenwood Springs. Colorado' (970) 945-1004
.""""
r'\
April 24, 1996
Mr. Mike Claffey
Page 2
Enaineer:
Jay W, Hammond, P.E.
Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc.
P.O. Box 2155
Aspen, CO. 81612
(970) 925-6727
Contractor:
Mr. Gary Carmichael
Carmichael Construction
P.O. Box 445
Carbondale, CO, 81623
(970) 963-1436
Proposed Work: As indicated above, the work is proposed to repair and restore the river
embankment as a result of flood damage that occurred in the Spring of 1995. The area that has
eroded represents a generally triangular-shaped area that is about 50 linear feet along the
Roaring Fork River and tapers to a point near the Winnerman Residence. The eroded area is in
the range of 18 to 24 inches deep and represents about 20 cubic yards of missing material
interspersed with large boulders that remain from the initial slope work, We expect to excavate
up to 10 additional cubic yards of material to key in the gabion baskets, then replace the eroded
and excavated area with 30 yards of material including the rock-filled gabion.baskets and cover
soil.
Due to the damage caused Py the high-runoff in the Spring of 1995, the slope is essentially
devoid of any vegetation at this time,. Our plan is to revegetate the slope as part of this
restoration work and the plan refers to the use of native willows and Red Osier Dogwood as
plantings within the temporary erosion blanket. I spoke this afternoon with Alan Czencusch of
the Colorado DMsion of Wildlife who was, at first, not supportive of the use of the gabion
baskets. When I explained, however, that the baskets would not be placed within the river
channel and that their use along the embankment would be covered with a soil and planting
layer, he indicated that this approach was acceptable from his standpoint. He recommended the
further use of Choke Cherry, streambank wheatgrass and crown vetch as additional riparian
species appropriate to the site. He also suggested we confer with a locatlandscape designer
for recommendations of native plants that may already be present within the area. The goal with
regard to revegetation is to have plants that will assist in further stabilizing the embankment
below Mr. Winnerman's residence while blending into the surrounding area and native species.
Excavated material that is clean will be removed to the County Landfill or to properties available
to Mr. Carmichael away from river or wetland areas. The sandbag remnants will be disposed of
to the landfill.
It is our intention to abide by the provisions of GP 96-07 with regard to this project. The Roaring
Fork River is not listed as critical habitat for any of the Colorado endangered fishes nor are there
any historic properties on the site. As noted, the project intent is to restore the embankment to
its pre-flood contours and conditions using handwork and light equipment such as a bobcat
loader that can access the top of the embankment around the house structure. No work is
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC.
"......,
.~.
April 24. 1996
Mr. Mike Claffey
Page 3
proposed in the river itself and no heavy equipment will be operated in the flowing water to
generate increased turbidity or suspended solids.
We hope you will find these items acceptable under GP # 96-07 for the Winnerman bank repair
project. I have photographed the site as a record of the pre-construction conditions and will
maintain a construction-phase and post-construction photo record as well. Please feel free to
contact me if I may provide additional information or comment,
Very Truly Yours.
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
~.a>- <- ~
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
ay . Hammond, P.E.
Principal, Aspen Office
JHilh ........c,
cc: Gary Carmichael
Larry Winnerman
"
~, ...
. . "C(. . ~ .
;:;~"
~,
. ..,~-
. .
.. .
.
"....,.
~
~
~
"'"
~~
:N
\:!:::s
. ... \.J
I
~
s::;)-
c.:~~
~ ~~t:i
~'.~~~
i::sc;:)).;~
U19:~....
~~~~
Vi",,~~
~ ;lo: L., ~
~~~(j
~
...
~
~.
.~'
. S ,...
~.
, ,
\.) . .
~-
l'
, ~.'~..
:,~~
~O:-.
.. ~~, .
~~..~
~~.~
~.as.~
.~~~
(j
,
\.
, '.
'\ .-
...' -'-.:':'"
", ;;.
/
t!:!
i::s
~
~
\
\
\ -I
~ I
Q: ,
:5~ I
~~ I
l::::N
1Q~
~~
. -"-
~
~
~
;i~
~g:
~S
~Vi
"
fIi
(A ;..:
....J~
...."j
~
~
. ... ---
.k~;':j.'~""
.;",-.
1 V )f~Nd Hl~ON
L tf'/qtf'
..... ..,~~;j~d;~~l~~~:;e,;~~:
.-,' ~ :.::~ '~:'~~~~ ' .
'.'
,"
.) .'
.-,
'..,,'
..
":;1;".".
.,.
..
...
.. .
~
~.
.~
~
~
.;1
...
.. :",.,
~'i\l.. .
,:,.".,..., ..'\'"
:!;:: "': ~;' .. .:':
:Ii ..
..',
W~.22{:' ';'
'".'",,"'
c"!:'"
~J:;tlf
'F;
. ~ .., .~
-, '. >:~
,. <: '.~ .'
,. .'
.~~
"l;
..... .~~f,~
':-:i/.';'
,......
",
. ,,:!"'-
~
~
a
~(/JBImYId Jl~
SWISY8 _
r
)~.,
'.' ,"
I
I
,
, .'1.;
,. '.,-- :. .',~.:.::.v',.:.
~. . , , .. I 1
. ,~... ~...': ~'.~ ~.;t~
.~.::.~..~.,~..,,~. ,~1::':'
....
i
I
.~
,I
./~."
,
,
,.,.",
..
~
~
~.
~
a
.rv
.~
:\:,
'.'
;;',
. ~.,
..:.:
;:.
'ii.
'r:
".
':-'f:
'f.
I
ATrAOlMENl' 1 -.
~-AND USE APPLICXl'ION FORM r,
1) Project Narre ~,.....;u>r,,^4.'" ~:"e,.... ~t\.""- ~f""t"" /MItt ~'rkh;I,'""2:a.f)ll-y( ~je.c.-t
2) Project Location ~t5" (~I1- N. ""B.\"'k. A"~AAu€. I f\.~""1 ct;.
q,(({)(1
(indicate street address, lot & bl=k I1UDi:>er, legal description '..mere
appropriate)
3) Present Zonirq N A
4) rat size -
5) Applicant's Name, Address & !bone # .--.t1r. L(lr"\~lVh\~ r-v\I\ll.\I\.
:0,.1'1 N. ~<",k f\'-!-e..-, ~"fM'1 CO. 91/61/ (~1-0) ~7_rJ-J'$SI
6) Representative's Name, Address & R10ne # 1"\... ,- \"'1 .J00"""" ...."J} .2>t..~ve:.e,-
~ (f\f.'(er/ :LM-'i ?D"&"" 7..1 <7l',. Acsf<N1., roo SllofZ-
7) Type of AWlication (please ch<3ck all that apply) : ('110) ct'Z 5" - &;1- 2.1
Corxlitional Use _ Conceptual SPA
_ O:mcept:l.lal His'-c.Oric Cev.
_ Special Review FiIl,3.1 SPA
FinaJ. Historic De<r.
8040 Greenline Conceptual roo
~ stream Maxgin FinaJ. roo
Minor Historic Dev.
Historic D=!roli tion
M:xmtain vieH Plane Sub:livision
_ Historic Cesignation
Corrlcaniniumization _ TextjM3p Am=nclment
_ lot SplitjIDt Line
lIdjust:ment
_ G-QS Allotrent
_ G-QS Exemption
8)
Description of Eld..s;t:irq Uses (mDtler ani type of exist:in:J struct:ures;
approximate sq. ft.; fII""""'..r of L.ih.<..<:l=; any previous approvals granted to the
prope...rty) .
':T:)o.,)f\Q.1' re"",~d.(I.All.A'O J
C~..."...A-l.t"u(l.~~J.. ~ .II.. \ q II:C;
@, ~lS /:!'11- N, t'a.rk
I
AoJPA\\)f2. .
9)
Description of eevelcpDerIt ~lication
~.\.~() ().'W\. tJ\l'1rir",. / A.&.lM~ vl.7::~Al"lltt\fe..- ;,.)~I't. oft
\P..~f1'r ,hIPt'" \::,e.....v\k- ~-ef'OS~tI-v'\ \lfI lq'-i s--:
+('0,
10) Have ycu attached the following?
-L Response to Attac::hIrerrt 2, M:in:im..nn Sllmk<<ion Contents
~ Response to Attac::hIrerrt 3. Specific Sl1m; <<<<ion Contents
~ Response to Attac::hIrerrt 4, Review standaJ:ds for Ycur AWlication
r'\
--
,
.g
cJ
"''1,.
~
<;.
.
a
o
!f
i
8a.salt
..-.........
.-"
:s
(;
4..s>>>
....,eJ]
M0l111t~
VICINITY MAP
1~
Not alllltreetllor toads are
named on maps. CorI.structlon
of streets and roads may be In
progress In certain areas.
Aspen
SITE
~
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS
118 WEST 6TH. SUfTE 200
GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 81601
(970) 945-1004 ASPEN, CO. (970) 925-6727
315/317 N. PARK AVENUE
JOB
9,",0'/9A
DATE SY
'i .2.'1' % J\\..
SCALE
NONE
APPRV
JH
DI+t;.No.
! of!
"""
."""'.
Copies Furnished:
Ms. Sarah Fowler, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 8EPR-EP,
999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466
Mr. Keith Rose, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 764 Horizon
Drive, South Annex A, Grand Junction, Colorado 81506-3946
Mr. Paul von Guerard, Subdistrict Chief, U.S. Geological Survey,
402 Rood Avenue, Room 223, Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
Mr. Alan Czenkusch, Colorado Division of Wildlife, 473 Mountain
Laurel, Aspen, Colorado 81611
City of Aspen, 130 South Galena, Aspen, Colorado 81611
-""_.~=
-
.--.
-
i
.J
~ ~ ~
111 ~
fi
d ~i
~ ~~
f~' II
.! If II ~
Itll (~ ~ '";:c>( ~
il '~;=! ~ ~
?<. ~
" ~
~
al
:s:
"
~
~~
.....
~~
;;;~
I
II
~i
~
''-.---
- --:: ',-:;::---
"".. """--"'~
-
g
~
.
FORK RIVER
if
d~
:1 lG! Ih!, jg
Ii l~ '!flll~l
~ ! ~~I~ ~~~~ ~ ~I~~
'! I, ilf !H! I 11111
;. Ii i~! iill f iiJl1
s illi Ii',' !d~ ~. =':111
_ .. ~~i ~ ~rb ~I ~:II~I
.. ~ .~
I 11
lit: I$.! ~
I '
. -I :-
~ . 'i.
I~
d
P;~
~~
.tm
I II:
,. , .
I j j
I! !
II!
r II
~.
~
~
~
Q;;
~
~
,l\,
~
~
~
II
I If!
I :I~:
llii
.1:1:1
IJ
~ ~