The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.1001 Ute Ave.0001.2007r. \ 1001 UTE AVE 0001.2007.ASLU 273718200063 ESA/2 FREE MKT PUD 1-- A AlkktfS+E- -t /:4....2,11,9--- LIE; 3 1~ 4 . h 11 1 1 i 4 Davis Horn3IE. PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING -3 December 29,2006 Jessica Garrow, Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street I Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Ute Mesa Subdivision Planned Unit Development (PUD) -- 8040 Greenline Review, PUD Amendment and Residential Design Review Dear Jessica: Ute Mesa, LLC (applicant) owns the Ute Mesa Subdivision Planned Unit Development (PUD) which is also known as the 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision PUD. The applicant is represented in this land use application by Davis Horn Incorporated, Planners and Jack Miller and Associates Incorporated, Architects. This land use application requests the following land use approvals which were identified in the City of Aspen Pre-application Conference Summary Sheet (see Attachment 1). * 8040 Greenline Review (Section 26.435.030); - * PUD Other Amendment (Section 26.445.100 B.); * Residential Design Review (Section 26.410); * Slope Reduction for Lot Area (Section 25.575 C.); and * Impact Fees and Dedications (Section 26.600). The land use application is divided in to the following sections: I. Background; Conctilio. II. Project Description; III. Land Use Approvals; and Â¢Eot#/2, IV. Summary. ALICE DAVIS AICP $ GLENN HORN AICP 215 SOUTH MONARCHST.Â· SUITE 104Â·ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 -970/925-6587Â·FAX: 970/925-5180 adavis@rof.net ghorn@rof.net Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 2 I. DALAWAV ULNLI The Ute Mesa Subdivision PUD is generally located at the base of Aspen Mountain, north of United States Forest Service land, south Of Ute Avenue and east Of Aspen Chance and Ute Additions Subdivisions and west of the Hoag Subdivision Lot 1 and the City of Aspen Ajax Park. Refer to Attachment 2, Site Vicinity Map. The upper portion of the property which includes approximately 4.1 +/- acres is generally located above the old Midland Railroad spur line within the jurisdiction of Pitkin County. The lower 2.7 +/- acres are located within the Aspen City limits. The subject site is a metes and bounds parcel which includes a portion of the 1001 mining claim (M.S. 1741). The site is bounded by Ute Avenue to the north, Ajax Park and Hoag Subdivision Lot 3 to the east, Aspen Mountain to the south (USFS), and Aspen Chance and Ute Additions Subdivisions to the west. Lot 3 Hoag Subdivision, the lots in the Aspen Chance and Ute Additions Subdivisions are developed, while Ajax Park to the west and Forest Service land south are undeveloped. Vehicular and pedestrian access to the site is from Ute Avenue. Pedestrians, skiers, and bicycle riders may access the site from the nordic trail which traverses the south side of the property providing access to the Little Nell ski trail and Aspen Mountain Road. Attachment 3 is a copy of the draft Final Plat of Ute Mesa Subdivision/PUD which has been submitted to the City of Aspen for approval and recordation. The Plat shows that 2.8 acres of the site are located within the City limits and the remaining 4.1 acres located within unincorporated Pitkin County. The unincorporated land is zoned AFR-10. The Ute Mesa Subdivision PUD (aka 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision PUD) was approved pursuant to Ordinance 24, Series of 2006 which appears as Attachment 4. A triangular strip of land located between the Aspen city limits and the 8040' contour line is zoned C (Conservation) . The land below the 8040' contour line which is zoned R-15 PUD (Moderate Density Residential Planned Unit Development). A ski trail and an abandoned right-of-way of the Midland Railroad spur traverses the upper portion of the property above the city limits line. The land encompassing the ski trail and old railroad spur is densely vegetated with mature aspen, spruce, fir and serviceberry Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 3 trees and shrubs. Mine tailings are located below the mature trees and shrubs. There is a pocket of serviceberry shrubs and maple trees within the tailings. When the Aspen Chance Subdivision was developed evergreen trees were planted on the west side of the tailings pile. The northwest corner of the property is well vegetated with cottonwood and spruce trees and native grasses and shrubs. Figure 5 shows three tennis courts are located in the northeast corner of the property. Attachment 5, is a November, 2005 1001 Ute Avenue: Topographic Improvement Survey prepared by Aspen Survey Engineers, Incorporated. The land in the City of Aspen is split between two zone districts by the 8040 topographic line. Approximately 5,540 square feet of land is located between the 8040' elevation line and the City limits and is zoned C (Conservation). The remaining 111,064 square feet of land within the City limits is zoned R-15 PUD (Moderate-Density Residential, Planned Unit Development). Attachment 5 includes a slope analysis of the property prepared in accordance with Section 26.575.020 C. of the Aspen Land Use Code. Table 1, presents Aspen Survey Engineer's topographic slope categorization of land in the R-15 PUD zone in a tabular format. The data in Table 1 show there are approximately 110,080 square feat of land in the R-15 PUD zone. After applying slope reduction factors, approximately 63,310 square feet of land may be used as Lot Area. Total Lot Area in Table 1 is further reduced by subtracting surface easements for driveways. Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 4 TABLE 1 1001 UTE AVENUE: SLOPE ANALYSIS FOR R-15 PUD ZONE* Per Cent Square Feet Per Cent Square Feet Slope Category Gross Area Factor** Lot Area 0-20 60,310 100 60,310 20-30 6,000 50 3,000 >-30 44,770 0 0 Total 110,080 NA 63,310 * Land in the C (Conservation) zone is not included in the Lot Area calculation. ** Reduction Factors from Aspen Land Use Code, Section 26.575.020 C. Source: Aspen Survey Engineers Inc., and Davis Horn Inc.; January, 2006 Attachment 5 shows that the site is relatively flat adjacent to Ute Avenue. Three tennis courts are located on the east side of the flat area. The area to the west of the tennis courts is undeveloped. An eight inch sani tary sewer line, a 12 inch water line and electric and telephone and natural gas service are located in Ute Avenue. An existing fire hydrant is located across Ute Avenue near the northeast corner of the site. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Attachment 3, the draft Final Plat of Ute Mesa Subdivision/PUD, shows the PUD is composed of three lots for development and four common areas. Lots 1 and 2 will be improved with free market single family dwelling units and Lot 3 will be improved with a deed restricted affordable housing "for sale" dwelling unit. Common Area Lots A, B, and C will be owned and maintained by the Ute Mesa Homeowners Association while Common Area Lot D will be deeded to the City of Aspen and preserved as open space pursuant to a conservation easement. Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 5 Attachment 6 depicts the Ute Mesa PUD Landscape Plan. The Plan shows the proposed building footprints, driveway, emergency vehicle turnaround, relocated tennis court and landscaping. Site development will begin with rough grading for the driveway and tennis court relocation. The tennis court relocation will be done by a certified and licensed tennis court manufacturer and installer. It is anticipated that all three dwelling units will be stick built off site and shipped to a staging area located outside ' the City of Aspen. The various house sections will be placed on the site by a crane. Exterior and interior finishes will beâ€¢ completed on site in the traditional manner. The final phase of construction will site clean up and landscaping. All site activities will follow the Construction Managment Plan submitted with the Access and Infrastructure and Building Permits. III. LAND USE REVIEWS This section of the land use application demonstrates compliance with the following sections of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. * 8040 Greenline Review (Section 26.435.030); * PUD Other Amendment (Section 26.445.100 B.); * Residential Design Review (Section 26.410); * Slope Reduction for Lot Area (Section 25.575); and * Impact Fees (Section 26.600). The Code standards appear in bold followed by the applicant's responses. Section 26.435.030 8040 Greenline Review - Section 5 of City Council Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2006 granted 8040 Greenline review for the "road serving the single family residence parcels and the relocation of the tennis courts" (see Attachment 4). This 8040 Greenline review is limited to "the specific residence designs" (emphasis added). Throughout this section of the application references are made to Exhibit A, Review Criteria and Staff Findings, of the July 10, 2006 Community Development Department Memorandum entitled "Second Reading of Ordinance NO. 24, Series of 2006-Ute Avenue Subdivision, Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 6 Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD Growth Management Review for Preservation of Significant Open Space Parcels" (see Attachment 7) . Section 26.435.030.C.1. The parcel on which the proposed development is to be located is suitable for development considering its slope, ground stability characteristics, including mine subsidence and the possibility of mud flow, rock falls, and avalanche dangers. If the parcel is found to contain hazardous or toxic soils, the applicant shall stabilize and revegetate the soils, or, where necessary, cause them to be removed from the site to a location acceptable to the city. The Community Development Department staff finding in Attachment 7 regarding this standard is: "Staff believes that the proposed building sites do contain the possibility of avalanche and rockfall hazards. Additionally, the proposed building sites the proposed building sites are located on mine tailings. However, the' Applicant' s engineers have recommended mitigation measures for these hazards that have been incorporated as conditions of approval -in the proposed resolution.' Staff finds this criterion to be met as long as the conditions of approval in the resolution are complied with" (emphasis added). The applicant's responses to this standard are addressed under the following sub-headings: * Slope and Ground Stability Characteristics; * Mine Subsidence; ' * Mud flow and Rockfall; * Avalanche Danger; and * Toxic Soils. The following expert reports are referred to in this section and appear as attachments to the land use application. * Attachment 8 November 21, 1986 Engineering Geologic Reconnaissance and Mine Dump Study Proposed Residential Development 1001 Claim, Ute Avenue, Colorado prepared by Chen & Associates * Attachment 9 February 23, 1989 Supplemental Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 7 Geotechnical Study Proposed 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision Aspen, Colorado prepared by Chen-Northern Inc. * Attachment 10 February 13, 1989 Letter from Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D. to Sunny Vann, Geologic Investigation addressing 1001 Ute Avenue * Attachment 11 May 20, 1991 Letter from Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D. to Glenn Horn, addressing 1001 Ute Avenue * Attachment 12 January 20, 2006 Avalanche Hazard Report prepared by Peter Lev Alpentech, Salt Lake City Utah & March 10, 2006 Memorandum to Glenn Horn from Peter Lev and Beat vonAllmen Slope and Ground Stability Characteristics. Attachment 5 shows that the site is relatively flat adjacent to Ute Avenue. Three tennis courts are located on the east side of the flat area. Slope stability was analyzed extensively in the five prior land use applications for this property which were reviewed by the City of Aspen. Refer to Attachment 8, a November 21, 1986 Engineering Geologic Reconnaissance and Mine Dump Study Proposed Residential Development 1001 Claim, Ute Avenue, Colorado prepared by Chen & Associates and Appendix 8, a February 23, 1989 Supplemental Geotechnical Study Proposed 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision Aspen, Colorado prepared by Chen-Northern Incorporated. The Geologic reports state that slopes on the property are steep' and extensive site grading for development may be needed. The portion of the site between the tennis courts and the City limits may be subject to slope instability. Site development is feasible based upon geotechnical considerations. The two proposed dwelling units will require special foundation treatment such as spread footings or pile foundations bearing on the underlying natural soils. Structural retaining walls will be required along the proposed driveway. It is recommended that cut and fill slope grades along the roadway and downhill side of the tailings pile ~ should be graded to 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter. Graded slopes should be revegatated or protected by other means to prevent erosion. Mine Subsidence. According to Attachment 8, the November 21, 1986 Engineering Geologic Reconnaissance and Mine Dump Study Proposed Residential Development 1001 Claim, Ute Avenue, Colorado prepared by Chen & Associates, the source of the mine dump materials on the site is the Lower Durant Tunnel. The tunnel portal lies 200 to 300 feet to the west of the site. Chen & Associates found no documentation of major underground mines below the property. The property lies east of major areas of mining Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 8 activity. Chen & Associates conclude in Attachment 8 that "the f risk for mine induced subsidence is considered to be low." Mud flow and Rockfall. Mudflow, also known as debris flow, is evaluated in Attachment 9, the February 23, 1989 Supplemental Geotechnical Study Proposed 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision Aspen, Colorado prepared by Chen-Northern Incorporated. According to the report, there may be debris flow potential originating from Spar Gulch within the lower western portion of the site. The proposed houses are to be located above the area which may be affected by potential Spar Gulch debris flows. The preservation of Common Area D (upper portion of property) which is densely vegetated should help limit debris flow potential. Minor rockfall potential is evaluated in Attachment 10, a February 13, 1989 Letter from Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D. to Sunny Vann, Geologic Investigation addressing 1001 Ute Avenue and Attachment 11, a May 20, 1991 Letter from Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D. to Glenn Horn, addressing 1001 Ute Avenue. Lampiris states in Attachment 10 that rockfall can occur from the outcrops above the site which are ' visible from Smuggler Mountain on the other side of the Roaring / Fork Valley. There are not significant fractures in the rocks to contribute to loose rocks on the hillside. The low elevation of the outcrops and the significant tree cover on the hillside will fr not allow rocks to gain much momentum. In spite of the low rockfall danger, Lampiris recommends that the rear foundation walls of the houses be designed to protrude at least four feet above finished grade and be without doors or windows on south facing side of the proposed homes (Lots 1 and 2). A review of Attachment 11 shows Lampiris modified his original recommendation to indicate that a wall or berm located on the south side of the back yards at' the toe of the steep slope would also provide adequate rockfall mitigation and mitigate snow slides as well. The wall or berm should be at least four feet tall and be designed to withstand~ forces of at least 200 pounds per square foot. The installation of the wall shall protect southfacing doors and windows from rockfall danger. Avalanche Danger. Avalanche danger has been evaluated in Lampiris' letters, Attachments 9 and 10 and more specifically in Attachment 11, a January 20, 2006 Avalanche Hazard Report prepared Memorandum to Glenn Horn from Peter Lev and Beat vonAllmen. Lampiris concludes in Attachment 9 that the extensive tree cover by Peter Lev Alpentech, Salt Lake City Utah and a March 10, 2006 above the sites should minimize potential avalanche hazard. He concludes there is not enough relief or catchment area above the sites to produce a major avalanche. Lampiris indicates that the recommended rockfall mitigation will also mitigate for minor avalanches. Peter Lev of Alpentech concludes his report by stating that the Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 9 site is free of any significant avalanche hazard at this time. Alpentech classifies the building site as being in the Yellow Avalanche Hazard Zone. According to Alpentech: "The Yellow Zone classification applies when the terrain is sufficiently steep and extensive to theoretically produce avalanches. However, the lack of snowcover, or the presence of a dense vegetation cover, and lack of historical support for avalanche activity all indicate there to be no significant avalanche activity. The ,Yellow classification does not require impact studies for building defense structures, or special building codes, as would the Blue Zone classification." The January 20, 2005 report recommends small or no windows on the - uphill side of the proposed residences. Alpentech elaborates upon this recommendation in their March 10, 2006 Memorandum recommending there be a three foot high retaining wall constructed at the toe of the slope to protect south facing windows. Portable wood shutters covering the windows could provide further protection when conditions warrant. Toxic Soils. Chen-Northern Incorporated addresses toxic soils in Attachment 9, February 23, 1989 Supplemental Geotechnical Study Proposed 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision Aspen, Colorado. Soils test show potentially hazardous lead concentration in the soils. Mitigation will consist of disposing of the contaminated soils on- site and providing a two to three foot soil cap. The applicant is consulting with Tom Dunlop, REHS of Dunlop Environmental Consulting Inc., to insure that potentially toxic soils are handled appropriately. Section 26.435.030.C.2 The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the natural watershed, runoff, drainage soil erosion or have consequent effects on water pollution. The Community Development Department staff finding in Attachment 7 regarding this standard is: "Staff does not believe the development will have an adverse affect on the natural watershed runoff, drainage, Soil erosion, or have consequent effects on water pollution. The ' Community Development Engineer will review a grading and drainage plan for the site upon permit for the subdivision improvements and for the proposed residences when that are submitted for 8040 Greenline Review. The drainage plan will have to demonstrate that there will not be an increase in the historic run-off from the property. Staff finds this criterion Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 10 to be met" (emphasis added). Attachment 13 is a December 12, 2006 letter from David Powell, PE of Timberline Engineering which addresses the conceptual drainage plan for the subject site. The Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan is an attachment to the letter. According to Powell, drainage patterns for the site will remain essentially unaltered and historic runoff rates will not be exceeded. Best construction management methods shall be utilized during the construction period to minimize soil erosion. The site will be landscaped in the first fall or spring after completion of site $ development. Section 26.435.030.C.3. The proposed development does not have a significant affect on the air quality in the City. The Community Development Department staff finding in Attachment 7 regarding this standard is: "Staff does not believe this project will have an adverse effect on the air quality of the City. The Environmental I Health Department does not require air quality mitigation for single family residences. Staff finds this criterion to be met" (emphasis added). The applicant will prepare a Construction Management Plan which will be reviewed and approved by the City in conjunction with the .Access and Infrastructure and Building Permit processes. The Plan will include a fugitive dust control plan which will include fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed areas, cleaning of adjacent paved roads, speed limits for construction related - vehicles and other measures to control construction dust. The Construction Managment Plan shall also include controls which will / be implemented by the contractor to control engine idling to comply~ with City of Aspen Municipal Code Section 13.08.110. Each residence shall be limited to two gas log fireplaces or two certified clean burning woods burning stoves and an unlimited number of gas fireplace appliances. There will be no woodburning fireplaces, nor coal burning heating devices. Section 26.435.030.C.4. The design and location of any proposed development, road or trail is compatible with the terrain, vegetation and natural land features. Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 11 The Community Development Department staff finding in Attachment 7 regarding this standard is: "Staff agrees with the Applicant's contention that the proposed building sites are sited on the flattest portions of the site. Staff does believe that the retaining wall necessary for the driveway will be substantial in size. However, Staff does believe that the tennis court fencing and the proposed Evergreen trees will screen the retaining wall from significant view after they mature. Staff does not really see a better location on the site from which to take access . Staff finds this criterion to be met" (emphasis added). The applicant is dedicating Common Area D which encompasses the existing City of Aspen trail to the City of Aspen. Attachment 6, the Ute Mesa PUD: Landscape Plan and Attachment 13, depict the j proposed grading and driveway plan to serve the PUD. The driveway plan was approved during the subdivision/PUD land use review process after extensive Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council review at multiple public hearings. Trees lost as part of site development will be replaced as required by the Municipal Code, Section 26.435.030.C.5. Any grading will minimize, to the extent practicable, disturbance to the terrain vegetation and natural features. The Community Development Department staff finding in Attachment 7 regarding this standard is: "As was previously discussed, the Applicant has proposed to site the building envelopes in the flattest portions of the site. However, further grading of the building envelopes may be required in the future when the lots are to be built upon. The Applicant has proposed that more specific grading plans Will be submitted in conjunction with 8040 Greenline applications that will be needed for the actual development of the single-family residences. Staff finds this criterion to be met " (emphasis added). The subject site has been significantly disturbed with mine tailings and the existing tennis courts. The proposed site~ development plan will significantly improve the appearance of land ,which is an eyesore to the neighborhood. The improvement in the appearance of the site will be similar to the transformation of the Aspen Chance from a community eyesore to a attractive, landscaped residential area. Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 12 1 Section 26.435.030.C.6. The placement and clustering of structures will minimize the need for roads, limit cutting and grading, maintain open space and preserve the mountain as a scenic resource. "Staff believes that the proposed building envelopes are clustered to allow for a common access driveway that will be installed prior to application for residences on the lots. Staff finds this criterion to be met" (emphasis added). Attachment 6, Ute Mesa PUD: Landscape Plan, shows that two of the proposed dwelling units are to be located at the toe of the steep slope behind the tennis courts and the third dwelling unit is proposed to be located adjacent to Ute Avenue. The site design seeks to limit cutting and grading. Common Area D is the most scenic portion of the property and has the steepest slopes. All of Common Area D which comprises approximately 4.1 acres will be dedicated to the City of Aspen as open space. Common Areas A and B which comprise approximately one acre of land will also be preserved as open space. A total of approximately 5.1 acres or 75 percent of the 6.8 acre site will be preserved as open space. Section 26.435.030.C.7. Building height and bulk will be minimized and the structure will be designed to blend into the open character of the mountain. The height and bulk of the proposed dwelling units to be located on Lots 1 and 2 were a major topic of discussion during the PUD review process. The Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council concurred with the applicant that current appearance of the site is a blight on Aspen Mountain. The applicant presented photos of the Aspen Chance Subdivision (west of the site) taken in the mid 1980's which showed that the Aspen Chance Subdivision was similar in appearance to the 1001 claim prior to development as a Subdivision. It was demonstrated in the PUD review process that the base floor elevation of the houses proposed for Ute Mesa PUD Lots 1 and 2 will be at a lower elevation than the highest houses in the Aspen Chance/ Subdivision. By comparison, the existing houses located to the east on Hoag Subdivision Lot 3 and the Newfoundland Claim are significantly higher in elevation than the houses proposed on Ute Mesa PUD Lots 1 and 2. It was also demonstrated during the PUD review process that the topography of the lot located to the east is far steeper than the topography of Ute Mesa PUD Lots 1 and 2. The location of the houses on Lots 1 and 2 at a lower elevation then the neighboring lots and the gentle topography of lots 1 and 2, as compared to the lots to the east, are the most significant Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 13 factors which will reduce the perception of the height and bulk of the structures proposed for Lots 1 and 2. The proposed landscaping depicted in Attachment 6 will also help to screen the proposed structures and minimize the perception of height and bulk. Attachment 14 contains photo simulations of the Lots 1 and 2 houses and landscaping as viewed from Ute Avenue. The simulations are consistent with representations made during the PUD process and the following "Massing Controls" in Ordinance No. 24 Series of 2006, Section 20. 1. The specific designs of the two (2) free-market residential units that are to be submitted for 8040 Greenline Review pursuant to Section 5 of this ordinance shall be substantially consistent with the revised massing drawings presented to City Council on August 14, 2006. -1 t. 2. A substantial subdivision/PUD amendment review would be necessary to substantially vary from the massing drawings presented to City Council on August 14, 2006. 3. The width of the north-facing facades of the free-market residential units shall be limited to 120 feet. The north facing facade of the Lot 1 dwelling unit is 111 feet in width and the north facing facade of the Lot 2 dwelling unit is 91 feet in width. 4. The overall ridge height of the free-market, single- family residential structures shall be limited to twenty- seven (27) feet above finished grade, and twenty (20) percent of the width of the front facades shall be limited to a ridge height of twenty (22) feet above finished grade. The ridge height of both dwelling units is limited to 27 feet at the top of the ridge. Each of the proposed dwelling units limits over 30 percent of the front facade to 22 feet in height which is 10 percent more than required. 5. Non-reflective materials shall be used in the construction of the proposed single-family residences. Section 26.435.030.C.8 Sufficient water pressure and other utilities are available to service the proposed development. The Community Development Department staff finding in Attachment 7 Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 14 regarding this standard is: "Utility services would have to be provided to the property. The City Water Department and Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District have reviewed the proposal and their comments have been incorporated in the resolution as Staff deems ' ~ appropriate. staff finds this criterion to be met" (emphasis added). Refer to Attachment 15, a December 29, 2005 letter from David ' Powell, PE of Timberline Engineering to Glenn Horn entitled 1001 Ute Avenue Infrastructure" and Attachment 16, a September 30, 2005 memorandum from Tom Newland to Glenn Horn entitled "Utility Placement and Traffic Generation at 1001 Ute Avenue. " Powell finds in his letter that sewer, water, electric and natural gas utilities lF are readily available in Ute Avenue to serve the proposed / development. Newland finds in his memorandum that City of Aspen water service and Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District sewer service are accessible to the site in Ute Avenue and the Water Department and Sanitation District are capable of serving the proposed development. Section 26.435.030.C.9. Adequate roads are available to serve the proposed development, and said roads can be properly maintained. The Community Development Department staff finding in Attachment 7 ~l regarding this standard is: "As has been previously discussed, a common driveway would be, installed to serve both of the residential properties. The Fire Marshall has indicated that the road would be sufficient - to serve the properties with emergency services and a hammerhead turn around is provided for fire truck access. Therefore, Sta# believes that this criterion is met as long as the conditions of approval are complied with" (emphasis added). Access to the site was specifically approved by Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2006. ' Section 26.435.030.C.10 Adequate ingress and egress is available to service the proposed development so as to ensure adequate access for fire protection and snow removal equipment. The Community Development Department staff finding in Attachment 7 regarding this standard is: Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 15 Il The Fire Marshall has indicated that the road would be sufficient to serve the properties with emergency services and a hammerhead turn around is provided for fire truck access. Therefore, Staff believes that this criterion is met as long as the conditions of approval are complied with. Additionally, the City Streets Department has reviewed the - application and expressed that the proposed driveway is acceptable to serve the property with snow removal equipment. Staff finds this criterion to be met" (emphasis added). Attachment 17 is a copy of the driveway plan which will serve Lots 1 and 2. This plan has been reviewed and approved by Orin Moon, Assistant Fire Chief, of the Aspen Fire District as indicated by the stamp of approval on the plan. Section 26.435.030.C.11 The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan:Parks/Recreation/Trails Plan are implemented in the proposed development, to the greatest extent practical. The Community Development Department staff finding in Attachment 7 regarding this standard is: "Staff believes that the proposed Subdivision/PUD enhances the Â£ goals and objectives of the AACP' s Parks/Recreation/Trails T Plan. Staff finds the criterion to be met. The recommendations of the AACP were addressed in detail within 1001 Ute Avenue PUD application. The upper portion of the property 4 will be preserved as open space as recommended in the Plan. Additionally, this 4.1 acre parcel will be granted to the City of Aspen as Open Space. A prior owner of the property has already dedicated a trail easement across the property. During the PUD land use review process the applicant visited the site several times with the Parks Department and reviewed the field survey. The applicant and City staff determined that the existing Ajax Park 7 trail does not cross the subject site and an additional trail easement is not required. Section 26.445.100 B. Planned Unit Development Other Amendment , Section 3, of Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2006 establishes the Dimensional Requirements for the PUD. External floor area on Lots 1 and 2 is limited to 5,040 square feet per lot. The applicant requests that the allowable floor area be amended to permit the ' floor area of Lots 1 and 2 to vary by up to 378 square feet (5 percent of the permitted floor area on each lot) provided that the t , Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 16 total floor area of Lots 1 and 2 does not exceed 10,080 square feet of total floor area on the lots. The increased floor area will not effect the mass or bulk of either of the proposed houses on Lots 1 and 2. This minor floor area change is entirely within the buildings and has no impact on the appearance of the PUD. Section 26.410 Residential Design Review Jack Miller & Associates, Inc. has prepared schematic architectural plans for the proposed dwelling units to be located on Lots 1 and 2. Refer to the following attachments which show the plans. * Attachment 18 Ute Mesa PUD: Architectural Elevations * Attachment 19 Ute Mesa PUD: Birds Eye Perspective and Residence 1 Garage Opening Attachment 20, is a December 15, 2006 letter from Jack Miller to Jessica Garrow which addresses the Residential Design Standards. Section 25.575 C. Slope Reduction for Lot Area The applicant addressed Section 25.575 C., Slope Reduction for Lot Area as part of the PUD review process. Slope analysis was addressed in the background section of this application, but is repeated here to assist in the review of the land use application. Attachment 5 includes a slope analysis of the property prepared in accordance with Section 26.575.020 C. of the Aspen Land Use Code. Table 1, presents Aspen Survey Engineer's topographic slope categorization of land in the R-15 PUD zone in a tabular format. , The data in Table 1 show there are approximately 110,080 square feat of land in the R-15 PUD zone. After applying slope reduction factors, approximately 63,310 square feet of land may be used as Lot Area. Total Lot Area in Table 1 is further reduced by subtracting surface easements for driveways. Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 17 TABLE 1 1001 UTE AVENUE: SLOPE ANALYSIS FOR R-15 PUD ZONE* Per Cent Square Feet Per Cent Square Feet Slope Category Gross Area Factor** Lot Area 0-20 60,310 100 60,310 20-30 6,000 50 3,000 >-30 44,770 0 0 Total 110,080 NA 63,310 * Land in the C (Conservation) zone is not included in the Lot Area calculation. ** Reduction Factors from Aspen Land Use Code, Section 26.575.020 C. Source: Aspen Survey Engineers Inc., and Davis Horn Inc.; January, 2006 Section 26.600 Impact Fees and Dedications Impact Fees and Dedications were addressed as part of the PUD review process. Refer to Sections 9 and 10 of Ordinance 24, Series of 2006 (see Attachment 4). These sections of the Ordinance require the Park Development Impact Fee to be paid at the time of building permit issuance pursuant to Section 26.610 of the Land Use Code. Likewise, the School Lands Dedication fee is to be paid at the time of the issuance of building permit pursuant to Section 26.630 of the Code. IV. SUMMARY This land use application has explained the background associated with the Ute Mesa PUD land use approvals and demonstrated compliance with the Land Use Code standards identified in the City of Aspen Pre-Application Conference Summary Sheet (see Attachment 1). Please contact use if we have inadvertently neglected to address a Code provision to your satisfaction. We will be happy to provide additional information in a timely manner. The following is an list of attachments to this land use Jessica Liarrow December 23, 2006 Page 18 application. Attachment 1 Pre-Application Conference Summary Sheet Attachment 2 Site Vicinity Map Attachment 3 Draft Final Plat of Ute Mesa Subdivision/PUD Attachment 4 Ordinance 24, Series of 2006 -- An Ordinance of the Aspen City Council Approving With Conditions, A Subdivision Review, Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, And A Growth Managment Review For The Preservation of Significant Open Space Parcels For the 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado Attachment 5 1001 Ute Avenue: Topographic Improvement Survey prepared by Aspen Survey Engineers, Incorporated Attachment 6 Ute Mesa PUD Landscape Plan Attachment 7 Exhibit A, Review Criteria and Staff Findings, of the July 10, 2006 Community Development Department Memorandum entitled "Second Reading of Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2006-Ute Avenue Subdivision, Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD Growth Management Review for Preservation of Significant Open Space Parcels" Attachment 8 November 21, 1986 Engineering Geologic Reconnaissance and Mine Dump Study Proposed Residential Development 1001 Claim, Ute Avenue, Colorado prepared by Chen & Associates Attachment 9 February 23, 1989 Supplemental Geotechnical Study Proposed 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision Aspen, Colorado prepared by Chen-Northern Inc. Attachment 10 February 13, 1989 Letter from Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D. to Sunny Vann, Geologic Investigation addressing 1001 Ute Avenue Attachment 11 May 20, 1991 Letter from Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D. to Glenn Horn, addressing 1001 Ute Avenue Attachment 12 January 20, 2006 Avalanche Hazard Report prepared by Peter Lev Alpentech, Salt Lake City Utah & March 10, 2006 Memorandum to Glenn Horn from Peter Lev and Beat vonAllmen Attachment 13 December 12, 2006 letter from David Powell, PE of Jessica Garrow December 29, 2006 Page 19 Timberline Engineering Attachment 14 Photo simulations of the Lots 1 and 2 Houses and Landscaping Viewed from Ute Avenue Attachment 15 December 29, 2005 letter from David Powell, PE of Timberline Engineering to Glenn Horn entitled 1001 Ute Avenue Infrastructure Attachment 16 September 30, 2005 memorandum from Tom Newland to Glenn Horn entitled "Utility Placement and Traffic Generation at 1001 Ute Avenue" Attachment 17 Ute Mesa Driveway Plan Attachment 18 Ute Mesa PUD: Architectural Elevations Attachment 19 Ute Mesa PUD: Birds Eye Perspective and Residence 1 Garage Opening Attachment 20 December 15, 2006 letter from Jack Miller to Jessica Garrow which addresses the Residential Design Standards Attachment 21 Title Policy which shows Proof of Ownership Attachment 22 Fee Agreement Attachment 23 Letter Authorizing Submission of Land Use Application Attachment 24 Land Use Application Form Attachment 25 Property Owners within 300 Feet Thank you for your assistance in preparing this land use application. We look forward to completion of the land use review process. Sincerely, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED 31__A_ GL .c,1,I.Ly nORN AICP 1 - 6 Â£ f.' rats Co. 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attacnment 1 ATTACHIVIENT 1 I... 1 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Jessica Garrow, 429-2780 DATE: 12.08.2006 ' PROJECT: 1001 Ute Ave. ' REPRESENTATIVE: Jack Miller Jack Miller Associates Tel: 927.9513 DESCRIPTION: The area in question received Final PUD approval on August 14, 2006 in Ordinance 24, Series 2006. This Ordinance approved the subdivision of an existing lot into two (2) lots and four (4) Common Open Space areas, an 8040 Greenline review , for a shared driveway and for the relocation of tennis courts, and a conservation easement. The Ordinance further provided ' for "Massing Controls" that call for north-facing facades to be no more than 120 feet in width, the overall ridge height of the free-market single-family units to be no more than twenty-seven (27) feet in height, and twenty (20) percent of the width of the front facades be no more than twenty-two (22) feet in height. The Ordinance required the applicant receive a separate review ' ' for Residential Design Standards and 8040 Greenline for the free-market single-family residences. ' 1 The two single family residences require four (4) variances from the Residential Design Standards. The buildings are currently oriented towards the private road that was approved in the PUD. The buildings will require a variance from this standards, as they should be oriented toward Ute Ave. (26.410.040A1) The buildings each lack a street facing entrance, which requires a variance, (26.410,040[)1) Additionally, the buildings lack a first story element, which requires a variance. (26.410.040[)2) The buildings will also require a variance from the section requiring windows be absent between nine (9) and twelve (12) feet on the first floor. (24.410.040D3a) b ' Finally, the garages are below the street level. The Residential Design Standards state that the driveway cut may not exceed two (2) feet in depth. It was unclear if this was the case from the drawing presented in the Pre-Application meeting. Verification that this standard is met is required. Additionally, the ADU will require a variance from the materials requirement in the Residential Design Standards as there is stucco under the windows and stone. (26.410.040Elb) The ADU and two Free-Market Single Family residences require an 8040 Greenline Review. As part of the 8040 Greenline ' Review, it is advised that the applicant re-submit all avalanche and hazard forms that were provided for the original approvals. Any additional engineering, topographic, grading, etc information should also be provided. ~ Any more than three (3) Residential Design Standard variances require review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The 8040 Greenline review is also a Planning and Zoning Commission review. The Land use Application may include all the reviews required for all the structures on the property. Relevant Land Use Code Section(s): 26.410 Residential Design Review 26.435.030 8040 Greenline Review 25.575 Slope Reduction for lot area 26.600 Impact Fees http://www.aspenpitkin.com/depts/38/citvcode.cfm Also, Ordinance 24, Series 2006 (attached) ; Review by: Minor Applications to the Planning and Zoning Commission require a deposit of $1,350 for 6 hours of time. , ~ Additional time is billed at a rate of $225 per hour. Major Referrals from Parks and Engineering are also required; these are each billed at $376. Referral Agencies: None. Planning Fees: Minor. $1,350 Referral Agency Fees: Parks. $376; Engineering. $376. Environmental Health. $376 Total Deposit: $2,478 To apply, submit the following information: E Proof of ownership with payment. Il Signed fee agreement. Il Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. O Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. Il Total deposit for review of the application. 0 11Copies of the complete application packet and maps. HPC = 12; PZ = 10; GMC = PZ+5; CC = 7; Referral Agencies = 1/ea.; Planning Staff = 1 El An 81/2"by 11"vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. Il Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status, including all easements and vacated rights of way, of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. (This requirement, or any part thereof, may be waived by the Community Development Department if the project is determined not to warrant a survey document.) O A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as well as proposed. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearing O Copies of prior approvals. O Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the following digital formats. Compact Disk (CD)-preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word format is preferred. Text format easily convertible to Word is acceptable. El Applicants are advised that building plans will be required to meet the International Building Code as adopted by the City of Aspen, the Federal Fair Housing Act, and CRS 9.5.112. Please make sure that your application submittal addresses these building-related and accessibility regulations. You may contact the Building Department at 920-5090 for additional information. Disclaimer: M The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right, 1 *99 Co 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 2 . ZA~I -7-7 - - ' //0 -/--- 11- 1.444 1 EY'.2-147 6 44 , tf!~ - ' 8& e 43 *al er, f .93... 4.$5/1/1 )~L_~alvs 22;oneer GuZh~._ f it IM A/4/62, -0 -7 1 IAÂ¥: C .1\ . 4- -**1.t li .T\\ -: 14 -1 1 9/1 j ~** 4. 0:211\ 9 : '499 444, - 1. 47 1 =.1 02 10 1 K 1.4 /4/ - /O C 1 . /11 ft Millionaire 4 . 1% -11/.1 7 / .1â‚¬ 1 IÂ·: 4 ..p , /4.. --fl ./ -3 . - A% 3 I *10. 24 . 1 - ASEER'.MIN:ED /- 4 C A..1 *t\ <f,1 1 --A -â€¢04 11 sue\ .. g / 273718200851 ,/ --* -1 7-* f Pitkin County ~ Aspen Chance 2737.18200063 *,1 = UTE ME-SALLâ‚¬ ~ 273718265858 3'~ CITY OF ASPEN' - Ute Cemetery / A..P * - ... 1 15.-1- 273718268001 *th 0 273513400028 y Hoag 1% ASPEN SKIING COMPANY / FRANKLIN JULIE L ~ 0 i.\Ilk %./>744\\~ --''ll Q 3, 1 -I *.% , 0 / i f /// i. - 22 USFS -~. \\\\\ I \ / 1 USFS 1 - - *i-.1. 1 , % <3 4 , This map/drawing/image is a graphical representation Legend N of the features depicted and is not a legal - Roads ! '' Condos representation. The accuracy may change UTE MESA PUD: 0 150 300 1 1 1 Structures 111* Parks & Openspace depending on the enlargement or reduction. 92, SITE VICINITY Feet Water i,,3.3 City of Aspen Copyright 2005 Aspen/Pitkin GIS s 1--1 Parcels ATTACHIVIENT 2 1 'Nt. 4 Take 0 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 3 ATTACHMENT 3 FINAL PLAT OF UTE MESA SUBDIVI SION/PUD APPROVED BY YHE CITY OF ASPEN AS (1001 UTE AVENUE SUBDIVISION PUD) SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. AREA: 6.783 ACRES ./- CERTIFICATION OF DEDICATION AND OWNERSHIP 1'-40 PARCEL ID. NO. 2737-182-00-063 8,... KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THIT UTE MESA, LIC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPINY BEING THE RECORD OWNER OF THE PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON 1 DOES HEREBY SUBDIVIDE AND PLAT THIS REAL PROPERTY UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF UTE MESA SUBDIVISION P.U O., CITY OF ASPEN, PITIUN COUNTY ASPEN CHANCE COLORADO SUBDIVISION EXECUTED THIS - DAY OF -, 2006. CImÂ¥G Da,4 ..22 iu,Dles -C Ofâ€ž. C~OAD C$ 8.29 . '0 00 35 06 33 77Â· 5 3/16 44-E SUBD IV ISION C 2 51Â·17 . 30 00 . 06 S @540.E UTE ADDITION LAETHEM S STEARN, M~NAGER STATE oF COLORADO ) CJ .Â·. 47Â· 30 GO 25 . S P.31Â·43Â·E C. 30Â·3, U Â· 25 00 26 . .1 .W 8 7,Â·fu'.0-E ELLOW 2376 .S COUNTY OF PITKIN ) ~ U YELLOW 16129 LEGEND AND NOTES YELLOW 19588 3 2 THE FOREGOING OWNERÂ·3 CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS / UTE ADDITION MESA, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY. le'ING DIS~ANCE - DAY OF -, 2006, BY LAETHEM S. STEARN, MANAGER OF UTE WITNESS MY HAND IND OFFICIAL SEAL ../0. 5â€¢ E 0 53 O SURVEY MONUMENT AS DESCRIBED SISI . 0/3. 53Â·E .. YELLOW 9184 MY COMMISSION EXPIRM ' 5 $â€¢r52 50Â·E '6 90 I Lâ€¢ IIiÂ·O. 0,Â·E 26 5, TITLE INFORMATION FURNISHED BY: ACCESS EASEMENT NOTARY PUBLIC . 4/5. 30-I 2 t . 5 ,/07 00'I 39 35Â· STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY ASPEN CHANCE ~~0~> BK 447 PG 100 L . . 0, NUMBER: 45474 SUBDIVISI ON i 60. 04-2. L 10 . or/â€¢ 2â€¢'â€¢ 27 27 DATED: OCTOBER 30, 2006 , 4//9 " I .. < 4*24 2% RED 16129 ACCESS EASEMENT SURVEYOR S CERTIFICATE i '. S 61Â·3' 31Â·E 23 $7 1954 BLM BRASS CAP -AT 1-, SITE TBM 7071.61 9 UTE ADDIT ION @y Â· 50BDI VIE ION/PUD WAS PREPARED BY ME AND UNDER MY DIRECTION AND BK 447 PG 100 1, JOHN M. HOWORTH, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAT OF UTE MESI SUPERVISION ANO THIT THE LOCATION IND DIMENSIONS OF THE BOUNDARY ELEVATION BASED oN CITY OF MPEN GPS MONUMENT /4 + SUBDI VISION . 1* A 0-159 ELEVATION 7906,67-. / 0 4 YELLOW 9184 6' 4 4 OTHER FEATURES AAE ACCURITLEY AND CORRECTLY SHOWN HEREIN. THE LINES, BUILDING ENVELOPES, UTILITIES. IMPROVEMENTS, EASEMENTS AND 4 6- CONTROL PRECISION 15 GREATER THIN 1+10,000 AND AREA SHOWN TO COMMON AREA LOT A & 49 o.oIl OF AN ACRE AND THAT THE SURVEY WAS DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH 0% i % OPEN SPACE 2 4 C.R.S. 1973 TITLE 38, ARTICLE 51 AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME. EASEMENTS AND OTHER RATTERS OF RECORD SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON 4 1 "1 4 7 STEWART TITLE OF COLORADO, INC. TITLE COMMITMENT DATED OCTOBER *0.LI* 30, 2006, ORDER NO. 45474. SIGNED THIS - DAY OF -, 2006. ASPEN CHANCE VICINITY MAP MONISION * 2/ HORIZONTAL. 1 / CONTROL . .6416 JOHN M. HOWORTH, PLS 25947 RED,9598 / TeM 797! 61 -6 / - ~ ~ TITLE CERTIFICATE 26*998 ./ 2 THE UNDERSIGNED, A DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF STEWART TITLE OF COLORADO, INC. A TITLE INSURER, REGISTERED TO Do * 2 BUSINESS IN P l TKIR COUNTY, COLORADO DOES HEREBY CERT IFY THAT 1 --- -- LOMMON AREA LOT B THE PERSONS LISTED AS OWNER ON THIS PLAT DOES HEREBY HOLD FEE SIMPLE TITLE TO THE WITHIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FREE AND 4 OPEN S PACE ~ CLEAR OF ALL LIENS AND ENCUMBRANCES, EXCEPT THOSE ~S SHOWN OR STEWART TITLE OF COLORADO, INC. 6 23,250 SF ./ DESCRIBED HEREON. ASPEN CHANCE ' ~ ~ P.O B., SET RED 25947, 2 20Â· W.C ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 620 E. HOPKINS AVENUE SUBDIVISION ~ 3'0' LOT z TENNIS ESMT 28,207 9) + , BK 477 PO 90 5!INFI I REPRESENTIVE OF STEWART TITLE OF COLORADO, INC. STATE OF COLORADO) BUILDING H--1 \ LOT 3 iss ENVE LOPE '~ . THE FORECOING TITLE CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS 2,912 SF â€¢/- COUNTY OF PITKIN 1 Ovs ; C 0/0+ f ENVELOPE 1,245 SF â€¢/ BUILDING _DAY OF -, 2008, BY P \/ O+6% 060 AS REPRESENTIvE OP STEWART TITLE OF COLORADO, INC. WITNESS MY HAD AND OFFICIAL SEAL- 1,902 SF ./. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES- 0 4 4 d NOTARY PUBLIC / LOT 1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER'S APPROVAL -- 23,692 Sf ./- x THIS PLAT OF UTE MESI SUBDIVISION P.U.0 WAS REVIEWED AND APPROIED BY %. 3,.: DAY oF 2006. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER OF THE Cl TY OF ASPEN, THIS ~ UILDING \6 ty/ -\\. , ENVELOPE ~~ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER AVALANCHE M{T#GATION ~ THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OF THE CITY ASPEN, THIS _ 1-Â»L ~~ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL '1 THI PLAT OF UTE MESA SUBDIVIBION P U D. WAS REV IEWED AND APPROIED BY LIMITS RED, 15710 OUTPARCEL A- DAY OF - 2006. \04%449*X.\- 2/6 UTE PLACE SUBDIVISION CO-UNI TY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR \ (LOT 1 HOAG SUBDIVISION) \ 0 444, 46 CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL \ \ \ \ ...431.*1* \1\ THIS PLAT OF UTE MESA SUBDIVISION P.U D WAS REVIEWED IND APPROVED aY THE CITY OF ASPEN ON THE - DAY OF -, 2006. ATTEST: MAYOR CITY CLERK 1 1 YEL LOAL84 . 2Â· OFF Llk CLERK AND RECORDER'S ACCEPTANCE \/PÂ· ./. THIS PLAT OF UTE MESI SUBDIVISION P.U D. WAS ACCEPTED FOR RECORDING YELLOW 1 0 IN THE OFFICE oF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF PITKIN COUNT~~COLORIDO ~T _ OÂ·CLOCK _ M. ON THIS _ DAY oF -, 2 %42%4*:> LEGAL DESCRIPTION 4 CLERK AND RECORDER 1 *./ki I 4 PORTION OF THE 1001 LODE MINING CLAIM USMS NO. 1741 SITUATED IN SECTION 18 TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL AERIDIAN MORE PARTIeULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: 2 COMMON AREA LOT D 4 BEGINNING AT CORNER No 3 0% THE tool LIDE MINING CLAIM, USMS No. 1741 WHENCE AN IRON POST WITH BRASS CAP AFFIXED FOR CORNER NO I 6 d~ OF ASPEN TOWNSITE BEARS NORTH 66711Â·30Â· WEST 132.50 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 47?07 00- WEST 1000.00 FEET ILING THE SOUTHEASTERLY 1,8,0,2 sp ./. 4;02 LINE OF THE SAID 1001 LODE TO A POINT. THENCE NORTH 45?10Â·00- WEST 300.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY 0y, LINE OF THAT LAND DESCRIBED IN BOOK 390 AT PAGE 897 OF THE CLERK AND RECORDERS OFFICE OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO TO A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID 1001 LODE f ,ff. THENCE NORTH 47707 00Â· EAST 968.65 FEET ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID IOOI LOCE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF 9,0 , I . THE UTE ADDITION TO THE CITY OF MPEN THENCE ALONG SI ID SOUTHIESTERLY LINEOF THE UTE ADD ITION 4 SOUTH 39157 22Â· EAST 178.31 FEET TO SAID CORNER NO I ASPEN TOWNSITE THENCE NORTH 28?28Â·00' EAST 49.54 FEET ALING THE SOUTHEASTERLY 46 LINE OF LOT I UTE ADDITION TO THE CITY OF ASPEN SAID LINE ALSO 00 BEING BETWEEN CORNER I AND 2 OF THE ASPEN TOWNSI TE BOUNDARY, TO A POINT oN THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID 1001 LODE THENCE SOUTH 43?10'00- EAST 137.64 FEET ALONG THE NORTHEISTERLY LINE OF SAID IO01 LODE TO CORNER NO. 3 THE POINT OF BEGINNING. BOOK 390 AND ALSO A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEAST I /4 PAGE 897 NORTHWEBT 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO BEING MoRE PARTICULARLY DESCR (BED As FOLLOWS BEGINNING AT CORNER NO 3 OF THE 1001 1-ODE MING CLAIM USMS NO. 741, WHENCE CORNER NO 1 oF ASPEN TOWNS TE BEARS NORTH 667 / 30 WEST 132,50 FEET. THENCE NORTH 47?07'00' EAST 2.20 FEET ALING THE NORTHWESTERLY PREPARED BY LINE OF LOT 1, HOAG SUBDIVISION TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY 0~GHT LOT 3 oF WAY oF UTE AVENUE: THENCE NORTH 33748 30- WEST 149.99 FEET ILING WD RIGHT OF WAY HOAG SUBDIVISION Â·ro A POINT ON LINE 1-2 01 SAID ASPEN T0WN5 ITE ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC THENCE SOUTH 28?28 00Â· WEST 33.08 FEET ALONG SAID LINE 1-2 TO A POINT ON LINE 3-4 OF SAID 1001 LODE: THENCE SOUTH 45?10Â·ocr EAST 137 64 FEET ALONG SED UNE 3-4 To THE 210 SOUTH GALENA STREET POINT OF BEGINNING ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO NOTICE ./.011,10 TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST C-ENCIN' LEGAL ACTION IASED .0. AN~ DEFECT ON THIS PLAT WITHI. T~EE YEAR~ AFTE' Â¥00 Fl.T DISCOVE* S./DEFECT IN NO EVENT mÂ¥ An 'CT~ON PHONE/FAX [970) 925-3816 66 =: m mr:'uww:Jig:':==6=Â®'- DATE JOB CERrl#,C,7,0,4 ,& â€¢re,D IF NOT ~T 5TAM~FO ~ITM â„¢G â€¢;EAL I DE SHEET 1 OF 2 11/06 I 9029HL SUR~EYOR L j 1 FINAL PLAT Ul 0 A SUBDIVK SFON/PUD 2 "7 0 A APPROVED BY YHE CITY OF ASPEN AS (1001 UTE AVENUE SUBDIVISION PUD) SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WE ST OF THE 6th P.M. CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. AREA 6 783 ACRES Â·/- PARCEL ID. NO. 2737-182-00-063 PLAT NOTES THIS FINAL PLAT (Â·F INAL PLAT- 1 OF UTE MESA SIDIVISION/PUD L UTE MESA 1 SUBD!VIDES UTE MESA INTO l'HE LOTS SHOWN HEREON 2. THE REAL ESTA1 E, AS 5110Â¥yN HEREIN, 15 SUBJECT To: 1 1 I THAT CER Lk J N SUBDIV SION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND UTE MESA, LLC RECORDED , 2006 AS RECEPTION NO GTHE -SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT* ) AN[ 1 11) THIT CERTAIN DECLARRION OF PROTECTIVE COVENINTS FOR UTE MESA SUBDIvlsION/PUD {THE DECLIRATIONÂ· 3 RECORDED ' , 2006 AS RECEPTION NO . OWNERSHIP OF ANY LOT SHOWN /.EREON SHALL BE SUBJECT To THE TERMS, PROVISIONS CONDITIONS, RESERVATIONS IND RESTRICTIONS SET FORTH IN SAID DECL~RAT 1ON 3. UTE MESA, LLC, FOR ITSELF, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ISSIGNS. REGERVES, FOR ITSELF, ITS EMPLOYEES, CONTRACTORS, SUBCONTQACTORS AND UTILITY COMPAMIES rHE RIGHT TO ENTER INTO AND PERFORM *ORK AT REASONAELE TIMES, ON OVER, UPON AND ACROSS THE REAL PROPERTY SHOWN HEREIN FOR THE PURPOSE O~ INSTALL NG OR COMPLETING THE INSTALLATION OF ANY 3:EDIÂ¥ SIGN ]MPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT 1. IMI TED TO, UTILITIES *ID ROADS WHICH ACTIVITÂ¢ES I'lAY CREATE DISTURSANCES, SUCH AS NOISE /ND DUST BY (Ccd,T ING F DEED TO ANY PORTION OF I LOT SHOWN IN TH IS P IN,il PLAT, THE OWNER -HEREOM ACKNOWLEDGES THAT SUCH PROPERTY HAY BE SO AFFECTED IND WA] VES Â·AND REL I NOU I SHES ANY RIGHT TO OBJECT TO OR TO MAKE ANY CLA IM FOR DAMAGES OR OTHERWISE ARMING OUT OF THE FOREGOING ACT/inES OR DISTURBANCES CAUSED THEREBY UTE MESA, LLC HEREBY RESERVES TO ITSELF, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, UTILITY EASEMENTS ON, OVER, UNDER, ABOVE, ACROSS AND THROUGH Al.L LOTS OTHER THAN WITHIN BUILDING ENVELOPES FOR PURPOSES OF USING, INSTALLING CONSTRUCTING, MAINTAINING, IMPROVING, REPAIRING AND REPLACING DRAINIAGE~~, WATER AND IT h. t TY EACH- ITIESOF ANY K IND OR NATURE WHATSOEVER INCLUD BUT NOT LIMITED TO, STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES, FIRE HYDRANTS ~ND RELATED FIRE PROTECTION DEVICES SINITARY SEWER /NES WATER LINES SNOW MELT GY9 TEM L. INES, IRRIGAT, 04 LINES AND SPRINKLER ~EVICES, UNDEAGROUND ELECI C LINES, GAS LINES TELEPHONE U NES CABLE TELEVISION LINES FIBER OPTIC LINES AND OtHER COMMUNfCATION FACILIÂ·r IE~, WATER STORAGE IND DIS+RIBUTION FACILITIES AMD VAULTS OR PEDESTALS FOR ANY OF THE FOREGOBNG, TOGETHER WITH A PERPETUAL RIGHT OF I NGRESS AND EGRESS TO IND FROM SUCH EASEMENTS WITHOUT L]Mi T TO THE POREGOING UTILIY E~SEMENTS UTE MESA, LLCÂ· 11 DOES, FOR THE BENEFIT OF ANY UTILITY COMPANY OR OTHER 4Â¢:OV IDER HEREBY DEDICATE AND GRANT PERPETUAL NON-EXCLUBI VE EASEMENTS ON, OVER, UN6ER ABOVE r ACROSS AND THROUGH THOSE AREAS DES IGNATED ON TH 15 FINAL. PLAf AS UTf LITY EMEMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF USING, INSTILLING, CONSTRUCTING, MAINTAINING, IMPROVING REPAIRING AND REPLACING UNDERGROUND UT)LITIES INCLUDING laUT NOT LIMIT~D Toi WATER, SEWER, ELECTRIC, MS TELEPHONE ~ABLE TELEVISION FIBER OPTICIND OTHER cOMMUNCATION FAÂ¢IL TIES, TOGET~R *,TH THE RIGHT 6F NORESS AND EGRESS THERETO AND U J MIr SU8# tuTE ANY ONE OR MORE SPECIFIC EASEMENTS FOR THE USE BY ANY #TILJTY COMPANY OR OTHER PROVIDER BY THE RECORDATION oF M INSTRUMENT IN THE PITKiN COUNTY REAL ESTATE RECORDS LIENHOLDER CONSENT 5 UTE MESA, LLC HEREBY RESERVES 70 ITSELF, ITS SUCCESSORS OH ..SIUMS' I DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON, OVER UNDER, ACROSS AND THROUGH ALL LOTJ SHOWN MERRILL A. CHOZEN AND JILL E. CHOZEN 1981 TRUST, BEING THE BENEFICIARY HEREON EXCEPTING ONLY THE ~OOTPRINTS OP ANY Bull.DINGS Now OR HEREAFTER OF THAT CERTA I N DEED OF TRUST DATED MIRCH 22, 2005, AS IMENDED, IND CONSTRUMED ON THE REAL PROPERTY 5 HOWN HEREON FOR PURPOSES OF I ) USING' RECORDEO MARCH 22, 2006 AT RECEPTION NO 522055 ANR AMENDMENT INSTALLING, IMPROVING, MAINTAINING, REPAIRING IND REPLACING DRAINAGE FND THERETO RECORDED OCTOBER 16, 2006 AT RECEPTION NO 529845, WHICH DEED DEWATERING FICILITIES OF ANY KIND OR NATURE, INCLUDING~,gtJ~~~~~sL,~91{Jt~~O, OF TRUST ENCUMBERS THE REAL PROPERTY SHOWN HEREIN, HEREBY CATCH BAS INS DRY WELLS DIVERSION AND STORM DRAINAGE . CONSENTS TO IND APPROVES THE FILING OF THIS PLAT AND THE SUBDIVISION WITH A PERPE~UAL RIGHT 6F i NGRESS IND EGRESS TO AND FROM SUCH EASEMENT 5 AGREEMENT IN ACCORDANCE W I TH THE COVENANTS, RESERVATIONS, AND (Il) FOR THE DRAI NAGE OF WATERL MUD AND DEBRIS F.00 IG FROM OTHER EASEMENTB, OBLIGAIONS AND CONDITIONS APPEAR ING HEREIN AND AGREES LANDS THAT SAID DEED OF TRUST SHALL BE SUBORDINATE TO TH! S PLAT AND THE SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT. 6. UTE MESA, LLC HEREBY GRANTS, DEDICATES ING SETS APART TO THE ASSOCJAT ION FOR THE PERPETUAL NON-EXCLUSj VE USE ;IND BENEF { T OF THE EXECUTED THIS- DAY OF , 2006, OWNERS FROM TIME To TIME, OF LOTS :,2 IND 3 HEREIN, THEIR GUESTS AND INVITE&5. AN EASEMENT IFOR VEHi CULAR IND PEDESTRIAN INGRESS IND EGRESS ON, MERRILL A CHOZEN AND JILL E CHOZEN 1981 TRUST ACROSS, bVER AND THROUGH COMMON AREA LOT C SHOWN HEREON SUBJECT To THE RIGHT ON THE ASSOCIATION TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, MAINTAIN, REPAIR AND BYÂ· REPLICE A DR IVEWAY, LANDSCAPING, A GATE AND/OR GATEHOUSE AT A DES I GNATED MERRILL A. CHOZEN, TRUSTEE POINT ALONG AND ACAOSS COMMON AREA LOT C, *HICH IMPROVEMENTS MAY ENCROACH INTO ANY LOT OR COMMON AREA 5HO*N HEREIN OTHER THAN THE BY: DESj GNATED BUILDING ENVELOPE AND SHILL BE OPERATED PURSIANT TO JILL E. CHOZEN, TRUSTEE REASONABLE RULES KND REGULATIONS, FROM TIME TO TIME, ADOPTED BY THE ASOC IATi ON THE ASSOCIATION SHALL BE (1! RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE, STATE OF 1 INCLUDING SNOWPLOWING, REPAIR, UPKEEP IND REPLACEMENT OF SAID DRIVEWAY, ISS In ENTITLED TO ADOPT AND ENPORCE REASONABLE RULES AND REGULIT IONS COUNTY OF CONCERNING THE USE THEREOF. THIS DEDICATION IS MADIE SUBJECT TO THE UTIL:TY IND ITIER EASEMENTS SET FORTH IN THE OTHER PLAT NOTES HEREOF AND THE THE FOREGOING L I ENHOLDER CONSENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE HE THIS RIGHT OF POLICE, AMBULINCE, FIREFIGHTING IND OTHER EMERGENCY vEHICUES TO UTILIZE THE COMMON AREA LOT C UNDER ALL REASONILE I RCUMSTANCES =8AIN:F.ra--r--6,33@t' I 81I H':3&L A. CHOZEN, TRUSTEE OF TIE MERRILL A. 7 UTE MESA, LLC HEREBY DEDICATES AND 5ETS APART TO rHE ASSOCIATION FOR WITNESS HY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL, THE PERPETUAL, NON. EXCLUS I VE USE Â»ID BENEF I T OF THE CWNERS PROM TIME TO TIME OF LOTS 1 AND 2 SHOWN HEREON, THEIR GUESTS AND 1 NV E TEES, COMMON IrEI MY COMMISSION EXPIRESÂ· LOTS A, B AND D. LOT 3 SHALL HaVE NO RIGHTS OR PREVILEGES WHATSOEVER 'N AND TO COMAON AREA LOTS A, B OR D, UPON CONVEYANCE TO THE ASSOCIATION 06 WD NOTARY PUBLIC COMMON AREA LOTS A G AND D THE ASSOCIAT]ON SHALL IE ENTITLED, FROM TIME TO TIME, TO ADOPT ~ND ENFOR~E REASONABLE RULES AND REGULATIONS STATE OF CONCERNING THE USE THEREOF AS TO COMMON AREA LOT 8 ONLY, TH] S DEDICATION 'SS 4 5 HADE SUBJECT TO THE EASEMENT GRANTED TO USE SAI D COMMON AREA LOT B AS COUNTY OF MORE FULLY SET FORTH IN THE DOCUMENT RECORDED ]NI BOOK 477 AT PAGE 90 THIS DEDICATION OF COMMON AREA LOTS A, 8 AND D 15 MADE SUBJECT TO THE UTILITY THE FOREGO ING L IENHOLDER CONSENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE HE THIS IND OTHER EASEMENTS SHOWN HEREIN AND THE OTHER PLAT NOTES SHOWN HEREON. - DAY OF - 2006, BY ALL E. CHOZEN, TRUSTEE OF THE MERRILL A. CHOZEN AND JILL E. CHOZEN !981 TRUST, 8 UTE MESA LLC, AS THE OWNER OF LOT 3 SHOIN HEREIN FOR ITSELF, ITE WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, HEREBY: (1) WAIVES, RELEASES AND RELINQUItHES ANÂ¥ AND ALL RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES IN AND TO THE COMMON AREA LOTS I, 3 AND D MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SHOWN HEREIN AND ( 11) AGREES THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID COMMON AREA LOTS A . B AND D MAY, WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE OWNER OR OWNERS OF SA ID NOTARY PUBLIC LOT 3 6R 1 TS SUCCEStoRS OR ASS IONS BE FURTHER MODA= 1 ED AND THIT SAID COMMON AREA LOTS A, B AND D MAY BE BURDENED BY FURTHER EASEMENTS 9 UTE MESA, LLC RESERVES FOR KSELF ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSiGNSj A NONEXCLUSI VE EASEMENT ON, 04R, UNDER. 40Â¥E, ACROSS AND THROUGH LOT 3 SHOWN HEREON EXCEPTING THAT PORTION Of SID LOT 3 UPON WHICHANY IMPROVEMENTS MAY BE CONSTRUCTED, SAID EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE INSTALLATION Mt INTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT OF LANDSCAPING, INCLUDING, BUT NOT L IMI TED fo, LAWNS, SHRUBBERY, TREES AND FLOWERS, AND FIE WATERING THEREOF, I NCLJOI NG A SPRINKLER SYSTEM AND OTHER I MP*OVEMENTS OR ACTIVITIES INCIDENT OR RELATED TO ANY OF THE FOREGING THE RESERÂ¥ATI(N HEREUNDER DOES NOT IMPO9E ANY OBL IGAT ION ON UTE MESA, LLC OR ITS SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS TO INSTALL, MINTAIN OR REPLACE ANY LANDSCAPING 10. BY ACCEPTANCE OF A DEED CONVEING ANY I NTEREST 1 N THE Rel PROPERTY SHOWN HEREIN, THE GRANTEE OF 5UCH DEED, FOR IrSELF, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSI GNS, ACKI1OWLEDGES THE AWARENEM OF AND ASSUMES ALL R ] SK RELATE MiG TO: I 1 1 THE PRESENCE OF ~NY HISTORIC MINE DUMP MATERIALS OR ( 1 1) ANY MUD AVALANCHE OR DEBRIS FLOW, RUNOFF OR DRAINAGE HAZARDS AFFECTING SAID ~GAL PROPERTY AND HEREBY RELEASES AND AGREES TO INDEMN 4 DEFEND {INCLUDING REASONABLE ATTORNEYS FEES) AND HOLD HARMLES5 UTE HESA. LLC ANO ITS AGENTS CONSULTINTS REPRESENTATIVES SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS FROM AND AGAINsf ANY LIABILifÂ¥ OR CLAIMS THERd/ORE FOR ANY LOSSES OR D/MAGES TO i PERSONS OR PROPERTY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY OR DE/.TH THAT MAY RESULT TO SAID GRANTEE, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS FROM ~HE PRESENCE THEREOR 11 FOR PURPOSES OF THIS FINAL PLAT AND THE DEDICATIONL EISEMENTS AND RESERVATIONS SET FORTH HEREIN, IN ISSIGN OR SUCCESSOR OF UTE MESA, LLC SHALL BE DEEMED A SUCCESSOR OA ISIGN ONLY *F SPECIFICALLY DESIGNATED GY UTE MESA, LLC BY INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN THE PITKIN COUNTY REAL ESTATE RECORDS AND ONLY ATH RESPECT TO THE PARTICULAR RIGH15 OR INTERESTS SPECIFi OLLY DESCRIBED THEREIN 12. WITH RESPECT TO THE EASEMENTS RESERVED, GRANTED OR DEDICATED IN THESE PLAT NOTES, UTE HEA LLC RESERVES THE AIGHT. BUT HAS NO OBLIGATION, TO RECORD A DOCUMENT SPECIFYING THE PREC15 E BOUNDAAIES OF ANY SPECIFIC EASEMENT OR EASEMENTS WITHIN THE DESCRIBED EASEMENT +REIS. 13. ALL EASEMENTU RESERVED BY UTE MES,L LLC HERER SHALL NOT MERGE WITH INY FEE INTEREST OWNED BY UTE MESI LLC EITHER PRESENTLY OR IN THE FUTURE, BUT SHALL REM/N SEPARITE IND DIST NCT #ROPERTY RIGHTS OF UTE MESI, LLC, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, UNTIL REL.1NOUISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, PREPARED BY 14 'LL REFERENCES HF.REIN TO RECORI)ED DOCUMENTS IRE REFERENCES TO DOCUMENTS RECORDED I N OFFICE OF ME C,ERK ANO RECORDER OF P I TK I N COUNTf, COLORADO. ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC, P- I ENHOLDER CONSENT ON FOLLOWING PAGE ] 210 SOUTH GALENA STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 40TICE ACCO. INd rO COLORADO LAR YOU WST COPUENCE 41Y LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT Ok TWI~ PLAT ~i TIâ€¢t. T,+REE YEARS ./. YOU ..T Dil/VER S./ DEFECT. 1,1 40 EVENT MAY,NY ACTION PHONE/FAX (970} 925-3816 u./ OPON AMY DEFECT IN lh!' PUT ....RD MORE '-4 TEN g. .* . .TE . T. CERT.ICAT~ON S,Â«IN H.M THE CERVKCA,il IS vOID 'F ND>T â€¢ET S-*â€¢PEO ~IT,â€¢ YHE SEAL OF 74 DATE J08 su~veoâ€¢ SHEET 2 02 2 11/06 ] 9o29HL I '-; Co 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 4 _ -- -i .-1 .,/.It:â€¢ ' , 1%12/r~t~Â·-C J Lu. 2 , L v .u . -vnv iiY OF ASPEN . 3 im m IMIHMI~Iummjum 11/27/2006 01Â·38 531499 ATTACHMENT 4 Page: 1 of 9 JANICE K VOS CAUDILL PITKI, COLFTY CO R 46.00 D 0.00 r 1. ORDINANCE N0.24 1 1/ (SERIES OF 2006) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING WITH i CONDITIONS, A SUBDIVISION REVIEW, CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL/FINAL PUD, AND A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR THE PRESERVATION OF SIGNIFICANT OPEN SPACE PARCELS FOR THE 1001 UTE AVENUE SUBDIVSION, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Parcel ID: 2737-182-00-063 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Leathem Steam, owner, represented by Davis Horn Incorporated, requesting approval of Subdivision, Consolidated Conceptual/Final Planned Unit Development, 8040 Greenline Review, Growth Management Review for the Preservation of Significant Open Space Parcels to divide the parcel at 1001 Ute Avenue into two (2) residential properties and four (4) separate common areas, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26,470.040(B)(1), Detached Single-family and Duplex Dwelling Units, the Community Development Director approved a Growth Management Review for the construction of one single-family dwelling unit, conditioned upon approval of the other associated land use actions requested; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.030(B)(2), Consolidated Conceptual and Final Review, the Community Development Director consented to allow for the development application to be reviewed as a consolidated PUD review because of the anticipated limited scope of issues involved with the reviews and. WHEREAS, pursuant to the applicable sections of the land use code, the Community Development Director has reviewed the requested land use actions and recommended denial of the growth management review for the preservation of significant open space parcels and that a maximum floor area of only 3,830 square feet be allowed per residential lot; and. WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 4,2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened and continued the public hearing on this application to April 18, 2006; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on April 18,2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened and continued the public hearing on this application to May 2, 2006; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant amended the development application to include the development of a Category 4 affordable housing unit to mitigate for the second free-market residential unit in the subdivision; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on May 2,2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution Nr, .6. Series of 2006, by a six to zero (6 0) vote, approving with conditions an 8040 Green.line Review, a Growth Management Review r. , '- - -J-V. ll, 2990-11:49AN CITY OF A:LE' ------ - - NO. 7877 ?. 2 fill'11 lim -lilli lili 1111111111111111111111% ill 11/27/2006 01:38 531499 Page' 2 of 9 JANICE K VOS CA-DILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 4600 D 0.00 r \ for the Development of Affordable Housing, and recommending that City Council approve - with conditions, Subdivision Review, Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, and a Growth Management Review for the Preservation of Significant Open Space Parcels for the 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision to divide the parcel at 1001 Ute Avenue into two (2) residential properties, a parcel for the development of a Category 4 AH unit and four (4) separate j common areas, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on July 10, 2006, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposal and continued the hearing until July 24,2006; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on July 24,2006, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposal and continued the hearing until August 14,2006; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on August 14, 2006, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposed 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision and approved Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2006, by a four to zero (4-0) vote, approving with conditions, the 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision, Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, and Growth Management Review for the Preservation of Significant Open Space Parcels; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements ofthe Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CrIY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council hereby approves with conditions, a Subdivision Review, Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, and a Growth Management Review for the Preservation of Significant Open Space Parcels for the 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision to divide the parcel at 1001 Ute Avenue into two (2) single-family residential properties, a property for the development of a "for sale", three-bedroom, Category 4 affordable housing unit and four (4) separate common areas, subject to the conditions contained herein, OK. 27.2006-11:49AM CITY OF ASPEN NO. 7877 531499 11-1111-111-1111.-1111-11- ]1111111 11/27/Z006 01 :36 f Page: 3 of 9 I - JANICE K VOS C...DILL PI IKI~ Dl-KTY CO R 46.00 D 0.00 Section 2: Approved Development Development of two (2) free-market single-family residential dwelling units, and the development of a "for sale", three-bedroom, Category 4 affordable housing unit, the relocation of the existing tennis courts approximately thirty (30) feet to the west of their current location, along with the necessaiy road improvements to access the residential lots are hereby approved subject to the terms of this ordinance. Section 3: Dimensional Requiremenit The approved dimensional requirements are as follows: Dimensional Approved Requirement Dimensional Requirements Minimum Lot Size Lot 1= 24,850 SF Lot 2= 30,060 SF Common Area 1 Open Space= 20,860 SF Common Area 2 Open Space= 24,860 SF Common Area 3 Access Easement= 15,290 SF Common Area 4 Open Space= 920 SF Minimum Lot Width 25 Feet for Common Area 2 Open Space Li - Minimam Lot Area 31,655 SF in PUD Per Dwelling Unic Minimum Front Per Building Envelope Yard Setback Minimum Side Yard Per Building Envelope Setback Minimum Rear Yard Per Building Envelope Setback Maximum Height 25 Feet as measured from finished grade and 27 Feet to the ridge Allowable External 5,040 SP per each of the FAR two (2) single-family residential dwelling units a S calculated ba5ed on the City land use code methodology in affect at the time of building pennit submittal. Additionally, 1,400 SF is allocated for the development of a "for sale", Category 4 affordable housing umt. Minimum Off-Streer 2 Spaces per Residential Parld.ng Unit 1 JEC. 27. 2906-11: 49ANE -CITY OF ASPEN Nu 7877 0 4 1 / 1 lilli 1111 lili Ill 111 lili 531499 Page: 4 of 9 11/27/2006 01:361 JANILE K US CAU-ILL PI IKIN COLATY CO R 46.00 0 0.00 , Section 4: Subdivision/PUD Plat and Agreement The Applicant shall record a subdivision/PUD plat and agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code within 180 days of approval. The Plat shall contain the property boundaries, easements, and the building envelopes. Section 5: 8040 Greenline Review The 8040 Greenline approval granted herein is only for the road serving the single-family residence parcels and the relocation of the tennis courts. Prior to applying for building permits on the two (2) free-market residential units or the associated accessory dwelling units within the subdivision/PUD, an 8040 Gmenline Review on the specific residence designs shall be applied for and approved pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.435.030,8040 Greenline Review. Section 6: Residential Design Standards The two (2) single-family residences to be constructed within the subdivision shall be required to meet the applicable City of Aspen Residential Design Standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410, Residential Design Standards. -Section 7: Affordable Housing Mitigation A "for sate", three-bedroom, Category 4 affordable housing unit consisting of a minimum of 1,400 square feet of net livable space shall be constructed in combination with providing a conservation easement on the southern 4.1 acres of the fathering parcel to mitigate for the free-market residential dwelling units to be constructed within the subdivision. The affordable housing unit shall be excluded from the homeowner's association for the subdivision so that it will not be responsible for maintenance and association fees common to the subdivision. The homeowner's association documents shall not contain any language that prohibits the owners ofthe affordable housing units from having dogs. Section 8: Conservation Easement The Applicant shall deed the 4.1 acres of the fathering parcel to be placed under a conservation easement to the City of Aspen. Subsequently, the City of Aspen shaJ] record a conservation easement to be held by a third party on the 4.1 acres of the fathering parcel to remain in Pitkin County, that will be sterilized in perpemity against future development in exchange for one of the two (2) single-family development lights within the subdivision. The property shall be deeded to the City pdor to submission for an access/infrastructure permit on the common driveway improvements within the subdivision/PUD. The conservation easement document shall be prepared by the Applicant and reviewed by the Pitkin County Community Development Department prior to recordation. Section 9: School Lands Dedication Fee Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630, School Lands Dedication, the Applicant shall pay a fee-in-lieu of land dedication in conjunction with any residential development in the subdivision. Prior to building pennit issuance on any residential development within the subdivision, the Applicant shall pay the school lands dedication fee associated with the subdivision as calculated by the City Zoning Officer using the dedication schedule in effect --- -.--DEC. 271 2006-'11:50AM CITY OF ASPEN--- NO. 7877 1 -F In|i --|ii I| -1 I ii ii-1 I l_~-i ri I-Ii 531499 Page: 5 of 9 11/27/2005 01:36! JANISE K US 3 UCILL PIIKIN CCJRTY CO R 46.00 D 0.00 at the time of building permit submission as set forth in Land Use Code Section 26 630.030, School Lands Dedication: Dedication Schedule. Section 10: Park Development Impact Fee Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Park Development Impact Fee, the Applicant shall pay a park development impact fee at the time of building permit issuance for any construction within the subdivision that adds new residential/lodge bedrooms and/or commercial/office square footage. The City Zoning Officer shall calculate the amount due using the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit submission as set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.610.030, Park Development Impact Fee: Fee Schedule. Section 11: Soil Subsidence. Rock Fall. and Avalanche Hazards The Applicant shall submit gectechnical and soil stability reports perfonned by a qualified, licensed engineer, demonstrating the land is suitable to handle the proposed development in conjunction with the 8040 Greenline Review applications for the individual residences proposed within the subdivision/PUD. The designs for the single-family residences within the subdivision/PUD shall comply with the recommendations of the Applicant' s Avalanche Specialist, Peter Lev, and Applicant's Geologist, Nicholas Lampiris, by providing an engineered four (4) foot tall retaining wall on the south side of the residences. k Section 12: Mine Waste 1 The Applicant shall provide a mine waste testing and handling plan to the City prior to submitting a building permit application on either of the residences, that complies with the following conditions of approval regarding development in an Environmentally Sensitive area and handling of any hazardous or toxic soils encountered on the property pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.435.030 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code: a Any disturbed soil or material that is to be stored above ground shall be securely contained on and covered with a non-permeable tam or other protective barrier approved by the Environmental Health Department so as to prevent leaching of contaminated material onto or into the surface soil. Disturbed soil or material need not be removed if the City's Environmental Health Department finds that: 1) the excavated material contains less than 1,000 parts per million (ppm) of total lead, or 2) that there exists a satisfactory method of disposal at the excavation site. Disturbed soil and solid waste may be disposed of outside of the site upon acceptance of the material at a duly licensed and authorized receiving fucility. b. Non-removal of contaminated material. No contaminated soil or solid waste shall be removed, placed, stored, transported or disposed of outside the boundaries of the site without having first obtained any and all necessary State and/or Federal transportation and disposal permits. c. Dust suppression. All activity or development shall be accompanied by dust suppression measures such as the application of water or other soil surfactant to minimize the creation and release of dust and other particulates into the air. DEC. 27 2006-11:50AM CITY OF ASPEN i NO. 7877 P, 6 1--111-11- -111 - 1 lillill--111 -1 -lili lili 531499 Page: 6 of 9 11/27/2006 01.36; JANICE M LOS GA-DILL PITKIN CIJATY 03 R 40.00 0 0.00 d. Vegetable and flower gardening and cultivation. No vegetables or flowers shall be planted or cultivated within the boundaries of the site except in garden beds consisting of not less than twelve (12) inches of soil containing no more than 999- ppm lead, e. Landscaping. The planting of trees and shrubs and the creation or installation of landscaping features requiring the dislocation or disturbance of more than one cubic yard of soil shall require the same measures outlined in sub-sections a, b, c, f and g, Â£ Any contaminated soil or mine waste rock that is either disturbed or exposed shall be contained on the property such that runoff does not exit the property or contaminate clean soils existing elsewhere on the property. g. Any contaminated soil or mine waste rock to be left oIl-site shall be placed under structures or pavement. Soils used in landscaped areas or engineered fills shall be covered by a minimum of 1 foot of clean soil that contains less than 1,000 ppm lead. Section 13: Fire Mitigation Fire sprinkler and alarm systems that meet the requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be installed in each of the single-family residences to be constructed within the subdivision/PUD. The water service line shall be sized appropriately to accommodate the required Fire Sprinkler System. The residences to be designed and constructed within the subdivision/PUD shall meet the Colorado Defensible Space Standards. ComplianceÂ· with the Colorado Defensible Space Standards shall be verified as part of the 8040 Greenline 0/ Review process on the individual residences. Section 14: Driveway Construction The driveway shall be constructed to the grades that are proposed in the application and shall not exceed twelve (12) percent at any point. A hammerhead fire truck turnaround meeting the requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be installed as proposed in the application. The Applicant shall enter into a recorded road maintenance agreement with the City that is to be reviewed and accepted by the City Fire Marshal pbor to the issuance of an access/infrastructure permit to construct the road. An access/infrastructure permit shall be applied for and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to commencing any grading or construction activities related to the installation of the common driveway to the residential parcels. A geotechnical report shall be submitted as part of the access/infrastructure permit application. Section 15: Landscaping The Applicant shall install landscaping that is consistent with the landscaping plan that is proposed in the application for screening of the retaining wall. A tree removal permit and tree protection plan shall be submitted and approved by the City of Aspen Parks Department prior to commencing construction activities related to the subdivision access improvements. Additionally, individual landscaping plans for the residential parcels shall be submitted and reviewed by the City Parks Department as part of the 8040 Greenline Review applications for the individual residences. The Applicant shall provide a financial -DEC. 27. 20060-11:50AM-CITY OF ASPEN- - ----NO. 7877Â· -P. 7 ' h I IE |I -| 1 lilli - ~11| 11/27/2006 01:36; 531499 Page: 7 of 9 JAIECE K VOS CAUCILL P.TKIN COL..fY CO R 46.00 0 0.00 security to ensure the completion of the landscaping as shown on the landscaping plan in the application is completed prior to a building permit application being submitted on any of the residential units within the subdivision. Section 16: Relocation of Tennis Courts The Applicant shall relocate the existing tennis courts prior to or in conjunction with the installation of the common driveway to the residential parcels within the subdivision/PUD. An access/infrastructure permit shall be applied for and approved prior to the commencement of construction activities related to relocating the tennis courts. The pathway from Ute Avenue to the relocated tennis courts shall be improved to comply with applicable ADA accessibility requirements. A deed restriction shall be recorded on the Common Area 2 Open Space (parcel to contain the tennis courts) that preserves the parcel against future development. -Section 17: Trail Easement The Applicant shall grant a public trail easement to accommodate the existing Ajax Trail if it is found to be located outside of the existing trail easement in areas. Additionally, the Applicant shall grant a permanent public trail easement meeting the approval of the City of Aspen Parks Department along the eastern corner of single-family residential Lot 1 in order to accommodate a pedestrian trail from the Ajax Trail down to Aja Park prior to recordation ofthe final subdivision/PUD plat. Section 18: Water Del)artment Reauirements j The Applicants shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. The Applicants shall also enter into a water service agreement with the City and complete a common service line agreement for the residential units. Section 19: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Requirements The Applicants shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) to ACSD lines shall be allowed. The sanitary sewer lines serving the residential properties within the subdivision shall be constructed out of a yellowmite material since adequate separation between the water and sewer lines cannot be maintained under the common driveway. If a glycol heating and snowmelt system is to be installed, the glycol storage areas shall be reviewed and approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District prior to installation. Section 20: Massing Controls The specific designs of the two (2) free-market residential dwelling units that are to be submitted for 8040 Greenline Review pursuant to Section 5 of this ordinance shall be substantially consistent with the revised massing drawings presented to City Council on August 14, 2006. A substantial subdivision/PUD amendment review would be necessary to substantially vary from the massing drawings presented to City Council on August 14, 2006. The width of the north-facing facades of the free-market residential units shall be limited to 120 feet. The overall ridge height of the free-market, gingle-family residential 2006-11:51AM-CITY OF ASPEN --NO. 7377 P 3 / I 11111 l ili lilli 1-l i lli ll- li l li li l li lili 11/27/2006 01:36; 531499 Page: 8 of 9 JANICE K VOS CAUDILL PITKIN COLN-Y CO R 46.00 0 0.00 structures shall be limited to twenty-seven (27) feet above finished grade, and twenty (20) percent of the width of the front fa9a(les shall be limited to a ridge height of twenty-two (22) feet above finished grade, Non-reflective materials shall be used in the construction of the proposed single-family residences. -Section 21: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall be vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries ofthe City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title, Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a vested property right, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statiltes, pertaining to the following described property: 1001 Ute Avenue, City and Townsite of Aspen, by Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2006, of the Aspen City Council. Section 22: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be constued and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 23: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 24: A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 10th day of July, 2006, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper o f general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 120 day of June, 2006. Helen Klu, ruauuoi uu, iviay. < ,/6, --- DEC. 27.2006-11:51AM CITY OF ASPEN NO 7877 k 9 531499 Page. 9 of 9 11111Ill lilill lillill 111111 11/27/2005 01:36; Attest: JANLE K VOS CHUDILL P.TKI~ COUNTY CJ R 46.00 D 0.00 \A A ) *k '\-y='FV,~ ~~tlerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 14th day of Augus~~6~/ Attest: Kathryn S. 064 City Clerk Approved as to form: 2=6406- C.,....Joh~11'. Worcester, City Attorney r Co 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 5 Â®*.1 - : .MEMT Al DEER I 110 A -- I UfL ADDITION ' 46 - D Â· 'M ' I 73+ 2 60*Â¥EY CONTROL FENCI i 0 -~pir YEwoo O 1,4 Mt H a. â‚¬ 1 40 DISTANCE i . 'r , e TITLE IN/ORMATION FURNIS)â‚¬O IY L 1 5 #/ 0 00'E 0 1 ' 1 LANOSCAP I NG STEVAMT TITLE QUARAI1 Y COMPANY -. 5 ENCROACHES L 2 8 34'll'00 4 29.00 .A.~ â€¢', ' * ACCEIS /9/02â€¢ â€¢3760 L 3 1 02',5'00-I . 50 '54 RED Â¢61204 â€¢47/100 2 DATED. APRIL 21, 2005 L 4 6 42'53 00Â·E C.- 0 10 2 7 25 64 L 5 5 30'57 22Â·E 44 37 4 *- LLOW 9114 ~2'02 * MANHOLE 4, 1*â€¢40 I y i S 1 934 ILM IRABS CAP -AT I \ % th Â® VALVE I. 1 32 , A1% 0% 0 40 to / Pl, 1 2 FOOTCTOURI \ - ~ TREE SEE LAYER FOR CAL I PER AND TYPE vERIFY BEFORE CoNST 1\ ELEVATIONS BASED ON CITY OF ASPEN OPS MONUENTATION EDGE OF TRIES . MONUMENT aÂ·,59 -ELEVATION 7906.67 RED I 9591 - : CL OUT SEE 00OK 678 AT pAGE 57 ASPEN CHANCE OA FOR ACCESSOMY OVELLING RED 1 95" -- % 3 ELECTR IC UNIT APPROVAL \ NO EASEMENT FOUND CERTIFICATION SUBD IVIS ION ~ ~ ~ TR *F K \ e THE UNDERSIGNED STATES THAT~YE,PRÂ°'ERTY DESCRIBED HEâ€¢EON WAS .ELD SURVEYED DURING 2005 AND 7 ACCURATE TENNIS FACILITY \ *ASED ON THE F IELD EVIDENCE AS SHOWâ€¢I IND #MIT THERE IRE Pâ€¢0 DISCREPANCIES OF RECORD, BOUNDARY L :AE CONFLICTS ENCROACHMENTS, BOOK â€¢47 PAGE 90 1 \ 9 47â€¢07'06'w 2 20' EASEMENTS OR R IGHTS oF *AY INFIELD EV IDENCE OR 440* TO f 1 EXCEPT AS HEREIN SHOWN UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WITH NO 4OvEGOUND - SET RED 23947 APPURTENANCES, AND Docur,ENTS OF RECORD NOT SUPPLIED TO THE \\\ SURVEYON AHE EXCEPTED. THIS SURVEY 19 VOID UNLESS *EÂ¥ STAMPED WI TH THE SEAL OF THE SURVEYOR BELOW ~f 1 DATED- \11.2/er LANOSCAPING ~ ENCROACMENT ~ JOHN M fERTH P L.S. 25947 . . 71-Il 2 1~ , . //4/ TRAIL 70 ASPEN CHANCE SUBDIVISION ,3 SLOPE LEGEND 7 -Sh- \ LAYER (30) SLOPES P--5--A-Â·C ---2 1-Â£E*3Li-GI-=frEÂ«~1-1- ~ ~~ ~~ * y e AREA wITHIN TOWNSITE 6,605 SF Â·/Â· ' 00& + r#Th-3224Â»2-1Â«-----'-- OUTPARCEL -A- SLOPES 0-20% 60,303 SF Â·/ & 11Â° , 0 0 N X6*46241174 ~ 0 --- % . UTE PLACE SUBDIVISION % %ier<74/.:2:/\4\ \ - -nk..1---2:7401*11*242. -- / CLOT I HOAG SUBD.) SLOPES 20Â·30â€¢ 1131-4-0-401 5,008 SF â€¢/- / RED-CAP, 15710 , 1/33&23 .4'M. SLOPES > JO* (134-4.0-14) 4477 I SF Â·/ 'Â° Â«Châ‚¬31, 1:1Â«342\â‚¬ - \90 \\\\ 1 1 -\ ./. --\ .690 V \\\\ \\ .\ I . . \ .12./.Â©4/ / 2 |':' 'Â·~ SLOPES AGOVE 8040 IDOTS-4-0-161 3,54 l SF Â·/ . ~10 *u - N------1- . 912* vet- .... \\\\ ~~- - li 12Â· TRAIL \ 00 00~ h. g ORIGINAL CORNER EASEMENT ~ HOAG SUBDIVISION 2 SK 678 PO 214 -- 9175 ;A~< â‚¬VERLA/ YELLOW 15710 1 \ k \b TOPOGRAPHIC / IMPROVEMENT SURVEY 44 0 COUNTY PARCEL ,01 CP A PORTION OF THE 1001 LOOE MINING CLAIM (UNITED STATE MINEUL SURVEY â€¢1741) SITUATED IN *1 ~0 SECTION 18. TOINSHIP 10 SOUTH. RANGE 64 vEST oF THE eth P I.. WORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED 6 \0 AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT CORNER NO 3 OF THE 1001 LOOE, MS 1741 WHENCE AN IRON POST WITH BRASS CAP AFFIxED FOR COBER NO I oF ASPEN TMISITE BEARS NORâ„¢ 66â€¢ll'30' *EST *32 SO FEET THENCE SOUTH 47'07' WEST 1000.00 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID tool LOOE TO A POINT: THENCE NORTH 45'10' WEST 300.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY UNE OF THAT LA~ DESCRIBED IN BOOK 390 AT PAGE 897 OF THE CLERK AND RECORDERS OFF ICE OF P, TK IN COUNTY. COLORADO. TO A POINT ON THE NORTIESTERLY LIAE OF SAID 1001 LOOE THENCE NORTH 47-07' EAST 966.65 FEET ALONa THE NORTHICSTERLY LINE OF SAID 1001 LOOE TO A POINT 0,4 THE SOUTWISTERLY LIAE OF THE UTE AODITION TO THE CITY OF ASPEN: THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LIK OF THE UTE ADDITION SOUTH 39â€¢57'22' EAST *78 31 FEET To SAID CORNER 40. 1 ASPEN TOWNSITE: LOT 3 TMENCE NORTH 20'20' EAST 49.54 ALONa THE SOUTHEASTERLY LImE OF LOT 1 UTE ADDITION TO THE CITY OF ASPEN SAID LINE ALSO BEING BETIEEN COBER NO 1 AND 2 oF THE ASPEN TO-S I TE 000Â©ARY. TO A HOAG SUBD. POINT ON THE NoRTHEASTERLY LINE oF SAID 1001 LODE CLAIM THENCE SOUTH 45~10' EAST 137.04 FEET ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY .2 OF SAID 1001 LODE CLAIM TO CORNER NO. 3 TO THE POINT oF BEG INNINO AND ALSO A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SE 1/4 All 1/4 oF SECTION 18. TOIISHIP 10 SOUTH. RANGE 84 WEST OF THE Uh PRINCIPAL CRIDIAN. PITKIN COUNTY. COLOMADO BEING WORE PARTICULARLY OESCRIBED AS FOLLOWSÂ· BESINNINO AT CORNER NO 3 OF THE 1001 LODE M.9 1741. WHENCE CORNER NO 1 OF ASPEN TOWNSITE , _.NOTE NORTH 66â€¢11'30' WEST 132.50 FEET: 13 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 'SURED LEGAL DISCRIPTION THENCE NORTH 47'07' EAST 2.20 FEET ALONO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 1 HOAe SUBDIVISION rO AND BLM LOCATION OF LINE A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIOHT-OF-WAY OF UTE AVENUE: 2-3 1001 LODE THENCE NORTH 33'41'300 WEST M.99 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY TO A POINT ON LIC :-2 OF SAID POLLINE 23 ASPEN TOWNSITE ARI,=E - 8LM PLAT THENCE SOUTH 28â€¢28' WEST 33.08 FEET At.ON0 SAIC LINE 1-2 TO A POINT ON LINE 3-4 OF SAID }001 LOOE 100/0. THENCE SOUTH 45-10' EAST 137.64 FEET ALONG SAID Lli 3-4 TO THE POINT OF BEGIANING 00 00. t .c \ I /LOT 37 CITY OF ASPEN COUNTY OF PITKIN STATE OF COLORADO BOOK 390 D,41/ 1 PAGE 897 . 1 9,0 1 PREPARED BY ATTACHMENT 5 SPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC. 210 SOUTH GALENA STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Im *. ANÂ¥ D~FY PHONE/FAX Â£970) 925-3816 DATE JOB Er:25:5~M:32Nli'- U.t'#,0,10.1 11 Â¥0,0 0, 10, .F /*#1â„¢ 4. .Al 0. 41 , 1/05 1/029/ 41-800 322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 6 ATTACHMENT 6 -Il .Property LIne -- - ,w *-0 -Froperty LI,Â·1~ Plant Liet A .t -'.-1 j 1 Frcpoeeal-To CredtaBuffer .m M#V.1,1 / -1/080 7 7-' 1- 4.I.-_ 0-Hal-7 9.,mbol Otv. ICommon'"r i ar-:,flr; Nan'~ 1 1 Paqi' Tr- \ ~ Of' ilj-*. | Pr,pi,h/tr,:rriIWIdmI i ' I" 4 4. 1 .4 2 - / 1 1 1 # \ \ 4,1 Precosed Houe) arl~ Chozan Proparty - ~ f INI, Trati '12 ' 58 Color=do Bme ..Im..11.1 am'-10 Ft 0 & B \ 1 and Tenplle Court i 1 5torla Fat~37'op,Â£10 Fitlk,-'~"~Â«3 - ''~ - ' - F"/ruckTurnarourW 1 11 1 11 1% 1 1 11 1 - lilli + 11 Pacid: ova Sh,t~ ' \ 0 ' ..,1 M ~d, ./ 11 -Â£111- 1 111 u 0 78 2== Comue '860*look'f..... 3 a ft. ,/B - 41-1....11. 1,4 1. 1 1 1111 - 1-11 1,11."11'lp. 1 11 Fro,Del 501,8, / -, , O 3- ,=- Â·, \ i,lpt elf)1 461,1,Ill-Â·*.IMA 5011Â·la klm,0/ 8 (?I CO,lt, To el#:/ Mdlry*Ual, ~ < ~~4 1~ ' atoâ€¢,8 Fath To Tennie 0 P~â€¢,00 MDI. Ki,tâ€¢v,1 , M firrt 1 \ D,yebackE-MingÂ¥/011 m 1 7.514#el#rl.*.#th ' . l~j 1 Fv.Ira -1 '*ti,i, 11 11 11 .- , ' \ .0 1111.11 11, 1 00 : CED- . '4 11~11= Fl. 1... 1-0 1 .Spr- 1 88.0 (irl. de-ori, Exjettrla Gr~,12 . \' 1 11 I 10.l 1 Con'. 2~500*IRI' A-â€¢â€¢- 1 1- 1 \ \ ' :dooâ€ž~ 1/,)~ortâ€¢1.1(901[,drov- fÂ¥,tiF'-1~â€¢I~1 \ \. 0 ./ V .....14"11 1 1 1 + / - 1 -- Flat Gard,11 Araa L 4 - %1 1 \1 0 Reeidence 2 1 \\ 1 1. 1- $ 1 74 1 / E,datâ„¢ Vea,tatkon ~ \, ~ .41 / 43 Upper Floor: 8021.DO N. , 1 % \ Pr.000 1 / % 14 , 9â‚¬4 - A , 0. \ % I : \ \ ' ~ 4*PÂ»4:11 lilli lk.@11111111Rjfpil f ~1 //\ 1 *,7995.00 , ~ L , 4421'~ 'ftl;~PÂ«%4*9\24 2 R~ Frr(Â·>Â·t(t . _ 42 1 , . I ./ '1$~ .1 ./ :I.* Al-â‚¬Mtly< Vitt64438212Lit,ti;â‚¬6441 1914f.i ~ t ' "78'1?0 > ; 1 '&*40 * Wir 009'10 ' ., ...e ok .,2. r- . 1, 1.1 1, ' '4,4 - 4 P*,1 - ur,91,*#uebl,1, 1 , z Â· , 4- i ' 1. - . t -L Acce,6 Thro~h WaN Â· T \ \ 1 \ - \ ri . . 1Auto Court, 1 - 7 v . h I. LI~ ... NX - - N , 4, I 4 .6 \ /1 9 1 - u. 1, Tu Te.4..cirt \\ ~tv ~' -1.4 w U. T/LtloCU#Â©80. 5 ~Â·, , ~~: A '. 40 4, / . 461 I 1 \1 1 ~E R'JfÂ¢ :1 9 ,/ / --------v~-3 -4|09480Â¢1:WaliTDSte,1,08 Room L / fi~i ~ ~ Up[ *\154Â·4 9 1 / .-1014 - .Â·. . A -- .. .. .- st. p.tio on Top - 1 41,â€¢94 . '3 :21* i i , - -- ' \2\*r ./...0 \ . . .. p<..E)*"lÂ¢rtpo, /, - - - - 7 0#/i \ il' \ 1 , Room Below 1 .*mfi \ .. \ . 11'A.<41#W.9.4 / 04.Me VId.,Id F.6 *Vlth sâ„¢. *,2//126 -0 -1977 /11 1 1 i \ Â· 1 Ji '| 44â€¢ \ C *,rop.ty , 1=1,3 1.'.+ 4 114 1 -~ ~1 Â·,~'91.-9-WiTIDeflna . ~ ~ || || | ~ ~ ~ ~ , I t & n 1 1 1 1 ; L , 1 11~ EMetll,0 Ve,tat!0,I To Eamal,1 \ , 4 \ 9'iÂ©.1.., 1 11 'J' . -'t; 1': 1 1 .9 1 5. - , i i 1 1 k . f 1 w ~ ~ *9~ ki 9 - b 8rty With 0.-00 Fof Drlvaway 0 42 4 Â« a - ' Â· Path To rm,nle courte , I) '. + ' - 1 3 -Necourt ,6. / 4 ' ~ : 1 4,0!10 F#TO Ma~ Gate of \ L. . \\ ~ :I.\ \ i /b . t. 4.-/ l 1 1 - , 1 I. Bou{&11 To Help Rat/11Grade Bet,~am, Orlvawny Wa!101,1 Tan,110 Court WAU â€¢ - 110./ 1 j, a ~, - , / ~ 2' PAI,1,0 84*can Plivanay- '2' tr@,ledred &.*0'WNI AtonÂ¢ Ed#of Taff,le Court \ i \ \ \ I " 1 1 It ..+ 9. k . 7 4 9~~.~,1.66 /14 - wd Gaurbrall , , 244 / \1 . \ . 1 i All Exlett,10 Vegetation WIll Be Freearvad 1 1 1 V " , ..' .....IA*: Kiv % 44 .'. -a ,&41, 0 l-â‚¬<.!. 1.. 1 1 - \ 1 ../... '1/5,/1 1 4.7.- 1 111 1/: 2 1 . Â·!77..9, 2,13 1-K-11 42 9 Wherever Foeelble. Slte Grading W11100 ~ 1 7 . TI *4/ 12Â· From Ed, 0 f Court To Walle. 12' from Senettlve To Thle leeue. Treee To Be Removed Â· 1 C 1 WIll Be Determined In Field In Conjunctlon 5 \ ~ . ~ ~ 1 ' 1 1 1 j Courb To Cou t. It' Fron, I,ck L- ro Willa Â· Ov// L Pln~nek~ . 2436*+12'+36412436Â·+12'=156' 4../ f / Ovarall W Cbmen,ki . 21Â·+78' 21Â·=120 1. /11 11 1 - 01 ..utÂ·~.1 , 2 With Aepenaty Farke Department 1 - 1 Reeidence 1 i e I : i 1 !.ii, - Tot0120'2150'94.2/ low/Floon 7995,00 1 Real!0rted Terlrlie Court 44 F- 8008.00 1 4 Lpper Floor: 8021.00 Â· i ' ' ,% 1 1 +/- 7974 1 /1 / Deck 12 /; i ;IIi i!1: ' 140' 1 '1, Terraca: f r 11 ki J 6 I m ~ Guset Iarkb,0 ' Pulloff Ars# ; ' ~ eultdIM,0 Err/elc~a . * - I i i *374&7//00 1 1 1, / i ;Access - 1 FJIng Em,0140 - e BN.:6#2-0 Wall- ' 11 i h ed Evarkeer Tres To B...1 ....ZIJ\\ i , ,- i Toel/&9/1*Dryotacl,1 \ ' i WIth Exlatlne Trece OM Park Property Clryet=k KIDJInln, Wall & L i ' f 0 1 EXtitle Cottorlwood ~ 9 4 511 1/ ilili 1 1 . 19 '1111+1 1 30-1 I ' ir ' Â£-- 4 t . . bl Extetlngladetall,1 f 4/ \1 LA) 1 / Roof ,/4 I 1 1{ 6 3 1 , -1--SS>' I. 1 .1 , lilli rk b ~ Froposed 1 1 1 ' 4 Drlveway 1 0 71,00 ~14 1 \2%4 rl 2 Cat 4 Unit ! irh / k-7 2 1 \ /1 \ ' C r.-- 11 1 Z- 37. 1 ; * -& --li- ==~su~z-- 1- --1-20_ --4 TrL-J-- - 7974 - Â· 1 0. 7974 \ \ 7970 - 9.-6- -. - \ \ 4-- -- 1 \ Ute Mesa LLC Landscage Plan r--~ ,~ GREG MOZIAN AND ASSOCIATES, INC v Landicap' Architecture Â· Environmental Planning Version - 12/14/06 1 A (:ru..St.~ 221.141;:, .*--'P.7/ 1/16"=1'-0" L_-~ - -42114-=610.1 4 n. 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 7 ~ ATTACHNIENT 7 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: James Lindt, Senior Planner RE: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2006 -1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision, Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, Growth Management Review for Preservation of Significant Open Space Parcels- Public Hearing DATE. July 10,2006 APPLICANT /OWNER: a..., 7 Leathem Steam - 14 * . REPRESENTATIVE: ..4 j. 2 Davis Horn Incorporated. LOCATION: 1001 Ute Avenue. - ---%.=- I .- le-r : ..' 3. 3- 1 4LAUX~. ' I 1 6.' IL..1 i CURRENT ZONING: Northen.most 2.7 acres is located in City's 1Â·Â·adf-Â¢'>74 R-15 Zoning w/ a PUD overlay. Southernmost 4.1 acres is located in Pitkin Photo Above: Property as seen from County's AFR-10 Zoning. Ute Avenue. SUMMARY: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Applicant requests subdivision approval Staff recommends that City Council approve to divide the existing parcel into six (6) the requests with a lower FAR than is being separate parcels; two (2) of which are to proposed for each of the --single-family contain single-family residences, one of residential units in the subdivision. which is to contain a "for sale". Category 4 affordable housing unit, one of which is to PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION contain the existing tennis courts used by the RECOMMENDATION: Gant, one of which is to contain a common The Planning ard Zoning Con-~rnission driveway, and the other parcel is to be unanimously recornrnended approval of the common open space. land use actions being requested. 4.. I 9. Adequate roads are available to serve the proposed development, and said roads can be properly maintained. Staff Finding As has been previously discussed, a common driveway would be installed to serve both of the residential properties. The Fire Marshall has indicated that the road would be sufficient to serve the properties with emergency services and a hammerhead turn around is provided for fire truck access. Therefore, Staff believes that this criterion is met as long as the conditions of approval are complied with. 10. Adequate ingress and egress is available to the proposed development so as to ensure adequate access for jire protection and snow removal equipment. Staff Finding The Fire Marshall has indicated that the road would be sufficient to serve the properties with emergency services and a hammerhead turn around is provided for fire truck access. Therefore, Staff believes that this criterion is met as long as the conditions of approval are complied with. Additionally, the City Streets Department has reviewed the application and expressed that the proposed driveway is acceptable to serve the property with snow removal equipment. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 11. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Trails Plan are implemented in the proposed development, to the greatest extent practical. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposed Subdivision/PUD enhances the goals and objectives of the AACP's Parks/ Recreation/Trails Plan. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 00 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 8 ~ ATTACHMENT 8 ~=,, i. Clien &Associates Gle 508 ~ Consulting Geotechnical Engineers 303 ENGINEERING GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE AND MINE DUMP STUDY PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 1001 CLAIM, UTE AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO Prepared For: Dale C. Bullough 5960 South DTC Boulevard, Suite 600 Englewood, CO 80111 Attention: Mr. J. R. Mcintyre Job No. 4 423 86 November 21, 1986 TABLE OF CONTENTS . SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF STUDY 1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1 ' SITE CONDITIONS 2 GEOLOGIC SETTING 3 Site Geology 3 POTENTIAL GEOLOGIC IMPACTS 4 Snow Avalanches 4 Potentially Unstable Slopes 4 Mine Dump 5 Subsidence Due to Underground Mines 5 Debris Flows 6 Soil Erosion 6 + Seismicity 6 MINE WASTE TOXICITY 7 PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION TYPES 8 LIMITATIONS . 9 BIBLIOGRAPHY 10 FIGURE 1 - SURFICIAL GEOLOGY FIGURE 2 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF TEST PIT PROFILES TABLE II - SUMMARY OF LEAD CONCENTRATION TESTS TABLE III - SUMMARY OF EP TOXICITY TESTS Chen & Associates SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF STUDY This report presents the results of an engineering geologic reconnaissance and preliminary mine dump evaluation for the proposed 1001 Claim Residential Development located in the south- eastern part of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, as shown on Fig. 1. The study was performed as authorized by Mr. J. R. Mcintyre. This report describes the general engineering geologic condi- tions at the site and identifies potential geologic impacts to 1 the proposed development. A preliminary evaluation of the poten- tially toxic constituents in the mine dumps on the property was also made. The study includes a review of published geologic literature, a geologic site reconnaissance, test pit excavation, and chemical analysis of mine dump samples from the test pits. i The purpose of this report is to provide the owner with a prelim- inary site characterization to aid in planning and preliminary design. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT We understand the proposed development will include subdi- vision of the property into four duplex residential lots and an access road. We assume the structures will be wood frame con- struction and typical of residences in the area. The development will be serviced by Aspen municipal water and sewerlines. There are various development configurations being considered for the r access road and the proposed structures. The proposed building Chen &Associates -2- locations for Alternative 1 are shown on Fig. 1. Because of the steep site terrain, grading will be an important aspect of the 4 property improvement. SITE CONDITIONS â€¢ The site consists of approximately two acres of land that is occupied by mine waste piles and tennis courts. Ute Avenue 1 borders the property on the north. Existing residential develop- ments are adjacent to the western and northwestern boundaries of I the site. The land to the south and to the east of the site is undeveloped and forested. The property lies near the toe of Aspen Mountain on the southern edge of the Roaring Fork Valley. The site topography is irregular and generally slopes steeply down to the north. The natural terrain has been modified by a large mine dump near the middle of the property. Slopes in the area of the mine dump are locally as steep as 100% but generally 65% and less. The lower part of the site has been leveled and three paved tennis courts constructed. The tennis courts may remain in the present â€¢ location or may be relocated as part of the development. An old railroad grade lies to the south and upslope of the mine dump and . is paralleled by a trail approximately 70 to 80 feet further upslope. We understand the upper trail bench has been constructed in the last year or two. Above the mine dump, the natural slopes are thickly vegetated with aspens and pines. The mine dump is sparsely vegetated with Chen &Associates i .2 i---7 r.-9 -3- grasses and brush. A few cottonwood trees grow on the lower parts of the site near the valley floor. GEOLOGIC SETTING The geology in the project area is complex. Three major ' structural elements, the Sawatch Uplift, the Colorado Mineral Belt, and the southwest part of the Eagle Structural Basin come together in the vicinity of Aspen, Colorado. The bedrock in this area is complexly folded and faulted. Regional geologic mapping of the Aspen area (Bryant, 1971) indicates that the near-surface bedrock beneath the site is a complexly faulted series of Cam- brian to Mississippian-age sedimentary rocks and Precambrian igneous rocks. Bedrock outcrops are not present on the site. The Roaring' Fork Valley was occupied by valley glaciers during the Pleistocene. Glacial deposits occur at places on the valley slopes and along the valley floor. Site Geology: Our interpretation of the surficial geology on the site is shown on Fig. 1. The surface deposits on the southern part of the site above the mine dump consist mainly of colluvial soils composed of angular rock fragments in a clayey sand matrix. These deposits are identified by map symbol Qc. Near the center of the site, the mine dump is the surface deposit. The mine dump is mainly angular limestone, shale and igneous rock fragments in a clayey and silty matrix. The mine dump is identified by map symbol MD. On the lower part of the site, the soil is a poorly sorted glacial moraine deposit which ranges from clay to boulder-size Chen & Associates -4- r ' particles. The gravel to boulder sized materials are generally subrounded. The glacial deposits are identified by map symbol Qg. POTENTIAL GEOLOGIC IMPACTS Based on our geologic evaluation, several conditions of a geologic nature have been identified which should be considered during development of the site. These conditions include poten- tial snow avalanches, potentially unstable slopes, the mine dump, potential subsidence due to underground mines, the potential for debris flows, erosion potential, and seismicity. Snow Avalanches: The vacant area directly adjacent to the < property on the east has been identified as a snow avalanche track (Mears, 1979). The distribution of vegetation and broken 1 0 trees indicate that an avalanche probably occurred here in the 7 ' relatively recent past. In addition, the steep slopes on the upper part of the site and directly above the site have been identified as a potential avalanche area (Colorado State Univer- sity, 1974, Bryant, 1972 and Mears, 1979). Several small to moderate-sized avalanche tracks occur above the site. We recom- mend that an avalanche expert be consulted to evaluate the potential for snow avalanches and impact on the proposed development. Potentially Unstable Slones: Evidence of landslides was not observed on the site. The slopes on the property are steep to locally very steep and extensive site grading for the development may be needed. The slopes may be subject to movement due to the Chen & Associates -5- site grading or construction. The sections of the site which may be affected by potentially unstable slopes in our opinion extend from the tennis courts to the south boundary of the site. When f ' grading plans are more complete, we should be contacted to provide geotechnical evaluation. Site specific geotechnical investigations should be conducted to evaluate the stability of proposed cuts and fills that are planned in the areas above the tennis courts. Mine Dump: The dump covers approximately one-half of the area of the property. The mine dump materials, based on our experience, 1 do not comprise a suitable soil for providing foundation sup- i port. These materials may be extremely variable in texture and density and may include miscellaneous debris such as mine tim- bers, old metal waste, and other debris. The impacts of the mine dump materials with respect to building foundations and toxicity potential are discussed later in this report. i Subsidence Due to Underground Mines: The apparent source of the mine dump materials that occur on the site is the Lower Durant , Tunnel. The portal for the tunnel lies 200 to 300 feet to the west of the site. During our review of geologic literature, we found no documentation of major underground mines below the property. The property lies to the east of the major areas of mining activity. Based on our reconnaissance and literature review, we believe it is unlikely that extensive mine workings ' underlie the site. The risk for mine-induced subsidence is considered to be low. Chen &Associates -6- Debris Flows: One of the major gulches that drains runoff from Aspen Mountain, Spar Gulch, empties onto a small debris fan approximately 300 feet west of the site. Historic floods and debris flows resulting from intense thunderstorms have occurred ' in the vicinity of Spar Gulch and have inundated areas downslope ' (Aspen Times, 1919; Aspen Times, 1964). A debris flow or flood originating from Spar Gulch could impact the lower, western section of the site. Since other areas not involved in the development may be impacted, debris flow mitigation for the project can be handled by an overall storm water and debris flow management plan for the sections of the City of Aspen near the base of Aspen Mountain. 1 . The steep slopes above the site may constitute a potential source for small debris flows. This heavily vegetated part of the site should not be disturbed to help limit debris flow potential. We recommend that the potential for debris flow/flood impact on the site be evaluated by a surface water hydrologist and that high sediment concentrations be analyzed in connection with such events. Soil Erosion: Because of the steepness of the site, areas stripped of vegetation for construction will be subject to ero- sion. Concentrated runoff should not be allowed to discharge onto steep, unprotected slopes. All stripped areas should be revegetated or protected by other means. Erosion control mea- sures should be made part of the overall development plan. SeismicitY: Historic seismic activity in the Aspen area has been relatively low. Potentially active faults have not been iden- Chen & Associates -7- 11 . tified in the project area (Kirkham & Rogers, 1981). In our opinion, the area does not present an earthquake risk above that normally considered for the region. The site is in Uniform Building Code Seismic Zone 1. 1 4 MINE WASTE TOXICITY A preliminary evaluation of the extent of the mine dump at the site was performed by making a geologic reconnaissance and by digging five pits with a backhoe. Our interpretation of the extent of the mine dump and the test pit locations is shown on Fig. 1. A summary of the subsurface profiles encountered in the pits is presented in Table I. Pit 1, located near the top edge of the dump where the depth is probably tens of feet deep, did not penetrate .the pile depth. Pits 2 through 5, which were excavated near the periphery or in less extensive dump areas, penetrated the mine waste and extended into the underlying natural soils. Samples of the mine waste and natural soils were subjected to laboratory testing to evaluate their toxicity potential. The results Of the lead concentration tests are presented in Table II. Three of the samples which showed the highest lead concentration were subjected to EP Toxicity Tests which are t presented in Table III. Based on the laboratory testing and our experience in the area, the mine waste materials represent a hazard with respect to lead concentration. It appears that some of the natural soil below the mine dump could also be classified as a hazardous Chen &Associates -8- material. We understand that mitigation of the toxicity hazard will probably consist of a soil cap and revegetation of the slopes. The specific mitigation plan and level of protection Will need to be coordinated with local environmental authorities. When more specific property development plans are ' known, an appropriate level toxicity mitigation plan should be Full included as part of the development plans. PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION TYPES Limited subsurface exploration was performed as part of the mine waste evaluation. The natural soils encountered below the mine waste consist mainly of coarse granular soils. The mine waste material is a variable type, relatively loose and contains miscellaneous debris. Building foundations constructed at the / site should be placed entirely on the undisturbed natural soils. Where the mine waste is relatively deep, pile foundations will probably be needed. Where the depth of the mine dump is relatively shallow, excavating through the material and placing spread footings on the natural soil can probably be used. This procedure of foundation construction has been successfully followed on the adjacent Chance Claim Subdivision. When the building locations and grading plans have been determined, a site specific subsurface investigation should be performed to determine foundation design parameters. 4 - Chen &Associates ! I, -9- LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in this area for use by the client for design purposes. The conclusions and recommen- dations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the geologic reconnaissance, the exploratory pits excavated at the locations indicated on the exploratory pit plan, and the Â·~ proposed development plans. The information presented in this report is suitable for planning and preliminary design pur- poses. We recommend additional exploration and evaluation for specific grading and building design. If you have any questions or if we can be of further assis- tance, please let us know. Very truly yours, CHEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. 49'PST (47*1 f?,-â€¢ (17<: 15222 .n By 0,9 3â€ž25'A, -Et, 5.C 9 21 -4, 554. R 0 0-S P 10 24&, / En#ineeriMg Geologist ~ttf~'Â·0'ONAL erÂ¥-<33 <VI COLU and By Shz=-1.p-39&4 Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. RS/SLP/ec CC: Doremus and Wells Chen &Associates t -10 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1 Aspen Times, September 5, 1919, Page 1, Cloudburst Scatters Mud Over City. Aspen Times, August 7, 1964, Page 16, Worst Cloudburst in Years Floods Aspen on August 5. Bryant, Bruce, 1971, Geologic Map of the Aspen Quadrangle, Pitkin County, Colorado, U.S.G.S. Map GQ-933. Bryant, Bruce, 1972, Map Showing Areas of Selected Potential Geologic Hazards in the Aspen Quadrangle, Pitkin County, Colorado, U.S.G.S. Map I-785-A. Bryant, Bruce, 1972, Map Showing Avalanche Areas in the Aspen Quadrangle, Pitkin County, Colorado, U.S.G.S. Map I-785-G. Bryant, Bruce, 1972, Map Showing Mines, Prospects, and Areas of Significant Silver, Lead and Zinc Production in the Aspen Quadrangle, Pitkin County, Colorado, U.S.G.S. Map I-785-G. Colorado State University, 1974, Pitkin County, Colorado, Lower Roaring Fotk Valley, Environmental Resource Analysis. Kirkham, Robert M., and Rogers, William P., 1981, Earthquake Potential in Colorado, Colorado Geological Survey, Bulletin 43. Mears, Arthur I., 1979, Colorado Snow-Avalanche Area Studies and Guidelines for Avalanche Hazard Planning, Colorado Geological Survey, Special Publication 7. Rohlfing, 1943, Map of Workings in the Aspen Mining District, Pitkin County, Colorado. U.S. Geological Survey, 1928, Field Record File, RQ-34, Mines of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. t Chen & Associates ' -- It ' 1 111: 11 1 5 Â£ ........'................ I -r- b . I .... "1-le r '= // Ch-I .Ir 44\ ~194 -14'kj'Y;N,3;'. Ec:, 72/~ 3,3 istâ€žlmyl-,e_U--- - . .q* 4.11 f-1Â·.. %;\1.-\\ ,~,\\ ,~,~1\1,\\\~dr \\\\\\\\\\~t\\\\\1/..i 'Nxi b--715-6412>aÂ«-947%<~ , ~ Â· ~ 49%%9% Â©Io Au I n i Â«15,>UllÂ·b' 0-0-6 1 4771 4- l / 1\ Le>.-,L'.244.<81 9 . l ly< *k- 1 ./. 4.\ MD. . 41./ \ 490<. 4 k /Ill \ i. Oc A, '1 Â»4 - . '4 1 l. i /</ 'k'.14%) ~,1 *4 %-0---223 , 1. I \\ & - =... 1 1% .. ... J.. NA,// 2 . be, ... 1,57% r 4..,2 .. ~11~1111,1~ i\11~11<1 ;.li\-''ll'.i.r~~/' TIFF-**15 1 1 i 1 C . -9 2/ 1 ................ - . 1 / - . 111 j 11 \) Qci.1 ' . 4. r / C 1 // 1 4:. 1 Â£ 'V \ Ii, ill 1 1 -I / 1 1 IJ 1/''CD < ' tl~xl _< ~ ' IMLI .1 ,/ 244, j - 1) ~~) i'/ ~ ~jq~i* 1 11 6 '1 I : Â·<. ~;~l/<Â· \ 1 in ' Mit'\ -1-3 1 1 Ti / -1 1 .1 f 1 .1 Qg/ 11 1 3' 1 /1Qc . c (lf- $- - . --0. -LIâ‚¬-Ep-:pl 9, f . 1 1 0 ' ' 1/.-I- . + .- ------ - I - : 4 9 4 . I , . 3 fl -- D.-I......................... 11.1-1. .....I...4 ..... SURFICIAL GEOLOGY 1001 CLAN Cheâ€¢ A 4-Mir, 11._I.-ILL -1.'P- 11 ~ CA.2.79 chen and associates, inc. HYDAOMETER ANALYFIS SIEVE ANALYSIS f 'UE Wl AUING; U b 'JIANOARO SEHIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 2â€¢ â€¢44 7 ..P .5 MIN 1% ..IN 60 WN 19 MIN 4 MIN 1 MIN .2)0 .100 '50 'â€¢0'30 Â·16 1.M / 4 4.- 3- s" 6 Â· r Â·10 100 Â· 1 1 1.1 1 11 . : i :! 1 1. 111 5 ; ;,-1 I 0 90 1,11 6'.'' if 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 & 1 1 /, '11 :0 1 1 .1 1 1 1 1 1 11 511 '11,111 11 1 111 00 'T! 111111 ; i ~i i i i:' i,; ;i;; 70 , 1 1 1 1 1 ' 11 , 11 1 1 I. 1 T 60 ''1 $ i . 3 1 1 6 ; i ; ; 11 1 6 40 2 1 1 1 11 1.1 1 1 T Il 50 ' ' , , , 1 E : 1; 1 1 1 9 : 1 1 6 1 11 /1 1 , 1 1 :' 2 : i I i Sog 1 1 , 1 1 1/1 .1 I ' 11 40 1 1 I 1 It, '1 1 1 I' '' lili| 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 5 :1:i,1 ..1 1 2: 30 ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 : 1 11 1 1 I I , 1 : : 1: 70 1, 1 :1; i 61 1 1 1 11 20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i &4- T li i 80 111 lilli, Ill 10 i ' 1 1 ,- , 1 , 1, 11 1 lili : 1 I 1. 1 1 ; i 1 1 ] 11: ' 1 11 lilli' 001 002 005 009 019 03; 014 1â€¢9 297 1 590 1.19 2~38 4 76 9.52 19.1 38.1 76 2 127 1 260 1 1 1 111,1 1 1 :1:1 4 1 51 ' llili '11 1' 1 & lili ; I ' 1 I lillih 1 11 111 mil 1, 100 042 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SAND GAAVEL CLAY TO SILT FNE ~ COARSE rINE 1 MEDIUM |COAASE COe8LES GAAVEL 67 $ SAND 25 $ SILT AND CLAY 8 96 4 0 1 LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE oF silty sandy gravel FROM Pit 2 at 6' - 9' | HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS | ~ TIME READINGS U S STANOAAD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS ~ 24 HH 7 HA 45 MIN 15 MINI 60 MIN 19 MIN 4 MIN 1 MIN 7 JO Â·100 -50 70'30 16 -78 4- 1.- 1'5- 3- * 5-6- 100 , 1 . 5 5 ': ' .4 : 5 : ;/IF I lili 11 1, : 111 111 1 1 1 1,111 1 T 1 1 1 11! 1[1 .III & 8 1, , 1: 1 1 i 1, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1: :10 1 1 1 1 6 7 .1 Il, '11 80; 1 T , ' 1 1, III 1 1 i iii I:i ' 1 11 ,1 , I ' 620 1 11 11 111.11,1 1 I , 1 1 1 1 .1 [ 1 1 I lilli, 1 1 1 1, 1 1 1, I 11 70' ; i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1/ '11 '30 1 1 1 1 1 1 â€¢ ,1 1 1,1 ' 1 'lilli:16:I. ''Ii, 1 1 : 1 1 ' . 1 1 1 , 1 1 i ] 1,1 lili 1 1 1 11 ; 11 , V , i '. i.n 1 P ~ ~ ' ''' ' ' i .1 & 6 /:2' 1, 1 1 1.1 so; r ::!: r 1 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 !1 '1111,i/ 111,111 40; ] i 1 , i il; r [ 1 l' If 1 , 1 1 ,/ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 : till,~ â€¢ ilw 30; 71 11 1 1, 1 1. 1 11 , 1 .- 1 1, : i i E ,Â·:10 ' 1 , 1 , /T ., 1 1, 1 1 ! 1 JI . 1 1 111 1/111 1 I 1 1 11} 20; , 1 , , 1 11 1 1: J 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 T 1 / 1 1 11 0 1 11 1 ]],1 1 ]lilli 1,11], I 1 ; : 5 : i; ;Â¤U 611 1 11 1 1 : :90 1 lili i ' 111'i 1 1 111 6 ' 1 1 1 111,1 . 1 li l i t ' 11 11] 1 1 1 l ili 1 lili: 11/4 . 1 â€¢1 1 Il.]J] 1 1 1100 '1 iiI 00, 00.Â· 005 009 019 037 074 149 291 1 590 , 19 |2 38 4 /6 9 52 ,91 38 I 762 12/' 280 1 042 20 4 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SAND GRAVEL CLAV TO SILT COBBLES FINE | MEDIUM ICOAASE FINE | COARSE GRAVEL 55 # SAND 29 * SILT AND CLAY 16 0 lIQUID LIMIT % % PLASTIC1TY INDEX SAMPLE OF clayey sandy gravel FROM Pit 4 at 5' - 8' 4 4 423 86 GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig - 7 PERCENT PASSING 03 IÂ¥13 1N33U3d O3NIÂ¥138 1 N33 PEnCENT PASSING TABLE I Job No. 4 423 86 Summary of Test Pit Profiles Pit Pit Mine Waste Natural Number Depth (ft) Depth (ft) Soil Comments 1 10 10 Not encountered Wood debris in mine waste. 2 10 5 Silty sand, gravel and cobbles 3 9 3 Silty sandy, gravel with cobbles 4 8 3 1/2 Clayey sand and Refusal on large gravel with cobbles boulders and boulders 5 8 7 1/2 Clayey sand and Refusal on large gravel with cobbles boulders and boulders i. SE -* 1 2- . i TABLE II Job No. 4 423 86 j 1 Summary of Lead Concentration Tests Sample Lead Material Location Concentration Type (Ppm) 1 Pit 1 at 3 - 6' 2,190 Mine Waste Pit 2 at 0 -3' 16,600 Mine Waste Pit 2 at 6 - 9' 5,350 Natural Soil Pit 3 at 0 -21 1,160 Mine Waste pit 3 at 3 - 5' 391 Natural Soil Pit 4 at 0 - 3' 1,110 Mine Waste Pit 4 at 5 - 8' 213 Natural Soil Pit 5 at 3 - 6' 3,640 Mine Waste , , 4 TABLE III 4 423 86 Maximum Pit 2 at Pit 2 at Pit 5 at Concentration Sample 0' - 3' 6' - 9' 3' - 6' Allowable Arsenic 0.002 0.000 0.000 5.0 Barium 3.24 2.06 2.84 100.0 Cadmium 0.788 0-585 0.277 1.0 Chromium 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.0 Lead 8.14 7.82 4.56 5.0 Mercury 0.00042 0.00006 0.00021 0.2 Selenium 0.000 0.006 0.006 1.0 Silver 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.0 Note: All results in mg/1. r TABLE III 4 423 86 Maximum Pit 2 at Pit 2 at Pit 5 at Concentration Sample 0' - 3' 61 - 9' 3' - 6' Allowable Arsenic 0.002 0.000 0.000 5.0 Barium 3.24 2.06 2.84 100.0 Cadmium 0.788 0.585 0.277 1.0 t Chromium 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.0 4 Lead 8.14 7.82 4.56 5.0 Mercury 0.00042 0.00006 0.00021 0.2 Selenium 0.000 0.006 0.006 1.0 Silver 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.0 Note: All results in mg/1. 4 4 4 1 1 TABLE III 4 423 86 Maximum Pit 2 at Pit 2 at Pit 5 at Concentration Sample 0' - 3' 6' - 9' 3' - 6' Allowable Arsenic 0.002 0.000 0.000 5.0 Barium 3.24 2.06 2.84 100.0 Cadmium 0.788 0.585 0.277 1.0 Chromium 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.0 Lead 8.14 7.82 4.56 5.0 Mercury 0.00042 0.00006 0.00021 0.2 Selenium 0.000 0.006 0.006 1.0 Silver 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.0 r 1. Note: All results in mg/1. % 4 1 1 APPENDIX C Co. 1 -800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 9 Billings Great Falls Chen-Northen Inc. 5080 Road 154 Boise He,ena Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Casper Phoenix 303:945-7458 Colorado Springs Pocate!10 Denver Rock Springs Elko Salt Lake City Evanston San Antonio Gilette Tri Cities Glenwood Springs Yakima ATTACHIVIENT 9 SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL STUDY PROPOSED 1001 UTE AVENUE SUBDIVISION ASPEN, COLORADO Prepared For: 1001 Ute Avenue Partnership c/o Richard Neiley 1 Attorney at Law 600 East Hopkins, Suite 3 Aspen CO 81611 Attn: Richard Neiley Job No. 4 209 89 February 23, 1989 A member of the ~ group of companies TABLE OF CONTENTS CONCLUSIONS 1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 2 SITE CONDITIONS 2 FIELD EXPLORATION 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4 POTENTIAL GEOLOGIC IMPACTS 4 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 6 FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS 7 FLOOR SLABS 8 UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM 9 SITE GRADING 9 MINE WASTE TOXICITY 10 LIMITATIONS 11 FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS , FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURES 4 AND 5 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Chen-Northern, Inc. CONCLUSIONS Development of the site as planned appears feasible based on geotechnical considerations. The two proposed residences are located on top of the existing tailings piles and special founda- tion treatment such as spread footings or pile foundations bearing on the underlying natural soils are recommended for the building support. A structural retaining wall will be needed along the uphill side of the access road. Cut and fill slope grades along the roadway and downhill side of the tailings pile should be graded to 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter. The graded slopes should be revegetated or protected by other means to prevent erosion. The toxicity of the mine waste can probably be mitigated by capping them with noncontaminated soil and revegetation. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a supplemental geotechnical study for the proposed 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision located in the southeastern part of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Fig. 1. The study was conducted in accordance with our proposal for professional services letter to Vann Associates, Inc., dated January 27, 1989. Chen & Associates, Inc. (now known as Chen-Northern, Inc.), previously conducted an engineering geology and mine dump study at the site and reported our findings on Novem- ber 21, 1986, Job No. 4 423 86. The purpose of the current study is to provide subsurface information for use in planning and preliminary design and to address the potential geologic impacts on the current development plans. A field exploration program consisting of drilling exploratory borings was conducted to obtain information on subsurface conditions. Samples obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to deter- mine their engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop preliminary recommendations for possible foundation types, depths and allowable bearing pressures and for Chen-Northern, Inc. -2- grading criteria of the access road and mine dump pile. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing are presented in the report. This report has been prepared to summarize the data obtained during this study and to present our conclusions and recommendations based on the geologic conditions identified, the proposed construction, and the subsurface condi- tions encountered. Design parameters and a discussion of geotechnical engi- neering considerations related to construction of the proposed subdivision are included in the report. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The subdivision is proposed to consist of two residential buildings and an access road located approximately as shown on Fig. 1. The existing tennis courts will be relocated to accommodate the driveway access. The building sites are situated on top of the existing mine dump which will be downcut up to about 10 feet to achieve a relatively flat building area. The downhill side of the mine dump will be graded to a maximum slope of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical. Cut and fill sections up to about 10 to 12 feet deep are proposed along the access road. The uphill cut which is into the natural hillside is proposed to be supported by a retaining wall. The mine dump material is proposed to be disposed of on-site. If building locations or grading plans change significantly from those described above, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations contained in this report. SITE CONDITIONS The site is in similar condition to that described in our previous report of November 21, 1986. The site slopes down to the north at irregular grades Chen-Northern, Inc. -3- due to the past development with an elevation differential of about 50 feet within the proposed development area. The lower and middle parts of the sites are relatively flat with a very steep intervening slope consisting of mine dump material. The hillside above the development area is heavily forested and has an average grade of about 50%. The old Midland Railroad grade and an uphill ski trail which were present at the time of our 1986 study are located on the steep slope above the development area. About 2 to 3 feet of snow covered the property at the time of our field work. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on February 1, 1989. Three exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions including the mine dump depth. The borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a track-mounted CME-45 drill rig. Access onto the mine dump piles was difficult due to the snow cover and steep irregular terrain. A small dozer was used to make a trail into the property from the vacant lot to the east which is the same access route used in the 1986 exploration work. The borings were logged by a representative of Chen-Northern, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 1 3/8-inch I.D. spoon sampler. The sampler was driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the sub- soils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Fig. 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. Chen-Northern, Inc. -4- SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface profiles encountered at the site are shown on Fig. 2. The two borings drilled in the proposed building sites encountered mine dump waste up to a depth of about 30 feet below the existing ground surface. The depth to the contact with the natural ground surface likely increases to the north due to the natural ground surface slope. Hole 3, located in the upper part of the access road, encountered a much smaller fill depth. The mine waste consists mainly of sand and gravel-size fragments that are silty to clayey and contain cobbles and possibly boulder-size material. The underlying soils encountered in the borings consist of medium dense silty to clayey sandy gravel with cobbles and probable boulders. The mine waste and natural subsoils are like those described in our previous engineering report. The penetration resistance testing of the soils indicates the mine waste is relatively loose and the natural gravels are medium dense to dense. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings con- sisted of in-situ moisture content and gradation analyses. Results of gradation analyses performed on small diameter drive samples (minus 1 1/2-inch fraction) of the mine waste and natural coarse granular soils are shown on Figs. 4 and 5. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were generally moist. The groundwater level is generally known to be relatively deep in the area except for possible seasonal perched water conditions due to snowmelt. POTENTIAL GEOLOGIC IMPACTS The geologic conditions which could potentially impact development on the site were presented in our previous engineering report and consist of snow Chen-Northern, Inc. -5- avalanche, unstable slopes, mine dump, subsidence due to underground mines, debris flow, erosion and seismicity. We understand that the potential snow avalanche impact and mitigation are being studied by others. The risk of subsidence due to underground mines is considered to be low since we found no documentation of any major underground mines below the property. The earth- quake risk is considered typical for the area and buildings should be designed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Seismic Zone 1 requirements. Evidence of landslides was not observed on the site but there is a risk of construction induced slope instability due to the proposed cuts and fills within the development areas. Methods to reduce the risk of instability associated with the grading are presented below in the "Site Grading" section. 4 There may be debris flow or flooding potential originating from Spar Gulch within the lower western part of the site. The proposed development is located within the upper part of the site which should be outside of Spar Gulch impact but could be impacted by other small debris flows. Development is not proposed within the upper, steeply sloping and heavily vegetated part of the site which should help to limit the debris flow potential. We recom- mend that the grading surrounding the proposed residences be designed by a surface water hydrologist to allow for potential flooding including high sediment concentrations. Erosion potential of the graded areas should be ] controllable by revegetation where there is sheet flow runoff and by riprapped channels where flow is concentrated such as along the edge of the road. Comments regarding the mine dump impacts are discussed below in subsequent sections and should be mitigable as part of the final design. Chen-Northern, Inc. -6- FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS The residential buildings are proposed to be located on top of the existing mine dump which has a depth of 30 feet or more. The mine waste material is of variable type and density and is not considered suitable for support of foundation loadings. Based on the residential type construction and the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings, we recommend building foundations constructed at the site be placed entirely on the undisturbed natural soils. The mine dump is relatively deep on Lot 2 and a drilled pier or driven pile foundation will probably be needed. At Lot 1, the mine waste depth is more limited and a spread footing foundation excavated to below the waste material may be feasible. Small diameter pressure-grouted piles have been used for support of residences constructed on mine waste fill in the Chance Claim Subdivision. Driven piles such as a heavy steel H-section with tip reinforcement are probably also a feasible foundation type. Files should be designed based on an end bearing capacity on the order of 10,000 psf and a skin friction of 500 psf to 800 psf. We expect that piles will pene- trate the natural soils about 5 to 10 feet to achieve the desired load capac- ity. Piles should have a minimum total embedment length of 15 feet. Due to the coarse and dense nature of the natural subsoils, difficult driving and drilling conditions should be anticipated. We expect there could be some ground subsidence during the pile installations due to the loose nature of the mine waste. A representative of the soil engineer should observe the pile installations on a full-time basis. Spread footings placed on the undisturbed natural soils should be designed for a maximum bearing pressure of 3000 psf. As an alternative, the subexcavated mine waste could be replaced with structural fill compacted to at least 100% of standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. We Chen-Northern, Inc. -7- expect settlements to range to about 1 inch. Footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for walls and 2 feet for columns. Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced to span an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Exterior footings or footings placed beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Areas of loose or soft material and existing fill encountered within the foundation excavations should be removed. New fill placed beneath foundation areas should extend down from the edges of the footings at an effective grade of 1 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter. Foundation excavations and struc- tural fill compaction should be observed and tested by a representative of the soil engineer. FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS Building foundation walls which are laterally supported and can be expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 45 pef for backfill consisting of the on-site granular soils. Cantilevered retaining structures such as site grading walls along the access drive which can be expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pres- sure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 35 pef for backfill consisting of the on-site granular soils. The recommended pressures assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal backfill surface. An underdrain system is recommended to prevent the buildup of water behind a wall. An upward sloping backfill surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining struc- ture. The walls along the driveway should be designed for a lateral earth Chen-Northern, Inc. -8- pressure of at least 50 pef equivalent fluid unit weight for a 2 horizontal to 1 vertical backslope. The lateral resistance of foundation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of the sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materi- als and passive earth pressure against the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be calculated based on a coeffi- cient of friction of 0.5. Passive pressure against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 400 pcf. The coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will occur at the ultimate strength, particu- larly in the case of passive resistance. FLOOR SLABS The natural granular soils are suitable to support lightly to moderately loaded slab-on-grade construction. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, nonstructural floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. We suggest joints be provided on the order of 15 feet on center. The requirements for slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A thin layer of fine gravel may be placed beneath floor slabs to facilitate construction. The existing mine waste fill is considered unsuitable for support of floor slabs. In the building areas, the fill should be removed and replaced with properly compacted structural fill. As an alternative to removal of the fill, a structural slab supported on the building foundations may also be Chen-Northern, Inc. -9- considered. All fill material for support of floor slabs should be placed and compacted according to the criteria presented in "Site Grading". UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in mountainous areas that local perched groundwater may develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawl space and basement areas be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of drain tile placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free-draining granular mate- rial. The drain should be placed at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1% to a suitable gravity outlet. Free-draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2% passing the No, 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 2 feet deep. SITE GRADING , Natural hillsides in the area appear to have had a relatively stable geologic history and major stability problems are not anticipated with the use of proper grading procedures. To limit the potential of construction induced slope instability, we recommend that cuts into the steep natural hillside above the proposed building area be retained by structural walls designed according to the criteria presented in this report. The cut and fill sections Chen-Northern, Inc. .4 -10- should also be limited in depth to about 12 feet as proposed. Permanent unretained cut and fill sections should be graded to 2 horizontal to 1 verti- cal or flatter. If seepage is encountered in cut sections, an investigation should be conducted to determine if the seepage will adversely affect the cut stability. Fill sections beneath roadway and floor slab areas should be compacted to at least 95% of standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Before placing fill, the exposed surface should be cleared of all organic matter and loose soil and benched into hillsides exceeding 5 horizontal to 1 vertical. In general, the on-site natural soils and granular portions of the existing mine waste should be suitable for use in fills. The fill mate- rial should be free of vegetation, topsoil or other deleterious substances and oversized rock. The soil engineer should approve all fill utilized on the site prior to placement. Graded slopes should be protected against erosion by revegetation or other means. Surface water should not be concentrated and directed onto steep slopes unless drainage channels with erosion protection are provided. The ground surface surrounding the proposed buildings should have a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in paved areas. Diversion ditches or swales should be provided around buildings or above cut slopes to control the surface runoff. MINE WASTE TOXICITY The testing performed as part of our previous site investigation identi- fied the mine waste to have a potentially hazardous lead concentration. Leaching of the lead into the underlying natural soils below the mine dump may also have occurred. We understand that mitigation of the toxicity hazard is Chen-Northern, Inc. -11- planned to consist of disposing of the contaminated soils and mine waste on-site and providing an imported noncontaminated soil to cap the materials. We expect that the soil cap depth will need to be 2 to 3 feet but the specific mitigation plan and level of protection will need to be coordinated with local environmental authorities. LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices in this area for use by the client for design purposes. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled at the locations indicated on Fig. 1 and the proposed type of construction. The nature and extent of subsurface variations across the site may not become evident until excavation is performed. If during construction, fill, soil, rock or water conditions appear to be different from those described herein, this office should be advised at once so reevaluation of the recommendations may be made. We recommend on-site observation of excavations, foundation bearing strata, pile installation and structural fill testing by a representa- , tive of the soil engineer. Very truly yours, Me: e 0 ..1 .3 CHEN-NORTHERN, INC. 15222 1*1 ..e ;Â¢/ A.... 4.4.S"ONAL'284$3 BY Â»pawf- pÂ¢Â« irÂ£81'280iQ*4/ LY< 1-Â»= Reviewed Bv 6 Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. SLP/ec cc: Vann Associates, Attn: Sunny Vann ' The Stevens Group, Inc., Attn: Tom Stevens Chen-Northern, Inc. 40 Bom P im / 1 / 0,0 1470 < C ~ ~_ 1 1 SETBA1--53)< C - 1- 4- / - / 1 /-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ENVEL.OPE BUILDING ~ PIT 4 \ /- N \\ \ \/ PIT 3 - | O - COMMON SPACE O 1 + \ 1 1 liTass 1\\ C\\1 -* 1 HOLE I /1 1 / 1 \ , 1 -/ 1 20 40 80 \ ~ ~ ~I~ ~ \~\~ ~~ LOT I ~~ ~ ~< 1 ~ ~ 1 , /PIT 54---- \ \ \\\\ \\ \ \\\ 41 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET \ --- \/ 1- 6- \ , LEGEND ~ l\ \\I \ \ \\ FIRE ACCESS ~ 1 \ \ RLOCATED T~GS ~COURTS< - - \ 0 BORING LOCATION FOR THIS STUDY \ \ \\ \ \ PIT 2 --6--7 1 L , / -, 1 0 PIT LOCATION FOR JOB NO, \ 4 423 86 DATED NOVEMBER 21, \\\\ \\ v,FT- ,--- BUILDING / h J /1 i l \ 1\ \\ \ ENVELOPE O HOI 2~ / / ~| ~ . / / 11 ~ - 1986 E \\ 1 I / /dll ~ PROPERTY / LOT 2 ~ / j /| 6 1 BOUNDARIES ,; 1 \ \1\ ' t \ / 1 11 1 / / 1 i 1 lil 14~3 1 j' C I C j // 1 C C 1 1 \\\ C C 1 Ill i / 1 /1 1 2 C C \ 1 ~\\ \ 0 - - 1 1 11 1 ) j 1 1 \1 J j 1 1 PROPOSED ROAD / . c 1 \ -- 9/ -- -1. 1 1 &%- 71,0 , P - - - - -- - - _7980 80- 7990 4 209 89 Chen & Associates LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS F.. 1 Hole 1 Hole 2 lio le 3 Elev. = 8022' Elev. = 8021' Elev. = 8020' Lot 1 Lot 2 Access Road 8025 8025 X 8020 8020 ~< Building X Pad Grade X ~8/12 ~ WC=2.6 6/12 8015 8015 --+4=45 '01 18/12 -200=12 . ' 7 9/12 Road 2,0 9/12 Grade ~ 20/12 8010 :91 WC =2.6 8010 ;%10 + ~68215 21 15/12 17/12 09 WC=2.5 632 8005 *h 4=44 67 8005 -200=12 ~ 102/12 fy. *29 ~ 23/12 8000 r.6 14/12 8000 28/12 7995 7995 '4 30/12 7990 7990 0. 10 L~ 85/12 - 7985 7985 Note: Explanation of symbols presented on Fig. 3. 4 209 89 Chen & Associates Logs of Exploratory Borings 11. 2 ><MXXX Elevation - Feet llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 1llll1llll1llll1llll1llll1llll1llll1llll1 100:1 - UOITEADin LEGEND: ~ Fill; mine waste, mainly silty sand and gravel with cobbles, some timber debris, loose, moist, dark brown. ~ Gravel (GM); sandy, silty to clayey, cobbles, possible bouiders, medium dense 104 to dense, moist, brown. Drive sample; standard penetration test (SPT), 1 3/8-inch I.D. split spoon sample, ASTM D-1586. 8/12 Drive sample blow count; indicates that 8 blows of a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the SPT sampler 12 inches. r Depth at which boring cared following drilling. NOTES: 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on February 1, 1989 with a 4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger. 2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by taping from features shown on the site plan provided. 3. Elevations of exploratory borings were obtained by interpolation between contours on the site plan provided. 4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. Fluctu- ations in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content (%) +4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve 4 209 89 Chen & Associates Legend and Notes Fl, 3 CA-2-79 chen and associates, inc. 1 -VDROME-ER ANAL'SIS SIEVE ANALYSIS -,VE AEAD NOS US STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SOUARE 2-ENINGS 1 24 HA - -A .10 45 MIN ' E U 'N 60 MIN 19 MIN I MIN 1 MIN -200 Â·100 '50 -40 Â·30 '6 1-9 '.1 4- ,Â·~ râ‚¬' 3-- 5-6- 3- 100. Â· 11Â·.Ii :, 0 1 1 //1 1 , , 1 1/. 1 .0 1 1 1 , Ill Â°Â°i 5,1 11;ir.,i 1/lili ilt , ,/ i 1 , 1 . '' LU 80; 11 3 6 /;; 11' 1 1 1 i L... 2 1 11 ; 4 1 1 / 1 11 14 1 1,1 ;11 1/! , 11 40 C,41 1 1 1 1 1 1, 1 1 1 11 ' 1 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 1 ./: 1 1 50~ d i ' Rii/: 2 . '! 1 1 1 1 11, ' .,60 Ii I 40; ..1 1 1 1 1 1 1 /11 1 1 1 1 t , 1 11 1 30'. | 1 ill/' i , 11 1 , 17 1 111,1 1 -1 11 5 20; , i ,- 111 1/111! 1 dll , 1 111 1 1 le; ' 1 I , i :Ji 1 1 1 1 1 11 li 11 1 ' 1 /11 1 {I 1 :l ;.~:6 M , L i & ~f ,a0 001 005 009 019 237 074 +49 297 1 590 1'9 238 476 952 1 9 1 38.1 7â‚¬ 2 .27 1 200 042 20 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SAND GRAVEL COBBLES W-. T 'W .1.- 1 ='NE ~ MEDIUM |COARSE AWE 60/"13= GRAVEL 45 6 SAND 3% SILT AND CLAY 12 % 0 0 0/0 LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF mine waste FROM Hole 1 at 5 feet and 10 feet combined 1 -VEROMETER ANALYS,S SIEVE ANALYSIS ~ -iMEAEADINGS US STANDARD SER'ES -/2-â€ž O-w--I J-==%'Nul 24 wH 7 -R -10 45 MIN '5 Â·v'.!N 60 M IN 19 MIN z VI IN ' MIN Â· 2 )C .00 Â·50 Â·40'30 Â·,6 q8 Â· 4Â·Â· 4Â·Â· 1 9 3' 5 6 100' i 0 1 1 1 1 11 i /1 1 ] 1 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 , 1 610 1 11 1 11 ,/I~ 1 1~: 1 1 111 1 11 1 , i 1 1 11] 1 ' ;20 1 1 1 IiI / 1 r ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 '1 1 1 11:30 , 1 1 11 'r 1 , f 70 1 ; :, 11 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .1 142 60 , I I : 11 1 1 1,1 1 I 31 ;so 50 Â·i . ' , ' I 1,1 I /1/ 11 : 1 L 1 4' 1 11 / ' 1 1 '1' 1 $ I 1 1 iii 1 ' 11:-0 40 â€¢,f'i , 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 11 , 1 1 | 1/1 11 1 ! 1 1 1 111 1 1 1 1 , 1. 1 1 I :70 30 / 1 1 , ! 1: 1 -111 111 1 1.- 1 .1 1 11 1 20 Â· i ' ' ' 'L 1 1 1 11 100 IIi 1 1 1 - 11 1 1 1 / :no 1 !1 1 : /1 j 111 10 1 1 . 11 r 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 ~~i 1! '' '1' I'$ , 11 1 1 c i ' .:: Il 1 I ililli'' I I 1 1 1 l ili 1 11 111 11:1 . 1 11 ' 1 I, 1100 obl 002 005 009 0Â·9 237 0-4 149 297 1 590 1 19 #2 38 4.76 9 52 191 381 76 2 127 i 260 042 20 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SAND GRAVEL 4/ - r e - V." T 'U JIL , 20-BLES CINE | MEDIUM |COARSE FINE | COAASE GRAVEL 44 Â°o SAND 44 4 SILT AND CLAY 12 % C w ' LIQUID .INt IT PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE 0, mine waste FROM Hole 2 at 15 feet 4 4 209 89 GRADATION TEST RESULTS. Fjo PERCENT PASSING 03NIV13U 1N 33Ej3d O3NlV13U 1 N3 OU3d PERCENT PASSING CA-2-79 chen and associates, inc. HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SiEVE ANALVSIS -.ME READINGS U S STANDARD SERIES C.EAA SQUARE OPENINGS 1 24 .A 7 FIR '10 Â·Â·6 5'6' 3- 45 MIN Â·. MINI 60 WN 19 MIN 4 MIN 1 MIN Â·2)0 .'00 50 Â·40 Â·30 1-9 -, 4" 4 19 3 0 100.:; I & i:,1 1 3 lili i I i , i : 9 1 Id 1 11 1 1/1 90~ 1 â€¢ 1 1 1, , L I~ 10 1 1 1 I ! Il 80; , i .4 ' i &1 , J 1 1 '1 III T 70: , ..B ~ , 1 i 1 r , '/1 1 1 I 1 1 11 1 1 1 6OE , 1 1 11 11 , Â· Â· Â· ' ~ i .....4 ' T i 4 5i 1 11 L ! I 11~ 1 11 50~ i , 1 1 I 'M,/' i E i i ) 1 | ,|-. . i ~,~~ 40; 1 , 1 111 1/1/ 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 |i ~ 1' ' 1 ' 1 --0 30' .Â· ~ vil. 2 1 1 4 r 1-1 11 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20~ 1 ,~73 1 i Ki 80 '' R lili 1 I I . :11:1: 10: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 /1 30 111 1 1, 1 1 1 1 . 0. ' , ' '',i' U ' ri i :;i,1 1 1 1 1'1 ;1111 1 1 1 1 1 ~ !11,1 , 1 11 I, 011 11 100 001 002 005 009 019 037 074 149 297 1 590 1.19 2 38 4.76 9.52 191 38 1 76 2 127 ' 200 042 20 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SAND GRAVEL C08BLES CLAY TO SILT FiNE ~ MEDIUM ~COARSE FINE | COARSE GRAVEL 52 Â°: SAND 33 % SILT AND CLAY 15 0/0 4 5 LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF silty sandy gravel FROM Hole 3 at 10 feet 1 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 1 1 TIME READINGS US ST-ANDAPD SERiES CLEAB SQUARE OPENINGS 24 .R 7 )-R Â·10 3" 5 6 45 MIN 15 MIN 60 MIN -9 MIN 4 MIN 1 MIN -200 .00 '50 Â·40 -30 Â·16 I ' 8 ., 1.0 - 4 - 1,1- 0 1002 1 , 1 11 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 E 1 t; 1 11 ' ' ':20 80; 1 1 11 1 1 1 11& 11 1 1 1 1 1 , 6 ~ ~30 70~ I [ 1 , 1 i , 11 1 1 i 1 ik 1 11 1 1 19 1 i 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 11 , ,/1 i'~ ~~~~ "~50 11 .1 11 ill 'I 1 1 l 1 1 11 Â· . 1 :~ : : i ' e t! 3=o I 1[ , , ;70 : 11 . ifi i i 44 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 20: 1 6 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 5 , "1 1 1 1 1 !!i :90 1,, 1 . 1: 1 1 1 1; E ' 1 1 1 1 ],1 1 1 0, 1 ~ 1||'il 1 1;11!JI,1 1 11 b.Iflllâ€¢ 'I, 111!1~. 11 1 1,11'ul' 1~ ;too 001 002 005 009 019 037 074 149 297 ' 590 1 19 i238 4.76 9.52 191 381 76 2 127 260 042 20 152 1 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS SAND GRAVEL CLAY TO SILT - COBBLES RINE ~ MEDIUM |COARSE FINE | COARSE GRAVEL : SAND SILT AND CLAY 0/0 0/0 4 i LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF FROM ' 4 209 89 GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 5 - PERCENT PASSING 03NIV13U 1NBOtjad 03NIV13U 1N3OW3d - PERCENT PASSING CHEN AND ASSOCIATES 4 209 89 TABLE I SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SAMPLE LOCATION GRADATION NATURAL NATURAL PERCENT ATTERBERG LIMITS UNCONFINED MOISTURE DRY PASSING COMPRESSIVE SOIL OR DEPTH CONTENT DENSITY GRAVEL SAND NO. 200 LIQUID PLASTICITY STRENGTH BEDROCK TYPE HOLE (FEET) (%) (PCF) (%) (%) SIEVE LI~IT INDEX (PSF) (%1 (%) 1 4.5 1 2.6 45 43 12 mine waste combined 2 15 2.5 44 44 12 mine waste 3 10 2.6 52 33 15 silty sandy gravel Co 1 800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 10 *it All ATTACHMENT 10 Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D. CONSULTING GEOLOGIST f \~7 0793 VALLEY ROAD CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 (303) 963-3600 (24 HOURS) February 13, 1989 Sunny Vann 210 South Galena Aspen CO 81611 RE: 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision Dear Sunny: I have completed my limited geologic investigation concerning n only the potential for rock fall and snow sliding on the above referenced property on the north-facing slope of Aspen ~ Mountain above Ute Avenue as shown on the acco,32-an-i-ng map.Jhli> rn& Chen and Associates has already addressed the other i EstrE85.7 This is along the southern edge of the Town of Aspen within the Aspen 7 1/2 minute quadrangle, Pitkin County, Colorado. The dual envelope or proposed site is at the base of a steep, conifer-covered hillside on a large tailing pile which will be modified. There are two rights-of-way above the sites as shown. The ridge line just above the property is held up by bedrock. The geology above the site (which will be located on mine tailings) consists of a thin veneer of colluvial deposits containing angular blocks of limestone, sandstone and some â€¢ granitic rocks. The matrix is mostly si],ty sand. This surficial deposit has been mapped by Bruce Bryant, 1971, as a i talus deposit but I believe that the term colluvium is more accurate at this location. The underlying bedrock could not be determined because of lack of nearby outcrops, but is probably the Cambrian age Sawatch Quartzite or one of the Lower Paleozoic carbonate units. Because of the steep attitude of bedrock units in this* area and the latal'ting present, the bedrock could even be the Precambrian age quartz monzonite. Snow sliding and minor rock fall is a possibility on this , property and there is a well established chute on the northwest side of the site. This small chute can be well seen and its relationship to thei site evaluated from across the valley in the Smuggler area. It appears to be directed more toward the neighboring property to the northwest. Snow sliding can occur elsewhere as well but will be minor. Tile extensive tree cover above t.he sites should minimize the potential hazard. There is simply not enough relief or catchment area above the sites to pr'oduce a major ava,1.anc:he. Rock fall can occur at this location from the outcrops above but they are not much fractured and therefore not likely to contribute frequent loose rocks to the hillside. The low elevation of the outcrops and the significant tree cover will not allow rocks to gain much momentum. Nevertheless, the rear foundation walls should be designed to protrude at least four feet above finished grade and be without doors or windows on this upslope-facing side of the proposed homes. They should be strong enough to withstand forces of at least 200 pounds per square foot. This should provide a large measure of protection from either rolling rocks or snow slides that may reach the sites. Any positive landscaping which can be done at the rear of the homes during or soon after construction would also be helpful. If there are further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, 9Ut'toli~ Nicholas Lampiris Consulting Geologist i Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 FormATT-10-S Alldunmen[ 11 Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D. ATTACHMENT 11 CONSULTING GEOLOGIST 0793 VALLEY ROAD CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 (303) 963-3600 (24 HOURS) May 20. J991 17 cu n Horn 300 E. Hyman. Suite B Aspen CO 8161i 1001 Ute Aven , ics Dear Glen: I recently spoke to David Finholm, architect. about mitigating the two units at the above referenced site rear of the buildings rather than at the rear wall of the buildings. This is entirelv possible at this site because the hillside above 4. '. - une propertv is not overly high nor hazardous at this end of the ridge. MY original recommendation can be modified to include the option to create a wall or berm(s) at the rear of the yard and before the break in slope which will at least equal the four feet of protection I recommended. Thus, four feet of protection in the form of walls or berms with steep uphill faces will be just as cood. Angles of the mitigation features can also be utilized to lessen the impact of snow or rocks: this would be harder to accomplish at the rear walls. These structures should be just as strong as those originally ' contemplated. If there are questions remaining please call. Sincerely, ltd 94 Nicholas Lampiris Consulting Geologist Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322--3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 12 ATTACHMENT 12 CHOZEN PROPERTY UTE AVENUE, ASPEN, COLORADO Avalanche Hazard Report by Peter Lev Alpentech, Salt Lake City, Utah 20 January 2006 PITKIN COUNTY OVERVIEW Alpentech has been asked a number of times to evaluate avalanche hazard to Pitkin County and Aspen properties and has made a number ofvisits to Pitkin County over the years. Unlike many other areas ofthe mountain west Pitkin County and Aspen have seen a steady stream of avalanche consultants, avalanche hazard map makers, and disparate chroniclers ofthe local avalanche history. The result is a complex and sometimes conflicting picture ofavalanche hazard potential. The Red and Blue Zone Avalanche Hazard Classification (Avalanche High Hazard Zone and Avalanche Moderate Hazard Zone respectively) and reliance on the Pitkin County Snow Avalanche Areas map (showing Historic Avalanche Areas and Potential Avalanche Areas respectively)* has provided the framework for evaluating avalanche hazard in Pitkin County. However, as more obscure land comes to real estate development, these traditional avalanche hazard classifications may not be sufficient for accurately describing the avalanche hazard. This new development land may be on or under steep slopes, yet there may still be a legitimate question whether or not there is avalanche hazard. There are some special considerations when evaluating Pitkin County terrain and snow climate. The first is the extreme variability from south-aspect slopes to north-aspect slopes. South-aspect slopes are typically covered in oak brush, sometimes as tall as six to ten feet, while the north-aspect terrain may be heavily forested in conifers and the "open" avalanche paths covered in a variety of"destruction" vegetation sometimes over six feet high. In either case the Pitkin County terrain which may be subject to avalanche hazard is clothed in natural cover and is not typically bare ground or grass, except at the highest elevations (or on the ski area runs). The second major consideration is the extreme variability of snow cover from south aspect to north aspect. South-facing slopes often have no snow cover at all, while north-facing slopes may have 1 to 4 feet of snow. The third major consideration is the variation in snow depth when comparing, for example, the relatively lower altitude and minor north aspect slopes adjacent to and above the town of Aspen (8000 feet) to the more seriously impacted development terrain in the County affected by avalanches originating at 10,000 feet or higher. The point is there is not a 'one size fits all' for designating a particular terrain as an avalanche path. The traditional Red and Blue Zone classification is primarily based on the configuration and steepness of a relatively bare slope (or at best, open trees), and the known avalanche history. The three considerations outlined above do not significantly come into play in the Red/Blue Zone classification, and this is a shortcoming. Yet some of the land coming to development, although either on or affected by steep terrain, lacks any obvious avalanche paths and lacks history. Therefore, ground cover must play an important role in determining potential avalanche hazard, as must the varying depth of snowcover (due to aspect and elevation).. It is therefore important to incorporate these considerations in any realistic avalanche hazard evaluation. Some ofthe terrain we have been asked to evaluate is adjacent to the town of Aspen, lower elevation and north-facing, very steep and covered in dense forest. Tree core samples at various locations show the oldest trees to be on average 60 years old. We judge this to be the time marker near the end ofthe mining days, a time when the slopes had been cleared of nearly every tree. We have no doubt that during the mining period avalanches did indeed occur on the de-nuded slopes. Today, however, we see little or no sign of avalanche activity on these slopes. In the European Alps, particularly in Switzerland, forests are planted and maintained to protect towns. Forests are a proven and highly regarded method of avalanche protection. This is as true in Pitkin County as in the Alps, although perhaps without the intention. Summing up, we are seeing some new development in Pitkin County taking place on terrain which does not appear to us to be either Red or Blue Avalanche Hazard Zone terrain, but rather a sort of'grey' zone somewhere between Blue (moderate avalanche hazard) and White Zone (no possibility of avalanches). Because ofthis situation, we are utilizing, as needed, an additional hazard classification, which we call the 'Yellow Zone'. This Yellow Zone classification applies where the terrain is sufficiently steep and extensive to theoretically produce avalanches. However, the lack of snowcover, or the presence of a dense vegetation cover, and a lack of historical support for avalanche activity all indicate there to be no significant avalanche activity. The 'Yellow' classification does not require impact studies necessary for building defense structures, or to special building codes, as would the Blue Zone classification. A conservative tilt to the above conclusion would take into account the possibility of 1) climate change producing much more snow, leading to, 2) loss of forest due to huge snowfalls and unusually large avalanches, and 3) as a separate threat, loss of protective forest due to bug infestation or fire. However, these possibilities are speculative and are not supported by the snow climate history ofPitkin County. * 1974 Colorado State University at Fort Collins CHOZEN PROPERTY ANALYSIS The proposed building site is on a mine dump at 8,025 feet. Above this site the slope rises gradually to the Ute Hiking/Ski Trail which traverses above the site at about 8,060 feet elevation. Above the Ute Trail the terrain rises steeply to a shallow bowl at about 8,500 feet. This is a vertical distance of about 475 feet. The slope above the Ute Trail ranges in steepness from 70% to over 100% (see map attachment "Slope Steepness"). The attached photo shows the important features and findings of our investigation. Our ski inspection route (yellow dash line) is indicated. We dropped into the upper bowl then exited over the ridge into the ski area. In the bowl we noted some possible avalanche starting zones amongst the trees. The rock outcrop (on map) and generally thin snow cover encouraged us to renew our inspection from below and just above the Ute Trail. At this point we observed four small and narrow (10 feet wide or less) moderately active avalanche paths, which appeared to stop at the Ute Trail (green solid lines). A spotty thinning of the forest and some broken branches vaguely defines these slide paths. Also, we noted rockfall damage throughout the lower forest. We understand from talking with the Aspen Ski Patrol that these avalanches occur primarily as wet spring slides. Four years ago a number of them hit the Ute Trail but did not go beyond. The Trail appears to work as a catchment area for these small slides. We could find no defining evidence that any of these small slides reach beyond the Trail and the relatively short distance down to the mine dump. The slopes rising from the mine dump to the ridge-line (described above) are densely forested in mature conifers, with some scattered aspen along the lower end. Referring to the photo, notice at the left corner ofthe mine dump is the number '57'. This number and location refer to a tree core taken at that spot. The core (see photo attachment) is from a typical, healthy conifer, ofthe type and age to be found throughout the subject terrain all the way up into the Upper Bowl. Fifty-seven is the age of this tree. We find the age of 60 years to be common for conifers in the Aspen area. This is the marker at the end of the mining era, prior to which almost every tree available had been cut down. On a slope such as this, denuded oftrees, there were no doubt avalanches. Today, the forest provides a viable protection from almost all avalanches and certainly from serious avalanches. Although this forest is without 'intention' it is just as legitimate avalanche protection as the much cared-for avalanche protection forests above villages in Switzerland. Conclusion: The Chozen property and building site are, in our opinion, free of any significant avalanche hazard at this time. However, should the forest be lost, then the mine dump building site will be subject to potentially serious avalanche hazard. There is no reason to expect a demise ofthe protective forest, but some possibilities are: 1) too much warmth/drought could promote a bug infestation which kills a significant number oftrees, 2) an unusually heavy winter snowfall could enlarge the existing small avalanche paths, 3) and really massive snowfalls could occur, followed by massive avalanching which clears out the forest. The relatively lower elevation of the slopes affecting the subject property and historical climate record for Pitkin County suggests possibilities 2) and 3) above to be unlikely occurrences. Possibility 1), however, could be a concern given the extent ofbug infestation elsewhere throughout Rocky Mountain forests. We are giving the subject property a Yellow Zone avalanche hazard classification. This classification (see Introduction page) applies to terrain which is sufficiently steep and expansive enough to produce dangerous avalanches, if it were relatively bare ground. This terrain, however, is very densely forested. The forest shows no significant tree damage from avalanches (attention: there is considerable rockfall damage). Some minor avalanche tree damage does appear in the marked (green lines) paths. Yellow Avalanche Hazard Zone classification does not require the building site to be protected by avalanche defense structures or special avalanche building code. Therefore, an avalanche impact study is not necessary. However, we recommend there to be only small or no windows placed on the uphill side of the proposed residences. Enclosure(s) March 28, 2006 James Lindt City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: 1001 Ute Avenue Planned Unit Development Dear James: Enclosed with this letter are: 1. March 24, 2006 Memorandum to Glenn Horn from Peter Lev, of Alpentech Addressing Avalanche Protection on South Side of Proposed Residences; 2. Warranty Deed conveying 1001 Ute Avenue from Chozen to Leathem Stearn; and 3. March 27, 2006 letter from Leathem Stearn to James Lindt authorizing Davis Horn Incorporated to represent him in the land use review process. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks for your assistance. Sincerely, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED GLENN HORN AICP To: Glenn Horn From: Alpentech - Peter Lev and Beat vonAllmen Date: 10 March 2006 Regarding: Chozen Property This is an addendum to our Avalanche Hazard Report dated 20 January 2006. The last sentence in the Report says: "However, we recommend there to be only small or no windows placed on the uphill side of the proposed residences." We would like to re- visit this statement. As indicated in the Report we don't expect any significant avalanche hazard to the proposed buildings. As also indicated in the report things can change, such as loss of the protective forest, however unlikely. Here is what we propose: We understand there is to be a patio/open area and a retaining wall behind the houses (between the houses and the slope). A patio is fine. A retaining wall could be raised above grade three feet and this would offer some protection, especially for the occasional small spring slide as noted in the report. Further, if one wanted to place more extensive glass on the patio-side of the buildings (south facing), the exposed glass could be protected by solid doors/shutters when conditions appear to warrant, thereby providing some additional security to the structures. The Iron Blosam Lodge at Snowbird (Utah) is exposed on its north side to truly serious avalanches descending from the south-facing slopes and cliffs above the road. All the rooms on that north side have big windows, which are protected by heavy wood doors/shutters which can be moved into place as needed. For Alpentech, Peter Lev " , A., 4# 9 . ... :; 4.,.Â£Â·.Â·Â¢?~' a r " ~ B K Â·- 0 ;8322' f.13 W - 0. /14 1 1.1 ...1 . .-77/4 '1 7' . â€¢~ Wd. 1111.1.9 '9, -4. c . - 4 .t ... *f 7** ..< I ' 4,4. â‚¬* ;1.113% .11. J.20 -fae . : 1-Bry *.Â·k ...-'-I- iÂ· 7:kijidlif- *vi 9 4: ~ir 5 4...4 '' . Â· ta.'- i. . i _ 4,Â·'5~ 12Â·''OÂ· 191â€¢0~3; . , â€¢F = 1 . i ./ 49:543~6'~11 0 3 221 ., r .~li .2- 4 , . f.... (14*Fl/, *2249 3 ' - Vote h. 2 Â¥ a p :.0 -..fr ,.1. ht'- 2. S*1â‚¬71~DI.kaprlF i , ... ' . f 7//JFW liN . 4 - / 7 . 1 :Rk't~-ff@Et "12 - t 1,1. -3 * 2 -444 v I I 2- . D 0 -* 4. -1,64'Ft- 33,263996Arth/LiA/7/16 0 I.- 2 Â¥ 3 7 -i. I. R .. , 1 ; 9 2 -Il.=-...-- /Kil' . i - t, --2 9- - *r ff *. , . Property Line. w. 14 '6 Â¢ Â· 77Â« i- ~. Â· . Â· I. - J, p.T,3 447 16<r - . # .' *- 4Â¢1 Â·. Q . . 1-la -. Â· 4 -A - . ...,. I .. . ._,-16, E. .. 12 u.bÂ· . . 2.. P. . - 2 URÂ¥ - 0 3 17* 2 - 1.1 P 745, ir,# R 7.-R . ///~ /. - I I -- r#14 4....-99.1 9 4.72: = 44,1,-7 Â· ,- .* 0 :Â· 04- > $ t.% U tâ€¢/ .-1 6 Â· rgP - . .... - $ .:. 24 - 2 - 10 - ~ 44 1.1, . --4 9 Aa< '4 ....5 0,1 1 - B - 61 - m. 1 <tar f. A- ,Â¥ - 4 4 3-,..tÂ·-4 2 ty, : 0 34~-..:Â·i}y.411 I / 1...3.- ...- hil-- .... *g -1 1 . - - 7 'f -- 1 7 ' -Â·-1.:i ji: . . A- I I . . . 0..L . 0 *4 . 1-Â·:(~,6- 4 ~ ~ . 1 .....~.1 4 - - .. , - 1 :.2 A- r 41: . .4..-: r- 'f . i -31 110 *i...f- - 1- /1 1 Â«- Ute Ski Trail ' z. * 4.94 - . a 9.1, ' - , F. t. '.5 + M -.,4 :â‚¬,, I .. :9 ....- I IE 3. E 2 . 4.- . 2. -- L le - p U-, i *Abu-- Â· . 1./ 1.4: 1< f Â·. .I/:A ' ' i ful#liwill . q,~ir_â€¢..tiak, Â· - '424... , 41 If 679 .1*06Â£ ..ME" /*- .41AF . r.+ 2.W , m,~'Â·.,*,â€¢â€¢. et. M 14#/9*84#F -/ 7- Â· '- A '56Ftlf} Â· CJ~ ..:'C ' '., Â·722~~ 41Â£~ -1 . / 'Aill : : -I . I~~' - . I -4... 4 i. Mt . 1.7 .... 4/7*6 , --- - .<.. 0 ,â€¢,dIR,i 4, 'Â· ,~,;i!29.w:oÂ· - Aa- -FLS -M*=i 1141- - --+-1, f. f'- - K,1:~litt.Â·~:.2 -B '.21rA#fnAd7;,w.Â·wÂ· .~p c.*91 74 ' Â¥14- . I -. 1 - 3 . .il.t ... :F,-1 f...572 - -. --I . , . 7 , 44.1, . - 1~1,1,:.rind ~~12",~~~~~~<~~~<t-/ 52~ 489-*I 1.- ' Â«Â·Â·Â· Â·**4 . C #Â·*C . 4.C ..: 2'Ait . -I 4~944*jib:Â·. r '- ._ 3,:v..p,~L~ - r An~ lictle-:*FRA--4,4.1., Plt.{73â‚¬ .W~ % *.7.NE' 3 'rÂ«. .4.2:=. m.404 . .. 3 2 -4>~ ~ br--ti-I 4Â¥~Sb 2:St , 2/2,1-ifi,1. 9 4..1*131* V#b*f ,+111--' I r , ' h -4.4%1.CI -02â€¢..cla- Y' 9.. 79 Â·Â· 06.61 9%1Â· pah- ALM . .4 406 2 . 1 gr- , il u... unt i 1 4- 4*b- UL , /tri , 1 ..ftFC 4 +I 16 51, 9 , - 57 year old tree, no signs of avalanches Irm= ia 44.k*--- 1 ....Â·- - 1 -Fol.-It 'bi,4 4 B L i 1 ., , { Dr? .4.7 - , January 10,2006 - Core samp/e of tree /ocated 4, 6 4 ~7.~Â». at s/ope transition on the South side of the Chozen-Merri// property -I.I.W.. ri r â€¢ C it, ? ili i j +a-498 / - . 4 r f 4,1. f k ) 9/' , W- mipa 31 / W. - 8 -70- 1Â¢ UÂ· ifi '~~~.) 4 ~ 07} * '1111- .//,/~ bl /7 v (1~0 3.-/ 1 \ C #* F. 4 60 '0/ 1 3 4-:. \ S al< 11 i 1 41 \ / *Â». /1\ p0074 1 , ' 9 //LI -1 4,4 . / t. Â£6= 1 . i Â« . 0.1,0 lia . Ahe ,7\ - - / I . /1 . - ./ 114* ....r 2 -& 1-r 11: f 1- -. r li :1- -2 11 / 11 F U.- / 11 - 1 , r-- 1/ Ute Avenue I 7/ 1 4-4- 1 Â·- 04 9(24 0 50 100 150 200 400 ~ \ SLOPE Avolonche Reconnaissance < 996 Chozen Menill Property [3~1 Investigation route, 1 -10-06 9% - 15% 1696 - 25% located ot Aspen Mountain. Ute Avenue 1/40 Approximate building site(s) 3696 - 45% Prepared for Davis Horn Inc. 2696 - 35% 215 S Monarch, #104, Aspen, CO 81611 X 3 4696 - 60% Peter Lev, Avalanched Expert E-2-1 Approximate property outline 61%-75% and Beat vonAllmen. P.E 7696-100% ~ InWIVA~NI#liet Preliminary: 1-11--06 ~k~Xi~ 101% - 500% I e.f< 12/~ / 1 /4 7 /./. /~ / // Â·i- - 2\'.1. ..,ri -- 1 11\% \ 1. f - 11 46{*=bl *Ml/El LO lo .lyÂ¥'.1 â‚¬ 2% BaL ~ 09001 1-0'k-,0 2 -<":'75 /11 ...t. ! -2. 1 -: 3 1 - f i *.9 - O- j,l D -23 - 49 2/-3.4 /*fr - - L .1 / \ 41 \ V te I \ I-- 0 X \ \ j. \ 1 i \ Â®SP C# 4- - 4 \ \ 2 - / ~1/ : 1 I .- . -4--I... i - Ill \ 1 / 1.-- 11 \ 11 1 1 11 \ / 1 1 - 1 1 Ute ~-1 *4; Avenue I 9* Lh 0 50 100 150 200 400 ~ .mk....d.....f"....P....9 . SOLARASPECT Avolonche Reconnoissonce [7=1 Investigation route, 1-10-06 N . Chozen Merrill Property NE located at Aspen Mountain. Ute Avenue NW ~ [J~ Approximate building siteÂ¢S) E Prepared for Davis Horn Inc. 215 S Monorch, #104, Aspen. CO 81611 -~ FF-1 Approximate property outline SEE ond Beat vonNImen, P.E. Peter Lev. Avolanched Expert SW ,â€¢mI,84*1~ch-,18Â¢ Preliminary: 1 -11-06 ~~~ S \ t l 1 1.4 . 4 i 16 i __u . \ /2\ / 2 \\ 9 CO 1 m e f< /, 93 / 11 j. n ALL' ~ 2 1 f 4 4 6-, / 0 1-1 1 1 \ ucl,+ 4% - -- i- 1 1 r//1 'im //--1 , / 4-1 1/2 r, 1 1' -- . - - il /j -1 /A -0 1 f / 1 11 - 11 f 11 1 / 11 Ute - -------~ ~ Avenue i 1, / 4, 1 / 0 50 100 150 200 400 - 6%-lifid \ Avolanche Reconnaissance 1-7=1 Investigation route, 1 -10-06 ELEVATION Chozen Merrill Properly located at Aspen Mountain, Ute Avenue 1[,2 Approximate building site(s) <7500 Prepared for Dovis Hom Inc. 8001 - 6500' Peter levi Avolonched Expert ~ 215 S Monarch. #104, Aspen, CO 81611 4 F<7 Approximate property outline 8501 - 9000' and Beat vor,Allmen, P.E WIW~mlach.,18# Preliminary: 1 -11-06 ~~ \ >41 1 j..., Ji b., *i .-- -1 I j " 14// , 4 F. \1 r- 2 1 91~11?21-1,/ 0. ' 2 t ..9-1 9/ .46â‚¬}Â« If.#,â€¢5~L> .ife- 1.2/4 111Â¥/ .1 1. -- /'AJ >0/*#I,Xrillillir......~0.00...~~~~I'll-m#En:i," , 144 - 1 .; \ Lt- 2-X 1 I -â€ž-I~ 31 - .></ Ar- ///7\ ' - ~,-Â«7+~~% i :*i 09 /1 , I 1 & ./ 1 .-' 4 \F / 11 Â»/ 1 ,/1 - P - / 11 1 / 11 / 11 Ute ----- Avenue f0000 .. 1 71 1 0 50 100 150 200 400 ~ D /\ N SLOPE Avalanche Reconnaissance < 9% 1~37~1 Investigation route, 1 -10-06 9% - 15% Chozen Merrill Property 16% - 25% located at Aspen Mountain, Ute Ave. 1* Approximate building site(s) 26% - 35% Prepared for Davis Hom Inc. 36% - 45% 46%-60% ~ ~terSi.3~z=LINS.2:r' CO 816114~> E77 Approximate property outline 61% - 75% and Beat vonAllmen, P.E. \ C27%:t~ ~ Â·Â·Â·Â·,~n~ch-ne# preliminary: 1-11-06 . 0*th, ' I A. - 7/ZI %4,3. 2*462/4 ' -EL; Â·~ Â·r-,0/ i , -2 1 1. . ., . , , Ple//1-13 . . . * i~-NE I M $ .bl ' 'F.Fe' . t. . $ .*I - ~Â· , , 9 ' . 43â€¢ 4 r 1/1. 1 -- 9/:2962-Â£'i.@/1 ./. 4~-- , ...... M' I X. *; A Â·Â· Ilin, 09//4/ V,h ~ Ur ./Â· , /4 - I 9. . 4 Wr , 7/4/%/ r ' mnw-5 ' 9 l./.Ill/'. , 4 -'- 1 3 I .....r ..+1 1.534 k j..114" .- 9.~ . , 1, r . -pr. 11 t.4Â¢16, j*f .15411.- 1~ 1/ U 1 ' Â· . * 2.,pt.I: , ' '%: rt/'' *,30#. I . 1 J ;~Â· ~< ,, ,#1, - 1?~' i I/<'..410;4: V ..A.~ 4. 1. ...~,PAFF#'P , 1, ........U.I C ' :.'Â·,v. 1.4, 4* ~457- , r h .4, 4..2.4,-2 V-/ . Â· Â·Â·~.Rn* pr 4 r //r 0 .1..... . ./ - fi .1. , .1 --7 - -- - -Ii.............r .Â£*'Â·Â»"iâ€¢ /. i.dill. 1 /1,'' , . A. r"4/ 3 -1 8 1 2,Â»lei., .................f..:1...JA/.P 12â€¢~â€¢ & 6 -Â¥ 1. -:69' 1,1. .0 - '1.-- 1. . . ~-- -'.' e-]- r. I : 23Â· 4 f M . .. 421.&.,0... ; r ..r. 1 . . %,9,1,. 'E' MÂ¢ tk- 4. a .,1.,2. '. V 19 Â·, 10. '02:q 744 44&441 1 .. . ' 4 4 - . 0- 0 1 4 ,~ t; .y, t. â€¢} % I .câ€¢ '~' '- P % . 7 - Ir , , AL - 20 ' ' . ,Â·~~p .A- 219/ : . '1 ... I 0 1 / 16- L - 71. O.: + /7..:gailt., f . r: .1 < , . 11? a I Â· EN/thâ€¢F' 2-*r; ~ ,Â· t â€¢v . 1 /-' : '. Â¥~ Â¢ , $ 1 /// 4 ...1, 0. .~,24+4' 1 ,6.7:po~~... .ta v. '. iÂ· 4 â€¢g~â€ž- 4 46=4.2,--'" ' 15 4 ' .. Â·â€¢ j,â‚¬ , 7+~:,i Â· i Â·E gUm.#Apul - fi .'.#2...*44.. / c . ... ; 14iI A - 0 ....... - 4 r I ,.,21'f '' â€¢*'' I:.'ll. . , C - I -Il.'ll'/- I J - A J2illiliq.,1,2, .1.0 i a, 38, ac' 1' 1 ' M . 4~#:fi P & 4 1 74*4 . 1 ' .2)71 11 2,9 tg, 1 . - n . 4. e' , 71.,TA. %*,2- ... '911 ~A i ..2 46 .1 1 49 . , 4 . r i I . i , I -.1Â·44Â·.Â· 4Â·,1-41.* - . , ..i'.â‚¬&*A...2:11( 949 ''. 79' Â·,..... 5. 1 14 '. 4 Y , *'' â€¢ i Zi 1 '. = I. 6 .L ....- ./ J. 3.IF L :4 1, F. Â¥ U , 1 1,6 7'ZE= . C - . I '4 1 W. , Â·Â· ..%~.1â‚¬...Ci,rn.m i ..6,0 .A . 4 2 jwl'*,9//Ii&' . I *L ~. I -. g 4,- v//CE :c.%7..~~~ 701/#17*044)i~â€¢6- Â·v""11';rgi.~ 4.. . .....' ' 4. .1 . 0 -. 1 4:f 1 - WA#.-3~ 4 ~~# ~kih4'4 4i l / -*i .<11 L i * 1 74.1.4ft. f . 4*,' .M, t t- - -- . 7. A I / 1H.49//79'X :%-.M. 5'.9/ '-i, 4â€¢t . '4 1,14 4- ... 1 /W.Â»4'. f Â· .:1 3:N,Al/1 . .Â»70 I ./ h* 0 4 i , A 4'4 .~84 V. 1- 4: , w' ?I: r,Â·444 .. , Â· r Â·*: p Â· ..1/ ~ 1 : - 1 j. ...1.0 A U \ 1-01 / 1 ..1*i. IV / 1% C f.. 1/ki /C : - / ...t I. /4445 ;62*i / 2 00 . 9.5.4*6' ' . ' . '. ; 7,1 ffÂ», 7 /1 / T .? - , fi:Â·:I - . / 4/ 1 // .Ick!.4.,1 1/ i l - \.) 1 ...: t ~-Â· Â· -V ,/// -- f /</11 ..i~ .314-:Ii.....- /1 '13 1 -. / h 460 / \ j. 1 /4 \ 40 . C I I \ I - //7\ ,1-/ I 1- -, /rt/ , 1 \ --1 i \\ A- V 1 / ,, - 111 \\ '11 Â¢00 1 / fli \ -'.1 i h \ II / 11 1 11 - Ute -1 7 J Avenue 1 ot 0 50 100 150 200 400 ~ 17 killi--9 Fil-.~V I.. I SOLAR ASPECT Avalanche Reconnaissance ~7~] Investigation route, 1 -10-06 N . Chozen Merrill Property NE NW located ot Aspen Mountain. Ute Ave. ~ [I~ Approximate building site<s~ E Prepared for Dovis Horn Inc. 215 S Monarch, #104, Aspen, CO 81611 1. 1 li2'-1 Approximate property outline SE 1~ Peter Lev, Avalanched Expert and Beat vonAllmen, P.E. SW S t.~.v~,Â®e,~ach.nal Preliminary: 1--11-06 ~~~) . 1 j /11 j 4 3 'A j b// , li / 11 \ / , I --IN X /42=-~ < 1--141Â«-----4/09/11/l- 49 .0*x) # /1 \1-1 - 1/ - \ -,1 I -- / i L// , 1 A e -' ./ 1 1 1 31-- , 0 3\ /-\ 1 11 1 I' h / li - / 11 ll ? Ute L--1 ------~I Avenue 1 zi 1 1 i J 2 + 1 r Ph 0 50 100 150 200 400 ':, 1 Avolanche Reconnaissance DI-~1 Investigation route, 1 -10-06 ELEVATION Chozen Menill Property located ot Aspen Mountain, Ute Ave. <7500 Prepared for Davis Horn Inc- 1~ Approximate building site(s) 8001 - 6500' 215 S Monarch, #104, Aspen, CO 81611 < Peter Lev, Avatonched Expert - |~-~~_~ Approximate property outline 8501 - 9000' and Beat vonAllmer. P.E. IwlÂ¥.a~nladU,4 Preliminary: 1-11 -06 300+J' - 8550 I / / / - 71 -v / 4:Ilillf illi-..ilil--#re~~~effif* 5 \\\ w / r z - m 12.0 r p//1/0/Fiwi4Jw / - . , $ 1 11(\ , -.4-1 96) + --At - \ I Â«041-249 *.1144. . 9---..- * 11 // , Â©0 1 4 --/ AliA 1011;11 ~ 1 Aill.b - 1 Lit .. f*'millill~fb* 3 "Tiv 0-'illill'll""p.'700~0~lillill:~:M All . ilillill'V 0 1 1 1-r--- - .,0.- 1 0 17- 1 . f X ..'B mq;w REÂ· + 1 \L - r . \1 - 8%00 , 9 -< 8150 -43 -. *g- '13 -,1, ---"- a V * 18.4 ./.I 1./. 3* 1Â» r r m~ 7 . i E 0 1/ - 93% 'Er/ *1-Â».-- Â¥ a 2 .. - 8100 14*/ a ,/ '''~~'.*I---*** M. \ ~--+ 8050 1, A - !1 il'll'll,lill'll/& 8000 2 -_ rn - \JJ / -* 0 50 100 150 200 400 V *5-5.-Flf-fl- 1 \ Avolanche Reconnaissance 0- -' Investigation route, 8-28-05 1 L,0,0/ Approximate avalanche outline < 996 11.22 12.0096 Chozen Merrill Property SLOPE ACREAGE %ACREAGE 9% - 15% 5.16 5.5096 located at Aspen Mountain, Ute Ave. ~ Approximate building site(s) ~- -1 Suspected avalanche activity 26% - 3596 6.95 7.40% Prepared for Davis Horn Inc. 16% 2596 4.10 4.4096 36% - 45% 7.84 8.40% 215 S Monarch, #104. Aspen. CO 81611 -4 46% -60% 14.39 15.40% Peter Lev, Avalonched Expert â‚¬ ~ Approximate property outline ~<~*p~ Possible protective measures 61% -75% 22.74 24.30% 7696 -10096 / 17.97 19.20% and Beat vor,Allmen. P.E 2-4137 101% - 500% * 3.37 3.60% IVWI/*Bel*dU~f Preliminary: 1 -11 -06 i {{f % . -0 4 6 % MIDNÂ» - 9 11 4111 - irt Y . -1 - le,1 E - L ~1 ~1 -p . â€¢ /Â»\1\0 8900 / Ul./.-- , 11 1111 - 8800 , 44 - 87~0 6 ~0 8700 9,1 2 11'rÂ«~ - 8650 / Â«f / 9, 1111 -- 8600 1 - - 8550 - '~~~----~al___~- 8500 1 71 -- 8450 81$ >fl / 8400 ,--4//// *513 0 8 8350 ~ / ' 8300 7~~ f ./ 4 8250 . - 6 8050 /19 8200 - F. ..C 471- 114 - 8100 - 8050 - %00 .i j / . . 7,1 . .'.F,r-/Ill, 9~ - .t 6243 1 4-+45- 1 0 , ...54 A.t 99'eqfil o *50 100 ~50 200 19,~ r I - 4- - n ....... 111~ SOLAR ASPECT (+wind ACREAGE 9(ACREAGE Avolanche Reconnaissance -- -1 Investigation route. 8-28-05 . (000/1 Approximate avalanche Outline N I O.94 1.60% Chozen Menill Property NE 17.09 29.90% NW 24.99 43.60% located at Aspen Mountain, Ute Ave. * 1 Approximate building site(s) E- -4, Suspected avalanche activity E O.39 0.70% Prepared for Davis Horn Inc. W 4.48 7.50% 215 S Monorch. #104. Aspen, CO 81611 ~ L _j Approximate property outline i .<4421 Possible protective measures SW 861 15.00% 7 and Beat vor,Allmen. P.E. -A \3157 SE 0.75 1.30% Peter lev, Avalanched Expert A,4-9 S 36.49 63.70% *wÂ»(af,Ujui Preliminary: 1-11-06 &NOT#9 0092 \ 119/60iff g \ -6950-~ i 1 \ 8850 2 CO .*. - 8800 - -SQ ) F- b""- -* 8650 -.-19 J-3 , / 3/4 33- -<-- 8550 -/---/ /Â»------/ - / - *il // / )11 ../// it00 - - 8500 - 7/Â·/2...... - 8450 - /-A- 8103 -0 1 -* 2.'1'/5 *. 8400 --- ur -i --/- do 8350 - - - 401 8300 -- 8250 80* \ 8200 M-* 8150 - Moo . --tlb-.-./Illk UÂ«=- *-9.-4/11'ew//Mil/3..lisxig.......9..fl/-=~M-/'./././.mq//61 rful./.%-t#Â·--'â€ž9'"'""I- r>. 8050 ##,0# ..~*,3.-T<rimi~~~.440~7 i 47=p l'-4 1.1 1 d 1~/ 7 4. + I 1/1 1 *41,6,"Imh \ ix . -/#17'.~. \ \ ELEVA I ION Al.KEAbt= 96ALKEAUE <7500 14.93 15.30% Avolanche Reconnaissance . -] Investigation route, 8-28-05 ~ L,,,/1 Approximate avalanche outline 8001 - 6500' 46.69 47.90% Chozen Merrill Property 8501 - 90000 33.41 34.30% 9001 - 9500 2.50 2.60% located at Aspen Mountain, Ute Ave. _~_ Approximate building site(s) + -1 Suspected avalanche activity Prepared for Davis Horn Inc. 215 S Monorch, #104, Aspen, CO 81611 (. I L I Approximate property outline | p01 Possible protective measures Peter Lev, Avalanched Expert AÂ·W-d and Beat vonAllmen, P.E. wlÂ»~allai#GOIL,)d Preliminary: 1 -11-06 dib \1<724 0998 0919 0019 - 0098 - 0999 f Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 13 itillijili3ililitillikillit ATTACHMENT 13 11111111111111 Uk[B BRIL]NE EN(I[KEER}[NO STRUCTURAL/CIVIL ENGINERRING ~ CONTRACTKNG ~ CERTIFIDED ENERGY DESIGN PROFESSIONAL December 12, 2006 Davis-Horn Planning Mr. Glen Horn 215 So Monarch St. Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 1001 Ute Ave. Site Conceptual Drainage Plan Dear Mr. Horn: Drainage patterns for the site will remain essentially unaltered and historic runoff rates will not be exceeded. Runoff above the bench for the residences will continue to be deflected by the old railroad bed and be coursed to the easterly property line and adjacent property. Runoff from the historic bench area and proposed construction will continue to be coursed around the tennis courts. Culverts and drain inlets will be installed as necessary to permit water movement around the site improvements. Lot land common areas: A dry well is anticipated along the easterly property line for drainage mitigation from Lot 1. A second dry well is anticipated in the parking area near the intersection of the driveway with Ute Ave for drainage mitigation ofthe runoff from the driveway. The proposed drywells will be sized to provide adequate detention capacity so as to not exceed existing storm runoff rates. Lot 2 and common areas An existing tree lined depression area to the northwest ofthe tennis courts will be reworked and continue to accept runoff waters that have historically been coursed that way from the Lot 2 area and improvements. This proposed depression will be sized to provide adequate detention capacity so as to not exceed existing storm runoff quantities. Overflow from the detention facility will continue in its historic orientation to the adjacent properties. Please call us at 970-963-9869 if you have any questions regarding this report. Sincerely, TIMARLINE ENdNEE#jAG< // -20 /// 8 Â· *t>/ *. vi ' Jay 1 4 W U -N- 41.; 4751 F- David A. Powell, Pit*. / 04'2Â·(~ 6 Â·: : Reg. No. 25851 172%'.. ..., i I. " n.,44.WAL NeS- 0/T./. 14. , P.O. BOX 6311 Q__1 -_ ___12 M. I - --- - - - --- - -- ---- 33 1.1 11 (. \ 1 le; 1,1 l.) f, . 1 4 \ 8 10 l.1 41 u l.); 11 1 41* fif.19 I I 4,4 232*1,4?â‚¬/4 h 61 1 ,/94~1Â« *. :34 't~ */'1- r 7- /1 1 'O ,= eym, - 1.U 1~ $ f 1 1// . 2 va - 1 [25 ...4 1 G- 0. -â‚¬2 r Sk- 1 ' 3 ..'ll/ , A/\ 1 4 '- k *41, 0 / \ 21-' #=Lty, c ; K1 '.... 2. 4 l \05... 3** COPYRIGHT ~ r; I -. ~<. -I : 1. - ,'11- 7- e '1 Ii" .i' I -- it IF . 9 5 i \ ' ':' \ / N - 2 \* I ' 1 I I - ~ m . - 0-- , 40% .,... t-,9.. 854 &\ .- - . 1 . 1. 4Â§*74 ..V , ./ 6. / 'câ€¢Â· -2 3 0 I li . ** -* 41-AN U /6 ~i X B -- 3 - 2 -- 21 8% i - , ~ N . N - hi.\ 0 . -8 6 go / 2 Z 9.6 Â· â‚¬yee , ,--- 3. .- --/ 111 1/ID j . / 1 V ' -42 4--- -- 7: \17 \ 3 GRAPHIC SCALE 12/*6:%# -- \Â«/4/1->-23 Â» - N /'. -M INDICA E GENtRAChâ€¢KEnON ZE v # '499-4- m :intiNITWMA . 1 9 0.= 4%. fl Of- 50.2 DRUAGE ./ GRAPHIC SCALE . - / .. 1--wIL \ ---- 3 - 22Ur )19*U----x --- ~ 9<:- - 1/ -- -:,<~::5:. ~. 4 %4 -~ MA b13*r#pFASPE~ c. DRAW' BY - Pl" ujUNTING RAINAGE &=TORBGRAPHY ~>-f/1\~1 \41\\\\///////2 1.-2 9 I -48610--- I. EGEND 71+.- 0 -nâ€¢14 h,â‚¬ 9 To BE REDEf}NED &-Â»EMA[N AS DETENno* fAG,atÂ¥ AND BE Â«t - - - +--7-,---9- ..T ~ 2-n- INCORPORATED INTO THE PMO DESIGN 1 Â£nt~ . 9-~id ~-,E .4 / 1 ~f f -,- - --I----- .r,Dapâ‚¬,A,O ; - D.I. Fol. 0 Ao~ 01A~ 001...} . 00( ADCÂ»? I. TAÂ· t. 4 9 0 ./*W.4- -; 9 9.VACE 01[' 'eâ€¢ *; 43-F~ 9 - â€ž9@ - OF IN..Â·~ 1 .~~ .-Â·,~~~~ Â· % ' L,~]ScAP[ A~CNI.F. .......AL De,EN 11 114 X i * 1 r _ .~ 1 DATE \11.1 r c 12/15/06 Lf 1 0 6 - - 2 . - < Imâ€¢)m PRU IM'.AMY REVISIONS ,- .. 4 ............11-1/ \ , . A ~\ \\ . ' \ 1 / 1. ... -. -7 - Â· ~ 01.DIMÂ® Sbal,1'24(*1 . Arl' UPPER C IN( LE \.t. -- \ - -* I. .., t \ 1 \ 11 11 '14 - / 1/, j 12/Ill.u'lic,â€¢Ill. 111 1 - 1 \ 1 1 . 1 SCALE 1 < 2 1 AS SHOWN J ~ ARROWS\jND/CATE ~dENERAL D/RECTION YJ /1 1 1 - ~27\,hth 2 -- 1 , - 141 # oR<.LET I i 2 /, ~ OF ISURFACE DRAINAGE ' DMAWING ~ CONCEPTUAL DRAINAG~,ABOVE' EXIST/NG RA/LROAD-1-3 - \ \ 11.- . : 7 /~111~1~.f. GRADING 94>- BEQ TO kEMA/N UNCHANGED \\ l~ 4 6 - 1,Â» t.. A GRAPHE SCALE GUARDRAI TYP and A . 3)~~ U'b -p tt DRAINAGE PLAN + - J Version 12/15/06 L (. rEIT } 4 f A q. 1%Â« ,/ trÂ·Â·f#L -, -- ~~ - T SHEET - _____11_ 4 --T,1-*.c ~IL pri ~ 0 ~ - ---' '<t_.,4Jogl) DRY,ELL - -- ----------~.-- --7Â«1?*wdsur} DRMÂ«GE & TOPOGRAPHY \ 1 /*/ d 06. V 6,946 â‚¬96 +16 3NOHd 00Â¥}[0103'N)dSÂ¥ a HANUAV aln COOI Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 14 ,. Â· 4 4 .0 ; .... ....'- ./ '1471 . # ''.9 -1 ,\72 . b ... 1% ... 29 . ''L . , , 1. .1 44 / 11- .1 77 - 4 4 . I +r :704 I #F.4 e,i' Â· Â·Â· . 4' .1, , f., & 9 d 11 .. . , k â€¢4 â€¢ 1 1. 4./ . ..9 .:., . . . 1 1. ~ ' ..,4.f'. ' 17 lit 1 . I . . Â· .Â· h ,Â·. . .Â· .A W. i. ' DrÂ» I .. 1 "1 ~ 0,Â·.4Â«%* -4~25. j.iÂ® -I. -11 -- . :41. 1 0 ' -~i i:i.: 1- - 44 4 L 44 ...4 '.,4 ' '. 4 1 - '4 / . fÂ· j /9 1. ' 7/" â€¢1:40 r. i,' 4 I . 2.1 2,. 1 .. L...ji>,1 14Â·r' <. . ! '1,1119 ~ ..' 1 .3 'v . ' 0 .' '.' *-/.: :. t,I' Â· e i~, : ..V N A INF . 4~~4â‚¬7â€¢r_~ 1'.1 6\, . i...........4/14# : & 1/1 ~ > 1 . ..14 .%... - 11~: '1â€¢r r Al:; 1:,4/. ---'4Â¢A'. . 1 W It - All' F .,04.FHMI 44.1 2wlic i , 1 ..2 - "1-7 t, r.,1 ..45,2 .-KA'*1- , 1 - 502Â·, , C. 1 9 1 I. 41/"& 4.3 9. ' AL Â· > 1.â€¢Â·4:0 -4!1~ . 0 I. 41 4, 4 ~' L";14:.4 1 1.- 01, - /. ' . Lk -501:06. . h,2. t -- 1:4.--Y 1 ' - 4. - - b''lk. Â£ a -jil 4 , A 4/ / i ./... L /4 '9. 1. Â© -4.,, . - - ..4 V 4 11- 7/ $-/ . , 11* b - - 0 r N .13 ., e 1.34 . Â· t . .' ,Â·i}f,*ellyt , _. . : ': i Â· , â€¢ 4 , /Af ~ . 1 I .: . 4.ALA , -r .. .. I ... . f..m. o, wif * 'b,:..:24â„¢i'%,. 1 0- - . 4 '.:Â»A.96'bl.M~4Â¥:4Â» *4 'r.... ....0. .:lill./hifi,Ell' '. . .4 e. . 1, .. - /1 ' Â· <4044. 4 1 I .,te . J~ .7 )4 Â·0 5:~.1~:t. ,~Â· â€žf:6 -â€žfÂ·M' ,, , I' --k~ ..' .â€ž .~. .14 y.. , :. W .4 4 11 - --- 61; i , t. 15 r ~171.'1#WN* #IM'' Â·- -9/tififi....tit .6 /4,~ . 1. .. ... 4. . 't ; f. 9- 0 4 . I . 4 I â€¢ : /: 4 LV-.2/.:' -SÂ·Ar . 7.SM, . 14 Â· -V 4 i - i Â· .J ...1 . I Â¥ . - 'rk ..6 . # . 4,Â·71-?: 4*4 â€¢4.4.. .., 2,-4.:fi.- ..C ... A.1 -i: i Â·?19*.1 #Â·t'ft#/Oft'*F.5/#GR~*M .. -I, ... '% Â· f , .Â· 49 -,1 + . 44, . . .2 -7 .4.1 ?. '44' : .2 '' 5 2,Â£ . . 64.04 . . '. 1 -Â»L ' N- 4 - e-/ 4.1/ I tr r.Â· 1 , 1 - -I ./ :.4*3 /12 1 t/ft /Fr,W 4*f,irlrt?Â·t~~,Â·..' 44 - ; I - 1 .. .4 . ,I, 1. f LÂ«* 7.6.'.4-i'..:J.04...f...:,4-1, ... , , 1. . .:. .....: .: 1 0 ./ 'll , , .... . g. Â·Â·.Â·014. : il'.'r..'~.â€¢Â·'. 4,;1 . 4% I 5 I I 40 .t 1:~it ~<4.-3-42 k* TA' .Fir:4:4 9.1.j 1 7.Â¥5,-4;~:. 70-<..:-,4:,i . V *511,1~43"r..O-1 f.'â€¢ ' 36,2/7 .'-# Â· : Â· ty>;.,~ Â·Â·~i,Â·Â·r{~~~h- ~(K..i:INIFiti~: 1 -'.9,6 1-j....,/.4:ti . p .... . 0, S ..., r - 0.*~2*Â©Ng@>.iii:f . 4 f'lfi Q. ?: i;-- 4, , ... 5-' ..:~14.4.3 29'9*/JI -0*f 13.3;;02 ' 9!0 1/ .0 . . 2 2 . 4 ... Â¥ I , -r V Â· J.~ rf.1 , 442 21 + w .-Â·. a ,-t.- r 41.i:.~*..4/1/ .., 4 ., : 2 - Ad...7:Â·0% pÂ· i y:t Â®,- * 2 V-2 9 . ir , I . I ... . , 1 9Â·,~ 0â€¢h I.-% â‚¬ 3%34.. ;le-*e: 4. 2 ..Â·*-;9.35%400*'2 -Di>'30-- 5.44 ~;: 7.i - . 1.â‚¬96 J.. .{.433{floill.9442 . . f k - Wt . 4 â‚¬2 -- - .:.0 .7,Â·,.>i ,4,7..2 â‚¬ =% ti -96.4 ... .a.- - 1- 4-7 4'1/9 hh2. .:/4â€¢â€¢11/.ic a . -h . <*LA.lij:~~~3,?k,t:.,1 F. r-:-*iyA: i.i:- - j DA tA. . Â· 6 . . .. ... .. 71...: e.94&- 1/lill"k ..~ :..7 -(2-, I f.4 ...4 Â·74~I ' 9// I. .. - i I :Â· .. -1 '43*1,0 '- Â· - ' ~Â· *.A Â»46Â· : 2 7 - 4= 3â€¢j ~ r Â·. -- 6 .... ... - : ., ...:681 64*.CR.i 6 p- ..15*4 . â€¢ Â· 1.1 .. - 4-:I. -' . 1 . 'AT +-f Â· 1 - t , 4 . AK.C . - - .. z L."104/994&<*kiL; f I i:~ .th<.4.-- .... .1 4- 1 -' 1---. - - 9"mitâ€ž 49- i -- . . I .1 - ' .... - r - 0 . c . . 1 :03.-le<* e . I h .61~ Â·- i #45ify H /2 ~ :/'_/4/01, 4 ./.PE+YFI...94 . 0. - I . ..ta./ 4 2.. n- Mn#- ' ~ I - I /' I +7.... : 1.2;.ifc-- :..91*3YfithSÂ«5**:.4-tal 7/ 2- kâ€¢'i -Ale:5*4 4 -~ 4 Â·-- ..1.1.- : F...''fo f, -21. -1 7- 9 $- I- 7/r *5/14,4.2~>1fN-tat3~3*~ 75-, . 4~3, *4,~;' 2.- t 43. hu. 4% . -a,rf, .-:, :3.-, - &32/R.1 .rf... . -I . .. . I 0 ---: I 'r -I. Â· . I ./. ... . 0 . 02*iE.1 -314&$ . 19 7 . - - 1 - L - - Â»... . - - . 1.1. . : .- -ZI. - . 1 --I. - - , -1 4 Wi . 1 *.MP.....Ill""Ill:"Ilil" 1& 1 141 1 - v Â· 1 2 i - -1/4 - r. 57 C . .r ; 4-/. . /4/ I . ...* . -2.e /8*% A .0 9 4 -t,48. i'Z ... 0 . I. . . 1,0 . I 3:Fir Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 15 111 1 lill jilill irlifil filill ill ATTACHMENT 15 TI[MB ERLINE EN<313~~fEE}El[HO STRUCTURAUCIVE. ENGINEERANG ~ CONTRACI[ING ~ CERTIFIED ENERGY DESIGN PROFESSIONAK December 29,2005 Davis-Horn Planning Mr. Glen Horn 215 So Monarch St. Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 1001 Ute Ave. Site Infrastructure Dear Mr. Horn: This report presents the proposed infrastructure for the development. DRIVEWAY The proposed driveway accesses the City of Aspen street system near the tennis courts on Ute Avenue. The length ofthe driveway will be approximately 400 feet. The grade of the driveway at the intersection ofthe drive and Ute Avenue is 4% and this grade continues into the site for 40 feet. The remainder ofthe driveway climbs the hill to the building sites at 12%. Radii ofcurves along the centerline ofthe road vary from 37 feet to 68 feet. A hammerhead fire truck turnaround is proposed at the top ofthe road. A guardrail is proposed in those areas where the driveway is above the adjacent grade. Construction ofthe driveway will require approximately 500 yards of cut and 1,800 yards of fill material. The approximate 1,300 yards of fill will be generated by the site preparation for a building platform. RETAINING WALLS Retaining walls associated with the driveway construction will be necessary. The rnaximum height of these structures will be approximately 20 feet at the north end ofthe fire truck turnaround. Cantilevered concrete retaining walls and/or Mechanically Stabilized Earth technologies will be used. Retaining walls will be necessary along the perimeter ofthe changed area oftennis court. These walls will vary from 14 feet high for retaining the existing hillside above to 8 feet high for retaining the tennis court above the existing ground below. SITE GRADING Grading ofthe bench at the top ofthe driveway down to the 8010 elevation will generate approximately _7,500 cubicyardsofmaterial._ The movement of the tennis court will generate approximately 600 cubic P.O. BOX 631 CARBONDALE, CO. 8 1523 PHONE 970 963 9869 / FAX 970 963 9003 1001 Ute Ave, Page 2, December 29, 2005 yards of fill material. The construction ofthe driveway will require approximately 1,300 cubic yards of material. There will be approximately 6,800 cubic yards of material exported from the site. DRAINAGE Drainage patterns will remain essentially unaltered. Runoff above the bench will continue to be deflected by the old railroad bed and be coursed to the southerly property line and adjacent property. Runofffrom the bench will continue to be coursed around the tennis courts. An existing tree lined depression to the north ofthe tennis courts will continue to accept runoffwaters that have historically been coursed that way. Culverts will be installed as necessary to permit water movement around the site improvements. A dry well installation is anticipated near the intersection ofthe driveway with Ute Ave. in order to pick up runofffrom the driveway. SEWER Aspen Consolidated Sewer District has an existing sewer main in Ute Avenue. Sewer services from the homes to the main will gravity flow along the driveway to Ute Ave. A street cut will be necessary to accomplish tapping into the sewer main. WATER The City of Aspen has a main water line in Ute Ave and taps for the proposed construction should be available. Extension o f the main water line up the driveway and into the construction area may be problematic due to the inability to loop the line. Ifa main line extension is not approved, a large (+20,000 gallon) water storage tank will be necessary at the top ofthe drive for fire fighting purposes. A street cut will be necessary to accomplish tapping into the water main. ELECTRIC An electrical transformer currently exists along the project side o f Ute Ave. and electrical cables will be routed along the driveway. A street cut for connection to this utility is not anticipated. NATURAL GAS Natural gas service currently exists along the project side of Ute Ave. and gas piping will be routed along the driveway. A street cut for connection to this utility is not anticipated. Please call us at 970-963-9869 ifyou have any questions regarding this report. Sincerely, TIMBERLINE ENDINEERING David A. Powell, PE Reg. No. 25851 Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 FormATT-10-S Attachment 16 11/13/2006 05: 03 9709255180 DAVIS HORN PAGE 01/03 A-rÂ·TAGA *e,vr 16 /N:$%0 New/and Project Resources, Mc. PROJECT MANAGEMENT /DEVELOPMENTAPPROVALS /TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RECREATION PLANNING /ENVEONMENTALANALYSIS Â¥'GRANTWR[TING (970) 9274845 70/CE 417 OR/GINAL ROAD, BASALT CO 81621 (970) 927-8148 FAX tomn@50oris.net -:--:Â·- ~ :-:~: ~~ ~ -- - -591:Â·erâ€¢+6 bodumrÂ·~'Lit: 201/7 ' ~ ..Glertrt:HuÂ¢A : i'LI' 0 / F, 7 1 r p FROM: : ' '', Torn .Newi~ridl ,' ~ Â·; ~ ' 0 NBATED 7 2~septembek*%05, . 0, i,~b: Â·Â·.41 '- 'h !Â·REc ' ~ â€ž, Â·i,Utilitv~Rlacement and traffic G6Aeration ht'1001,,Ute~AvenUd, ' DJ 1 11 This is to report to you my findings regarding the availability of utilities and to submit a traffic generation analysis for the development proposal at 1001 Ute Avenue. DEVELOPMENT ASSUMPTIONS The development proposal for the property is to place two single-family residences on the upper bench above the existing tennis courts. For the purposes of this analysis, the single-family residences are assumed to have 1-kitchen, 4-bedrooms, 4 1/2 -bathrooms, and two outside house bibs. AVAILABILITY OF UTILITIES: City of Aspen Water Department: Sedon 26.470.080C.2.b.(1)(a) of the code requires a written description of how the proposed development will be connected to the public water system, Including information on main slze and pressure; the excess capacity available in the public water system; the location of the nearest main; and the estimated water demand of the proposed development. I spoke to the Aspen Water Department and was told that the nearest water main is located within the Ute Avenue right-of-way adjacent to the proposed development. The main is either 8 or 12-inches in diameter and has more than sufficient pressure to accommodate the development as described above. There is also adequate availability in the water system to supply such a development. The estimated water demand for the proposed development would be about 1.79 ECU (Equivalent Capacity Units)/unit or 3.58 ECU for the development based on the information supplied. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: Section 26.470.080C.2.b.(1)(b) of the code requires a written description of how the proposed development shall be connected 11/13/2006 05:03 9709255180 DAVIS HORN PAGE 02/03 to the public sewage treatment system, Including the access capacity available in the public sewage system; the nearest location to the building site of a truck or connecting sewer line; and the expected sewage treatment demand of the proposed development. I met with Mr. Tom Bracewell, System Engineer for the district and described to him the proposed development, Tom said that the existing sewer line connection for the building is located along the Ute Avenue right-of-way adjacent to the proposed development. In fact, Tom remembered that a previous owner of this property did pay for a line extension from eth street to the property and that this extension may actually be in place. However, this would need to be investigated when construction begins, as no written record of the extension could be found. Tom said that the district measures demand in units that are equivalent to the capacity units calculated by the city water department but thatthey are known as EQRs for purposes of sewage capacity. As such, the development's sewage demand would be about 1.79 EQR/unit or 3.58 EQR based on the information supplied. Tom stated that this demand could be easily accommodated with the existing public sewage system. As far as the current condition of the sewage system, Tom stated that the sewer line in Ute Avenue is not in need of replacement at this time or in the near future. However, as with all new developments, an impact fee equivalent to $1,200/EQR for upgrade of the system would be assessed at the time the sewer line js connected. TRAFFIC GENERATION ANALYSIS I have been asked to supply answers to a portion of the information requested under Section 26.470.080C.2.b.(1)(f) of the code regarding the expected traffic generated by the proposed development: Estimated traffic count increase on adjacent streets resulting from the proposeddeve/opment: Using established trip generation rates from the 6~h Edition of the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, the following Average Daily Trips will be generated by the development: Amt. Use Ave. Daily Total ADT Traffic (ADT) 2 Single Family Detached Housing 9.53 19.06 (Land Use Code 210) In summary, the proposed development will generate about 19 additional vehicles per day. Currently, approximately 1,600-2,000 vehicles per day travel on Ute Avenue. The proposed development would increase the traffic on Ute Avenue no more than 1.2%. MEMORANDUM REGARDING UNUTY PLACEMENTANL, itu,trICGENERATION PAGE 2 FOR THE 1001 UTE AVENUE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL 11/13/2006 05:03 9709255180 DAVIS HORN PAGE 03/03 A description of the types and condition of roads to serve the proposed development: The proposed development will be directly served by Ute Avenue. The condition of this city street is satisfactory and condition is maintained by the City of Aspen. The totals number of vehicles expected to use or be stationed in the development: It is expected that tile number of vehicles that will use or be stationed at the development would be between 4 and 8 vehicles at any one time. This figure is based on the potential number of bedrooms (8) contained within the development proposal. The hours of principle daily use on adjacent roads: Da\\Y use on the road from the proposed development should peak between 6:00 am - 9:00 am and 3:00 pm-7:00 pm. Location of alternate transit (bus route, bike paths, etc.): The closest city bus stop is at the City market. This stop is used by the Cemetery Lane, Maroon/Castle and Hunter Creek bus routes. This bus stop is approximately 2,000 feet from the proposed development. The regional bus system, RFTA, uses the same stop and the Ruby Park Terminal which is located approximately 2,500-feet from the proposed development. The nearest bike path is the Ute Avenue and Aspen Club Trail, located immediately adjacent to the proposed development. MEMORANDUM REGARD,NG UHUTY PCACEMENrAND TRAP#10 GENdRATION PAGES FOR THE 1001 UTEAVENUEOEVELQPMENTPROPOSAL Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 17 -Ljvdloo 4 ..9.--- -A- . *14'4fjdi. iÂ· o v~ %/ I .... / ..h... .fo ):. ./. T/.1 'F'l.M \\,39%25+75.., < . .tt L (% 3 2â€ž301 a 3033 ---j-1- , 4.~ 2.'q-t4-MA2~.28 1 : \ ... I \\ \\.tk. I I \ k 4\ . ./ N \\0'--ftifililf-fl------- 4. DÂ·ob ocM ~ ATTACHNIENT 17 4 'd c - 98'jo'o \ 99342%41 ItÂ« 9\~~ ./)& P.' r. 7 CD = 4 87Â·53'00' W 4 1,~/ 15- 12*.2.1 ... 7<41Â©~6\ \ \\ \\\\\ \..4\>4\11 2-3404\ \4\. V\\ 9 !11376 * & a j.-1$0 11. 29 Dvd 1V 8 00 -. \,a , \ \ 2 \ N , OSS300V 3103 \ 1 ..4 4.1. \\\ \. \\\ O 9 1008 3 S M L /53 2 3 \ ./ .. . \ -1. \\12 \ \\\.:\ . I .>% I 1 1 8 - h 16008.99. / / ~ 1/9/>00, 1.--1 191 .6 i.>2\\ \ \.\ -- - 2-1940Â»42:0.-2.:.,.~,4 - 9810 / 1 -/1*0 .1. 4 / 5 . 1.2 \ i l <1:UN~24~Â·~ ~ 1. 4/ / - (4 , h !34 i 99 . 1 / f -0 ....:3*0.4 . . ...40#:414 - COPYRIGHT ' 1 %0 f t'24#2\ . 2 -9,0=/1 IO'9,0.01 321-Â·V \9931 .4 ,>4 rr 4 f\\~ / 44 @ 3dof/4 30 106Â»7-<2\92.'22\-Tr--AÂ«i - - - S 35'44>* f ~ -~ 42-3 %4 1 - .. a 'V 0.1 , 4 60. I I .a y--... Nt 2\\\ / I. AM 9 1 o /4 > i ./ 3 ) 4- \\\ \ \ , r 0 ..~ . 440/41.22 tnt * 0 294 '562 = V]av / I. ,/ 4 ,/*+ 0/ 99 ' 4-7441>c**\K \\ \ - 0.1 0. 6.Â§ S==S==== \ \ 94, -< 44 tr \; 1 ~JVER~VMJ,g.?*-k. - ( \I - Â¤18 \ 1.0/4Xt> .,+09,4 / , . 260Â¥68,0-+ 4< .1 ' Ji , 1\\ UNA03 1 .4, - 0 1 33 V3 ON 1- 4 \W' U i /Â· U /- - +Z 0 1\\ \ 1 ; ' : 0//~. I 2 \\\ \\.\ 06 3993 Lt,f MOOS J375 P :7 J. . St \ Ul C r ~ All E 49 ~ 0 1 1*-CUL 7< 1 Or- Al Il I 093 3 INN31 ' 0 M st. 1= 4.11.4 k- > 7U N - ido=.32 ,.+ A. - e. - - - - 6- 4889 m - < - /rr 0 9'4 04'-* m - *,34 4 f CIRCULAR (. . O -W Â· plif '30Â· ~\ i ... 8 -210'31; % 1 + 5 ,- OC - '21*96.4 , 122 r 9,154Â· we \ ' 2Â£-3.3.:10,4 ' 4\ El ,; C 1, .1,114 \?: . 2 7 ~,14 8 -0 LE'64 -4.~E = 7)~4 : offc- I :. 9.78 \\ Â£-10- 3 \ \i ~ '*74 (Pv~ .6Â·~# L 1 I DRAWN BY - - - 77 -i----~~4, 43Â« Â»i * -~Â° ~~,;~:f b.'~~:,I~*'.1.4~,p. \\ I \<1>0> 1 & Dp h 4 - 04= #04 \ I -./ I / -/.//4 9 +1 33 - 'Ch _ - /./ t\0 . ; I. ./ :0' . V'<. \ 1 4 / 1 . \\ 2 // 7 /7\ .2 < -NO fs Dll\ - N \ I . 9 c'*,-Â·-- 2Â«222 -- .4% - F Btl 1 1 1 1(22 93341 ---- OI/Lb I i /1 ~ . *V< /9*1 3 \\ <W\%â‚¬ *\ / a 44 - 323- \\\ , / \ 1/ \ 1'' .al\~2 1 3 - ---- 01\ : \/ 2?19 \ \\ \\ \\ - ./ 1/ 4,44. A~PR*39*1 SCALES: I 1 *vipa \ \'t *29 Â£ 1" = 20' HOR - \\ ...11 47 i \PMP ' iS,lit . lot 405 " = 20' VER i / ~----DAir---~ .i. .f / H 10/10/06 0 -- -1- -- 8050.00 . : 8050.00 ~ - ~ _ l- ~ REVISIONS 1 8040.60 - ; %51 Sri - 3452.70 Â· i 8030.00 - 8030.bo . L 1 ; ' Vel EL - /9/ W : , ir:.moo._.- .Â· .--I Â· 2 * 8020.00 - . $ K 8020.00 L f d .., 8010.00 ' ~ IA = 3+83.00 R STA Â·Â· 4+11.50 . 9, 8010.00 k / r f ~ _ - _ â„¢ ~ _ _ ~ ~ OVBVE LEN .- 9.00 cul,E Let...O.00 . VP' t.. //9/ UU #1 EL = 799443 a I. 8000.00 8000.00 :SCALE~ 7990.00 ; i -------- --~0-3.Â£1~ ~- _-20Â£'I-_. : .-5.33% , 7990 00 \ 8 72% - < w 7980.00 ' DRAWING Â» 7980.00 // E St 6 2. 7970.00 11ku - 7970.00 ROAD - PLAN and - 7960.00 ' 1 ir,1 CT, - n' man 56 :d Â· 1 7960.00 PROFILE Ve EL - 7967.12 Â¥& i.& ~CURVE LEN =Â·000- 7Â· Â·- VERSION 12 7950.00 . Â· ' 7950.00 .. . r J ; I I -4 - 0 I 7940.00 &* 7940.00 Â£ - 7930.00 7930.00 7920.00 C.010 7920,00 0 15 7910.]0 h 20 *0 12 -- *1 22 -- ME 2% 22 2* ** 3@ 1% %0 30 3* 20 3, mi Zi- 1, 0, 2, 20 7900.00 \ 7900.10 -00 0+80 0+60 0+40 0+20 0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60 1+80 2+00 2+20 2+40 2+60 2+80 3+00 3+20 3+40 3+60 3+80 4+00 4+20 4+40 4+60 4+80 5+00 5+20 Â£Z9I8 Â£006 696 0Â£6 :I / 6986 Â£9 6 0 6 BNOHd OGYMOUOO NadSV Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 18 ~ U * I - -r 1111 RESIDENCE 1 SOUTH ELEVATON /11\ - 1-- j' + 5/CÂ©ya 229~2'~427'.: 34'-0. ONE STORY PORCH DEPTH EXCEEDS 6 FEET 111'-0' RESIDENCE 1 NORTH ELEVATON THESE DOCUMENTS,PREPARED BY JACK MILLER ANO , DATE: 125/9006 SHEET ASSOCIATES ARCHITECT. ARE INTENDED SOLELY FOR Ify 4 JACK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES UTE MESA PUD THIS PROJECT ANO MAY NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN .i _ 4 1 ARCHITECTURE/PLANNING SCALE: A-1 PART FOR ANY OTHER PROLCT WITHOUT THE ' j EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT , 4 Â© 2006 JACK MILLER & ASSOC 11 1 - POST OFFICE BOX 4285, ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 PHONE 303-927-9513 1001 UTE AVE. ASPEN, COLORADO DRAWN: LCK ATTACHMENT 18 I-..' g-- --==I-- ... =~ 0 00 : 00 E;*~Nilâ„¢Arger-~~",9,~,3/Fg~|,~G_ 1 A A . 1/:29=*Jlmimiril,Ing - *Â·rÂ·â€¢mrs,-11..~r:,~~~,1 ,"11....1 =f&.Ii-/~~~~~Â£f~â„¢ragaffi-1~~tfEE94AWfEEiblEE--*6<32&~321-11 - '.1,:.al.... it=- ..D 1 A. - - -~-~--i,1,:i..=c.,t,Ai=.J...i,ii.reiâ€žâ€ž, :Ill'll'll'll'll/9Pil//Il"M'/1//~IlryfP/:Ill'll'll'll'll'll'll:Nim:Imill/"Wgilli 2*1~ '~~ '1 ~ 12â€¢ 1-T ....*.- .--' i --.-' wr-rl-T ,- - -r-r-v-r- 4 T- Tr. - _ -1-1 4 1 4 , .1 a 1. I / RESIDENCE 2 SOUTH ELEVATON - ..4104 L.11 -U Â·6 -tr 1 AT - ' / k -J \ \\Oil I' ONE STORY PORCH I DEPTH EXCEEDS 6 FEET I 924L _ RESIDENCE 2 NORTH ELEVATON THESE DOCUMENTS. PREPARED BY JACK MILLER AND I r DATE: 12/I5/2006 SHEET A~OCIES *CHET AREIMENDEOSOLE,YFOR A*IZI, . 2-1 JACK MILLER AND ASSOCIATES UTE MESA PUD THIS PROJECT AND MAY NOT BE USED IN WHOLE OR IN ~ - 1~8 | ~ A-3 PARTFORANYOTHERPRO.ECTWITHOUTTHE ARCHITECTURE/PLANNING SCALE: EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT Â© 2006 JACK MILLER & ASSOC , i r POST OFFICE BOX 4285, ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 PHONE 303-927-9513 1001 UTE AVE. ASPEN, COLORADO DRAWN: LCK , ... .Ilillim - ---1---il Zin'.1.':18~Bm.imLVal1~09#:,,1.,~,$1$*=i~-*:â€¢.,B,4*16,bib..imb,&1WJ 631/2/lin/1/Imililigi~/Sitrir/*Ph/~Ilillilillill'llillilluallillillillill/te./1/lill 'll: 1 1-1&11.42'MI... -1 - .1 A. ...... -6/9*:4,~,~'~ilgi~~~ - L,~872!er-=r-.-9,~~~~is,02~ "imÂ¥=42,=.~ Ima~21121%21: - . 1 & 1 0 Â· 41'il -difill/1~1*'1913/82=18 =~2~U~SE@*2*~@U&22.f~2--~2-=.im@BRÂ£5BEL Ifi/~W-go,3,5-/:Milut,/.-9&-1*LA..:P#"MA. --m=.-lill.Trg:.:.:~# -=8,~11111 All....BE:likE* râ‚¬**7=392Â«*-21*089: il*/lf-L3.<31714 ~. .~R.,INE: mi= Im,=i.lia. i._.m.. Ii<Zilii:F,f-I ~,IiÂ¢I:JIT~Ir,-ami,a= mm I. . A. .. . du**922NÂ¥*:a,HU~NmaÂ¥*882*31Â®k // P...liE<-:.-~=i- 36Â»./,2-_Â»..ii.~ â€¢Ek ==222=els;Mlairs=g=E=Z===522~=2521':=:--- G...~**fem~t~--M-mm:&~- 0*..996....1.1 1/4/Wer~' lit4rl-==~22.25 -211214'*~~~i~Xiffile:"'rella9ilial-ilitam 'ta; 0- 6~~:,~1~*o,~ i,J ~.1.r iall' 09,1,01,1,11 -2 .r/el~.. .mi:mililill :Ni=,0.~--- ,=1===mgt 0 . 0 0/ ... 1. 0 0 . 0 . A A. .. .. . .... 0 1 Imn===I .. ~. .. jIM I TAbIA . 9.1.~ .. .. 1 Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 19 V Ah. f . 4 ,1 ' - -------7Â¢-----7--- /1 , t 1 : il k/Â· i a '' 1 . i 4 4 3 2420 . . . 'L i 1 0 . fi / 1 1 1 4. ; A :..\ ? 1 7Â» - .+ \ 7 j / 1 1 6 4, + /1 , --. tn f. I,\/. f f <6 1 4 \ ff- 6.1.-9 - . . --. Â£ I -/* 2- .dj-its - - T.... , 1\ t 5- 419Â» A t < ..1 0 . -~rni/ / 1. . r V. ,-1 $ 1+1 1 1 i"ME' 1 y.:r' -'2.1. 4 j $. 1 4-..C , A lit k. W . 2 --14 - 4. , 6.--=DI ' 1 0 - / .:t ~ f, .Fa A - AL<Attwl flil g 1 1 \~./1 A \ -- . 1 . .. f k.4 - . 1 4,1 - '.. 1 4 -1.(43 . 11' 57 Â· * % - --2- -- 1. 1% . 1 9 L I . 0 1 /14 i I , ~ -10***F.---90-E~7\/0 1 -- 1,24 A 0.4 075 Jugs>4 - 1 i I i & A. ATTACHMENT 19 Dec 18 06 09:22a Jack I . 11 fÂ· * . -Â£.*.+'.'I '3/.1:.~J~. -1 ' $90 k. - .,1,1~1.11,1,0 ./ 1171' 317â‚¬f 3 J .- '12, -4-lii 'Ill...Ill- .Till Â¢2X ' 0/lill'll'//1415?~ m ..... IlimIPPF'Xggitef -*~' â€ž~11-8*94%54.. i. . . .1. 6...:':7..1.:Sifli.'.ER':46- 2,2071.'d:,i.,4~ Ir *2**tt:702.-3%--p=,rl.....23;ki~:~65 gy/.i.J""'""""1 .::ki -: .....1 iki,i<,-1,"Ii=lkie til~,j,~:m,0,...Tle.92 J Fli:21, .-I."= - /,r,10,2 LÂ·Â· .221?711 ' A 1 523,01.5#flpi,42%11Wil1*~bilililill :21)*461 11#-1:1:,1,4,4,1, "24.I B'Wi 11':6.~.~lb-".Ill:2".,00.,3-9,/1:; 1,1,~~iri 1 ut:Air:l~341*1111'll"B~**Al~K )3~#Wt- li''lu. ~'"'~~~'','.P 1 1 ' 1...A'#0~5'444~,1,12,6 4 4 ~Ai./*i#,f~#MU,4/5%*14,~~~,~9.4.~ swi%7~91*mi*29r-tigs Â¢ - .. ..,4.4.- ...,~..-1~15P.,Elpr.,09* *3â‚¬:1---,=~-~~-~~~~~<-~~~<~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~Â«~~ t' '93/,it.97'44 ./ 411$.7...6.,1$...f~:.-g?,N?ObE 4Â»10\ r.lail.!k.â€¢ e: -Â· -â€¢Â·lic.4 . l 'Râ€¢,Â· -' - 'â€¢ 1,fWIWII(*lf'NIT*<. .':1 1~1.4 '311.1~ f m/744â„¢2â€¢ 1: N'hitill '/h~Â¥ 1Â· 4.9 /,1/-41 1. 4 . , -ci f.;3 4 , ri. 9 T ./.Â· 'E' . *Lf . , :0.344 L W ' L . ./, l Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 Form ATT-10-S Attachment 20 ATTACHMENT 20 JACK MILLER & ASSOCIATES, INC. Post Office Box 4285 Aspen, Colorado 81612 (970)927-9513 December 15, 2006 jessica Garrow, Planner Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 5ubject: 8040 Greenline Review Dear ]essica: In response to your comments on the 8040 Greenline review, and in addressing the required PUD massing controls that the council required and the applicant agreed to, we have complied on both length and height. 1) Length Requirement. The northfacingfhcades must be limited to 120' in width, Actual Design. The northfacingfacade ofResidence 1 is 111' in width and Residence 2 is 91' in width, substantially within the limits. IJ 1 2) Height Requirements. The overall ridge height to be no more than 27' in height and 20% of the ridge height shall be no more than 22' high. Actual Design. Residence 1 and 2 both have a maximum ridge height of 27' (the normal city height requirement is 329 and each has over 30% of the *ontfaÂ¢ade at 22' in height, 10% more than required. SUBJECT: Residential Design Standards. In response to your pre-application comments on design standard variances that will be required, we have made some revisions, and will o.*r our interpretations, which we feel will comply with the design standards, with no variances required. A-1 - It is not possible to orient the facades directly parallel to Ute Avenue, as we are building on a mine tailings pile, which has a steep slope and the crest Of the pile angles away to q/~ the south #om Ute Avenue. We need tojollow the crestfor the design concept we are following so as not to disturb the existing site more than is required. The residences are basically parallel to the axis of the new drive which relates much more directly to the residences, as Ute Avenue is almost 400#et to the north, and 50'lower. In addition, and more importantly, the ordinance U includes a quote " For the purposed ofsection 26.410 street shall also include private roads, streets and access easements serving more than one parcel" Also the residences are heavily screened with landscaping, it is unlikely that the angle to Ute Ave would be distinguishable. Within the adjacent subdivisions and PUD most all the jacades are oriented to their respective private roads. We don'tfeel that this should even be considered as a variance, considering that ourjacades do parallel the axis Of the private drive, D-1 - Due to the fact that we are creating a common drive between Residence 1 and 2, to be able to share 1- 14' wide garage opening, it appears to us that since a driveulay or access ~ easement is considered a street, as described above in paragraph Al , for all intents and purposes, the entry is facing the common drive, and wejeel that this shouldn't be considered as a variance. D-2 - We have redesigned the Residence 1 and 2 structures to comply with the one-story requirement. On Residence 1, we have created a one=story porch in#ont of the master bedroom which has no access on top, the distance is 6' deep and 34' long nihich exceeds the 20% V. requirement of 111 ' x 20% = 22 ' long. On Residence 2 we have created a one-story porch, non accessible, on theroofin#ont of the master bedroom which is 20' long, exceeding the 20% requirement Of 91' x .20 = 18' long. D-2 - Since the lower level is considered the jirst story, the windows restriction of 9' - ~ 12' do not apply on the upper level. We do not consider this to require a variance. C.2s - The garagefloorlevelis now only l'higher then theauto courtinfhmt ofthe garages at the end Of the drive, so this should not require a variance. E.lb - We do not think this comment is in keeping with the intention Of the design standards. The plaster is below a glass window. The stone arch is a classic system ofstructural support u,hich should not be considered a heavy material above lighter material. In that context, a glass window could not be put into a stone wall. In summarv, we consider that we have complied with all of the design standards and conditions and shouldn't be required to apply.for variations before the P and Z commission. Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 Recycled * Stock #ATT-10-S r....UVII'llu'll g I ATTACHMENT 21 COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A Effective Date: C }clober 3(). 2006 at 7:30 a.iii. Order Number: 45474 1. Policr or Policies To Be Issued: (X) ALTA i 1992) Owner's Policy Amount: TO BE DETERMINED (X) Standard C ) Extended Premium: 2. Propi;.ed Insured: To Be Determined c ) ALTA P)92 1.(,an Policy Amount: C ) Standard C ) Extended Premium: 3. The evate 01- interest iii the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: Fee Shnple 4. Title to the estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: Ute Meia, LLC. a Colorado limited liability company 5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows. See "Exhibit A" attached hereto Title Examiner: Chuck Dorn E-mail: chuck.dom @ stewart.corn Escrow Officer: Carolyn Ethridge E-mail: carolyn.ethridge@ stewart.com Statement of Charges: Policy premiums shown above, and - any chai-ges shown below are due and payable before a policy can be issued. To Be Determined EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Order No.: 45474 A portion of the 1001 Lode Mining Claim USMS No. 1741 situated in Section 18, Township 10 South. Range 84 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian more particularly described as follows: Begiiming at Corner No. 3 of the 1001 Lode, USMS No. 1741 whence an iron post with brass cap affixed for Corner No. 1 of Aspen Townsite bears North 66Â°11'30" West 132.50 feet; thence Soilth 47Â°07'00" West 1000.00 feet along the Southeasterly line of the said 1001 Lode to a point: thence North 45Â°10'00" West 300.00 feet along the Northeasterly line of that land described in Book 390 at Page 897 of the Clerk and Recorders Office of Pitkin County, Colorado to a point on the Northwesterly line of said 1001 Lode; thence North 47Â°07'00" East 968.65 feet along the Northwesterly line of said 1001 Lode to a point on the Southwesterly line of the Ute Addition to the City of Aspen; thence along said Southwesterly line of the Ute Addition South 39Â°57'22" East 178.31 feet to said Corner No. 1 Aspen Townsite; thence Noi-th 28Â°28'00" East 49.54 feet along the Southeasterly line of Lot 1 Ute Addition to the City of Aspen said line also being between Corner 1 and 2 of the Aspen Townsite Boundary, to a point on the Northeasterly line of said 1001 Lode Claim South 45Â°10'00" East 137.64 feet along the Northeasterly line of said 1001 Lode to Corner No. 3 the Point of Beginning. i And also a tract of land situated in the Southeast 94 Northwest 1/4 of Section 18, Township 10 South. Range 84 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at Corner No. 3 of the 1001 Lode Mining Claim USMS No. 1741, whence Corner No. 1 of.Aspen Townsite bears North 66Â° 11'30" West 132.50 feet; thence North 47Â°07'00" East 2.20 feet along the Northwesterly line of Lot 1, Hoag Subdivision to a point on the Southerly right of way of Ute Avenue: thence North 33Â°48'30" West 149.99 feet along said right of way to a point on Line 1-2 of said Aspen Townsite; thence South 28Â°28'00" West 33.08 feet along Line 1-2 to a point on Line 3-4 of said 1001 Lode; thence South 45Â°10'00" East 137.64 feet along Line 3-4 to the Point of Beginning. County of Pitkin, State of Colorado SCHEDULE B - Section 1 REQUIREMENTS Order Number: 45474 The following are the requirements to be complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to wit: 1. Partial Release of Deed of Trust Dated: March 22,2006, 1{xecuted by: Leathem Stearn, lo the Public Trustee of Pitkin County, to secure an indebtedness iii the amount of: $2,600,000.00, iii fuvor of: Merrill A. Chozen and Jill E. Chozen 1981 Trust, Recorded: March 22.2006 a.~ Reception No.: 522055. 2. The following is required with respect to Ute Mesa, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company: a. Satisfactory evidence furnished by the Secretary of State in which Articles were filed, confirming that said Limited Liability Company is in good standing. (i.e., Certificate of Good Standing, or copy of Articles of Organization bearing file stamp from the Secretary of % tate.) b. Copy of the Articles of Organization of said Limited Liability Company. NOTE: If any Managers are themselves partnerships trusts, limited liability companies or corporations, additional requirements will be necessary. 3. ( iood und Sufficient Subdivision Plat approved by the City of Aspen and recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. 4. Evidence satisfactory to Stewart Title Guaranty Company, furnished by the Office of the Director of Finance, City of Aspen, that the following taxes have been paid, or that conve>ance is exempt from said taxes: ( 1 ) The "Wheeler Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979) and (2) The "Housing Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990). 5. 1)eed from vested owner, vesting fee simple title in purchaser(s). 6. hidemnity and Affidavit as to Debts, Liens and Leases, duly executed by the seller and buyer and approved by Stewart Title of Aspen, Inc. SCHEDULE B - Section 2 EXCEPTIONS Order Number: 45474 rhe polic> or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession, not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien. or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, i imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters. if any, created, first appearing in tile public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof. but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this commitment. 6. linpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents, or an act authorizing the i.suance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water. 7. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments and any unredeemed tax sales. The effect of inclusions in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other district or inclusion in any water service or street improvement area. 8. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted, as reserved in United States Patents recorded May 1, 1884 in Book 11 at Page 97 as Reception No. 4536 and recorded August 26,1949 in Book 175 at Page 299 as Reception No. 96828. 9. Toi-ins. conditions. obligations and provisions of Leasehold Agreement between Destination Resort.%-Aspen, Ltd., a California limited partnership and Smuggler-Durant Mining Conipany, a New York corporation as set forth in instrument recorded October 30, 1979 in Book 378 at Page 419 as Reception No. 219149; and Assignment of Leasehold Interest recorded June 15, 1983 in Book 447 at Page 88 as Reception No. 250929; and Amendment to Agreement recorded June 15. 1983 in Book 447 at Page 90 as Reception No. 250930. 10. Terms, conditions, obligations, provisions and easements of Access Easement Agreement between Harley Baldwin and The Gant Condominium Association. Inc., a Colorado nonprofit corporation as set forth in instrument recorded June 15, 1983 iIi Book 447 at Page 100 as Reception No. 250931. 11. Right of way for Ute Avenue. 12. Tet-ms. conditions, obligations, provisions and easements of Grant of Trail Easement by and between Bayoil (USA), Inc., a Delaware corporation and the City of Aspen, Colorado as set forth in instrument recorded May 18. 1992 in Book 678 at Page 214 as Reception No. 344893. 13. Encroachment and/or Possessory rights of Lots 1 and 3 of Hoag Subdivision on the Southeasterly portion of the subject property as evidenced by Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc., Survey No. 19029 revised November 15, 1990 and referenced in Warranty Deed recorded ()ctobei- 15,1997 as Reception No. 409451. 14. l erms. conditions. obligations, provisions and easements of Agreement by and between Merrill A. Chozen and Jill E. Chozen 1981 Trust and Leathem Stearn as set forth in instrument recorded Mai-ch 22,2006 as Reception No. 522056. 15. Terms, conditions, obligations and provisions of Resolution No. 16 (Series of 2006) A Resolution of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Approving with Conditions and 8040 Greenline Review, A Growth Management Review for the Development of Affordable Housing, and Recommending that City Council Approve with Conditions, Subdivision Review, Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, and a Growth Management Review for the Preservation of Significant Open Space Parcels for the 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado as set forth in instrument recorded June 7, 2()06 as Reception No. 525008. NOTE: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 3-5-1, Paragraph C of Article VII requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed." Provided that Stewart Title of Aspen, Inc. conducts the closing of the insured transaction and ix responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner' s Title Policy and the Lender's Policy when issued. NOTE: Policies issued hereunder will be subject to the terms, conditions, and exclusions set forth in the ALTA 1992 Policy form. Copies of the 1992 form Policy Jacket, setting forth said terms, conditions and exclusions, will be made available upon request. DISCLOSURES Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: A. The sub.ject real property may be located in a Special Taxing District. B. A Certificate of Taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained form the County Treasurer or the County Treasureis authorized agent: C. Infin-mallon regarding Special Districts and the boundaries of such dhtricts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recoider, or the County Assessor. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 3-5-1, Paragraph C of Article VII requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction whicli was closed." Provided that Stewart Title of Colorado. Inc. - Aspen Division conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lender's Title Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative Mechanic's Lien Protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception No. 4 of Schedule B. Section 2 of the Commitment form the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A. The land described iii Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence, which includes a condoinimum or townliouse unit. B. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or materialmen for purposes of construction on the ) land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanic's and materialmen's liens. D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E. If there hits been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased, within six months prior to the Date of Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and/or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium; fully executed Indemnity agreements satisfactory to the company; and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. NOTHING HEREIN CONTAINED WILL BE DEEMED TO OBLIGATE THE COMPANY TO PROVDE ANY OF THE COVERAGES REFERRED TO HEREIN UNLESS THE ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE FULLY SATISFIED. File Number: 42Â·174 hic:war[ I itle 01'Ct,loiudo. Inc. Â· Aspen Division Disclosures Page I o[ 1 PRIVACY POLICY NOTICE PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, directly or through its affiliates, from sharing nonpublic personal information about you with a nonaffiliated thii-d party unless the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such as the type of information that it collects about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, we are providing you with this document, which notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Stewart Title of Colorado, Inc. - Aspen Division and Stewart Title Guaranty Company We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources: â€¢ Information we receive from you. such as on applications or other forms. â€¢ Information about your transactions we secure from out- files. or from our affiliates or others. â€¢ Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. â€¢ Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate agent or lender. Unless it is specifically stated otherwise in an amended Privacy Policy Notice. no additional nonpublic personal information will be collected about you. 1 t We may disclose any of the above information that we collect about our customers or former custoiners to our affiliates or to nonaffiliated third parties as permitted by law. We also may disclose this information about our customers or former customers to the following types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or with whom we have .joint marketing agreements: â€¢ Financial service providers such as companies engaged in banking, consumer finance, securities and insurance. â€¢ Non-tinancial companies such as envelope stuffers und other fulfillment service providers. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH AN YONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED BY LAW. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know ' that information in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. 1 ile Number: 45Â·i74 5[l\.:ill 11[leÂ·,1 ('â€žh,radâ€ž. hic. Â·\.pen Division PM,3.i Paki Nonce I'llge 1 011 i Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 Recycled ~ Stock # ATT-10-S Arracnment 22 Dec 12 2006 1:42PM Stearn Enterprises 203 2 ATTACHNIENT 22 Dec 11 2003 12:51PM MACKIE ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS 970 925 : CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Aercement fo r P,Yment of CitÂ¥ of Aspen Development AD,lication FeeB CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and U ~-t r-ve--5 - L L C_ ChÂ¢reinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: I. APPLICANT has submitt=d to CITY an application for U -T-â‚¬- r--1 65 - f'J o 90 LLC) Gr-â‚¬.CA|t'AL , fle S , le.Â·v.-tj. C>C->v~ rltu: '-LW, A- 01-he.r PUO Pv-nnchl Anc Mr Ch@reinaft-er, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and airees that City of Aspen Ordinance No 57 (Series of 2000) eslablishes a fee seÂ·u~ture for Land Use applicationa and the payincnI of all processing fecs i, a condition precedent To a determination o f application completeness. 3. APPL]CANT and CITY agree thai because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, il is not pos 5iblc at this tirnc to ascertain #le full extent of tile costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY farther agree that it is in the interest of the parlies thal APPLICANT make paynient of an initial deposit and to thereafter pormlt additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional cost; may accrue following their hearings ancl/or approvals, APPLICANT agrees hc will be benefited by relaining greater cash Iquidity and will make additional payinonts upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as corts we incurred. CITY agrees it will bc benefited through the greater cerlainty of roiovering its full Gosts to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it h impracticable for CITY staff to complcto processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planting Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless currem billings are paid in full prior to decision, 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agreesthat in considoration of the CITY's waiver of ils righ, to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $19-1% which is for hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY fo, the processing of the application mentioned Bbc>ve, including post approval review at a rate of $220.00 per planner hour over' the initial deposit, Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrucd cosls shall be grounds for suspension of processing. and in no case will building permits be lisued until Blt COStS aspociated with case procesdng heive been paid. CITY OF ASPEN APPL]CANT By: By: --,A Julie Ann Woods Community Development Director Date: (537,/ 2-.7~43 6 Billing Address and Telephone Nuntlier: Required Â· .3 7 FE72 /84 6,9-,uâ‚¬ 6*S 7-- (00 g 57-}00 er (17- 0 6,2-3-0 e:\Dupport\forms\agrpayag.doc 29 3 - 52.9-7 - ry-yo 1 1/30/04 ' RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECORD Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 Recycled ~ Stock # ATT-10-S Attachment 23 Dec 12 2006 2:14PM Stearn Enterprises p.2 10/23/2006 06:14 97B9255180 DAVIS H ATTACHMENT 23 02 UTE MESA LLC LEATHEM STEARN, MANAGER 37 FERRY LANK WESTPORI, CT 06880 December 12.2006 Jessica Gallow City ofAspen Community Development Department ] 30 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Ute Me:a Planned Unit Development 8040 Greenline and Residential Design Review (1001 Ute Avenue) Dear Jessica: Illis letter authorizes Davis Horn Incorporated and Jack Miller to prepare a 8040 Greenline and Residential Design Review land use application for the Ute Mesa Planned Unit Development. Davis Horn Incorporated and Jack Miller shall represmit the Ute Mesa LLC in tbe land use review process. Please contact me ifyou have any questions. Thank you. Siocer~% -OU===:=.'.- - LEATHEM STEARN MANAGER Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 Recycled 9~ Stock #ATT-10-S ~ Attachment 24 ATTACHMENT 24 ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION API'l.ICANT: Name: UTE_ neb r LLC- ~ Lea-ykenn S-rearn, noÂ«-ter U Location: lool U Te A Ue 412---f EL (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) -2. -7 3 -7 l 91 00 063 REI'RESENTATIVE: Name: Gle n n Her/1 1 0 44.5 Alw n -cric. ~ -3- ci clr= r.-'L: tter -- Address: -1 1 â‚¬ 5 . 0--l JA u ro k A-bÂ¢ e n CP ~ P CD â‚¬ a >< 9 2- 94 Phone #: C17 0 9 1 9- 6 9 <* 1 A tipen co el 1-7 93, 1-3 PROJECT: Name: 07-c_ r--1-e..30 POD - Address: 1 00 \ J -r c Au~-4~_<--e_- C cp %6 1 Gil Phone #: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): E Conditional Use U Conceptual PUD U Conceptual Historic Devt. ~ Special Review U Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) E Final Historic Development El Design Review Appeal E Conceptual SPA El Minor Historic Devt. El GMQS Allotment U Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) j Historic Demolition U -EMQS Exemption U Subdivision E Historic Designation mr ESA-8040 Greenline, Stream U Subdivision Exemption (includes El Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane U Lot Split E Temporary Use U Other: U Lot Line Adjustment U Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) U Acu-Af PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) 0 -2.- v r te rvâ€ž _L c k â‚¬- 1- O. L.). ~3 D. U. Havs you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ lk'-l g [30'Pre-Application Conference Summary Gdttachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement Cifiesponse to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form CJ-liesponse to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards All plans that are larger than 8.5" x 11" must be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy ofall written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECORD ATTACHMENT 3 ' DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: U 7 -â‚¬_ r-le 5 - POD ts O 40 R e J 2 â‚¬ uu < A K 4 1001 11-f \ Applicant: , J 7 e . 0-\C S * LLC_ A-u-1 Location: \00\ U 1--e A-u) e ~ -2 Zone District: (L--1 â‚¬J Lot Size: 3 1 6 5 3- â‚¬ e. r \ c> r Â¥vÂ·, i /7 I /,A Li 6/\ 5 ,* -1 2.- Lot Area: 63 , 3 io 0*- 1 ( for the purposes o f calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: 0 Proposed: 0 Number of residential units: Existing: 9 0 Proposed: 2 Number of bedrooms: Existing: 0 Proposed 13 Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing: 0 Allowable. 1 \,9 90 Proposed: \ 1 H WO Principal bldg. height: Existing: O Allowable: --1-1 1 Proposed: -1-7 ' 2-11 Access. bldg. height: Existing: 0 Allowable: 1 -7 Proposed: 6 6 On-Site parking: Existing: e Required: Proposed: N fÂ¥ N A % Site coverage: Existing: 0 Required: Proposed: % Open Space: Existing. 0 Required: N er Proposed: 16'1 Cd-,Y-â‚¬ b Front Setback: Existing: 6 Required: N Dr Proposed: 1 D Rear Setback: Existing: Required: N Pr Proposed: 5=r- 6 7 Combined F/R: Existing: O Required: NA Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: O Required: NA Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: D Required: 0 4 Proposed: Combined Sides: Existing: O Required: M ~ Proposed: Distance Between Existing Required: Proposed: Buildings Existing non-conformities or encroachments: O 0/le Variations requested: 0 12>A <L_ 6 Legal Tabs Co. 1-800-322-3022 Recycled ~ Stock # ATT-10-S Attachment 25 Impression antibourrage et & s*chage rapide - www.avery.com Utilisez le gabarit 5160Â® 1-800-GO-AVERY ATTACHMENT 25 247 ENTERPRISE LLC 1135 UTE LLC 6020 OSBORN PROPERTIES LTD C/O MICHAEL WELTY 6363 WOODWAY 10TH FL 6020 OSBORN 52 EAST END AVE HOUSTON, TX 77057 HOUSTON, TX 77033 NEW YORK, NY 10028 679534 ONTARIO LTD ADLER LAURA AGER RONALD & ELEANOR S C/O CHARLES C GOLD MTN RESORT INTERIORS CORP 2800 ISLAND BLVD #2305 130 ADELAIDE ST W #3302 PO BOX 1963 MIAMI, FL 33160 TORONTO ONTARIO CANADA, M5H3P5 ASPEN, CO 81612 ANDERSON JUNE H AGUA FRIA PROPERTIES LLC APPELQUIST THOMAS W TRUSTEE 50% C/O BB&T TRUSTEE 460 ST MICHAELS DR BLDG 300 400 LIVINGSTON ST PO BOX 10001 SANTA FE, NM 87505 NEW HAVEN, CT 06511 OWENSBORO, KY 42302 ARNETT DAVID & BETTE ASPEN ALPS CONDO ASSOC ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC 5333 N CAMINO REAL PO BOX 1128 PO BOX 1248 TUCSON, AZ 85718 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN VIEW LTD BAYLDON BARBARA W TRUSTEE 50% BECK CYNTHIA 100 S MAIN AVE #300 647 W BARRY AVE PO BOX 1569 SIDNEY, OH 45365 CHICAGO, IL 60657-4504 PACIFIC PALISADES, CA 90272 BECNEL DANIEL JR & MARY H BEEM CORPORATION BESHARAT GERALDINE PO DRAWER H 3528 OAKTON DR PO BOX 7 RESERVE, LA 70084 MINNETONKA, MN 55343 ELBERTON, GA 30635 BITTEL JUDITH R 50% BLAUSTAT 202 LLC BLOCK JOEL A TRUSTEE 50% 801 ARTHUR GODFREY RD STE 600 1125 PARK AVE #6D 647 W BARRY AVE MIAMI BEACH, FL 33140-3323 NEW YORK, NY 10128 CHICAGO, IL 60657-4504 BOTT ALLEN D BRENER DANIEL M & SHARON G BRITTEL STEPHEN H 50% 1 DOS POSOS 5202 POCAHONTAS 4125 BRAJANZA ST ORINDA, CA 94563 BELL-AIR, TX 77401 COCONUT GROVE, FL CARMAN PETER BURNS DARYL R CHMELIR FRANK J & SANDRA L ASPEN ALPS #808 7169 SO POPLAR LN 201 39TH ST 700 UTE AVE ENGLEWOOD, CO 80112 DOWNERS GROVE, IL 60515 ASPEN, CO 81611 CHOZEN MERRILL A & JILL E TRST CHU MICHAEL CITY OF ASPEN 1230 SACRAMENTO ST 38 CORMORANT CIR 130 S GALENA ST SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94010 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ASPEN, CO 81611 Ak!3AV-09-008-L Â®091.5 31VldIAI31 Â®AlaAÂ¥ asn m,09L5 Â®AlliIAÂ¥ ~~ Ilin-W~ ARAP'MMAA flutiuu.1 aai., afinnuic Due uier Impression antibourrage et & suchage rapide ,"Illill www.avery.com ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® Utilisez le gabarit 5160Â® 1-800-GO-AVERY CLAMAN HENRY N & JANET S 1/2 INT COHEN HOWARD & CAROL TRIFARI CRAWFORD JOAN 518 RIVER VIEW DR 3551 WOODCLIFF RD 12921 BRUSHWOOD TERRACE GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81503 SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91403 POTOMAC, MD 20854 CRONIN CARL & TOBY ANN CRUM THOMAS F & CATHRYN R CUTLER SHERRIE STEPHENS TRUST 8748 DORRINGTON AVE 991 UTE AVE 197 EIGHTH ST #506 LOS ANGELES, CA 90048-1724 ASPEN, CO 81611 CHARLESTOWN, MA 02129 DAVIS RICHARD M JR LIVING TRUST DEFRANCIA JAMES M 58% DAVIS TERRY CONNALLY C/O DAVIS CANNON DEFRANCIA CYNTHIA J 42% 1046 ONTARIO PO BOX 728 17 UTE PLACE SHREVEPORT, LA 71106 SHERIDAN, WY 82801 ASPEN, CO 81611 DEPALMA JOHN R DEHNERT G PAUL & VICKY DENNING ROBERT R & KATE K 1/2 INT ATTN MARIA 3110 MAYWOOD AVE 740 WEDGE DR 710 W WILSON AVE AUSTIN, TX 78703-1133 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81506-1823 GLENDALE, CA 91206 DESTIN CO DILLARD WILLIAM T 11 & MARY A DIAMOND NATHAN C/O MULLIN TBG C/O DILLARD DEPT STORES INC 5465 BANYAN TRAIL 2029 CENTURY PK EAST 37TH PO BOX 486 CORAL GABLES, FL 33156 LOS ANGELES, CA 90067 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72203-0486 EMERSON JANE C & JONATHAN E FAVROT CAFFREY FIDELITAS HOLDING CO LTD 129 TUNXIS VILLAGE 124 CHARLESTON PK 30 CARTIER ST FARMINGTON, CT 06032 METAIRIE, LA 70005 OTTAWA ONTARIO CANADA, K2P 2E7 FONVIELLE HENRY S & LEE FOSSIER MIKE W REV TRUST FRANKLIN JULIE L 305 LLOYDS LN 7 WAINWRIGHT RD #88 62 RYE RIDGE RD ALEXANDRIA, VA 22302 WINCHESTER, MA 01890 HARRISON, NY 10528 FRAUTSCHI STEVEN & MIE FRY LLOYD EDWARD FRYKLUND ROBERT 1561 CREST DR 1335 STRATFORD DR 2917 DUKE ST ALTADENA, CA 91001 PIQUA, OH 45356 HOUSTON, TX 77005 GOLUB GENE GANT 103 LLC GESSNER RICHARD W REV TRUST GOLUB & CO 311 TOWN CENTER 1705 11 TH ST NE 625 N MICHIGAN BELLA VISTA, AR 72714 MASSILLON, OH 44646 CHICAGO, IL 60611 GOODSIR SUSAN A 1/3 GRAHAM MAUREEN & THEODORE L GRAHAM NELL C $009 HIGHWOOD COURT NW 7507 PHELPS CLOSE 6081 W CRAWFORD ST NASHINGTON, DC 20007 NEW ALBANY, OH 43054 DENISON, TX 75020 AblaAÂ¥-09-008- L Â®09LS 31VldIAI31 Â®*JeAV asn Â®09,5 Â®AkmAV ~~ 803*JaAe'AAMAA 6unuli.4 aaid aBDnwi; Due luer Impression antibourrage et a s6chage rapide ./ill'll www.avery.com ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® Utilisez le gabarit 5160Â® 1-800-GO-AVERY GRAYSON GERALD GROUP 102 LLC HAHN TRUST 10147 BLUFFMONT LN 6400 RIVERSIDE DR BLDG B 8405 INDIAN HILLS DR LONE TREE, CO 80124 DUBLIN, OH 43017 OMAHA, NE 68114 HARRISON JOAN G 50% HARTMAN BARTON HARTMAN DOYLE & MARGARET 7701 ST CHARLES AVE 2865 NE 24TH CT PO BOX 10426 NEW ORLEANS, LA 70118 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33305 MIDLAND, TX 79702 HEIRLOOM PROPERTIES COLORADO HARVEY BRIAN L HAUGER MICHAEL A & JUDY L LLC PO BOX 240011 13516 QUAKING ASPEN NE 10077 GROGANS MILL RD STE 475 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87111 THE WOODLANDS, TX 77380 HENDERSON WAYNE F HENRY CHARLES V 111 AN D J EAN D HEVRDEJS CATHY CAMPBELL 39 CANTERBURY RD 937 WILLOW ST 3244 ELLA LEE LN MADISON, NJ 07940 LEBANON, PA 17042 HOUSTON, TX 77019 HIRSCH MICHAEL & MARY HOCKER DAVID E HONIGSBERG JOHN 63 EMERALD DUNES CIR 610 SWESTENDST#C103 12921 BRUSHWOOD TERRACE HENDERSON, NV 80105 ASPEN, CO 81611 POTOMAC, MD 20854 JACK LP HYMAN DIANA JACOBS HARLAN & DEBRA TRUST ALBERTA OR ROD JACK 8 WINTHROP DR 8040 N LA JOLLA SCENIC DR 10 WESTGATE WALK DIX HILLS, NY 11746 LA JOLLA, CA 92037 KITCHENER ONTARIO CANADA, N2M2T8 KAY REV TRUST JANNA INC KAUFMAN MICHAEL A & SHERRYL W LEVINSON BONNIE 500 PATTERSON RD 7 FERNWOOD CT 2127 BROADWAY #1 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81506 E BRUNSWICK, NJ 08816 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94115 LARSON DAYL A & KAY W FAMILY KEENAN D MICHAEL KNAUS DOUGLAS A & KENDALL J PARTNERSHIP 1135 BELLVIEW RD 1627 SOUTH BLVD 119 S JACKSON ST MCLEAN, VA 22102 HOUSTON, TX 77006 DENVER, CO 80209-3125 LIBERMAN KEITH & KATHLEEN FAMILY LEE MARIANNE S LTD PARTNERSHIP LEPOW RANDAL M & DANA S TRUST 2836 PATRIOT PARK PLACE 6355 SEWANEE ST 9554 HIDDEN VALLEY RD HENDERSON, NV 89052 HOUSTON, TX 77005 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 MADDALONE CHARLES TRUST LINEBERGER WILLIAM CARL LOWE DEVELOP CORP C/O PAT MADDALONE TRUSTEE 145 GREEN ROCK DR 610 S WEST END ST PO BOX 20124 BOULDER, CO 80302 ASPEN, CO 81611 SEDONA, AZ 86341 Ak13AV-09-008-L Â®09 L5 31VldIAI31 Â®*JeAv asn Â®0915 Â®AkIEIAV ~ Ulo]'Â£1@Ae'MAAM Bulluu.1 001.1 a60nu~ Due wer Impression antibourrage et & s*chage rapide - www.avery.com ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® Utilisez le gabarit 5160Â® 1-800-GO-AVERY MARSLAND SUSAN L MCCORMICK ROGER F FAMILY TRUST MARNETT MARTIN J & MARCELA B TRUSTEE UNDER TRUST AGREEMENT 66% 608 EMERSON AVE 1310 N RITCHIE CT MCCORMICK MARY E 34% ALLIANCE, NE 69301 CHICAGO, IL 60610 PO BOX 21532 OWENSBORO, KY 42304 MCCOY TRUST MCGOVERN PHILIP C & MARY ANN MEHL HARRIET 3485 S SILVER SPRINGS RD 33 PLEASANT ST 350 W 57TH ST LAFAYETTE, CA 94549 MANCHESTER, MA 01944 NEW YORK CITY, NY 10019 MERRILLS DAPHNE METCO REALTY LTD MEYER HOWARD W THE E WING TYNINGHAME HOUSE TEXAN BUILDING 2660 MIDDLEBURY LN DUNBAR E LOTHIAN 333 W LOOP N STE 410 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 SCOTLAND EH42 1XW, HOUSTON, TX 77024 MEYER WILLIAM J 2/3 MOEN DONNE P & ELIZABETH A MORRIS TRUST 1000 CAMPBELL CT 8 CABALLEROS RD 906 FRANKLIN LAKE BLUFF, IL 60044-1300 ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 RIVER FOREST, IL 60305 ORR ROBERT L FAMILY PARTNERSHIP NUTTER GEORGE ERNEST & LYNDSAY OWEN BILLYE HOWELL LLLP 223 HANNA RD 3535 GILLESPIE #303 500 PATTERSON RD TORONTO ONTARIO CANADA, M4G 3P3 DALLAS, TX 75219 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81506 PAGEAL VENTURES LTD PAISLEY ON THE BEAR LLC PANTER BARRY M TRUST ATTN LEVIN PAUL C C/O MARGARET I PROCHASKA 3837 WINFORD DR 55 DELISLE AVE #1003 191 SPAULDING LN TARZANA, CA 91356 TORONTO ONTARIO CANADA, M4V 3C2 EVANSTON, WY 82930 PARKER WILLIAM A JR PHILLIPS STEPHEN & BARBARA PINE A PHILIP 1900 GARRAUX WOODS RD NW 900 FIFTH AVE 1600 E ATLANTIC BLVD ATLANTA, GA 30327 NEW YORK, NY 10021 POMPANO BEACH, FL 33060-6768 PRATER BILL GEORGE & MARIE C PINSKY STEPHEN & ALENE PITKIN COUNTY TRUST 382 DELEGATE DR 530 E MAIN ST STE 302 1257 POST OAK CT WORTHINGTON, OH 43235 ASPEN, CO 81611 SPRINGFIELD, MO 65809 PROPERTY INVESTORS #1 LLC PROSTIC EDWARD & MARJORIE PYRFEKT PROPERTIES LLP 8407 BROOKEWOOD CT 2225 STRATFORD RD 1424 CEDAR BAY LN MC LEAN, VA 22120 SHAWNEE MISSION, KS 66208 SARASOTA, FL 34231 RAMSEY STACIE A RAPPAPORT FAMILY PARTNERS LTD REICH DANIEL S TRUST 25% INT 39 CANTERBURY RD PO BOX 127 999 N TUSTIN AVE #216 MADISON, NJ 07940 TIBURON, CA 94920 SANTA ANA, CA 92705 Ak!3AV-09-008- L Â®09 L5 31VldIAI31 Â®Â£,aAV asn Â®09 L5 Â®AM,Av n luo)*JaAe'MAAM Butiuu.1 aaid aBpnug pue uler Impression antibourrage et A s*chage rapide - www. avery.com ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® Utilisez le gabarit 5160Â® 1-800-GO-AVERY REICH MELVIN L TRUST RICE MARGARET A RICHTER VALERIE ARDEN 4609 SEASHORE DR 13912 FLINT 6214 N 34TH ST NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 OVERLAND PARK, KS 66221 PARADISE VALLEY, AZ 85253 ROSENBERG HENRY A & DOROTHY RODAN FAMILY LIVING TRUST ROSE FAMILY TRUST CROWN CENTRAL PET CORP 614 LASALLE AVE #442 240 S BRISTOL AVE ONE N CHARLES 22ND FL OAKLAND, CA 94611 LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 BALTIMORE, MD 21201 SANDERS RICHARD & JOANNE SANDITEN EDWARD STANLEY SCHALDACH NANCY 8 PARKWAY DR PO BOX 11566 2494 S OCEAN BLVD #J-8 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80110 ASPEN, CO 81612 BOCA RATON, FL 33432 SCHARLIN HOWARD R & GLORIA G SCHIRMER LESLIE M SCHWARZ JOHN H 10 EDGEWATER DR APT 4A 4100 E QUINCY AVE CALTECH 452-48 CORAL GABLES, FL 33133-6962 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80110 PASADENA, CA 91125 SCHWEPPE DAVID P 85% SCOTT JOSEPH A SEAMAN SAUNDRA L SCHWEPPE VALERIE G REV TRUST 15% PO BOX 5941 8505 ARLINGTON BLVD #210 8435 NW 43RD LN 0ENVER, CO 80217 FAIRFAX, VA 22031 OCALA, FL 34482 SEWELL BEVERLY JEAN & RALPH SEIFERT COLORADO TRUST SHAPIRO CYNTHIA R TRUST BYRON 2421 HAMILTON DR 5704 DEVILLE DR 884 QUAIL RUN DR AMES, IA 50014 EDINA, MN 55436 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81505-8608 SHIELDS VIVIAN S TRUST SHIRK JAMES A SHULMAN ROBERT A PO BOX 1555 PO BOX 1549 132 NASSAU ST #812 GULF BREEZE, FL 32562-1555 BLOOMINGTON, IL 61702 NEW YORK, NY 10038 SIEGEL LOIS H QPRT SILVERMAN MARK J & NANCY C SIMMONS LEONARD & MARGARET 3 GROVE ISLE DR #1109 7404 BROOKVILLE RD PO BOX 54 MIAMI, FL 33133 CHEVY CHASE, MD 20815 ASPEN, CO 81612 SIMPKINS B DOUGLAS & JOHNETTE SIMON JEROME M & DONNA SINAI ALLEN TETLOW 1294 ROCKRIMMON RD 16 HOLMES RD 2921 AVALON PL STAMFORD, CT 06903 LEXINGTON, MA 02173 HOUSTON, TX 77019 SMART EDWIN J SLOANE RICHARD A & CAROLYN J SNYDER JAMES DANIEL & LINDA RAE C/O R L STEENROD JR & ASSOC 124 RIGHTERS MILL RD 1225 BRAEBURN 2009 MARKET ST GLADWYNE, PA 19035 FLOSSMORE, IL 60422 DENVER, CO 80205-2022 AM)AV-09-008-1 Â®0915 31V1dIAI31 Â®*JeAV asn Â®09,5 Â®AllaAV ~ Ille'kiaAP~AAMAA 6UllU,JA ,@41-1 afinnauc n, ip â€¢i,pr Impression antibourrage et h s*chage rapide ,/Ill"li www.avery.com ~ AVERYÂ® 5160Â® Utilisez le gabarit 5160Â® 1-800-GO-AVERY STEWART TITLE CO STEWART SAMUEL P STOPEK RICHARD E & JULIE C/O JENNIFER SCHUMACHER 124 CHARLESTON PK 6311 VIA VENETIA NORTH PO BOX 133 METAIRIE, LA 70005 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33484 GYPSUM, CO 81637 TATEM H RANDOLPH 111 & SUE TAWGIN JOHN S TEN TEN UTE H O ASSOC BRINKLEY 129 SEA GIRT AVE 19 UTE PL PO BOX 12373 MANASQUAN, NJ 08736 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 TOBEY ROBERT W VANDERLIP HENRIK N VANTILBURG JOHANNES & JOANNE 41 CHERRY HILLS FARM DR 133 RIVER RD 225 ARIZONA AVE PH ENGLEWOOD, CO 80110-7113 COS COB, CT 06807 SANTA MONICA, CA 90401-1243 WAGNER PAUL L & DOROTHY H WATCHMAKER LINDA L 95% WATERS MICHAEL A & ADELAIDE ANN 3480 MIDDLEBELT RD 4527 BRUCE AVE PO BOX 8237 W BLOOMFIELD, MI 48323 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55424-1122 ASPEN, CO 81612 WEKSTEIN TRUST WELLS RICHARD A & SUSAN T WELSCH SUSAN F TRSTE 100 BELVIDERE ST UNIT 9A 970 POWDER LN 10 UTE PLACE BOSTON, MA 02199 ASPEN, CO 81611-2105 ASPEN, CO 81611 WERNST INC WHEELER THOMAS R & PATSY C WHITAKER PATRICIA D TRUST 8639 DESERT DUSK CT NE 2120 AUSTIN AVE SUITE 100 1910 PINE ST ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87113-2354 ROCHESTER HILLS, MI 48309 ST LOUIS, MO 63103 WILKERSON WILLIAM WOODWARD TERRY ZAINO BONIFACE A & ALISON H 3000 NE 30TH PL 3662 BRIDGEPOINTE 876 PARK AVE #4 SOUTH FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33306 OWENSBORO, KY 42303 NEW YORK, NY 10021 ZLN RESIDENTIAL TRUST C/O CONSTANTINE D GEORGES 701 EDWARDS AVE ELMWOOD, LA 70123 Ak13AV-09-008- L Â®09 LS 31VldIAI31 Â®Â£1@Av asn Â®0915 Â®AZIJAV ~ LUO]*.laAe'AAMAA Butiuu.1 eaw 06Pnlug Due wer 1 ... 1 111111!1 . 1 111 Ble Edit Record Navigate Ferm Reports Format lab Melp 21 .6 Jignp 1 1 :2 2% s '2. :2 I ~ g~ Main Custom Fjelds Fees Â·Actions Pacce]. Foutingflatu: FeeSummaf: Routingilistoe .6.1~achmeft: 1 0 ./- ...... .-::# ---Â« .<<<~Â«4444â‚¬Â«422. 1 5 .1 Â·Â·Â· Â·Â· 1 6 1 Pefrr,il T Ype 1 astu A. pei, Land Use 2004 Petrnit # <i)001330/.ASLU 1 Address ~1001 UTE AVE 1 Apt/5 uile 1 + R /KÂ·.ul.~ -/ U.,-'.., 2- City jASPEN State ICJ ' i Zip :81611 ..1 Permit jnformation 16 1 4 Matte, Petrn,t ~ ~ Routrig Queue :ia-lu06 App,~ied ~01 /02*007 i r. 7 F{oject 1 Status pend,ng Apptoved 1 fIt -i--*nn Desctic,tion EGA Â·. EHEE:tÂ·,iÂ·{kET SINGLE FAMILY PUD Issued ' Final I Submitted GLENN HORN 9256587 Clock ~Running Daps: 2 Ex.ties 12/28,1200.7 0 Wnef Last Name UTE MESAUC - ' i37 FERK, b,1.E EAST L| Ftist Name Â· iWESTPORT CT 06880 Phone :(203) 2278890 4 0118 Il.AppE~i' Applicant Last Name STEARN Flist Narne LEATHEM -4 FERRY LN E WESTPORT CT 06880 Phy~ ; Oust # 127396 Lendef Lau Name ! ] First Name Phone 2 Enter the matter petmit number Record 1 of 1 fletica--fill. Â£ .2/ -fF#23,349)<1~ 1-- , 1- .-r THE CITY oF ASPEN 1 File-, RdÂ©: 7%2 apprbwed %01 0 CleÂ¥1[wiDJ **y-1 119â‚¬tftÂ© 44\2- Uado,A R)(114 3,) 143 AÂ»hed.Ft -1Â© *M,4- 6-44*Â¥t- a* s#Yast lot }Mt 4 -\0 -ff GlYÂ«,E 9-12, - - + -Tho 0*WQ,d PAP_ 4&2 4- 1-lte - ~981\ CÂ¥10% lit 0 \U- \ = 5 ,4 )*~b )0-1-- 4 (2(924 -fYÂ» 01%2- V\Bl O*glitÂ¢D CUX\ C,}1).403~*3 994 9Â¥Es dfotion. 7917 1111111 lilli lilli 1- 1 lili 11111111111 lilli l li lli . _,e: 1 of 6 05/16/2007 01:58 JANICE K LOS CA-JILL PITKI C)LATY CO R 31.00 D 0.00 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN VARANCES, A PUD OTHER AMENDMENT, AND AN 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW FOR 1001 UTE AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS MINE, 1741 MINE NAME: ONE THOUSAND ONE PERCENT: 100 ACRES: 0 DESC: ALL SURFACE & MINERAL RIGHTS DESC: SECTION 18-10-84 WEST OF THE 6TH, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL NO. 2737-182-000-63 Resolution #07 - 9 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Ute Mesa, LLC, represented by Glenn Horn of Davis Horn Inc., and Jack Miller of Miller and Associates, for a variance from the residential design standards for secondary mass; a PUD Other Amendment for building on a lot line and to permit the transfer of three-hundred and seventy-eight (378) square feet from Lot 2 to Lot 1; and an 8040 Greenline Review; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned R-15 PUI); and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended denial o f the 8040 Greenline Review and Residential Design Standard variance, and recommended approval o f the PUD Other Amendment; and, WHEREAS, the all references in the application to Ute Mesa PUD or Ute Mesa Subdivision shall be construed to mean 1001 Ute Avenue; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 3,2007, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 9, Series of 2007, by a four to one (4-1) vote, approving a variance to the residential design standards for secondary mass; approving an "8040 Greenline Review"; and, approving a PUD Amendment; and WIIEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves a variance to the i -~ i H m -Mwi --1- -1-im~Il ,37917 ~ Page: 2 of 6 05/16/2007 01:58 JANILE K VOS C.._DILL PITKI JOLI~ TY CO R 31,00 0 0.00 Residential Design Standards for secondary mass, an "8040 Greenline Review," and a PUD Other Amendment; on the property located at 1001 Ute Ave, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: Building Permit Application The building permit application shall include the following: a. A copy of the final P&Z Resolution. b. A Construction Management Plan approved by the City Engineering Department. The plan shall outline how construction shall address, and minimize the negative impacts of, potentially hazard materials on-site. c. An Access and Infrastructure Plan d. A fugitive dust control plan e. A detailed grading and drainage plan to be reviewed by the Community Development Engineer. Soil from the site will be tested for 8-heavy metals as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) standard. To determine leachability of the metals, a Toxicity Characteristic Leaehing Procedure (TCLP) test will be performed on all 8-heavy metals. As well as TCLP analysis, total concentrations of the 8-heavy metals will also be determined. f. A landscaping plan detailing landscape improvements associated with the avalanche walls Section 4: PUD Other Amendment for Allowable Floor Area The total allowed external Floor Area on Lots 1 and 2 shall be limited to 10,080 square feet, pursuant to the PUD approval in Ordinance 24, Series 2006. A PUD Other Amendment is hereby granted that transfers three-hundred and seventy-eight (378) square feet from Lot 2 to Lot 1, and therefore assigns 5,418 square feet of Floor Area to Lot 1, and 4,662 square feet of Floor Area to Lot 2. Floor Area shall be calculated based on the City land use code methodology in effect on August 14,2006, the date of passage for Ordinance 24, Series 2006. Pursuant to the PUD approval, 1,400 square feet of Floor Area is allocated for the development of a "for sale" Category 4 affordable housing unit on Lot 3. Section 5: PUD Other Amendment for Development Along a Lot Line A PUD Other Amendment is hereby granted, which permits below grade structures to be built with a zero minimum side yard set back along the shared lot line of Lot 1 and Lot 2. This shall allow for the development of a structure to accommodate the proposed sub- grade parking garage, basement, and driveway, pursuant to plans submitted December lilli lilli 1-111 | ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~-~ r ag~317 6 05/16/2007 01:58 JANI.E K VOS 3 _DILL PITKI Z .JRTY CO R 31.00 D 0.00 29,2006 and representations made at the April 3,2007 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. The only part of the two structures permitted to share a common wall shall be the sub-grade structures. A minimum distance of twenty (20) feet shall be required between the two dwellings above grade. Section 6: Residential Design The two (2) single-family residences and the one (1) affordable housing unit shall be required to meet the applicable City of Aspen Residential Design Standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410, Residential Design Standards. A variance is granted from the Residential Design Standards requirement for the two (2) free-market single-family residential structures that ten (10) percent of the mass be located in a secondary mass (Land Use Code Section 26.410.040(B)(1)). Section 7: Massing Controls Pursuant to PUD approvals received as part of Ordinance 24, Series 2006, the following shall apply to the two (2) free-market single-family residential structures: the width of the north-facing facades shall be limited to 120 feet; the overall ridge-height shall be limited to twenty-seven (27) feet above finished grade; twenty (20) percent of the width of the front facades shall be limited to a ridge height of twenty-two (22) feet above finished grade; and non-reflective materials shall be used in construction of the structures. Section 8: Fire Mitigation Fire sprinkler and alarm systems that meet the requirements of the Fire Marshall shall be installed in each of the single-family residences to be constructed within the subdivision/PUD. The water service line shall be sized appropriately to accommodate the required Fire Sprinkler System. The residences to be designed and constructed within the subdivision/PUD shall meet the Colorado Defensible Space Standards. Section 9: Landscaping The Applicant shall install landscaping that is consistent with the landscaping plan that is proposed in the application for screening of the retaining wall. The Applicant shall receive a tree removal permit prior to the removal of any existing on-site trees. Further, the Applicant shall work with the Parks Department The Applicant shall provide a financial security to ensure the completion of the landscaping as shown on the landscaping plan in the application is completed prior to a building permit application being submitted on any of the residential units within the subdivision. . The site shall be landscaped in the first fall or spring after completion of the site development. Section 10: Toxic Soil Controls and Mine Waste The Applicant shall provide prior to submitting a building permit application on either of the residences, the City with a mine waste testing and handling plan that complies with ~~- 337917 1-1 lilli-Ill- -lili -li-1 05/16/2007 01:58 ~~ Page: 4 of 6 JAN:CE K VOS CAUDILL PITKI' CIJA.FY O R 31.00 D 0.00 the following conditions of approval as memorialized in Ordinance No. 25, Series 1994 regarding the handling of any contaminated soils encountered on the property: a. Any disturbed soil or material that is to be stored above ground shall be securely contained on and covered with a non-permeable tan) or other protective barrier approved by the Environmental Health Department so as to prevent leaching of contaminated material onto or into the surface soil. Disturbed soil or material need not be removed if the City's Environmental Health Department finds that: 1) the excavated material contains less than 1,000 parts per million (ppm) o f total lead, or 2) that there exists a satisfactory method of disposal at the excavation site. Disturbed soil and solid waste may be disposed of outside of the site upon acceptance o f the material at a duly licensed and authorized receiving facility. Soils identified as non-toxic in the RCRA test outlined above in Section 3, part e do not fall under the toxic handling plan, and are not subject to the above enumerated requirements. b. Non-removal of contaminated material. No contaminated soil or solid waste shall be removed, placed, stored, transported or disposed o f outside the boundaries of the site without having first obtained any and all necessary State and/or Federal transportation and disposal permits. c. Dust suppression. All activity or development shall be accompanied by dust suppression measures such as the application of water or other soil surfactant to minimize the creation and release o f dust and other particulates into the air. d. Vegetable and flower gardening and cultivation. No vegetables or flowers shall be planted or cultivated within the boundaries of the site except in garden beds consisting of not less than twelve (12) inches of soil containing no more than 999- ppm lead. e. Landscaping. The planting of trees and shrubs and the creation or installation of landscaping features requiring the dislocation or disturbance of more than one cubic yard of soil shall require a permit as provided in Section 7-143 (4). Â£ Any contaminated soil or mine waste rock to be left on-site shall be placed under structures or pavement. Soils used in landscaped areas or engineered fills shall be covered by a minimum o f 1 foot o f clean soil that contains less than 1,000 ppm lead. g. Any contaminated soil or mine waste rock that is either disturbed or exposed shall be contained on the property such that runoff does not exit the property or contaminate clean soils existing elsewhere on the property. 1-111111111-1111-111-1-1 -1 537917 Page: 5 of 6 11 lili 1 05/16/2007 01:58 JANICE K VOS C -JILL PITKI DLATY CO R 31.00 D 0.00 Section 11: Mudflow Rockfall, and Avalanehe Protection A wall or berm at least four (4) feet in height that can withstand forces of at least two- hundred (200) pounds per square foot shall be constructed in conjunction with development on Lot 1 and Lot 2. The wall or berm shall protect the south-facing facades of the development from rockfall and avalanche danger. Section 12: Water Department Regulations The Applicants shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. The Applicants shall also enter into a water service agreement with the City and complete a common service line agreement for the residential units. Section 13: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District The Applicants shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District' s rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) to ACSD lines shall be allowed. The sanitary sewer lines serving the residential properties within the subdivision shall be constructed out of a yellowmite material since adequate separation between the water and sewer lines cannot be maintained under the common driveway. If a glycol heating and snowmelt system is to be installed, the glycol storage areas shall be reviewed and approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District prior to installation. Glycol heating and snowmelt system must be designed to prohibit and discharge of glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have approved containment facilities. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District' s rules and regulations. ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD. All ACSD fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the planned reserve capacity of the existing system (collection system and or treatment system) an additional proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection system or treatment capacity constraint. Where main sanitary sewer lines are required to serve this new development or the existing publicly owned sewer system requires modification or adjustment, a line extension request and collection system agreement are required. Easements for main sewer lines to be dedicated to the district for future ownership and maintenance shall be dedicated and conveyed to the district using standard district form and language. I, illill.Ilill I I li ."il. ill Illi Illi.I' 05/16/2007 01:58 ~ 537917 Page: 6 of 6 JANICE K VOS CAUDILL PITKI CC-REY CO R 31.00 D 0.00 Section14: This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section15: This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 16: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity o f the remaining portions thereo f. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 3rd day of April, 2007. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: /7 f k oak â‚¬66'44*_ .." City Attorney Ruth Kruger Chair ~'7 E ATTEST: 4 f.t--5-~ -i-ic.-ttiÂ£-~--*777 04-t~.~31-f,~ i ~~ CL~< efiu(2141'tw --1 1 Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk ' :r: C. C E--61 G:\cityUessica\Cases\1001 Ute\P&Z\1001Ute_PZReso_04.03.doc DEVELOPMENT ORDER ofthe City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date o f this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. Ute Mesa LLC. 1001 Ute Ave. Aspen, CO 81611 Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number MINE, 1741 MINE NAME: ONE THOUSAND ONE PERCENT: 100 ACRES: 0 DESC: ALL SURFACE & MINERAL RIGHTS DESC: SECTION 18-10-84 WEST OF THE 6TH, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO. parcel ID 273718200063 Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property The applicant has received 8040 Greenline Approval for two free-market homes, a PUD Amendment to allow development along the lot common lot line for the free-market homes, a PUD Amendment to shift FAR from Lot 2 to Lot 1, and a Residential Design Standard Variance from secondary Mass. Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan City of Aspen, Planning and Zoning Commission, Resolution 9, Series 2007 (attached), PUD Amendments, Residential Design Standard Variance, 8040 Greenline Approval. Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) June 3.2007 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) June 4. 2010 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) Issued this.3rd day of June, 2007, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. 041Â»_~~~~ Chris-Bendon, Community Development Director PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 1001 Ute Avenue, Parcel ID 2737-182-00-063, by PUD Amendment, Residential Design Standard Variance, and 8040 Greenline Review on April 3, 2007. For further information contact Jessica Garrow, at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 429-2780. s/ City of Aspen Publish in The Aspen Times on June 3,2007 PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan. and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 60, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertainÂ· ing to the following described property: 1001 Ute Avenue, P.ircel ID 2737-182-00-063, by PUD Amendment, Residential Design Standard Vari ance, and 8040 Greenline Review on April 3,2007. For further ir:formation contact Jessica Garrow, at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept, 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 429-2780. sl City of Aspen Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on June 3, 2007.(365801) Section 18: Vested Property Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 1001 Ute Ave, City of Aspen, by Residential Design Standard Variances, PUD Other Amendments, and 8040Greenline approval by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission. MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Director FROM: Jessica Garrow, Planne 0 Mil RE: Ute Mesa PUD (1001 Ute Avenue), Residential Design Standards Variance, 8040 Greenline Review, PUD Other Amendment Resolution No. ~, Series of 2007 - Public Hearing DATE: April 3,2007 APPLICANT /OWNER: PROPOSED LAND USE & ZONING: Ute Mesa, LLC No Change REPRESENTATIVE: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Glenn Horn of Davis Horn, Inc., Staff recommends approval of the PUD Amendment and and Jack Miller, of Miller denial of the Residential Design Standard Variance and Associates 8040 Greenline Review. LOCATION: : 'fS'f.. 1001 Ute Avenue. The property is legally described as MINE, 1741 MINE NAME: ONE THOUSAND ONE PERCENT: 100 ACRES: 0 , ....4 "94 DESC: ALL SURFACE & MINERAL RIGHTS DESC: SECTION 18-10-84 WEST OF THE 6TH . Â·~ 11 *.,2 CURRENT ZONING & USE R-15 (Moderate Density Residential) with a PUD 1 . REVIEW PROCEDURE: The Planning and Zoning Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or deny any variance requests from the residential design standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410.020(D), Variances. 1 vii The Planning and Zoning Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an 8040 Greenline Review, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.435.030(C), 8040 Greenline Review. The Planning and Zoning may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an amendment found to be consistent with or an enhancement of the approved final development plan by the Community Development Director, but which does not meet the established thresholds for an insubstantial amendment, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.100(B), Other Amendment. STAFF COMMENTS: RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS: Secondary Mass The proposed development is located within the Aspen Infill Area, and therefore must comply with the secondary mass requirement in the Residential Design Standards. The elimination of a secondary mass contributes to the bulky nature of the development. Staff finds the requested variance does not create a better design in the context, and in fact creates a development with little visual or architectural variation or relief. Staff finds that the inclusion of a secondary mass would improve the overall design and would help the proposed development better match the character of the area. Staff finds this review standard is not met. Compliance with this standard is also attached as Exhibit A. 8040 GREENLINE: The property must obtain 8040 Greenline Review approval prior to applying for a building permit. The review ensures development within one hundred and fifty (150) feet of the 8040 elevation line is required to go through an 8040 Greenline Review to ensure development is provided with adequate utilities, have a minimal impact on runoff, air pollution, and reduce the potential for avalanche, unstable slopes, rock falls, and mud slides. The review also ensures development at this elevation blends with the open character of the mountain. The Applicant has addressed the natural hazard potential on the site, and conditions have been included to ensure the potential for avalanche, unstable slopes, rock falls, and mud slides is minimized. Further, adequate ingress and egress is provided to the development. However, Staff finds that the proposed design maximizes the bulkiness of the building and that the building fails to blend with the open character of the mountain. The Applicant has chosen to primarily use stone materials for the development. These materials are heavy and bulky, and create a massive structure that does not blend in with its surroundings. The fact that there is little to no material differentiation between the two proposed structures further contributes the sense of bulkiness of the building. The Applicant could remedy this by decentralizing some of the mass through the use of a secondary element. This would do a great deal in ensuring the development blends with the mountain character. 2 Staff finds the development does not meet the review standards for an 8040 Greenline Review based on Criteria 7, minimizing bulk of the structure and blending the structure into the open character of the mountain. Compliance with this standard is also attached as Exhibit B. PUD OTHER AMENDMENT: The Applicant has proposed that three-hundred seventy-eight (378) square feet of FAR be transferred from Lot 2 to Lot 1. The original PUD approval, pursuant to Ordinance 24, Series 2006, limited each lot to 5,040 square feet of FAR, for a total of 10,080 square feet of FAR. The Applicant has requested the FAR transfer to assign 5,418 square feet of FAR to Lot 1, and 4,662 square feet of FAR to Lot 2. The overall total FAR would remain at 10,080 square feet. Staff finds this request is consistent with the approved PUD, as it maintains the approved overall FAR. The Applicant has also proposed a PUD Amendment to permit a zero lot line development along the internal property line between Lots 1 and 2. This Amendment request has been made to accommodate the development of shared below grade garage access. Staff finds that this request is consistent with the approved PUD, as it enables the Applicant to minimize the amount of impermeable surfaces associated with above-grade garage access. Staff finds this review standard is met. Compliance with this standard is also attached as Exhibit C. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that this application meets the applicable review standards for granting a PUD Amendment for the transfer of three-hundred and seventy-eight (378) square feet of FAR from Lot 2 to Lot 1 and to allow for development along the internal lot lines of Lot 1 and Lot 2. Staff recommends against the requested variance from the residential design standards, and recommends against the 8040 Greenline Review. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. ~, Series of 2007, approving variances to the residential design standards for secondark mass; approving an "8040 Greenline Review"; and a PUD Other Amendment for the Ute Mesa PUD located at 1001 Ute Avenue. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Residential Design Standard Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- 8040 Greenline Review and Staff Findings Exhibit C -- PUD Other Amendment Review and Staff Findings Exhibit D -- Development Review Committee Comments Exhibit E -- Application, Dated December 29,2006 Exhibit F - Addendum to Application, Dated March 23,2007 3 PLANNING COMMISSIONER NOTES: RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN VARANCES, A PUD OTHER AMENDMENT, AND AN 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW FOR 1001 UTE AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS MINE, 1741 MINE NAME: ONE THOUSAND ONE PERCENT: 100 ACRES: 0 DESC: ALL SURFACE & MINERAL RIGHTS DESC: SECTION 18-10-84 WEST OF THE 6TH, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL NO. 2737-182-000-63 Resolution #07 - 9 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Ute Mesa, LLC, represented by Glenn Horn of Davis Horn Inc., and Jack Miller of Miller and Associates, for a variance from the residential design standards for secondary mass; a PUD Other Amendment for building on a lot line and to permit the transfer of three-hundred and seventy-eight (378) square feet from Lot 2 to Lot 1; and an 8040 Greenline Review; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned R-15 PUD; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended denial of the 8040 Greenline Review and Residential Design Standard variance, and recommended approval o f the PUD Other Amendment; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 3, 2007, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. , Series of 2007, by a to (__- __3 vote, approving a variance to the residential design standards for secondary mass; approving an "8040 Greenline Review"; and, approving a PUD Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves a variance to the Residential Design Standards for secondary mass, an "8040 Greenline Review," and a PUD Other Amendment; on the property located at 1001 Ute Ave in the-*t=*fr:-**1_ City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. ell--2.-)==-â€¢- Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: Building Permit Application The building permit application shall include the following: a. A copy of the final P&Z Resolution. b. A Construction Management Plan c. An Access and Infrastructure Plan d. A fugitive dust control plan e. A detailed grading and drainage plan to be reviewed by the Community Development Engineer. This shall include a Leachate test confirming that any ~ storm runoff from the site will be not exceed accepted environmental limits. f. A landscaping plan detailing landscape improvements associated with the avalanche walls Section 4: PUD Other Amendment for Allowable uff Fkf)( AYâ‚¬)0 The total allowed external ffig>n Lots 1 and 2 shall be limited to 10,080 square feet, pursuant to the PUD approval in Ordinance 24, Series 2006. A PUD Other Amendment is hereby granted that transfers three-hundred and seventy-eight (378) square feet from Lot 2 to Lot 1, and therefore assigns 5,418 square feet ofÂ£~~to Lot 1, and 4,662 square feet of F'Xk)to Lot 2. Ly Â£~A shall be calculated based on the City land use code methodology in effect on August 14, 2006, the date of passage for Ordinance 24, Series 2006. Pursuant to the PUD approval, 1,400 square feet of 15~}) is allocated for the development of a "for sale" Category 4 affordable housing u~Til<on Lot 3. Section 5: PUD Other Amendment for Development Along a Lot Line A PUD Other Amendment is hereby granted, which permits below grade structures to be built with a zero minimum side yard set back along the shared lot line of Lot 1 and Lot 2. This shall allow for the development of a structure to accommodate the proposed sub- grade parking garage, basement, and driveway, pursuant to plans submitted December 29,2007 and representations made at the April 3,2007 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. The only part of the two structures permitted to share a common wall shall be the sub-grade structures. A minimum distance of twenty (20) feet shall be required between the two dwellings above grade. Section 6: Residential Design The two (2) single-family residences and the one (1) accessory dwelling unit shall be required to meet the applicable City of Aspen Residential Design Standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410, Residential Design Standards. A variance is granted from the Residential Design Standards requirement for the two (2) free-market single-family residential structures that ten (10) percent of the mass be located in a secondary mass (Land Use Code Section 26.410.040(B)( 1 )) Section 7: Massing Controls Pursuant to PUD approvals received as part of Ordinance 24, Series 2006, the following shall apply to the two (2) free-market single-family residential structures: the width of the north-facing facades shall be limited to 120 feet; the overall ridge-height shall be limited to twenty-seven (27) feet above finished grade; twenty (20) percent of the width of the front facades shall be limited to a ridge height of twenty-two (22) feet above finished grade; and non-reflective materials shall be used in construction of the structures. Section 8: Fire Mitigation Fire sprinkler and alarm systems that meet the requirements of the Fire Marshall shall be installed in each of the single-family residences to be constructed within the subdivision/PUD. The water service line shall be sized appropriately to accommodate the required Fire Sprinkler System. The residences to be designed and constructed within the subdivision/PUD shall meet the Colorado Defensible Space Standards. Section 9: Landscaping The Applicant shall installlandscaping that is consistent with the landscaping plan that is proposed in the application for screening of the retaining wall. The Applicant shall receive a tree removal permit prior to the removal of any existing on-site trees. Further, the Applicant shall work with the Parks Department Additiu~lly, individual landscaping plans for the residential parcels shall be submitted and~ki~wed by the City Parks Department as part of the 8040 Greenline Review al~lications for the individual residences. The Applicant shall provide a financial security to ensure the completion of the landscaping as shown on the landscaping plan in the application is completed prior to a building permit application being submitted on any of the residential units within the subdivision. The site shall be landscaped in the first fall or spring after completion of the site development. Section 10: Toxic Soil Controls and Mine Waste The Applicant shall provide prior to submitting a building permit application on either of the residences, the City with a mine waste testing and handling plan that complies with the following conditions of approval as memorialized in Ordinance No. 25, Series 1994 regarding the handling of any contaminated soils encountered on the property: a. Any disturbed soil or material that is to be stored above ground shall be securely contained on and covered with a non-permeable tarp or other protective barrier approved by the Environmental Health Department so as to prevent teaching of contaminated material onto or into the surface soil. Disturbed soil or material need not be removed if the City's Environmental Health Department finds that: 1) the excavated material contains less than 1,000 parts per million (ppm) of total lead, or Disturbed soil and solid waste may be disposed of outside of the site upon <2) that there exists a satisfactory method of disposal at the excavation site. acceptance of the material at a duly licensed and authorized receiving facility. b. Non-removal of contaminated material. No contaminated soil or solid waste shall be removed, placed, stored, transported or disposed of outside the boundaries of the site without having first obtained any and all necessary State and/or Federal transportation and disposal permits. c. Dust suppression. All activity or development shall be accompanied by dust suppression measures such as the application of water or other soil surfactant to minimize the creation and release of dust and other particulates into the air. d. Vegetable and flower gardening and cultivation. No vegetables or flowers shall be planted or cultivated within the boundaries of the site except in garden beds consisting of not less than twelve (12) inches of soil containing no more than 999- ppm lead. e. Landscaping. The planting of trees and shrubs and the creation or installation of landscaping features requiring the dislocation or disturbance of more than one cubic yard of soil shall require a permit as provided in Section 7-143 (4). f. Any contaminated soil or mine waste rock to be left on-site shall be placed under structures or pavement. Soils used in landscaped areas or engineered fills shall be covered by a minimum of 1 foot of clean soil that contains less than 1,000 ppm lead. Section 11: Mudflow Rockfall, and Avalanche Protection A wall or berm at least four (4) feet in height that can withstand forces of at least two- hundred (200) pounds per square foot shall be constructed in conjunction with development on Lot 1 and Lot 2. The wall or berm shall protect the south-facing facades of the development from rockfall J Inger. Â·4-i~44*fk~--'~ Section 12: Water Department Regulations The Applicants shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. The Applicants shall also enter into a water service agreement with the City and complete a common service line agreement for the residential units. Section 13: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District The Applicants shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) to ACSD lines shall be allowed. The sanitary sewer lines serving the residential properties within the subdivision shall be constructed out of a yellowmite material since adequate separation between the water and sewer lines cannot be maintained under the common driveway. If a glycol heating and snowmelt system is to be installed, the glycol storage areas shall be reviewed and approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District prior to installation. Glycol heating and snowmelt system must be designed to prohibit and discharge of glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have approved containment facilities. 11'H The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD. All ACSD fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the planned reserve capacity of the existing system (collection system and or treatment system) an additional proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection system or treatment capacity constraint. Where main sanitary sewer lines are required to serve this new development or the existing publicly owned sewer system requires modification or adjustment, a line extension request and collection system agreement are required. Easements for main sewer lines to be dedicated to the district for future ownership and maintenance shall be dedicated and conveyed to the district using standard district form and language. Section14: This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section15: This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 16: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 3rd day of April, 2007. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Ruth Kruger Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk G:\city\Jessica\Cases\1001 Ute\P&7\1001Ute_PZReso_04.03.doc EXHIBIT A: REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS The Planning and Zoning Commission may grant variances from the Residential Design Standards if the proposed application meets the following: a) Provides an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or, b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specifc constraints. The following are Staff' s findings in regards to the variance being requested by the Applicant. Variance Requested 1. Secondary Mass (26.410.040(B)(1) All ne-w single family and duplex structures shall locate at least ten (10940 percent of their total square footage above ,-;7775* grade in a mass which is completely detached from the ~ , 44-Â«f ~> principal building, or linked to it by a subordinate 0 .m- -3--1--1.+-t---- '11 connecting element. This standard shall only apply to - parcels within the Aspen Infill Area pursuant to Section 26.410.010 (B)(2). Accessory buildings such as garages, sheds, and accessory dwelling units are examples of appropriate uses for the secondary mass. A subordinate linking element for the purposes of secondary mass shall be defined as an element not more than ten (10) feet in width and ten (10) feet in length with a plate height of not more than nine (9) feet. Linked pavilions six (6) feet in -width and ten (10) feet in length shall be exempt from Section 26.575.020(A)(8) a) Provides an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the boardfeels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or, Staff Finding: The proposed development is located within the Aspen Infill Area, and therefore must comply with the secondary mass requirement in the Residential Design Standards. The elimination of a secondary mass contributes to the bulky nature of the development. Staff finds the requested variance does not create a better design in the context, and in fact 1 creates a development with little visual or architectural variation or relief. Staff finds that the inclusion of a secondary mass would improve the overall design and would help the proposed development better match the character of the area. Staff finds this criterion is not met. b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. The site includes a number of slopes, but Staff does not find that the slopes require the requested variance. This is a new development, meaning that there exist no built conditions on the site that would require this variance. The site is not rendered undevelopable by the requirement to meet this Residential Design Standard. Staff finds this criterion is not met. 2 Exhibit B -- 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW: According to Section 26.435.030 of the Land Use Code, no development shall be permitted at, above, or one hundred fifty feet below the 8040 Greenline unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set below. 1. The parcel on which the proposed development is to be located is suitable for development considering its slope, ground stability characteristics, including mine subsidence and the possibility of mud flow, rock falls and avalanche dangers. If the parcel is found to contain hazardous or toxic soils, the applicant shall stabilize and revegetate the soils, or, where necessary, cause them to be removed from the site to a location acceptable to the city. STAFF COMMENT: Staff believes there are rockfall, mudflow, and avalanche hazards on the site. The Applicant's engineering team has proposed a number of mitigation measures to deal with these dangers. Environmental analyses o f the property indicate contaminants in soil on site. The Applicant has proposed a number of conditions to deal with these toxic soils. Conditions of approval are included in the Resolution that address these concerns. If the Applicant complies with all conditions of approval, Staff finds this criterion is met. 2. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the natural watershed, runoff, drainage, soil erosion or have consequent effects on water pollution. ~TAFF COMMENT: Staff does not believe the proposed development will have an adverse affect on the natural watershed, runoff, drainage, soil erosion, or have adverse effects on water pollution. A condition of approval has been added requiring the Applicant to submit a grading and drainage plan to the Community Development Engineer. The plan will be required to demonstrate that the development does not result in an increase in the historic runoff from the property. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the air quality in the city. STAFF COMMENT: Staff finds that the proposed development will not have a significant air quality impact. A Construction Management Plan (CMP), approved by the City Engineering Department, will be submitted as part of the Building Permit Application. The CMP, will address any pm 10 concerns, will include controls to control engine idling, and will include a fugitive dust plan. Further, the proposed residences on Lots 1 and 2 shall not include coal burning heating devices or woodburning fireplaces. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The design and location of any proposed development, road, or trail is compatible with the terrain on the parcel on which the proposed development is to be located. ~TAFF COMMENT: The driveway was approved as part of the original PUD approval, and received 8040 Greenline approval as part of the PUD review process. The location of the Lots 1 and 2 was also established as part of the original PUD approval. Staff recommended approval of the lot locations at that time because they represented the flattest portions o f the site. Staff finds that the proposed development is consistent with this previous finding and that the proposed location o f the residential development is appropriate. A condition of approval has been included in the Resolution requiring a retaining wall or berm four (4) feet in height be placed on the Lots to protect the south side o f the development from potential environmental hazard related to the surrounding terrain. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Any grading will minimize, to the extent practicable, disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land features. STAFF COMMENT: As stated above, the proposed development is located on the flattest portion o f the site. Further, a condition of approval has been added requiring the Applicant to submit a grading and drainage plan to the Community Development Engineer. This plan will ensure the grading will minimize impacts to the terrain, vegetation, and natural land features. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. The placement and clustering of structures will minimize the need for roads, limit cutting and grading, maintain open space, and preserve the mountain as a scenic resource. STAFF COMMENT: The location of the lots was determined in the original PUD approval. The Applicant has proposed to use a common driveway, approved by Ordinance 24, Series 2006, to provide access to Lots 1 and 2. Further, the Applicant proposes shared access to individual garages. These garages are located below grade. Staff finds that by using a common access point for the garages and by placing the garages below grade, that the Applicant helps minimize the need for roads and limits the cutting and grading needed to accommodate vehicle access. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Building height and bulk will be minimized and the structure will be designed to blend into the open character of the mountain. STAFF COMMENT: Massing controls were included as conditions of approval in Ordinance 24, Series 2006. These included limiting the ridge height and length o f the two (2) single- family structures. While the proposed development meets these massing control requirements, it fails to meet the secondary mass requirement in the Residential Design Standards. Staff finds that the proposed design maximizes the bulkiness of the building and that the building fails to blend with the open character of the mountain. The Applicant has chosen to primarily use stone materials for the development. These materials are heavy and bulky, and create a massive structure that does not blend in with its surroundings. The fact that there is little to no material differentiation between the two proposed structures further contributes the sense of bulkiness of the building. The Applicant could remedy this by decentralizing some of the mass through the use of a secondary element. This would do a great deal in ensuring the development blends with the mountain character. Staff finds this criterion is not met. 8. Sufficient water pressure and other utilities are available to service the proposed development. STAFF COMMENT: The proposed development received utility services as part of the original PUD approval. Conditions of approval from the City Water Department and the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District were included in the original PUD approval, and have been included in this Resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 9. Adequate roads are available to serve the proposed development, and said roads can be properly maintained. STAFF COMMENT: As was discussed above, a common driveway has been approved that will provide access to the residences from Ute Ave. This driveway was reviewed by the Fire Marshall as part of the original PUD, and the Fire Marshal determined the proposed access plan met all Fire Department requirements for emergency service access. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 10. Adequate ingress and egress is available to the proposed development so as to ensure adequate access for fire protection and snow removal equipment. 8TAFF COMMENT: As noted above, the Fire Marshal has reviewed the proposed access plan and has determined appropriate ingress and egress is provided to the proposed development. Further, snow removal equipment is able to access the development. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 11. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Trails Plan are implemented in the proposed development, to the greatest extent practical STAFF COMMENT: Staff finds that the proposed development meets the goals o f the AACP with respect to Parks/Recreation/Trails. A trail easement is provided over the lot, and the upper portion of the site is preserved as open space, pursuant to Ordinance 24, Series 2006. Staff finds this criterion to be met. EXHIBIT C: REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS An amendment found to be consistent with or an enhancement of the approved final development plan by the Community Development Director, but which does not meet the established thresholds for an insubstantial amendment, may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a public hearing pursuant to Section 26.445.030(C) Step 3. The action by the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be considered the final action, unless the decision is appealed. Staff Finding: The Applicant has proposed two (2) PUD Amendments. First, the Applicant requests that three-hundred seventy-eight (378) square feet of FAR be transferred from Lot 2 to Lot 1. The original PUD approval, pursuant to Ordinance 24, Series 2006, limited each lot to 5,040 square feet of FAR, for a total of 10,080 square feet of FAR. The Applicant has requested the FAR transfer to assign 5,418 square feet of FAR to Lot 1, and 4,662 square feet of FAR to Lot 2. The overall total FAR would remain at 10,080 square feet. Staff finds this request is consistent with the approved PUD, as it maintains the approved overall FAR. Second, the Applicant has request a PUD Amendment to permit a zero lot line development along the internal property line between Lots 1 and 2. This Amendment request has been made to accommodate the development of shared below grade garage access. Staff finds that this request is consistent with the approved PUD, as it enables the Applicant to minimize the amount of impermeable surfaces associated with above-grade garage access. The Staff finds this criterion to be met. 1 3 EYAW D MEMORANDUM To: Development Review Committee From: Alex Evonitz, Com. Dev. Engineer Date: September 13,2006 Re: Smuggler Racquel Club Conceptual PUD and Affordable Housing Development Attendees: Alex Evonitz, Com. Dev. Engineer, Jessica Garrow, Planning, Adam Trzcinski, City Engineer, Phil Overleylander and Steve Hunter, Public Works, Denis, Murray, Building Dept., Todd Grange, Zoning, Brian Flynn and Chris Farmer, Parks, Glenn Horn, Planner. At the development review committee meeting held on February 7,2007 comment from staff included the following regarding the 8040 Greenline Review; Public Works - Phil Overleylander, Steve Hunter; â€¢ Public Works estimated 5 ECU per unit verses the 1.79 that was included in the report. The 5 services should be shown on a 20-foot span length on the main. â€¢ The tennis courts and landscaping will also need to account for water use estimates. â€¢ The City understands that the Open Space will not anticipate and additional water use at this time. Zoning - Todd Grange; No Comments at this time. Parks - Brian Flynn and Chris Farmer; â€¢ No trees on the property line near the4 driveway cut at the end o f the tennis courts. â€¢ The applicant needs to review page 15 of the Parks requirement for the survey needed to transfer the City of Aspen easement for the trail. Specifically, showing that there is no easement required on lot #1. â€¢ Also the applicant needs to reference Section #8 for PitCo referencing the Conservation review. â€¢ The landscaping plan for behind the avalanche walls must be submitted and approved. Engineering - Adam Trzeinski; â€¢ Driveway width has a maximum of 18-feet wide at the entrance to the existing ROW line. â€¢ No material storage or stabilization penetration into the City ROW. â€¢ All interior property corners must be set as part of the property survey before the Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Com. Dev. Engineer - Alex Evonitz; â€¢ A detailed environmental plan must be submitted as part of the building permit application or the permit application will not be taken. â€¢ Leachate test must be submitted confirming that any storm runoff from the site will be above accepted environmental limits. Achibit- Y:- Davis Hornlus- PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING March 23,2007 Jessica Garrow Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: 1001 Ute Avenue 8040 Land Use Application Amendment Dear Jessica: Ute Mesa LLC (applicant) is represented in this letter by Davis Horn Incorporated. This letter responds to your March 21,2007 email to me. Please include this letter with the materials which you prepare for the Planning and Zoning Commission. The land use application seeks a Planned Unit Development Other Amendment to increase the permitted floor area on Lot 1 by as much as 378 square feet provided there is a corresponding reduction in the floor area on Lot 2. As noted in the land use application, the floor area change will not affect the mass or bulk of either of the proposed residences. During the administrative approval process for the 1001 Ute Avenue Plat, James Lindt, former City Planner, indicated that minor modifications to the proposed building envelopes would be permitted provided the changes are consistent with the spirit of the land use process and representations made in the process. One of these minor modifications was the enlargement of the proposed building envelopes toward the center of the property. A review of Attachment 3 of the application shows there is no interior side yard building envelope setback. You may wish to review this with Jennifer Phelan since she has been reviewing the Final Plat. The purpose o f the zero lot line interior side yard setback is to provide for driveway, basement and garage construction. The portion of the structures located above finished grade will have a setback from the interior lot line. The applicant is seeking a variance from Section 26.410.040 B.1., Secondary Mass, based upon _ the specific geographic characteristics of 1001 Ute Avenue site and the relationship of the site to the development within the immediate site vicinity. The proposed residences are located almost 300 feet from Ute Avenue. The site is not at alllike a typical Aspen Infill Area lots located in the Aspen Townsite. There is a tennis court located between Ute Avenue and the houses. The Secondary Mass standard may be appropriate for houses developed immediately on Ute Avenue within a subdivision such as the Ute Addition because the lots are on grade with Ute Avenue and only 65 feet in depth, but is not appropriate for 1001 Ute Avenue, nor the Aspen Chance Subdivision to the west. As noted at length in the PUD review process, the 1001 PUD has many ALICE DAVIS AICP $ GLENN HORN AICP 215 SOUTH MONARCH ST. Â· SUITE 104 Â· ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Â· 970/925-6587Â· FAX: 970/925-5180 adavis@rof.net ghorn@rof.net similarities to the Aspen Chance Subdivision and may be viewed in some ways as an extension of the Subdivision. After several growing seasons, the public views of the houses in the 1001 Ute Avenue PUD will be similar to the public views of the Aspen Chance. The Aspen Infill Area is that area located south o f the Roaring Fork River and east of Castle Creek. Although the subject site is located in this Area, the 1001 Ute Avenue site has very little in common with more typical Aspen Townsite infill sites. The subject site has more in common with lots located at the base of Red and Smuggler Mountains on the north side of the River where the Secondary Mass standard is does not apply. A site specific consideration of the geographic characteristics of the 1001 Ute Avenue PUD and the relationship of the site to the surrounding area shows that the site should probably not be included within the Aspen Infill Area. Please consider these comments in preparing your recommendations to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Call me if you have any questions. Thanks. Sincerely, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED la GLENN11ORN AICP . 111-lili-Ill 1111111111111111111111111111111111 11/27/2006 01 :35I 531499 Page: 1 of 9 JANICE K VOS CAUDILL PITKIN COLATY CO R 46.00 0 0.00 ORDINANCE NO. 24 (SERIES OF 2006) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A SUBDIVISION REVIEW, CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL/FINAL PUD, AND A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR THE PRESERVATION OF SIGNIFICANT OPEN SPACE PARCELS FOR THE 1001 UTE AVENUE SUBDIVSION, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Parcel ID: 2737-182-00-063 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Leathem Steam, owner, represented by Davis Horn Incorporated, requesting approval of Subdivision, Consolidated Conceptual/Final Planned Unit Development, 8040 Greenline Review, Growth Management Review for the Preservation of Significant Open Space Parcels to divide the parcel at 1001 Ute Avenue into two (2) residential properties and four (4) separate common areas, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26,470.040(B)(1), Detached Single-family and Duplex Dwelling Units, the Community Development Director approved a Growth Management Review for the construction of one single-family dwelling unit, conditioned upon approval o f the other associated land use actions requested; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.030(B)(2), Consolidated Conceptual and Final Review, the Community Development Director consented to allow for the development application to be reviewed as a consolidated PUD review because of the anticipated limited scope of issues involved with the review; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the applicable sections of the land use code, the Community Development Director has reviewed the requested land use actions and recommended denial of the growth management review for the preservation of significant open space parcels and that a maximum floor area of only 3,830 square feet be allowed per residential lot; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 4,2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened and continued the public hearing on this application to April 18, 2006; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on April 18, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened and continued the public hearing on this application to May 2, 2006; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant amended the development application to include the development of a Category 4 affordable housing unit to mitigate for the second free-market residential unit in the subdivision; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on May 2,2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 16, Series of 2006, by a six to zero (6-0) vote, approving with conditions an 8040 Greenline Review, a Growth Management Review I , 531499 1 lilill ilill illill lill lilli illill illill ill lill lill lill 11/27/2006 01:36# Page: 2 of 9 JANICE K VOS CAUDILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 46,00 D 0.00 for the Development o f Affordable Housing, and recommending that City Council approve with conditions, Subdivision Review, Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, and a Growth Management Review for the Preservation of Significant Open Space Parcels for the 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision to divide the parcel at 1001 Ute Avenue into two (2) residential properties, a parcel for the development of a Category 4 AH unit and four (4) separate common areas, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on July 10, 2006, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposal and continued the hearing until July 24,2006; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on July 24,2006, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposal and continued the hearing until August 14,2006; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on August 14,2006, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposed 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision and approved Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2006, by a four to zero (4-0) vote, approving with conditions, the 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision, Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, and Growth Management Review for the Preservation o f Significant Open Space Parcels; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council hereby approves with conditions, a Subdivision Review, Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD, and a Growth Management Review for the Preservation o f Significant Open Space Parcels for the 1001 Ute Avenue Subdivision to divide the parcel at 1001 Ute Avenue into two (2) single-family residential properties, a property for the development o f a "for sale", three-bedroom, Category 4 affordable housing unit and four (4) separate common areas, subj ect to the conditions contained herein. n "m 1-~~ ~~~ ~ 1 1 ~~ 531499 Page: 3 of 9 11/27/2006 01:36; JANICE K VOS CMUDILL PITKIN COLATY CO R 46,00 D 0.00 Section 2: Approved Development Development of two (2) free-market single-family residential dwelling units, and the development of a "for sale", three-bedroom, Category 4 affordable housing unit, the relocation of the existing tennis courts approximately thirty (30) feet to the west of their current location, along with the necessary road improvements to access the residential lots are hereby approved subject to the terms of this ordinance. Section 3: Dimensional Requirements The approved dimensional requirements are as follows: Dimensional Approved Requirement Dimensional Requirements Minimum Lot Size Lot 1 = 24,850 SF Lot 2= 30,060 SF Common Area 1 Open Space= 20,860 SF Common Area 2 Open Space= 24,860 SF Cornmon Area 3 Access Easement== 15,290 SF Cornrnon Area 4 Open Space= 920 SF Minimum Lot Width 25 Feet for Common Area 2 Open Space Minimum Lot Area 31,655 SF in PUD Per Dwelling Unit Minimum Front Per Building Envelope Yard Setback Minimum Side Yard Per Building Envelope Setback Minimum Rear Yard Per Building Envelope Setback Maximum Height 25 Feet as measured from finished grade and 27 Feet to the ridge Allowable External 5,040 SF per each of the FAR two (2) single-family residential dwelling units as calculated based on the City land use code methodology in affect at the time of building permit submittal. Additionally, 1,400 SF is allocated for the development of a "for sale", Category 4 affordable housing unit. Minimum Off-Street 2 Spaces per Residential Parking Unit 531499 1 11111111111111 lillil lli lli 1111111 11/27/2006 01:361 Page: 4 of 9 JANICE K VOS 1.-DILL PITKIN COLArY CO R 46.00 0 0.00 Section 4: Subdivision/PUD Plat and Agreement The Applicant shall record a subdivision/PUD plat and agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code within 180 days of approval. The Plat shall contain the property boundaries, easements, and the building envelopes. Section 5: 8040 Greenline Review The 8040 Greenline approval granted herein is only for the road serving the single-family residence parcels and the relocation ofthe tennis courts. Prior to applying for building permits on the two (2) free-market residential units or the associated accessory dwelling units within the subdivision/PUD, an 8040 Greenline Review on the specific residence designs shall be applied for and approved pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.435.030, 8040 Greenline Review. Section 6: Residential Design Standards The two (2) single-family residences to be constructed within the subdivision shall be required to meet the applicable City of Aspen Residential Design Standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410, Residential Design Standards. Section 7: Affordable Housing Mitigation A "for sale", three-bedroom, Category 4 affordable housing unit consisting of a minimum of 1,400 square feet of net livable space shall be constructed in combination with providing a conservation easement on the southern 4.1 acres of the fathering parcel to mitigate for the free-market residential dwelling units to be constructed within the subdivision. The affordable housing unit shall be excluded from the homeowner's association for the subdivision so that it will not be responsible for mintenance and association fees common to the subdivision. The homeowner's association documents shall not contain any language that prohibits the owners of the affordable housing units from having dogs. Section 8: Conservation Easement The Applicant shall deed the 4.1 acres of the fathering parcel to be placed under a conservation easement to the City of Aspen. Subsequently, the City of Aspen shall record a conservation easement to be held by a third party on the 4.1 acres of the fathering parcel to remain in Pitkin County, that will be sterilized in perpetuity against future development in exchange for one of the two (2) single-family development rights within the subdivision. The property shall be deeded to the City prior to submission for an access/infrastructure permit on the common driveway improvements within the subdivision/PUD. The conservation easement document shall be prepared by the Applicant and reviewed by the Pitkin County Community Development Department prior to recordation. Section 9: School Lands Dedication Fee Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630, School Lands Dedication, the Applicant shall pay a fee-in-lieu of land dedication in conjunction with any residential development in the subdivision. Prior to building permit issuance on any residential development within the subdivision, the Applicant shall pay the school lands dedication fee associated with the subdivision as calculated by the City Zoning Officer using the dedication schedule in effect 531499 1111111111111 111 lili 11111 lili lili lili Page: 5 of 9 11/27/2006 01:351 JANILE K US 2 --ILL PITKIN JOUFTY CO R 46.00 0 0.00 at the time of building permit submission as set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.630.030, School Lands Dedication: Dedication Schedule. Section 10: Park Development Impact Fee Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Park Development Impact Fee, the Applicant shall pay a park development impact fee at the time of building permit issuance for any construction within the subdivision that adds new residential/lodge bedrooms and/or commercial/office square footage. The City Zoning Officer shall calculate the amount due using the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit submission as set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.610.030, Park Development Impact Fee: Fee Schedule. Section 11: Soil Subsidence, Rock Fall, and Avalanche Hazards The Applicant shall submit geotechnical and soil stability reports perfonned by a qualified, licensed engineer, demonstrating the land is suitable to handle the proposed development in conjunction with the 8040 Greenline Review applications for the individual residences proposed within the subdivision/PUD, The designs for the single-family residences within the subdivision/PUD shall comply with the recommendations of the Applicant's Avalanche Specialist, Peter Lev, and Applicant's Geologist, Nicholas Lampiris, by providing an engineered four (4) foot tall retaining wall on the south side ofthe residences. Section 12: Mine Waste The Applicant shall provide a mine waste testing and handling plan to the City prior to submitting a building permit application on either o f the residences, that complies with the following conditions of approval regarding development in an Environmentally Sensitive 4... area and handling of any hazardous or toxic soils encountered on the property pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.435.030 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code: a. Any disturbed soil or material that is to be stored above ground shall be securely contained on and covered with a non-permeable tam or other protective barrier approved by the Environmental Health Department so as to prevent leaching of contaminated material onto or into the surface soil. Disturbed soil or material need not be removed if the City's Environmental Health Department finds that: 1) the excavated material contains less than 1,000 parts per million (ppm) of total lead, or 2) that there exists a satisfactory method of disposal at the excavation site. Disturbed soil and solid waste may be disposed of outside of the site upon acceptance o f the material at a duly licensed and authorized receiving facility, b. Non-removal of contaminated material. No contaminated soil or solid waste shall be removed, placed, stored, transported or disposed of outside the boundaries of the site without having first obtained any and all necessary State an(For Federal transportation and disposal permits. c. Dust suppression. All activity or development shall be accompanied by dust suppression measures such as the application of water or other soil surfactant to minimize the creation and release of dust and other particulates into the air. 531499 lili 11111111111 111 lilli 1 11111111111 11/27/2006 01:361 Page: 6 of 9 JANICE K VOS u UDILL P:TKIN C:JA.TY C) R 46.00 0 0.00 d. Vegetable and flower gardening and cultivation. No vegetables or flowers shall be planted or cultivated within the boundaries of the site except in garden beds consisting of not less than twelve (12) inches of soil containing no more than 999- ppm lead. e. Landscaping. The planting of trees and shrubs and the creation or installation of landscaping features requiring the dislocation or disturbance of more than one cubic yard of soil shall require the same measures outlined in sub-sections a, b, c, f and g. f. Any contaminated soil or mine waste rock that is either disturbed or exposed shall be contained on the properly such that runoff does not exit the property or contaminate clean soils existing elsewhere on the property. g. Any contaminated soil or mine waste rock to be left on-site shall be placed under structures or pavement. Soils used in landscaped areas or engineered fills shall be covered by a minimum of 1 foot of clean soil that contains less than 1,000 ppm lead. Section 13: Fire Mitigation Fire sprinkler and alarm systems that meet the requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be installed in each of the single-family residences to be constructed within the subdivision/PUD. The water service line shall be sized appropriately to accommodate the required Fire Sprinkler System. The residences to be designed and constructed within the subdivision/PUD shall meet the Colorado Defensible Space Standards. Compliance with the Colorado Defensible Space Standards shall be verified as part of the 8040 Greenline Review process on the individual residences. Section 14: Driveway Construction The driveway shall be constructed to the grades that are proposed in the application and shall not exceed twelve (12) percent at any point. A hammerhead fire truck turnaround meeting the requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be installed as proposed in the application. The Applicant shall enter into a recorded road maintenance agreement with the City that is to be reviewed and accepted by the City Fire Marshal prior to the issuance of an access/infrastructure permit to construct the road. An access/infrastructure permit shall be applied for and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to commencing any grading or construction activities related to the installation of the common driveway to the residential parcels. A geotechnical report shall be submitted as part o f the access/infrastructure permit application. Section 15: Landscaping The Applicant shall install landscaping that is consistent with the landscaping plan that is proposed in the application for screening o f the retaining wall. A tree removal permit and tree protection plan shall be submitted and approved by the City of Aspen Parks Department prior to commencing construction activities related to the subdivision access improvements. Additionally, individual landscaping plans for the residential parcels shall be submitted and reviewed by the City Parks Department as part of the 8040 Greenline Review applications for the individual residences. The Applicant shall provide a financial C j 531499 111111111 1-Ill - 1 -li li- -l ili-111- 11 lili 1--1 11/27/2006 01'36E Page: 7 of 9 JAMEE K VOS C ._jILL PITKIb CON.Y CO R 46.00 0 0.00 security to ensure the completion of the landscaping as shown on the landscaping plan in the application is completed prior to a building permit application being submitted on any o f the residential units within the subdivision. Section 16: Relocation of Tennis Courts The Applicant shall relocate the existing tennis courts prior to or in conjunction with the installation of the common driveway to the residential parcels within the subdivision/PUD. An access/infrastructure permit shall be applied for and approved prior to the commencement of construction activities related to relocating the tennis courts. The pathway from Ute Avenue to the relocated tennis courts shall be improved to comply with applicable ADA accessibility requirements. A deed restriction shall be recorded on the Common Area 2 Open Space (parcel to contain the tennis courts) that preserves the parcel against future development. Section 17: Trail Easement I The Applicant shall grant a public trail easement to accommodate the existing Ajax Trail if it is found to be located outside of the existing trail easement in areas. Additionally, the Applicant shall grant a permanent public trail easement meeting the approval of the City of Aspen Parks Department along the eastern corner of single- family residential Lot 1 in order to accommodate a pedestrian trail from the Ajax Trail down to Ajax Park prior to recordation of the final subdivision/PUD plat. Section 18: Water Department Requirements The Applicants shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. The Applicants shall also enter into a water service agreement with the City and complete a common service line agreement for the residential units. Section 19: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Requirements The Applicants shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) to ACSD lines shall be allowed. The sanitary sewer lines serving the residential properties within the subdivision shall be constructed out of a yellowmite material since adequate separation between the water and sewer lines cannot be maintained under the common driveway. If a glycol heating and snowmelt system is to be installed, the glycol storage areas shall be reviewed and approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District prior to installation. Section 20: Massing Controls The specific designs of the two (2) free-market residential dwelling units that are to be submitted for 8040 Greenline Review pursuant to Section 5 of this ordinance shall be substantially consistent with the revised massing drawings presented to City Council on August 14, 2006. A substantial subdivision/PUD amendment review would be necessary to substantially vary from the massing drawings presented to City Council on August 14, 2006. The width of the north-facing facades of the free-market residential units shall be limited to 120 feet. The overall ridge height o f the free-market, single- family residential 531499 1111111 11 1--Ililli 111 111111111111 11/27/2006 01:35; Page: 8 of 9 JANIZE K ~03 - UL ILL PITKI~ COLKTY C. R 46.00 D 0.00 structures shall be limited to twenty-seven (27) feet above finished grade, and twenty (20) percent of the width of the front faQades shall be limited to a ridge height of twenty-two (22) feet above finished grade. Non-reflective materials shall be used in the construction of the proposed single-family residences. Section 21: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall be vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance o f a development order. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries o f the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation o f a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a vested property right, pursuant to the Land Use Code o f the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 1001 Ute Avenue, City and Townsite of Aspen, by Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2006, of the Aspen City Council. Section 22: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 23: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 24: A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 10th day of July, 2006, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12th day of June, 2006. 11/ra- L<- Helen Ki!6 I<janderid, Mayor . , 531499 Page: 9 of 9 lillill'lllili 111 lili l i lli lili 11/27/2006 01:36; Attest: JANICE K VOS CRUILL PITKIb COL'.rY C) R 46.00 0 0.00 ha,quu...Â« _1 -34 A_*Ad,14 Kathryn S. Koc~City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 14th day of August, 2096 , Attest: .,02 >401- Kathryn S. I~h, City Clerk Approved as to form: ,34**eL c John /Worcester, City Attorney 4 . Davis Horn*- PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING March 23,2007 Jessica Garrow Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: 1001 Ute Avenue 8040 Land Use Application Amendment Dear Jessica: Ute Mesa LLC (applicant) is represented in this letter by Davis LIorn Incorporated. This letter responds to your March 21,2007 email to me. Please include this letter with the materials which you prepare for the Planning and Zoning Commission. The land use application seeks a Planned Unit Development Other Amendment to increase the permitted floor area on Lot 1 by as much as 378 square feet provided there is a corresponding reduction in the floor area on Lot 2. As noted in the land use application, the floor area change will not affect the mass or bulk of either of the proposed residences. During the administrative approval process for the 1001 Ute Avenue Plat, James Lindt, former City Planner, indicated that minor modifications to the proposed building envelopes would be permitted provided the changes are consistent with the spirit of the land use process and representations made in the process. One of these minor modifications was the enlargement o f the proposed building envelopes toward the center o f the property. A review o f Attachment 3 0 f the application shows there is no interior side yard building envelope setback. You may wish to review this witli Jennifer Phelan since she has been reviewing the Final Plat. The purpose of the zero lot line interior side yard setback is to provide for driveway, basement and garage construction. The portion of the structures located above finished grade will have a setback from the interior lot line. The applicant is seeking a variance from Section 26.410.040 B. 1., Secondary Mass, based upon the specific geographic characteristics of 1001 Ute Avenue site and the relationship of the site to the development within the immediate site vicinity. The proposed residences are located almost 300 feet from Ute Avenue. The site is not at alllike a typical Aspen Infill Area lots located in the Aspen Townsite. There is a tennis court located between Ute Avenue and the houses. The Secondary Mass standard may be appropriate for houses developed immediately on Ute Avenue within a subdivision such as the Ute Addition because the lots are on grade with Ute Avenue and only 65 feet in depth, but is not appropriate for 1001 Ute Avenue, nor the Aspen Chance Subdivision to the west. As noted at length in the PUD review process, the 1001 PUD has many ALICE DAVIS AICP $ GLENN HORN AICP 215 SOUTH MONARCH ST.Â· SUITE 104Â· ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 Â·970/925-6587Â·FAX: 970/925-5180 adavis@rof.net ghorn@rof.net ' I ' 1/ similarities to the Aspen Chance Subdivision and may be viewed in some ways as an extension of the Subdivision. After several growing seasons, the public views of the houses in the 1001 Ute Avenue PUD will be similar to the public views of the Aspen Chance. The Aspen Infill Area is that area located south of the Roaring Fork River and east of Castle Creek. Although the subject site is located in this Area, the 1001 Ute Avenue site has very little in common with more typical Aspen Townsite infill sites. The subject site has more in common with lots located at the base of Red and Smuggler Mountains on the north side of the River where the Secondary Mass standard is does not apply. A site specific consideration of the geographic characteristics of the 1001 Ute Avenue PUD and the relationship of the site to the surrounding area shows that the site should probably not be included within the Aspen Infill Area. Please consider these comments in preparing your recommendations to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Call me if you have any questions. Thanks. Sincerely, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED 4 A- GLENN11ORN AICP Page 1 of 2 Jessica Garrow L 92-31001- 01â‚¬ From: Glenn Horn [ghorn@rof. net] AnA, Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 1:38 PM 1-1[' ~'ll~(. .-. To: Jessica Garrow Subject: [Fwd: Ute Mesa] 0 00\01 Ljpj *buu) 7 Thm et 2% 66 m sqqekled ch fo (rÂ»%4 -------- Original Message -------- Subject:Ute Mesa In -th# 12Â£60 preld 08 0189-- Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 14:03:06 E DT DBC C,orAA040 -M/leacylo~ 4-564 From:Dunlopenv@aol.com To:ghorn@rof.net fhbc - J elit imt Glenn, As per our meeting this morning, I recommend the following: 1) Planning and Zoning Commission Reso #07- , Section 3 (e). A requirement is stated that a "Leachate test" be done to confirm storm water runoff from the site will not exceed environmental limits. This raises a couple of questions such as; does the requirement speâ‚¬to waterior soilÂ·-sampling, and what are the environmental limits being referred to in the section? A conclusidA- is also drawn that storm water will leave the site. For clarity I suggest rewriting Section 3 (c) to read: Soil from the site will be tested for 8-heavy metals as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) standard. To determine leachability of the metals, a Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) test will be performed on all 8-heavy metals. As well as TCLP analysis, total concentrations of the 8-heavy metals will also be determined. The RCRA requirement is a federal standard generally applied when identifying the concentration of metals in or around mining sites. These metals include: Arsenic, Lead, Barium, Mercury, Cadmium, Chromium, Silver and Selenium. It will be of value to perform these tests for two reasons. The first being it should satisfy the condition placed on the application by the City of Aspen, and secondly, knowing the heavy metal concentrations will be necessary to provide to Pitkin County should soil from the project be exported outside the Aspen city limits and disposed of in Pitkin County. Knowing the results of the testing will also aid in designing storm water detention or treatment prior to discharge onto City streets, if that were to happen. There are mechanical engineered treatment and retention options to consider to remove the risk of off site transport of contaminated soil or water. To accomplish metal concentration identification it will be necessary to design and complete a soil sampling program that will systematically test soil. I suggest contact be made with a geo tech firm to create the sampling protocol. To begin the discussion I recommend test holes by laid out using a 50-foot on center grid. One sample will be taken from a depth of 0 - 2.5 feet from the surface; a second sample will be taken from 2.5 - 5 feet; a third and final sample will be taken between 5ft - desired depth of the excavation or refusal, which ever comes first. The third sample will be a composite of at least 3-grab samples taken as the hole deepens. There will be a total of 3 samples per hole. Each sample will be tested for the metals mentioned above. When the time comes to actually design the sampling protocol, details can be worked on between those involved in the project. It will be important to have the City of Aspen approve of this recommended approach to make sure , answers to their questions can be provided. 2) Planning and Zoning Commission Reso #07- , Section 10 (a). This condition requires disturbed soil exported off site be disposed of at a licensed and authorized receiving facility. There is currently only one licensed and authorized receiving site in Pitkin County, the Pitkin County Landfill. This restriction, as written, prevents 4/3/2007 Page 2 of 2 disposal of what might be declared "clean soil" from being deposited for other beneficial uses elsewhere off site. If implemented, the soil testing protocol mentioned in section 1 above will provide needed information that can be compared to a soil management document adopted by the Pitkin County Board of Commissioners on July 11, 2006. This guidance document spells out very precisely what concentrations of heavy metals constitute contaminated vs. clean soil. The guidance was taken from a similar document created by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. I suggest rewriting this requirement to allow for testing to determine disposition of soil exported off site. For example; "Disturbed soil and solid waste may be disposed of outside of the site upon determination based on sampling that the soil qualifies as being free of contaminants considered at a level to be harmful to humans and/or the environment. If the soil contains concentrations of heavy metals in excess of the standard, disposition will be at a duly licensed and authorized receiving facility. It is important to realize that the final decision whether or not to accept contaminated soil at the Pitkin County Landfill rests with the Landfill Manager. Should he determine the soil is not welcome at the County Landfill, other licensed receiving facilities must be sought. This may be as far as Denver or even in another state. Please contact me should you have questions. As you know I will be on travel most of the first two weeks of April, but will be available from time to time by cell phone. Thank you, Tom Dunlop Environmental Consulting, Inc. Thomas S. Dunlop, REHS PO Box 6289 73 Sinclair Lane Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Phone and Fax (970) 923-4820 Cell Phone (970) 379-4028 Dunlopenv@aol.com See what's free at AOL.com. 4 jOb )0*y[44 nall z *x 12_- a O/ 1 50/~ eoft Â·* 4 Â¥41/ 19\U toll &02 1 Prpebe fun 4/3/2007 Page 1 0 f 2 Jessica Garrow From: Jennifer Hall Uhall@hollandhart.corn] Sent: Thursday, March 29,2007 4:24 PM To: Jessica Garrow Subject: RE: 1001 Ute Ave Thanks Jessica- I already spoke with Glen and let him know I would present comments on behalf of a neighbor, Richard and Susan Wells, at the hearing. Our main concern in minimizing the spead of lead from the soil during construction. We are going to request that the general conditions from Setion 12 of the Ordiance No. 24 (Series of 2006) be restated and included in the the approvals. We are also going to request that the 11@ndling techniques for toxic soils referred to in the last paragraph of Mr. Dunlop's January 27,2006 letter to David Horn Inc. be specified and incuded in any-approval resolutions and addressed in any construction management plans. 'In addtion, if there is a subdivision PUD agreement for this property, I will request that the handling techniques be set forth in such agreement. The Wells are year round Aspen residents immediately adjacent to the Applicant's property and they have several small children and pets that are all frequently outside on the Wells' property. Given the extremely high levels of lead in the soil, they have concerns about it spreading through the air and water, as there are numerous underground and above ground waterways in this area. They also have concerns about contaminated soils being transported from the property on the wheels of vehicles leaving the construction site, contaminating the roads and being carried into our water system through storm drains. The plans provided do not indicate whether below-rade space is planned for the horng, but in light of the toxic soils present, we will suggest that it is not appropriate to undergo massive excavations in this area, not only due to the danger it presents to the public, but the danger it presents to the eventual occupants of the home. Please call me if you need any clarification on these comments. Thanks. Jennifer Hall Holland & Hart LLP 600 East Main Street, Suite 104 Aspen, Colorado 81611 jhall@hollandhart.com 970-925-3476 (main) 970-925-9367 (fax) 866-851-8335 (direct fax) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE - This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain information that is confidential or legally privileged. I f you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you must not read this transmission and that any disclosure, copying, printing, distribution or use of any o f the information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner. Thank you. From: Jessica Garrow [mailto:jessicag@ci.aspen.co.us] 4/3/2007 Page 2 of 2 Sent: Thursday, March 29,2007 2:03 PM To: Jennifer Hall Subject: 1001 Ute Ave Hi Jennifer - Attached is the material for the April 3rd hearing for the 1001 Ute Ave Application. There is an attachment in the memo that I am not able to email - I will put it in our "H" pickup file for you. Let me know if you need any other information prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Cheers, adio [6Â« j te j Jessica &3 M COM-(Â»tten in 001 KERS Jessica Garrow, Planner Â· Gold YOA f n fj,-Aftl â‚¬ Community Development Dept. 463 0-9\On , 09 v j City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street d*ionc~ P ) CIA/-j Aspen, CO 81611 970.429.2780 www.aspenpitkirl.com COMmint Â«08 mt-ion on soil tul)C-Y j/-rg 016/K/% coplÂ«ne>* 4 62&~ovt 3 add rds ervt. 0 0 recifair e \014% so < \ 6-od Lj : 5 Â¥164 : D\-Gin {18Â£\ [Â£ vet 0Â¥6(d Yli> Â·Â· i)(1 584 Whin-zlpiDO 4 t?* ROf ht fli),447 019 4.4~ 63Â»4 -i\/0,~ CorEtftÂ©boo c 60. *27 4/3/2007 January 27,2007 Davis Horn, Inc. Glenn Horn 215 S. Monarch St. Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Ute Mesa PUD (Formerly 1001 Ute Ave.) Soil Management Protocol Dear Mr. Horn: At your request Dunlop Environmental Consulting, Inc has reviewed City of Aspen Ordinance 24, Series 2006, an engineering and geological report from Chen & Associates dated November 21, 1986, and a supplemental geotechnical study done by Chen- Northern, Inc dated February 23,1989. All of these documents pertain to the property being discussed, Ute Mesa at 1001 Ute Avenue in Aspen, CO. The purpose of this review is to determine compliance of Ute Mesa with City of Aspen Land Use Code section 26.435.030.C. 1. This section states: 6'If the parcel is found to contain hazardous or toxic soils, the applicant shall stabilize and revegetate the soils, or where necessary, cause them to be removed from the site to a location acceptable to the city. " The geotechnical reports include observations made that identify the presence of mine waste on the property. This is not surprising as the base of Aspen Mountain was heavily mined at the turn of the 20th century in search of precious metals. The issue before us is to describe an approved method of soil management to minimize exposure of humans to soil contaminated with heavy metals. This was realized early in the approval process of this application and the City of Aspen established compliance criteria as defined in Ordinance 24, Series 2006. Mine waste existing on the property was tested for heavy metals in both Chen reports mentioned earlier. Test results appear in both reports and will not be repeated here. It is clear that heavy metals are present in and on the soil at Ute Mesa. The resolution o f the issue is as follows: It is the intent o f the applicant to retain all soil on site during construction. This historically has been an acceptable and recommended course of action by the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department. The advantage of this strategy is it eliminates off site transport of contaminated soil. Protocol to manage soil containing hazardous material has been successfully established within the City of Aspen indirectly through management of the Smuggler Mountain Superfund Site. If, for an unknown reason soil must be removed from Ute Mesa project, Pitkin County has established prescriptive criteria for disposal of contaminated soil at the Pitkin County Landfill. Arrangements will be made with the Landfill if necessary to receive soil as required in Ordinance 24. 1 The Chen report dated February 23,1989 mentions a soil cap 2-3 feet deep may be required over contaminated soil at Ute Mesa. This criterion is left open in the report for final ruling by the "...local environmental authorities," In this case the authority is the City o f Aspen Environmental Health Department. Acceptable depth o f cover of contaminated soil has been and continues to be one foot of soil containing less than 999 parts per million (ppm) total lead. A one foot depth is also mentioned in Ordinance 24, Section 11 (g). A one foot depth of soil with less than 999 ppm lead applied to any exposed mine waste at Ute Mesa after construction will satisfy this requirement. A one foot depth has been shown to be protective of human health and the environment as exhibited in approval documents for the Smuggler Mtn. Superfund Site located across the valley from Ute Mesa. With prompt revegetation and maintenance of the one foot cap erosion by wind and water will be minimized. Off site transport of soil by natural causes can be prevented using vegetation and other traditional controls. In conclusion; with proper landscaping, attention to dust suppression techniques during construction, maintaining contaminated soil on site, properly disposing of contaminated soil off site at a designated and controlled location (Landfill) if necessary, and proper handling of soil as described in Ordinance 24, Series 2006, compliance with approval requirements can be accomplished. Contact me for further questions, Sincerely, Thomas S. Dunlop, REHS 2 90 Not,1 Phil -Waker Â· MN, eall- COW't +D YME! S ir(l - CoMEi&42*-t Â·undtm-timat)rl? j/ho *'1.9.9 eco =3.(9 Ni 1 1 be 9 -/0 eros m. parcd ruteÂ£0 61Â»n WOUU' hal 6,0 in stnd[/+ -1-,r. heN a C can-&4 -fbeÂ« Â· rvew 0'- r.* Â· Pi * connetfortd ll-ops. on Nlain 10 - 7 0 1, Ord. E-kraM- inflk dGic{,ga /a,i 6Â¥WN rO[ 011 011.1 RNI/ ,- 41 *t- 1 A Prtnt ed. 4 +M..Ir- (Ahi 0 pu) 5~11 : goArtht hrj -tb- /Act RD . 4 1/0 (y, Itl os .CrK! Nill /10 Prwi de h.lb i . ./- Â®ti Â®A Â°01-1-1-i p de,vet [7141Â·74 AD 6 *-10,0- p(IN\* bil 84 -IN 1 18< I an -Par 8 . =. /*/MOA\VA . e * tia ~mnwed Â·pum iti . I. . - + -plan 4, det# Mly, + .-I- + Nel V.J{r# 1Yea Â®ju *Dm -+jox :~ap. 4,15.-.; f\20- fo /1 6-01*&4 1, defum,49 Yrai. Mot on 181- l - 1 , Â·Â·4* pub -- 9kxt -to,Ad viot m pitperfÂ·t~ ~ *Â·Â·Â·Sobrnfilt, Padj Ar OFPmed ..' t.. - - i . - *1 an(BEGA p |Trl ke hA rc( avabllu waRi . Â· Kie rrcb-vt rid /3 ju -blind yy#]4 , 4(44 *UCL *Ded ' A\l abnet- womij .Â· -Ntlt,dit*jbn it <114!1100 7 , f>i*â€¢Act- c,10 G Qcty,19'C 1 ... 3 .02&mÂ»>1*3 Mbo - En lf/+1719 PaA> I - drivtwaq l.,R) Cu(W 60* : t-A-0 2,l - ~NOT 0 #tjach. 1 2 f.emo\N- 30' 64 unek irtope /}t;66#ad- NO &13(Â£ pili /il 120VV ' GAIN>ft of let m*FÂ¥*rdÂ£d? Â·MGVNfe 08Â« q/antÂ¥-Jtn - - Â· UY~11\10Â¥ v\Iont! PH i ON-* Q(Â¢*l ;18 â€¢ alloth o t (NO MCI f ffle,-2 on va / 6, , . A . N#P .fEE it*â‚¬/3-Fil<Lit jo : 5Â®/ 041-20 Â£11Cle 01(69 (1 2/ * - bahnct f'*Pl# m 1 -817he,1 -fl o 9-2 (ioN Â·Clewl01-0 Flon Cf) VIN YDr)(1(td *do,kreg Â· Mien] _90 -2 013 -ID- Deft â‚¬â‚¬2-- 82644 61Â·_ -Clf'ld#1414 _Pl,li offtiAL Â· haul'/1(l_ Â®CL_ 1' p.Â£ . , 17: WK.%, --- -f' 7- i.et#-2 4 4 44 thinÂ£ 00/1 Jmp On fit! 1- Cap 3 te [lact, cordom //rmb Lttabo â‚¬k f- * â‚¬ 116(20( 00 5-kern Nat-#- inpocor I /1 1 ric h Â£3) : ?00' GAP Or) ctralÂ¢9 2511 - dd RUitlat -Lejnon . . 1-,Oolic{(f (Â¥11111 -c A fol~ Un,0 _ - 1 . Aibermdi~-_J 1 2 04 90Â»~_- _934601 -rk@6 4. toiÂ· _ - UNYÂ« 10 'perml- upfb _31% m -6-Vo~ _MLIM 904\ i *64 *a _Eti-w- does Ma exced 19 6994 ILEÂ«71- Â· -18*1(du hooks& */ 101 abagj (04, 2%24 foom 8-ki - r\Lib NQi -9049 muM -'/-- NAÂ¥*mb -5Â¤ago q** -646 iâ‚¬rD dn p ro uoidth_dUo _ 7 w\\\ FAI i r\AQQh dYNOAILU~ Cult girld (Ca* - tYÂ»tai cd>O -Â·*441 rÂ»Qgt - ~4340-_Bral<AU . j - 2 -. 1 00 l o K Ave, L . 441 0,"lizirllilli r- O..~.O H (174 *nbA pL Ard SUB#411)22> h -NK E OF Pep+41-r CEL-44 ) fbrk cr~[s c re *)P OfECTE 1015rst- R*44 + 4 16 T Mt.,Er Cot#10*kj OF Ote,vq soiL Mit> 90- (A) Rtae_ O,2.3 .Al le_ CoNTÂ»'1 (N*rED> - kt_ SO (46 st*4Lf> C HusT- GE c.-Dueeâ‚¬b -lt pmjeu~- 0*pk->vff- 2)91- judvil'Â·ic Chapter 26.410 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS Sections: 26.410.010General. 26.410.020Procedures for Review. 26.410.030Administrative checklist. 26.410.040Residential design standards. 26.410.010 General. A. Purpose. The purpose o f the following design standards is to preserve established neighborhood scale and character, and to ensure that Aspen's streets and neighborhoods are public places conducive to walking. The standards do not prescribe architectural style, but do require that each home, while serving the needs of its owner, contribute to the streetscape. Neighborhood character is largely established by the relationship between front facades of buildings and the streets they face. By orienting buildings parallel to the street and maintaining a certain consistency in front setback patterns. there is interaction between residents and passersby and the built environment. The area between the street and the front door of the home is a transition between the public realm of the neighborhood and the private life of a dwelling. Low fences and hedges may be used to delineate the edge of a property, but it is important not to close off views of the front lawn and house. Certain elements of the front fagade of a house are particularly important components of neighborhood character. Front porches provide outdoor living space and animation to the streetscape, and one story entryways provide an appropriate domestic scale for a private residence. Street-facing windows can establish a hierarchy of spaces with larger, formal windows denoting public areas and smaller ones suggesting private rooms. Acknowledgement of the context that has been established by the existing built environment is important to protecting the uniqueness of the town. Avoiding building materials which have no relevance to Aspen's history or climate helps to meet this goal, as does avoiding a significant overshadowing of small homes by larger structures. Finally, along with creating homes which are architecturally interesting and lively, the pedestrian nature of a neighborhood can be further enhanced by reducing conflicts between people and automobiles, and by making alleys an attractive place to walk. Parking areas are to be concentrated to the rear or side of each residence. Secondary structures and accessory dwelling units, located along the alleys and inspired by the tradition o f outbuildings in Aspen, are encouraged. City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. Part 400, Page 5 B. Applicability. This section applies to all residential development in the City of Aspen requiring a building permit, except for residential development within the R-15B zone district. 1. Only the following standards shall apply to multi-family housing: Section 26.410.040(A)(1), building orientation, Section 26.410.040(C)(1)(a), access or, if not applicable, Section 26.410.040(C)(2)(b), garage setback and 26.410.040(D), building elements, as outlined in said section for multi-family buildings. 2. Parcels located within and partially within the Aspen Infill Area (see Section 26.104, Definitions) shall be required to comply with all of the standards. 3. Parcels not located in the Aspen Infill Area are required to comply with all the standards except the following: Section 26.410.040(B)(1), secondary mass, Section 26.410.040(D)(3)(b), non-orthogonal windows and Section 26.410.040(E)(2), inflection, in its entirety. ,40 Parcels with no street frontage and parcels with front yard setbacks at least ten (10) feet vertical* above Â»street'< grade -shall be exempt ' from the following requirements: Section' 26.410.040(A)(1), building orientation and Section 26.410.040(D), building elements, in its entirety. V 5. Residential units within mixed-use buildings shall be exempt from the ~, 1 requirement o f this Chapter 26.410 in its entirety. C. Application. An application for residential development shall consist of an application for a Development Order as may be required by the Community Development Director, Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, or City Council, pursuant to Section 26.304.030, and an application for "Residential Design Standards" review, pursuant to Section 26.410.020. D. Exemptions. No application for a residential development order shall be exempt from the provisions of this section unless the Planning Director determines that the proposed development: 1. Is an addition or remodel o f an existing structure that does not change the exterior of the building; or 2. Is a remodel of a structure where alterations proposed change the exterior of the building but are not addressed by any o f the Residential Design Standards; or 3. Is an application only for the erection of a fence, and the application meets Section 26.410.040.A.3. E. Definitions. Unless otherwise indicated, the definitions of words used in these regulations shall be the same as the definitions used in Chapter 26.150 of the Aspen Municipal Land Use Code. In addition, the following definitions shall apply: City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. Part 400, Page 6 Street. A way or thoroughfare, other than an alley, containing a public access easement and used or intended for vehicular, bicycle or pedestrian traffic. The term "street" shall include the entire area within a right o f way. For the purposed of Section 26.410 street shall also include private roads, streets and access easements serving more than one (1) parcel. 26.410.020 Procedures for Review. A. Determination of Applicability. Applicability shall be determined at the time of building permit submittal. The applicant may request a pre-application conference to determine as to whether the proposed proj ect is exempt from the requirements of this chapter. B. Determination of Consistency. Consistency with the Residential Design Standards shall be determined at the time of building permit review. The applicant may request a pre-application conference to determine consistency with the requirements of this chapter. C. Appeal of Adverse Determination. li an application is found to be inconsistent with any item of the Residential Design Standards, the applicant may either amend the application or seek a variance as set forth below. D. Variances. 1. Administrative Variances. The applicant may seek an administrative variance for not more than three (3) of the individual requirements. All applicant who desires a variance from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate, and the Community Development Director shall find that the variances, if granted, would: a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the director may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the director feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or, b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. The Community Development Director shall provide the Planning and Zoning Commission an annual report of approved administrative variances. 2. Variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040, which do not meet Section 26.410.020(D) above may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, if the project is subject to the requirements of Section 26.415. All applicant who desires to City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. Part 400, Page 7 consolidate other requisite land use reviews by the Historic Preservation Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Planning and Zoning Commission may elect to have the variance application decided by the board or commission reviewing the other land use application. An applicant who desires a variance from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate, and the deciding board shall find that the variance, if granted, would: a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or, b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. (Ord. No. 20 -2005, Ord. 52-2003, Â§5) 26.410.030 Administrative checklist. The Director of Community Development shall create a checklist for use by applicants and community development staff in identifying the approvals and reviews necessary for issuance of a development order for an application that is consistent with the Residential Design Standards. 26.410.040 Residential design standards. 3[~~*ITE DESIGN. The intent of these design standards is to encourage residential buildings that address the street in a manner which creates a consistent "fagade line" and defines the public and semi-public realms. In addition, where fences or dense landscaping exist, or are proposed, it is intended that they be used to define the boundaries of private property without eliminating the visibility of the house and front yard from the street. 1. .Building orientation. The' front facades of all principalsres shall bepitallel to the street. On comer Fri 1 291. 047 0/ lots, both street fkmgjpcades must be parallel to the intersecting streets. On cufÂ¢ilinear streets, the front facade Em__1 j No. 1 49' / / of all str~td@s shall be parallel=tÂ«Â®e tangent of the Yes. Yes. X~ midpojarof the arc of the street. Parcas. as outlined in S*tiGn 26.410.010(B)(4) shall be exempt from this requirement. 1 City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. Part 400, Page 8 R-Im One element, such as a bay window or dormer, placed at a front corner of the building may be on a diagonal from the street if desired. 2. Build-to lines. On parcels *lotsÂ»-60~ ~ 1&*Â·th~_15,000 square feet, arl@ast 60% of , the front faÂ¢ade. shall-tyâ‚¬lvithin 5 feet of the ' minimumjrontilrbsetback line. On corner ~ ~] 3-~EPI I ~ CO- sitgrthi-s standard shall be met on the frontage - ~- WIth the longest block length. PBPohQunay be r-11 used meet the 60% standard. Yes. NO. Yes. 3.-0"~ Fencei Fences, hedgerows, and planter boxes shall not be more than forty-two inches (42") high, measured from natural grade, in all areas forward of the front facade of the house. Man-made berms are prohibited in the front yard set back. Fence, yes &1Elll[tlEII...ll@.lÂ®[EQ.LE[1 littl Fence, no B.'94 BUILDING FORM. The intent of the following building form standards is to respect the scale of Aspen's historical homes by creating new homes, which are more similar in their massing, by promoting the development of accessory units off of the city alleys, and by preserving solar access. 1. Secondary Mass. All new single family and duplex structures shall locate at least ten (10%) percent of their total square footage above grade in a mass which is completely detached from the principal building, or linked to it by a subordinate connecting element. This standard shall only apply to parcels within the Aspen ** Infill Area pursuant to Section 26.410.010 (B)(2). h---. --- Accessory buildings such as garages, sheds, and accessory dwelling units are examples of appropriate < uses for the secondary mass. City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. Part 400, Page 9 A subordinate linking element for the purposes of secondary mass shall be defined as an '~ element not less than ten (10) feet in width and ten (10) feet in length with a plate height of not more than nine (9) feet. Linked pavilions six (6) feet in width and ten (10) feet in length shall be exemption from Section 26.575.020 (A)(8). I.~IL PARKING, GARAGES AND CARPORTS. The intent of the following parking, garages, and carport standards is to minimize the potential for conflicts between pedestrian and automobile traffic by placing parking, garages, and carports on alleys, or to minimize the presence of garages and carports as a lifeless part of the streetscape where alleys do not exist. 1. For all residential that have access from an alley or private road, the following standards shall apply: Alley ~~9--J~ \K a. Parking, garages, and carports shall be ~ ~~ '- ~ k--i I b. If the garage doors are visible from a T accessed from an alley or private road. No. c Yes. E-1 i stall doors, or double-stall doors street or alley, then they shall be single- designed to appear like single-stall I ~ ~_ 1 F doors. 7 \ 1 1, Street c. If the garage doors are not visible from a street or alley, the garage doors may be either single stall or normal double stall garage doors. 2. Fot all residential uses that have access only from a public street, the following ' standards shall be met: * A.* On the street facing facade(s), the width of the L*A '~ 2 2 ~1Â· living area on the first floor shall be at least five (5) feet greater than the width of the garage or - 9 - CE carport. 0-1 -4 P-),DE'â‚¬ -1 b.' The front facade of the garage or the front most - ~ supporting column of a carport shall be set back ' at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front most wall o f the house. i,!'1'0 ~ 'llE]rh-k~ 0 6 Plo / 6 1 - i - City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. t- x +3 X. 5Lf Part 400, Page 10 c. On lots of at least fifteen thousand - (15,000) square feet in size, the garage or ./ . / carport maybe forward of the front facade ,Â¢57;N 1 r.-EF'\ \ 518:14- 1 of the house only if the garage doors or 4 / carport entry are perpendicular to the \.3~33> / street (side-loaded). t.Â«I f \<f d: When the floor of a garage or carport is above or below the street level, the -7 1#*- driveway cut within the front yard setback shall not exceed two (2) feet in depth, - '6fâ‚¬13.1 measured from natural grade. e. The vehicular entrance width of a garage or carport shall not be greater than E. M twenty-four (24)feet. ~~.2 4~, .. ~ Â·4Â£-~ 24' .- f. If the garage doors are visible from a public street or alley, then they shall be single-stall doors, or double-stall doors designed .to appear like single-stall doors. D. BUILDING=ELEMENTS.-_The._intent_ok=the-followifiguilding elements standards is to ensure that each Tesidential-5uiflding has street-IWGirg-architectural details and elements, which provide human scale to the facade, enhance the walking experience, and reinforce-local building traditions. 1. Â·, Street oriented entrance and principal window. All single-family homes and dupbxps, except as outlined in Section 26.41~06(B)(4) shall hk*.*street-oriented entrance andtstreet facing i i Z i i i i ~ principal window. *fulti-family units/Â§hall have at least ili!1111 ilililil one street-oriented entranc<for,eVery four (4) units, and Iliilili front units must have a st~cian~ipal window. Corner Lot ilitilit / L-,- Iii lilli Illiilli On corner lots, ent~:iei~~d principal windowhhould face whichever stre#has a greater block length. This standard - Block Length X shall be satitfied if all of the following conditions are met: City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. Part 400, Page 11 a.(,The entry door sh~;!01-,face the street and 1 + C 4no more thg'ten feet (10'0") back Lar r..#- fromfitmost Wall of the building. RGÂ»dZ 87 1 Entry 5%067+shall not be taller than eight -232@2- f*/ i -7.. / / -7792 b. A colbred ...Â©gtry/Arch of fifty (50) or more square feet, with a minimum depth of *Â·00*et.-(6'), shall be part of the front facade. Entry porches and canop~shall not begtre than one stop, in height. mETRE]m~~ E B c. A hired-f;lciil~~~~ncipal window 49% requiresthlt- a signititgt window or 8-: rip 11 I ./ Ty 4 windows face street. - 2. First story el;Meut. All residentia~kuildings shall have a first-story street-facing ( element the width of whteb comprisdat least twenty (20) percent of the building's overall width and the depth 84~p}Ms at least six (6) feet from the wall the first-story element is projecting from. Asspming that the first story element includes interior living space, the height of the first,story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A firstytory element Ing be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck,horch, or enclosed 2rca) shall not be allowed over the first story element, howeve~4cessible space over the remaining first story elements on the front fagade shall not be precluded. 3. Windows. a. Street facing wfows shall 0ot span through the area where a ~cond floor level would typically exist, which is bg~ween nine (9) and ,>~'' - )2 twelve feet (12) above t})4 finished first floor. For interior staircases,jtisineasurement will .... 11 / 1 be made from the firs*landiAJf one exists. A 12' 9. transom window above the Ahâ‚¬n entry is exempt from this *kndard. 1 1 City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. Part 400, Page 12 b. No hlore than one..mon-orthogonal r- window"shall be allowed on each facade Bff -i i of the buildiI* A single non-orthogonal Orthogonal ~ ~I I r.,4,1 window in.a gable end may be divided *Em/:Ek with multions and still be considered one noe non-offhogonal Window. The Non-Orthogonal (4 rpÂ®irement shall only apply to Section 9 6 26-410-010(B)(2). \ 4. LightwellkÂ«All areaways;li~twells and/or stairwells on the street{aging facade(s) of a building shall be entirely recessâ‚¬3 4~tr~e frontmost wall of the building. -272~illimill'-f..%--- Yes L - El=J T . ~ No E.~CONTEXT. The intent of the following standards is to reinforce the unique { character of Aspen and the region by drawing upon Aspen's vernacular architecture and neighborhood characteristics in designing new structures. r 1. Materials. The following standards must be met: a. The quality of the exterior materials and details and their application shall be consistent on all sides of the building. 11 1~3 Stone yes Stone no City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. Part 400, Page 13 b. Materials shall be used in ways that are - true to their characteristics. For instance ' stucco, which is a light or non-bearing material, shall not be used below a heavy , material, such as stone. ~ 1 / 1 1 . 1/.-.- , * Yes No c. Highly reflective surfaces shall not be used as extenor materials. 2.~ Inflection. The following standard must be met for parce;sÂ·~<4~~ are 6,000 square feet or over AN!<~outlined in Section 26.410.010(B)(2): a. La one (1) story building exists livÂ¢4 adj RMft to the subj ect site, then ~ike new 4 ' x - construÂ®on must step down to ?Re story in @@Â® height alon~their common lot lige. If there are af Pkn one story buildings on both sidEs of the subject - - site, the applicknt may ch904 the side toward which to inflect. \ / ( A one story building,d~bbe defined as follows: A one story buil*Ag shalllean a structure, or portion of a st;xicture, where th*re is only one floor of fullyisable living space, 11 least 12 feet - wide acrggk the street frontage. Thii. standard r EME 1 shall by/met by providing a one stor261â‚¬ment 1,11[1111'11[1' 1.2. -- w h~p}f' is also at least twelve (12) feet %*le across the street frontage and one story tall k I , Iz' 6 12' Â¤t far back along the common lot line as the \-- adj acent building is one story. Ord. No. 20-2005; Ord. 52-2003 Â§7,8) City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. Part 400, Page 14 801--ad~orevff 1~l,lm' Larry Kumpost To: Planner Jessica Garrow Date: 3/22/2007 Time: 3:39:12 PM Page 1 of 2 ~~CSIMILE COVER PAG ..... Planner Jessica Garrow From: Larry Kumpost ..:Plt: 3/22/2007 at 3:39:10 PM Pages: 2 (including Cover) Subject : Ute Mesa PUD: Confirm Garage and Auto Court Elevations Jessica: Jack Miller asked me to send you domething that was cleaner and easy to read to replace the information he faxed the other day. Please let me know if this is OK. Thanks Larry Lawrence C. Kumpost, Architect (970) 626-4040 lark@ouraynet.com From: Larry 1<umpost To Planner Jessica Garrow Date: 3/22/2007 Time: 3Â·39.12 PM Page 2 of 2 Thursday, March 22, 2007 1:58 PM Dave Anderson (970) 625-4255 p.01 WW-- 3---w--- v 9 r ift / P m 8-09 / 00 b / 5/ ---17- - \1 e O 4.91 %-2 b-Â«al=222- /..2 -/ /N --\ 90 + 17 / \ L + i 19 2 -21 ELEV h / Mr,Â·HAN;CAL fr---maA,QOHÂ«*AGE- 4.~.4 \ --1 1] 16 31 F CyÂ·El_ 09 5%4 Ft d,~ 4 461 370,1, 2/\2 0-- - 1 ~12%= 194% ---4. ,/--L- 1 - 1 \ / 44- -Â«,1 #-3 4-7 0Sr:37<- 1 --Fi% -0:%%.// - OlD > ~S; ,//1~ /5155~ f\7 , 0~-, Â»g , -~,3;r~ 4 -~ -fl - , "=Are.... ./.' 2 I.. 1% 41- \ \41 i 11 '%, i 244 -7 ; 'r.4,~ 4 ~4 7 Ki 01 NE 1 , <. 0 6 1 &, m (P>0 \2 - / TENNy COURT ELEVA TION 79 75 ~~~~ u 8(90 0 coy - 9 C .490-8 \-/ 1 1001 UTE AVE r SUBDIVSION \ \\./ rgeâ€ž- 0-9,19 1\ 'Ii,'20 07 06:39p Jack Miller 970 927 8899 p,1 %::I ... JACK MILLER & ASSOCIATES ... .. JIVI ARCHITECTURE/PLANNING ; ,r 1 . RO. BOX 4285 ASPEN,CO 81612 970Â·927Â·95137ELE 970Â·927Â·8899 FAX jmiller@rof.net DateÂ·. 9 ~ 1 4 _/9 2 Attention: From: 3â‚¬55 too G auouj Name Jack Miller + Name Company, . ' . Office_ . .. __ _ Fax Fax (970) 9274829 Phone . Phone. 970/227-9513 Subject 04 lAAe 14 , Message: Ail-acke_<4 Clk pLOV~ U,hiCIA lÂ¥1(11 catec . . -tte 94-v-aqe floor 5-lab & f 116-1 -anA O- U 41 w Of,6.4 4 Vive â‚¬ + 11 <51. . Th W- 15- <MaN fcalÂ£* *7 f--A-* 1Â¥1 bul- 1 Cah- ? 44- 9 14 'r 'U. â‚¬ A tel- 14 LfU 1/\242 J Le-1 14,9 0410,3 I.fi /1 rji j IAL, u-â‚¬ a 41 .1 OVA,4* lueoh raL ~(( 0604 dtift.vâ‚¬Anital ~ .. You should receive pages(s), including this cover sheet. If you do not receive all of the pages, please call (970) 925-3476. Original will not follow. Regular Mail Â· Certified Mail Original will follow by: Federal Express Messenger 8 1 j2 .l y 1. SCFiED[li-E r. I 1 IALL M Â£1.2, RT NOICS - 'E OMERS =117Â£ PN.T ./ DEt*G 14! .41 */ ODERS d *L AT Ellf PARKNG 01}66 TEÂ»IS Â¢O~r[ 1,1,11 Zar CU.1,Â«4 *,LONG 01#'f efÂ·m e.4/7,1861 or)Â£,6 2 U. 7,1 @tut W Â»WiLL CIDGE 2.33 1041 [*01 ,â‚¬,R wwÂ£ M t.,less,â€¢pâ‚¬ FLAns OPED= Dr TALL EX07,Â£4, GAM,E. SU 1.4~50*'t MA,5 071Â·Ets 1.JJ' ALI,~ &41 04 / El- I i---. - \ i ' 1.... . - -- ~'Â· PROPERTY LINE. ... 'Â·uâ€ž,:g~ , i ",2 )>I- r..,A f.- ... 1-,Â·.5 Â·-,1 82 3 / ~ 892 Liu -11 r 1 7 11 0== 4 e I \ - P. ./ L B i :di - b. 1\ , j Al~ ~ - I \F / 11.1 t..4//, Lu ' 8-42 (94 0 - ' DUÂ¥,N DY Â· f. 9 kee f i .,0 c. Ck DA W Cl- ro .4,1 , r .1 F \ 1 I 7- , 4.- 2% i \to. \111) : 0 1% 2 --.- 1989 -f-.... --. m - - 8 ! te= 7 ME m 0111 t'' V 1 800 ' I. U. '~3 \ .) 2- .7.â€ž 1 1 ./jeffÂ¢- 1 . .9.4 . r-N , S =991 '.1 1 1 9.1), a - % \ - '.'. 9 3 9.44 DAÂ·rE ' ,%& -4 . 03/07/07 j - Â» 141 9 - -- - 1 el* - 1% v 1 REVISIONJ .. 21 . P Â· Ch 9 + T a , /1 TENNIS COURT ' i - :0, , 1 i 1 & +/- 7975 6 . SCALE 1 J i , '. . AS SHOWN 1 . / t 1 1 ' TRAWD,G / ' -9 I t / / b RETAINING 161/0--1-1/J %1 1 Â· WALL 4# t.e PLAN 46 - , 0. 0 2, 1, \ 93- PROPERT*, ONE. - Â·-- Â· E9 - , \\ \\ 3. 4 - . 1. -4 rÂ« l ' 0 . o fu.Â· - 9916-p- , . - / h \ 4 - 7950 5 '/ E-Â£--- 46 / 2, 16. L i C.600 2 I /: --1 f I Mai- 20 07 06:39p Jack Miller 970 927 8899 5 0209 ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: i (IDi l %1-0, A jo , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: A-PY 6 \ 7.3 , zoo.37 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) ~,<1661 Crl (30/4 80 (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code ill the following manner: D~ Publication of-notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of generai uit lul~Liull 1.11 U.la Ul L.y' 01 IÂ·-13.pell a L 11~,10 L ultual <l/) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice. By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproofmaterials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not , p less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , ,200 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(lE)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners ofproperty within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property pwners shall be thost on the current tax records ofPitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing..4 copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing ofnames and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. r ~.14Â«1~ 0/1,/DCÂ«_,2 1 *gnature The fomgging "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me thiiJ23day of -:71(at-e>f,uloâ‚¬P ..30255 fca- 410;rroti) WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: r)411 2 37 oot '98. pi--LU %49 2-1 -0/,u /Motary Public / JA Ir X~, i LOTHIAN *j ATTACHMENTS: Th' \ .& 00 9 COPY OF THE PUBLICATION f * CF COL-61 PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL â€¢ PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 1001 UTE AVE, 8040 GREENUNE REVIEW, I PUD OTHER AMENDMENT, AND RESIDENTIAL I 1 DESIGN STANDARD REVIEW -- PUBLIC ~ HEARING NOTICE JS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing I will be held on Tuesday, April 3,2007, at a meet- ing to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Ptan- ning and Zoning Commission. Sister Cities Room, City Hall, 130 S. Ga:ena St., Aspen, to review an application for 9 40 Greenline, PUD Other Amendment, and Fasidential Design Standards I Review at 1001 Ute Avenue. The subject property , I is legally described as MINE, 1741 MINE NAME I ONE THOUSAND O~'E PERCENT: 100 ACRES: 0 1 DESC: ALL SURFâ€žCE & MINERAL RIGHTS I DESC: SECTION 18-10-84 WEST OF THE 6TH, of I~ the City of Aspen. For further information, contact Jessica Garrow at the City ol Aspen Community Development Dept., 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429-2780, (or jessicag@ci.aspen.co.us). Â§(Bulit Kilig06-Ghair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on March 18,2007 ~ City of Aspen Account (221893) A' 1 . 4-#T,hs&441 .â‚¬*L. A.. , ti 4.4, 441:.*bt,Li'.fe"e-. i Â«44 . =Â¤ - ;'*4*W~â€ž 6>, 2.2. r=':04,tÂ·- D . 3.4':*456*1 fiE.Sila~e ~ E-2&06*,i*y,j,a>,at A... 0 - -4; t. 7...1 412 >t: ..9 ,Â¥177.- -7-, 42'X * ~ -*FtÂ·fÂ»'; .. . . I 7 f.: ?#6 I I ,--dici f PUBLIC TICE DATE TUEBÂ·-PRIL ~. . /,t' 1 TIME 9,30, '. 1001 - , (Lily Ha// 5,:te.f-C;Â·eiej to,Â« PLACE 130 S. Go r.r:.'.25Â¢. URPOSE 7b R 6/fe a Rego>31 for ICÂ©; UTE-8. O ' '' -: ' (,REENLT.NE FEUI 2, POD ' '' OHet Amp.nolment + e_ imt/al De : 6 'Â· . Ret..4Â£(0 2 37 jEr/V LAne Gisteor+, CT obes'b . 1 Â£1 1 , R :W"/ 4 IN Râ€¢â€¢r'-N I.O,/1Aci 'â€¢ Â£4 A , 4,-S' -1 .11 IN W Al 704 '0 .27 1 ..r -- 4 E 1 1 },4 I 4%.* te& 40'2*--Â·'40 1 '.% .115: f '4 ~4:23Wit~ I ./,46....:'42Â£24 ~ 78, tew.7, r., :QFS , . 48 'tle'le'Wir I ... Â· 2-6, 2. ...2 ., -.. . I. . - p -- (-3 i . I ' $ i L.tar 4 t'., 42... '*.ff f 5,5 1 : 9 91-24=*2 i *Ne.-4=-/,Effija k %,â‚¬, ,â€¢â‚¬ --f'. i ,4-=262-11-,ip..2~ y*, ~Â¢5 Â·.m . . '3Â» 44 944,64 A 3â‚¬04=-4# :' _ 1 1 '.,2.t~ 4J&5 -4 Â°HAN- i \ ...' i <1-4 4, ziCHMENT 7 A.0439AV' C OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SE U UN 6.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ~ 00 1 ul -r- e- \Auâ‚¬ A ut. â‚¬_ , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: HIGIOn .200_< STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, G \enn \-to,A (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publicatyg,4 notice: By the publigidfi in the legal notice sestialG~an official paperpr a paper of general cirâ‚¬Wglfon in the City of Asep'stleast fifteen (15) ~pfs pnor to the public~.dz. A copy of the publiGation is attached hereto. 4 Posting of notice: By posting o f notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the I9 day of Mc~-rt,k , 200 1, to and including the date and time of ihe public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtajped@rom the Commul*ty Development Departmenty.Â¥Â¢hich contains thÂ©Rformation describe*ifi~ Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of}be'Aspen Land Use C 3. At least fifteen95) days prior to 40â‚¬- the public hearin~iotice was hand delj>4ed or mailed by fiyafclass postage 04 1-1-kck ed prepaid U.S.jpdil to all owners of ~Aerty within three h~fdred (300) feet of the property 0ject to the developrynt application. The I}*fnes and addresses of propeN'owners shall be thosp/6n the current tax regAs of Pitkin County as they apppared no more than SiNÂ¥'(60) days prior to th~,<late of the public hearing. A )43 of the owners and governmental agencies s6 noticed is aitached hereto. (continued on next page) - . Rezoning or text cmc* u Â·.:. 'fihenever the offici*zoning district map is in any way to be chaggid or amended incidental t*02 as part of a general revision of this Title, or Mieneve< the text of this Titlyfs to be amended, whether,sdi; revision be 9*~~ by repeal o f this Title ~Fenactment of a new land,d@ regulation,pr otherwise, the requiremprt of an accurate survey Aor other sufficier}0egal description of, and *6 notice to and listing of,4-nes and addreSges of owners of real properfy in the area of the p]906sed change shall be Â¥4ived. However, the prop~ed zoning *tap shall,bâ‚¬ available for public in~ection in the planning yency durin'Â»A blising4 hours fry fifteen (15) days prior to the public heari~on such amencknen t~.~ U Signature ~ ~ The foregoing "Affidavit ofNotice" was acknowledged before me this .4/day of (6,/ / , 200-2, by (,lenn ll/rn WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL 5 5' JANET \ ~ My commission expires: A i LYNN i M ~ ;t RACZAK i # (~2*Ab L ./12 V 14.. N~I[ry Public :BR UY Cenrmston Exptres,gL- ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF â„¢E OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL b â‚¬ State of Colorado ) ) SS AFFIDAVIT OF JANET RACZAK County of Pitkin ) I, GLENN HORN, Affiant, being of lawful age and duly sworn upon my oath, do depose and state as follows: 1. A true and correct copy of the Public Notice for the 1001 Ute Ave, 8040 Greenline Review, PUT Other Amendment, and Residential Design Standard Review land use application, was placed in the U.S. Mail, first-class postage prepaid, to all those named in the list provided by the City of Aspen GIS Office (attached) on the J 6- day of March, 2007. FURTHER, AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. fbL E--- a f 1-LiD -7 GLENN HORN I)ate The foregoing instrument was acknowledged and signed before me onl~*bud-R~ , 2007 by Glenn Horn. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: 10/6/2008 *., L 4/ ~OTARY PUBLICM Uanet L. Raczak ~92:~ . 215 S. Monarch St 106 ...0.-0 f Â· 3 Â·.ft'j~9.i Aspen CO 81611 930 :z 7 0 0..Le ii&iNc(.,3 Tn uÂ· %-d z> |#u pubre-t N 19 y I. PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 1001 UTE AVE, 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW, PUD OTHER AMENDMENT, AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD REVIEW -- PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, April 3, 2007, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to review an application for 8040 Greenline, PUD Other Amendment, and Residential Design Standards Review at 1001 Ute Avenue. The subject property is legally described as MINE, 1741 MINE NAME: ONE THOUSAND ONE PERCENT: 100 ACRES: 0 DESC: ALL SURFACE & MINERAL RIGHTS DESC: SECTION 18-10-84 WEST OF THE 6TH, of the City of Aspen. For further information, contact Jessica Garrow at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept., 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429-2780, (orjessicag@ci.aspen.co.us). s/Ruth Kruger, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on March 18, 2007 City of Aspen Account . ImpressÂ·oe antit<.arrage et h sachage rapi , ery.com \*I AVEr,rt'i.Â© 5160Â® 091!xez le gabaft 5160Â® 1 462 -C. ,-AVERY L.-- 31 14 STEW Â·4 4 ; 114 Â¢. .3 u & EVOART SArd@JEL P STOPEK RICHARD E 8 JLL E 6311 VIA VENEE k NORVH 124 CHARLES ON PK POE. Â· .Â· METAIRIE, LA -70005 DELRAY BEACH, FL 334 34 GYPSÂ·.- r .., J ,Â·437 TATEM F , RANDOLPH 111 & SUE TAWGi N JCE 1.4, 4 TEN TEN UTE H O ASSOC API-4,.-EY 19 UTE PL 129 SEA .. 0 â‚¬ .A' E 5,0 W Â·y 1 2373 ASPEN, CO 81611 MANASCL Â·Â· . 02.' Â¢9 30 APPER. OC 81612 ; udEY ROBERT W VANDERLIP HENMK N VANTILBURG JOHANNES & JOANNE 41 CHERRY HILLS FARM DR 133 RIVER RD 225 ARIZONA AVE PH ENGLEWOOD, CO 80110-7113 COS COB, CT 06807 SANTA MONICA, CA 90401-1243 WAGNER PAUL L & DOROTHY H WATCHMAKER LINDA L 95% WATERS MICHAEL A & ADELAIDE ANN 3480 MIDDLEBELT RD 4527 BRUCE AVE PO BOX 8237 W BLOOMFIELD, MI 48323 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55424-1122 ASPEN, CO 81612 WEKSTEIN TRUST WELLS RICHARD A & SUSAN T WELSCH SUSAN F TRSTE 100 BELVIDERE ST UNIT 9A 970 POWDER LN 10 UTE PLACE BOSTON, MA 02199 ASPEN, CO 81611-2105 ASPEN, CO 81611 WERNST INC WHEELER THOMAS R & PATSY C WHITAKER PATRICIA D TRUST 8639 DESERT DUSK CT NE 2120 AUSTIN AVE SUITE 100 1910 PINE ST ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87113-2354 ROCHESTER HILLS, MI 48309 ST LOUIS, MO 63103 WILKERSON WILLIAM WOODWARD TERRY ZAINO BONIFACE A & ALISON H 3000 NE 30TH PL 3662 BRIDGEPOINTE 876 PARK AVE #4 SOUTH FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33306 OWENSBORO, KY 42303 NEW YORK, NY 10021 ZLN RESIDENTIAL TRUST C/O CONSTANTINE D GEORGES 701 EDWARDS AVE ELMWOOD, LA 70123 AblaAV-09-0081 Â®09 L5 31Vldl/\I31 Â®baAV asn Â®09 1 5 Â®AllaAV ~ LUO)*JaAEMAAM - Bullu!.td aag a6pnws pue luer Impressic"28 antibeurr/99 fet 6 540,age :a- I'llill/ - Â·nvia JetÂ¥.fc ni ~ AVERYÂ® 51600 ' Utilisez k iabarit 516043 19; 49Â· 3-AVEff REICH MELV, -2 1 TRUST RICE MARGARET A R;CHTER .ALERIE ARDEN 4609 SEASHORE OP 13912 FLINT 6214 N 24-TH ST NEWPORT BEACH, C'A 926S3 OVERLAND PARK, KS 66221 PARADÂ· 33 VALLEY, AZ 85253 R ",>c.ABERG HENRY A & DOROTHY RODAN FAMILY LIVIA . ROSE FAMILY TRUST s 101 44 CENTRAL PET CORP 614 LASALLE AVE #442 240 S BRISTOL AVE NE N CHARLES 22ND FL OAKLAND, CA 94611 LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 5.TIMORE, MD 21201 SANDERS RICHARD & JOANNE SANDITEN EDWARD STANLEY SCHALDACH NANCY 8 PARKWAY DR PO BOX 11566 2494 S OCEAN BLVD #J-8 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80110 ASPEN, CO 81612 BOCA RATON, FL 33432 SCHARLIN HOWARD R & GLORIA G SCHIRMER LESLIE M SCHWARZ JOHN H 10 EDGEWATER DR APT 4A 4100 E QUINCY AVE CALTECH 452-48 CORAL GABLES, FL 33133-6962 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80110 PASADENA, CA 91125 SCHWEPPE DAVID P 85% SCOTT JOSEPH A SEAMAN SAUNDRA L SCHWEPPE VALERIE G REV TRUST 15% PO BOX 5941 8505 ARLINGTON BLVD #210 8435 NW 43RD LN DENVER, CO 80217 FAIRFAX, VA 22031 OCALA, FL 34482 SEWELL BEVERLY JEAN & RALPH SEIFERT COLORADO TRUST SHAPIRO CYNTHIA R TRUST BYRON 2421 HAMILTON DR 5704 DEVILLE DR 884 QUAIL RUN DR AMES, IA 50014 EDINA, MN 55436 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81505-8608 SHIELDS VIVIAN S TRUST SHIRK JAMES A SHULMAN ROBERT A PO BOX 1555 PO BOX 1549 132 NASSAU ST #812 GULF BREEZE, FL 32562-1555 BLOOMINGTON, IL 61702 NEW YORK, NY 10038 SIEGEL LOIS H QPRT SILVERMAN MARK J & NANCY C SIMMONS LEONARD & MARGARET 3 GROVE ISLE DR #1109 7404 BROOKVILLE RD PO BOX 54 MIAMI, FL 33133 CHEVY CHASE, MD 20815 ASPEN, CO 81612 SIMPKINS B DOUGLAS & JOHNETTE SIMON JEROME M & DONNA SINAI ALLEN TETLOW 1294 ROCKRIMMON RD 16 HOLMES RD 2921 AVALON PL STAMFORD, CT 06903 LEXINGTON, MA 02173 HOUSTON, TX 77019 SMART EDWIN J SLOANE RICHARD A & CAROLYN J SNYDER JAMES DANIEL & LINDA RAE C/O R L STEENROD JR & ASSOC 124 RIGHTERS MILL RD 1225 BRAEBURN 2009 MARKET ST GLADWYNE, PA 19035 FLOSSMORE, IL 60422 DENVER, CO 80205-2022 tur,Aw-no-Ang-I 909kS 31VldIAI31 eXJ a Av aSn LdHisez le gabarit 5160Â® -f,:v:*ff.95Â¥1~ 1-800-GO-AVERY Ut.1 I . IVARSi ANG St i:-,AN L -11CCORMICK ROGER f FAMÂ© TRUST Â£91-ARNETT MARTIN J & MARCE. 1 8 lRUSTER JUR Â·R TRUSTAGREEMENT 83% â‚¬08 EMERSON AVE .etÂ·10 10 RTC}-14~. ET MCCORMICK MARY E 34:%' ALLIANCE, NE 69301 CHICAGO M 6.-310 FO BO,w 3 4 532 OvadS# RO, RY 42304 MCCOY TRUST MCG' Â· Â·. r PHILIP C & MARY ANN MEHL 4 :R ET 3485 S SILVER SPRINGS RD 33 P:. Â· '- .,.-7 ST 350 W :57 CH 31 LAFAYETTE, CA 94549 Malv! - LES-"ER, MA 01944 NEW Ye - t, 7137, Nv 00' 3 MERRILLS DAPHNE ; E-; C J) REALTY LTD - . fill- MEYER HO\'i . THE E WING TYNINGHAME HOUSE . 3 Â·11 . BUILDING 2660 MIDDLEGUO LK DUNBAR E LOTHIAN 333 W LOOP N STE 410 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 SCOTLAND EH42 1XW, HOUSTON, TX 77024 MEYER WILLIAM J 2/3 MOEN DONNE P & ELIZABETH A MORRIS TRUST 1000 CAMPBELL CT 8 CABALLEROS RD 906 FRANKLIN LAKE BLUFF, IL 60044-1300 ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 RIVER FOREST, IL 60305 ORR ROBERT L FAMILY PARTNERSHIP NUTTER GEORGE ERNEST & LYNDSAY OWEN BILLYE HOWELL LLLP 223 HANNA RD 3535 GILLESPIE #303 500 PATTERSON RD TORONTO ONTARIO CANADA, M4G 3P3 DALLAS, TX 75219 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81506 PAGEAL VENTURES LTD PAISLEY ON THE BEAR LLC PANTER BARRY M TRUST ATTN LEVIN PAUL C C/O MARGARET I PROCHASKA 3837 WINFORD DR 55 DELISLE AVE #1003 191 SPAULDING LN TARZANA, CA 91356 TORONTO ONTARIO CANADA, M4V 3C2 EVANSTON, WY 82930 PARKER WILLIAM A JR PHILLIPS STEPHEN & BARBARA PINE A PHILIP 1900 GARRAUX WOODS RD NW 900 FIFTH AVE 1600 E ATLANTIC BLVD ATLANTA, GA 30327 NEW YORK, NY 10021 POMPANO BEACH, FL 33060-6768 PRATER BILL GEORGE & MARIE C PINSKY STEPHEN & ALENE PITKIN COUNTY TRUST 382 DELEGATE DR 530 E MAIN ST STE 302 1257 POST OAK CT WORTHINGTON, OH 43235 ASPEN, CO 81611 SPRINGFIELD, MO 65809 PROPERTY INVESTORS #1 LLC PROSTIC EDWARD & MARJORIE PYRFEKT PROPERTIES LLP 8407 BROOKEWOOD CT 2225 STRATFORD RD 1424 CEDAR BAY LN MC LEAN, VA 22120 SHAWNEE MISSION, KS 66208 SARASOTA, FL 34231 RAMSEY STACIE A RAPPAPORT FAMILY PARTNERS LTD REICH DANIEL S TRUST 25% INT 39 CANTERBURY RD PO BOX 127 999 N TUSTIN AVE #216 MADISON, NJ 07940 TIBURON, CA 94920 SANTA ANA, CA 92705 A}33AV-09-008- L Â®09 LS 31Â¥ldINal Â®kleAV asn Â®09 15 Â®AMEAV ~ WO)*AlaAe'AAMM - 6unund aae a6pnuls pue tuer Â·*thÂ·C u 7". .y.com ;41 AME,20,00 515(30 impredion antknurrage et h sdchage rap:Â·le 2222 Utllisez le gabatit 5160Â® 3 17< -AVER GRAYSON GER:ALD ,?Rel Â· 10.0, L J HAHN TRUST '0 147 BLUFF MONT LN 510Â£ 0:. H. .:1 CIR Â·" L 8405 INDIAN Hit .S OP LONE TREE, -.3 80124 1- 64. 31. , Z ;3017 OMAHA, NE 681 HARRLOX JOAN G 50% HARTMAN +9?. ON HARTMAN DOYL,E & MAR NA.8 t 3 m.d 4 .-IARLES AVE 2865 NE Â·'' t.' i PO BOX 10426 DA f OR lANS, LA 70118 FT LAUDi.:r !.2 ' F! 3' 05 MIDLAND, TX 79702 HEIRLOOM PROPERTIES CO,-4 2/.N Â·4-4.VOâ‚¬ BRIAN L HAUGER MICI ,Â· 3. 4 i, JUDY L LLC ~ 3 2Â·:2 k 240011 13516 QUAKING ASP,EN NE 10077 GROGANS MILL RD STE 4 .r LON 4.+SELES, CA 90024 ALBUQUERQUE, NI,; 87111 10 THE WOODLANDS, TX 77380 HENDERSON WAYNE F HENRY CHARLES V 111 AN D J EAN D HEVRDEJS CATHY CAMPBELL 39 CANTERBURY RD 937 WILLOW ST 3244 ELLA LEE LN MADISON, NJ 07940 LEBANON, PA 17042 HOUSTON, TX 77019 HIRSCH MICHAEL & MARY HOCKER DAVID E HONIGSBERG JOHN 63 EMERALD DUNES CIR 610 S WEST END ST #C103 12921 BRUSHWOOD TERRACE HENDERSON, NV 80105 ASPEN, CO 81611 POTOMAC, MD 20854 JACK LP HYMAN DIANA JACOBS HARLAN & DEBRA TRUST ALBERTA OR ROD JACK 8 WINTHROP DR 8040 N LA JOLLA SCENIC DR 10 WESTGATE WALK DIX HILLS, NY 11746 LA JOLLA, CA 92037 KITCHENER ONTARIO CANADA, N2M2T8 KAY REV TRUST JANNAINC KAUFMAN MICHAEL A & SHERRYL W LEVINSON BONNIE 500 PATTERSON RD 7 FERNWOOD CT 2127 BROADWAY #1 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81506 E BRUNSWICK, NJ 08816 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94115 LARSON DAYL A & KAY W FAMILY KEENAN D MICHAEL KNAUS DOUGLAS A & KENDALL J PARTNERSHIP 1135 BELLVIEW RD 1627 SOUTH BLVD 119 S JACKSON ST MCLEAN, VA 22102 HOUSTON, TX 77006 DENVER, CO 80209-3125 LIBERMAN KEITH & KATHLEEN FAMILY LEE MARIANNE S LTD PARTNERSHIP LEPOW RANDAL M & DANA S TRUST 2836 PATRIOT PARK PLACE 6355 SEWANEE ST 9554 HIDDEN VALLEY RD HENDERSON, NV 89052 HOUSTON, TX 77005 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 MADDALONE CHARLES TRUST LINEBERGER WILLIAM CARL LOWE DEVELOP CORP C/O PAT MADDALONE TRUSTEE 145 GREEN ROCK DR 610 S WEST END ST PO BOX 20124 BOULDER, CO 80302 ASPEN, CO 81611 SEDONA, AZ 86341 AMBAV-09-008-L Â®09t5 31VldIAI31 Â®*JaA,1 asn Â®09 L 5 Â®AllaAV ~ UJOI)*JaAe'MMAA Bullut,d aaij aBpnws pue luer 1,5,;252,6 10Â¢r LK:Milb,UUâ€¢ray" 1114 mec'â€¢atir; I lue ----- ~#) *'Â¥W'â‚¬ 1,- De.,2 9 61/ w k.vâ€ž Utg'ifek ze cabarit 5160Â® - 1 U.20-AVERY CLAMAIÂ·. HE NRY N & JANET S 1,4 'N F COHEN HOWARD & C 2 1 9.PAR# CRMA FORD JOAN 518 Rl\'El ViEW DR 3551 WOODCLIFF RD 12921 BRUSHWOOD TERRACE GRAND u' NCTION, CO 81503 SHERMAN OAKS, CA 9 20 TC 11.AC, MD 20854 CRONIN CARL .f. T(. '27 2.4N CRUM THOMAS F & CATHRY R A-LER SHERRIE STEPHENS TRUST 8748 DORRING,-Or AVEr 991 UTE AVE 197 EIGHTH ST #506 LOS ANGELES, CA 6 0 .1 v ASPEN, CO 81611 C HARLESTOWN, MA 02129 DAVIS RICHARD M JR L:V ' i\, G TRUST DEFRANCIA JAMES M 58% DAVIS TERRY CONNALLY C/O DAVIS CANNON DEFRANCIA CYNTHIA J 42% 1046 ONTARIO PO BOX 728 17 UTE PLACE SHREVEPORT, LA 71106 SHERIDAN, WY 82801 ASPEN, CO 81611 DEPALMA JOHN R DEHNERT G PAUL & VICKY DENNING ROBERT R & KATE K 1/2 INT ATTN MARIA 3110 MAYWOOD AVE 740 WEDGE DR 710 W WILSON AVE AUSTIN, TX 78703-1133 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81506-1823 GLENDALE, CA 91206 DESTIN CO DILLARD WILLIAM T 11 & MARY A DIAMOND NATHAN C/O MULLIN TBG CO DILLARD DEPT STORES INC 5465 BANYAN TRAIL 2029 CENTURY PK EAST 37TH PO BOX 486 CORAL GABLES, FL 33156 LOS ANGELES, CA 90067 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72203-0486 EMERSON JANE C & JONATHAN E FAVROT CAFFREY FIDELITAS HOLDING CO LTD 129 TUNXIS VILLAGE 124 CHARLESTON PK 30 CARTIER ST FARMINGTON, CT 06032 METAIRIE, LA 70005 OTTAWA ONTARIO CANADA, K2P 2E7 FONVIELLE HENRY S & LEE FOSSIER MIKE W REV TRUST FRANKLIN JULIE L 305 LLOYDS LN 7 WAINWRIGHT RD #88 62 RYE RIDGE RD ALEXANDRIA, VA 22302 WINCHESTER, MA 01890 HARRISON, NY 10528 FRAUTSCHI STEVEN & MIE FRY LLOYD EDWARD FRYKLUND ROBERT 1561 CREST DR 1335 STRATFORD DR 2917 DUKE ST ALTADENA, CA 91001 PIQUA, OH 45356 - HOUSTON, TX 77005 GOLUB GENE GANT 103 LLC GESSNER RICHARD W REV TRUST GOLUB & CO 311 TOWN CENTER 1705 11TH ST NE 625 N MICHIGAN BELLA VISTA, AR 72714 MASSILLON, OH 44646 CHICAGO, IL 60611 GOODSIR SUSAN A 1/3 GRAHAM MAUREEN & THEODORE L GRAHAM NELL C 4009 HIGHWOOD COURT NW 7507 PHELPS CLOSE 6081 W CRAWFORD ST WASHINGTON, DC 20007 NEW ALBANY, OH 43054 DENISON, TX 75020 AOBAV-09-008-l Â®09LY 31VldIAI31 Â®A.laAV asn Â®091.5 Â®AMBAV ~ LUO)'X.laAe-MAAM Ill'llill 6ullu!.Id aaid a6pnlus pue luer ImpresGion dntibourrage et a 14<bage raph~â€¢N kill" www.aw . /.tem Otilisez le gabal â‚¬160Â® 1-800-GO<.1 9'ERÂ¥ AnA,HMENT 25 24/E ERPRISE LLC 1135 UTE LLC lu20 OSBORN PROPERTIES LTD 6363 WOODWAY 10T I FL C/Of -HAEL WELTY .. 6r,20 OSBORN C/> 174 END AVE HOUSTON, TX 77057 ..... ' v'USTON, TX 7-'ry M?V ORK, NY 10028 679534 ONTARIO LTD Â«.ER LAURA AGER CONAUN ELEANOR S C/O CHARLES C GOLD ~ _ F TN RESORT INTERIORS CORP 22(}C I'Su\NE Bl 'D #2305 130 ADELAIDE ST W #3302 - 3 BOX 1963 '1;.AM;, FL 3 . u TORONTO ONTARIO CANA>, P OHOE ' :PEN, CO 81612 ANDERSON JUNE H AGUA FRIA PROPERTIES LLE- , ..-r. , _:01 Â¥G.t)MASW TRUSTEE 50% C/O BB&T TRUSTEE 460 ST MICHAELS DR BLDG 300 Â£.00 : :' G # 2,5' ST PO BOX 10001 SANTA FE, NM 87505 NELL ..f., .4, CT 06511 OWENSBORO, KY 42302 ARNETT DAVID & BETTE ASPEN ALPS CONDO ASSOC ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC 5333 N CAMINO REAL PO BOX 1128 PO BOX 1248 TUCSON, AZ 85718 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN VIEW LTD BAYLDON BARBARA W TRUSTEE 50% BECK CYNTHIA 100 S MAIN AVE #300 647 W BARRY AVE PO BOX 1569 SIDNEY, OH 45365 CHICAGO, IL 60657-4504 PACIFIC PALISADES, CA 90272 BECNEL DANIEL JR & MARY H BEEM CORPORATION BESHARAT GERALDINE PO DRAWER H 3528 OAKTON DR PO BOX 7 RESERVE, LA 70084 MINNETONKA, MN 55343 ELBERTON, GA 30635 BITTEL JUDITH R 50% BLAUSTAT 202 LLC BLOCK JOEL A TRUSTEE 50% 801 ARTHUR GODFREY RD STE 600 1125 PARK AVE #6D 647 W BARRY AVE MIAMI BEACH, FL 33140-3323 NEW YORK, NY 10128 CHICAGO, IL 60657-4504 BOTT ALLEN D BRENER DANIEL M & SHARON G BRITTEL STEPHEN H 50% 1 DOS POSOS 5202 POCAHONTAS 4125 BRAJANZA ST ORINDA, CA 94563 BELLAIR, TX 77401 COCONUT GROVE, FL CARMAN PETER BURNS DARYL R CHMELIR FRANK J & SANDRA L ASPEN ALPS #808 7169 SO POPLAR LN 201 39TH ST 700 UTE AVE ENGLEWOOD, CO 80112 DOWNERS GROVE, IL 60515 ASPEN, CO 81611 CHOZEN MERRILL A & JILL E TRST CHU MICHAEL CITY OF ASPEN 1230 SACRAMENTO ST 38 CORMORANT CIR 130 S GALENA ST SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94010 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ASPEN, CO 81611 -00:5 Â®AkijAV ~ AkIBAV-09-008-L Â®09L5 31VldIAI31 Â®*JaAv asn ./ LUO)'A-laAe'MMAA - Bu!:u!.Id eeg aBpnlus pue wer 1 7 - ..4 1 ---2*1841.k~ - .*@...- 0 itt-ttt-ti.; aw*t'w#14139-mwiN*--*1 tJNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY Alumni Assâ€žciatirn SOUTH 011,4 1 Kp,1... ibek ./. p Dr. und Mis. James E. Andersen KY 42 1 Ta' Â° 1 ~ 2145 1 ieldircit DiÂ· ~- (inen,bi,N) AN' 423(}1 4. it. 1,11{: r 4.1: f ~y~CÂ·N22~(~.â€¢.41 ~ 23 PÂ·' AR 2007 PM 2 T 0~ b~#c-L& ~ith.~0,~, kirt - 91, ~ ND-0---t'-z-yi,~A"/h ~ 4- LJ-/*2.,W17 3 7-' 140 fl~,~-'r-~,t ) (2 r 7%,le)1' 1 81611*1902 "11 11, D 'll 1,} 11 1" 13, 1 l ili I lilli 1, 'li lilill, 1,1 111 1,0 'll 11 1,i t.Â·111-,[C NOTICE RE: -100-1-Â§ 1 432/,r ...1.?2 ,{:8)~40 f.2 1 ~ iNLINE-REVIE~Â¥, FWD-04 074' 64*' Nihil 7 AND RESÂ» - 41 1.7 4 1,0 ...4 ''3.-,ANDARD ItEVIEW - PUELIC Iffet;kno ji~... ,. Â·NOTICE-IS -kr:7',af #4 4 :jlf. 4-tb-at-a-public hearing-will -be held + rutÂ· ~' Â·,Â· .1.3, 2007, at a rric.Â·t Â·-,p u xer at 4:30 p.in. before the Aspen Fti , ins - ---- -Commission, 8 -,t,- -Â· rÂ¥.- . 2.m,-City Hall, 130 -S. Galena St.,- A<joeâ€ž f, t. _:,:p- an application for i.7 Ine, PUD Other Amendment, and RÂ»/ .lia, T~-sign Standards Review : . 9, Avenue. The subject property is len , 2 9),ed as MINE, 1741 MINE A ........ Â·2-r IE THOUSAND ONE PERCENT: 100 /; 215 -ESC: ALL SUR_FACE Er, ?.4~3: 26:3_. LIGHTS DESC: SECTION 18>10-84 WES.t Ot .THE 6TH, of the City of Asin . For further information, contact Jessica Garrow at i.he. City of Aspen Community Development Dept., 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429-2780. (orjessicag@ci.aspen.co.us). s/Ruth Kruger. Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on March 18,2007 City of Aspen Account GJ 0/**t 0 -9 9/ 0147 â‚¬+10 2/\ 11( 1/1 /1 ./. -1 b r 3 #4 ; ,\ 6-5 4 /w<:U veâ‚¬ 2 /~/ 1 1 4 E- Fzz ,~ e 2.-_<1 <1- fl,.2- ST 0 Ld 2 +43 )52 2 0 k/,7, J I Â¥ITZ UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY lJ~~ College of Arts and Sciences ASPEN COMMUNITY . 'E? HI t.'F'>â€¢. DEVELOPMENT 10 KM Â° 130 S. GALENA STREET l: CO PEN CO 81611 2 15 48 .<g' X 2 0 0 1 ,/CU REICH DANIEL S TRUST 25% INT UJ 999 N TUSTIN AVE #216 SANTA ANA, CA 92705 MI><IE 927 1 00 03/ 21/07 RETURN TO SENDER NOT DEL.IVERABLE AS ADDRESSED UNABLE TO FORWARD BC: 81611190230 *1479-05601-15-46 8161101902 11111,13,11,111}11,1111,11,1,111,1,3111,1,1111,111,111,11,11,1 9270536506 C033 PUBLIC Ne/7 hf tit.L <fri . e 8040 GREENLINE. 1412 : 04)MENT, ANi UP,Â·91Â»EN: i L DESIGN STANDARD 141 [EVÂ¥ 1'01-1..r . j JUNG b 0Â«ICE k. -12 .EBY GIVEN that a public hearing be 4-1 , uesday, April 3, 2 Â·,i a n. ng to begin at 4:30 p.in. before L. A ..'NÂ·. i' . Â· in,i and Zoning Cr , er Cities Room, City Hall, 130 S. 1 n. . .,n, to review an hub f- 3040 Greenline, PUD Other AI-tier, <.. 'sidential Design ..' at 1001 Ute Avenue. Tlie subject p: :';"Â·/.:.' : 03'y described as h ,â€¢' r '3 NAME: ONE THOUSAND ONE PER-aÂ» i : 'ACRES: 0 DESC: 1Â¥ I . i._Â·1 .f. ,@: MINERAL RIGHTS DESC: bill_,11'JN L-:I;-24Â· V/EST OF THE 6'i, .10 - of Aspen. For further inforniation. contact jess:c.+1 4 8..icw atthe City of Asp:.... m .â€žtry Development Dept., 130 S. Galena St., AspuÂ« CO (970) 429-2780, (Or i CSS 953 f.'.23 '~ i. 432(011.CO.US). s/Ruth Kruger. Ogir Aspen Planning aKid Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on March 18.2007 City of Aspen Account ASPEN COMMUNITY /â‚¬* H ex V \ -*-*-I.-**#--**#*--*.... DEVELOPMENT 2 PM Q -Ill...0--#.....% ] 30 S. GALENA STREET - 4049 'EN CO 81611 zonl./ .... COHEN HOWARD & CAROL TRIFARI 3551 WOODCLIFF RD \\499= SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91403 n L A .6 W. 0 14 L W U Uuf :Ad .L / U f RETURN TO SENDER NOT DEL.IVERABLE AS ADDRESSED UNABLE TO FORWARD DC: 816111902:30 *1479-03032--15-46 I I. I. .9141_lm.1902 11}1111)111,111)1}1111))11171 II11I)11I1))1,I)|})I1,11)1}1t)I1I 91400$504= LULf 5 1001 UTE AVE, 8040 GE ; t. . 4-:4 ; 'A, . JD OTHER AMENDMEL D RESIDENTIAL DESIGN i A k41, k :lb a + + 7 -- PUBLIC HEARING [C TICE IS HEREBY GIVEN th:n. w; il be held on Tuesday, April 3, , .C< 7, at a meeting to begin at 4.z, iÂ·:. 5.u ,:hâ‚¬ Aspen Planning and Zoning fe omission, Sister Cities Room, Ci ch J Gplena St,, Aspen, to review an mp'ication for 8040 Greenline, PL, t. (,r--_i - ;ndment, and Residential Design 3 3134Â·ards Review at 1001 Ute Ave.al : . -.er poperty is legally described as t/NE, 1741 MINE NAME: ONE THOUS.,.4.-- ...,6 PERCENT: 100 ACRES: 0 DESC: A Â¥ 0 7 TD E A CY U Q A â‚¬n TT-DAT .7- A - --- -- - ...I Â·. 4 - - -- I -- --- Â· _, ....,1-, uer._iÂ·i-Lul.L LX. 1Â¥111,1.,IUiL IUUÂ£-11 J .'..,LU, ...gui fulv '16- 1U-84 W125 1 UP 1 HE 612., of the City of Aspen. For further infoung ,r~ f,- 1.j - 5 codiact Jessica Garrow at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept., 130 S Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429-2780, (orjessicag@ci.aspen.co.us). EButh Kruger. Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on March 18,2007 City of Aspen Account g - PM .61 -3 ASPEN COMMUNITY l..., .r'.Â» ----CE--I DEVELOPMENT \10' 15 MAR .9~ 13l SALENA STREE 1 ~2,O 03/ %*6 ASPEN CO 81611 CITY OF ASPEN t/VOL 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 BiEiiÂ£1902 Cuui 11,11,1â€ž11,11 1/11I 1111,11,1,111,1,1111),11,1,111,11,1,11,1,1 C>783,--i~ 11, t es 1: 4 2 i UTE AVE, 804() GREENI , R 't. ? 1. t.0 - +THER AMENDMENT, ' e SIDENTIAL DESIGN STAN' A ti ( b t' d /''... i JBLIC HEARING N 2- CE IS HEREBY GIVEN thata pul- ,<: 6:1, ,ity:, i,j .. be held on Tuesday, April 3, -- - 2, - at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.ry j' 1 Ve n.'~-- Aspen Planning and Zoning -- -- - ilissionÂ«Sister Cities Room, City 1144, i a u ,.ena St., Aspen, to review an-- - -- ration for 8040 Greenline, PUD Ot,1,- 2 -1 1 2:nent, and Residential Design Â·52Â·ds Review at 1001 Ute Avenue, 'Int 6,0 ,-, oroperty is legally described as â‚¬7, 1741 MINE NAME: ONE THOUSAND C. 2 PLRCENT: 100 ACRES: 0 DESC: /. .1.-' bl-IK.rAC.P. /9 [VITINE11'.u.L :itÂ·JrTI-S DL'-;<_f. Slut.-i,uit iti-ll)-S217~VEST OF TI-IE 6 fyi. of the City of Aspen. For further information. contact Jessica Garrow at the City of ispen Community Development Dept., 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429-2780, (ot- iessicae@,ci.aspen.co.us). s/Ruth Kruger, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on March 18.2007 City of Aspen Account AeDEN COMMUNITY (4 ,/- /1,- #-LL.%' [ ELOPMENT SEPx AL WA Y les'.5 ' G J 130 S. GALENA STREET ASPEN CO 81611 ..4 15 fRECEIVEO' < 42501 MAY 2 1 2007 2*)6 / KN '811 NaMEN i -ty..77# BUILDING DEPARâ„¢ENT HOCKER DAVID E .-- A-2~36,Â»Â£xÂ«3 4-u 61'0 b Wib I ENU-ST #Ct03- ASPBM-mÂ©-87811- ---1'.ti~ >t . 9 230 I ANK SiEii$2i42 pnot E: 1001 UTE AVE, 8042 Â£ . 1 PUD OTHER AMENIV. AND RESIDENTIAL DESIE N 47 :g. . EW -- PUBLIC HEARINC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN a .., r. er ri=,g will be held on Tuesday, April L 2007, at a meeting to begin a 1 I .ill 0*3 the Aspen Planning and Zonin Commission, Sister Cities Room f :' 2 2 1 ) S. Galena St., Aspen, to review a . application for 8040 Greenline. . 1 , A mendment, and Residential Desigr Standards Review at 1001 Ute Ave :. , ' .f. .tÂ·ject property is legally described as MINE, 1741 MINE NAME: ONE THetÂ».41-*,-ONIE PERCENT: 100 ACRES: 0 DESC: ALL bURVALE & MINERAL Kiut, 1 1- '-' .1 6.1LliON 18-10-84 WESt UP irit 6TH, of the City of Aspen. For further inion-tion, contact Jessica Garrow at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept., 130 6. Gatena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429-2780, (or jessicae@ci.aspen.co.us). s/Ruth Kruger, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on March 18,2007 City of Aspen Account 11- -1.- --- ASPEN COMMUNITY .-r *,A? R 1 42\..8 .--=.--r.-=.4~4.----1- I. -- * --------4.. jill,~11290/1-I . . DEVELOPMENT RETURN FOR S. GALENA STREET .-- ----1,2/ji,1/97/1 ~ ADD!1. POSTAGE#-_p[4 ~ 1-n.--- I kill 'EN CO 81611 V. 15 MAR Ori -#./.%./.-- -â„¢----=/..---al.1.- 4/.-f e WHEN RETIA,UNG CROSS OUT hâ€¢i221/ ' I - Ain,trE OR PASTE STAMPS OVER (T NUTTER GEORGE ERNEST & LYNDSAY 223 HANNA RD TORONTO ONTARIO CANADA, M4G 3P3 PUBLIC N()'1'it 2. uÂ·' i il-Mb KITE ,4 1 E, 8040 GREENLINE REVII.K 1 1.1 0 1 1-1 2,14 A.i,Â·111'NOMENT, 6. O RESIDEN? AL DESIGN STANDARD REVIEn -Â·PUBLIC 74.ARING NE E CCE 13 H.61<EBY GIVEN that a public hearing w. J ' bet 1 4.Â· i 1 1-lesday, April 3, 2009, 21 1:?Â· 27; 'g to begin at 4:30 p.Iii. before the 1:Â·r, Z., :,-i ng and Zoning Comm :- 2* . ir Cities Room, City Hal], 130 S. Galen ' A.secii, to review an applicct 8040 Greenline, PUD Other Amendmei , R.rsidential Design Standaics ice,view at 1001 Ute Avenue. The subject properiv ib jugally described as MINE I 76 ) R.:11<E' NAME: ONE THOUSAND ONE PERCFN-1. 1 /.1(1 3 r.RNS: 0 DFSC: ALL SURFACE & MINERAL RIGHTS DESC: SECTION 18-10-84 WEST OF THE 6TH, of the City of Aspen. For further information, contact Jessica Garrow at the City o f Aspen Community Development Dept.. 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429-2780. (or iessicae@ci.aspen.co.us). s/Ruth Kruger, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on March 18.2007 City of Aspen Account --- aa ' ASPEN COMMUNITY .,Itt R 1,Â»/2x -W--./.........t--- . t 01% ~1 * ' DEVELOPMENT (2. PM 19,\ 1 3. GALENA STREET RETURN Fint r, - 0 -*----*-I.Ub 0- 15 MAR O -I....2--6, - ./.- 0 4 ~ ADD,L POSTAG 4. AorEN CO 81611 - WHEN RE MMLING CROSS OUT THIS 40NCE OR PASTE STAMPS OVFR IT JACK LP h ALBERTA OR ROD JACK ~~; 10 WESTGATE WALK KITCHENER ONTARIO CANADA, N2M2T8 3 6160/ PUBLIC NOTICE /E, 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW, 37 ' , M:ZNDMENT, Ar D . JAL DESIGN STANDARD REVEP 1 - LEARING NOux F r.iER.EBY GIVEN thatapublic hearing whi : ati Tuesday, April 3, 209 r r nacting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the 2 2- 3.Â·Â· 1-.:nning and Zoning C037,11.1;iÂ·r 12..., S;ster Cities Room, City Hall, 130 S. Gatera .F , .Aspen, to review an applic<Py for 8040 Greenline, PUD Other Amendrem, c .1 ' rte.sidential Design Standards Review at 1001 Ute Avenue. The subject property is legally described as MINE, 1741 MINE NAME: ONE THOUSAND ONE PERCENT: 100 ACRES: 0 DESC: ALL -SJTJACE & r/in<ERAL RIGHTS DESC: SECTION 1-840-02 WEST Or THE 6TH, of the City df Aspen. For further information, contact Jessica Ganow at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept., 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429-2780, (or lessieaq@ci.aspen.co.us). s/Ruth Kruger, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on March 18,2007 City of Aspen Account C NOTICE RE: 1001 UTE . l:,e j/Â· :. 9 .- E REVIEW, PUD OTHEK AND RESIDEND 9 4 t. 41 .,\ :'2~ (4ARD REVIEW -- PUBLIâ‚¬+U Â¥ - NOTICE IS HERE 32% r ..,at a public hearing will be held on Tue , 2007, at a meeting ce291 + 30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning Commission, Sister Ott " a. ity Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, . application for 8040 UD Other Amendment, and Reside Standards Review at /1. . nue. The subject property is legally C MINE, 1741 MINE NAMit' F Â·Â·t- 7340!JSAND ONE PERC. 1-i l. 19) i-1,_,fUL.,2 ' 17\TT. 1 no 4 ---- ALL SURFACE & MINER. -. UGHTS DESC: SECTION 18-10-84 WEST :- 2 ' Â·I-f 6TH. of the City of Aspen For further information, contact Jessica Garrow ar the Chi vo Aspen Community Development Dept., 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429-Â·2780. (or iessicau/ibci.aspen.co.us). s/Ruth Kruger. Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on March 18,2007 City of Aspen Account April 27,2000 James Lindt Flanning and Zoning Commiesion 0/0 Community Dgvelopment Board City Of Aspen 130 5. Galena Aepen, Co. 81611 Dear Mr. Lindt: Thank youforyourtimeon Wednesday the 26% As you Buggeeted, l am following up our convernation with a letter to De placed in the file. Ae adjacent property ownere to 1001 Ute Ave. ws are not opposed to the prop0963 lot Split provi61661 there ie no additional FAR approved above the current limite. We are absolutely opposed to the split should it include or result in any variance to the current FAR limits either now or in the future. Adain, thank you for your time. Kgarde, Rich and Ousie Welle e5 02-4 Fe / e. 06 L I d 10 April 24,2006 Â»t/-2,40(30 20 4%) Richard and Susan Wells 970 Powder Lane Aspen, Co 81611-2105 Dear Richard and Susan; Thank you for taking the time to review the enclosed request for your support of the proposed lot split on 1001 Ute Ave. We are presently on the Planning an Zoning Commission agenda for May 2,2006. At that time the Commission will consider the appropriateness of the proposal. Effectively, the lot split will cause a clean up of the tailings area and create a park-like setting on the remainder o f the property. Only two homes are contemplated on approximately 7 acres of land of which 4 acres are to be gifted to the City of Aspen for purposes of creating a permanent ski trail access and open space. As an adjacent property owner, you have already been provided a copy of the aforementioned proposal for a lot split, however if you have any questions regarding its contents, don't hesitate to call and we will be happy to clarify any confusion. I have taken the liberty of enclosing a letter of support for your signature or you may create your own if you are in support of the application. Very Truly j~prsr~ Rick Head enclosure DOWNTOWN ASPEN ' 606 E.AST HYMAN AvENUE, ASPEN, COLOR,ADO BI61 I OFFICE 970.925.281 I OR ToLL FREE 866,925.28 IIâ€¢ FAx 970.925.9 182 â€¢ E MAIL CAJR@SOPRIS.NET â€¢ WEBSITE www.carolannjacobson.com ~ Carol Ann Jacobson Reatty - Proud partner in tbe Real Estate family of Snowmass Real Estate Compe and the Roaring Fork Land Compati~