FLOOD04776

• County: Pitkin
• Community: Aspen
• Stream Name: Roaring Fork River, Hunter Creek
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Title: Aspen Village GMP Submission
• Date: 5/30/1980
• Prepared For: Pitkin County
• Prepared By: Aspen Village
• Floodplain - Doc Type: Miscellaneous

/p'
',. . .
_<1:....-
/..~~ ;'.
l ~'/-...~

506 E. MAIN STREET

ASPEN, COLORADO 8161 1

P
I
T
K
I
N

TO: Jim Reents, Planning Office

gd~

FROM: Bob Nelson, County Sanitarian

DATE: July 11, 1979

RE: Aspen Village Subdivision

c
o
U
-N
T
-Y

We have completed a review of the existing water supply
and sewage disposal systems on the basis of the attached
report prepared by El Dorado Engineering Company.

The existing water system .as outlined in the report complies
with Colorado Department of Health sanitary requirements
and has served as a satisfactory supply. However, as
indicated on page 15 of the submittal the applicants
recognize that there are deficiencies within the system
which necessitate changes to meet Section 5.25 of the
Pitkin County Land Use Code. These relate primarily to
the inability of the well pumps to provide water during
periods of extreme demand and undersized existing ~torage
facilities. Engineering plans addressing these criteria
should be submitted.

The sewage disposal system appears to be adequate to treat
the increased flows resulting from this proposed increase
of 39 dwelling units.

The other six lots are indicated as having individual water
supply and sewage disposal systems. We hesitate to comment
upon the water availability without the comments of a
qualified groundwater geologist as required by Section 5.205.2D
The use of a single well for the 5 clustered sites near the
north property should be investigated. With sufficient yield
this well could be located further from the individual septic
systems, which with the rapidly permeable alluvial soils
expected would minimize pollut~on potential.

All building sites are located just adjacent to the 100-year
flood plain. The individual sewage disposal will most likely
be installed in soils which are characterized similar to SCS
soil type 28F which presents severe limitations to conventional
septic tank absorption fields due to large stones and the
pollution hazard posed by rapid permeability below 2 feet.
There is also a possibility of a high seasonal water. As it
appears there is less than 10 ~eet of elevation change between
building sites, and the river. However, engineered sys~ems
in compliance with Pitkin Coun~y regulations are possible~