Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.pu.Pitkin Reserve PUD.1982-PD1r Li~~"<in, :1~eritt 8 Barclay PK-~ign Partnership Boa 3004 A.pe n, CO. 8161 I Ph~~ne: 303-925-5689 October 12, 1982 Aspen City Council 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Pitkin Reserve Ladies and Gentlemen: This letter Ltd., under P.U.D. Plan by the City cantly chan~ as possible is intended to Section 24-8.26 for development of Aspen in the led real estate alternatives to serve as the formal request of Pitkin, of the City Code for an amendment to the for The Pitkin Reserve that was approved fall of 1981. In response to a signifi- narket, request is hereby made to include the existing P.U.D. Plan: 1. The right to develop (or sell for development) single-family house sites in lieu of some portion of the two-lot, attached, zero lot line house sites that have already been approved. 2. The right to replat the development parcel for Pitkin Reserve to accommodate up to nine free standing single family houses, rather than the twelve zero lot line house sites envisioned under the current P.U.D. Plan, or a combination of free standing and attached zero lot line houses. 3. The right to relocate the private access road and the utility easement under that road from in front of the houses to behind the houses. In our preliminary submission we stated that our planning objectives and architectural concept were "...a response to a series of decisions that resulted from our commitment to low-impact land development and a belief that the opportunity exists for built forms to both enhance our site and support a rich landscape. Our initial decision was to preserve as much open space as possible for the use LiFkin, Averi[t & Rarday [k sign Partnership of the public as well as the residents of Pitkin Reserve and to avoid development in the corridor along the Roaring Fork River...We also felt that both the public recreational space and the private residences would benefit from maximum separation..." Our interest in relocating the road and mixing attached and free standing houses is a result of continued study of the site and a more sophisticated understanding of the opportunities that exist, market conditions, and of course a response to the concerns of the neighbor- hood and community at large that were raised during the review process. Practical Effect of Proposed Changes in Unit Types. The changes we are proposing (free-standing single family houses and attached houses accessed from the rear) will not result in a change of character for the approved P.U.D., will not be an increase in the overall coverage, will not increase the problems of traffic circulation and public utilities, and perhaps most imprtantly, will not reduce the open space or in any way negatively effect the Pitkin Reserve development, the surrounding neighborhood, or the Aspen community at large. To assure compatability with the proposed Pitkin Reserve attached houses, the concepts already approved by you, and to preserve the . integrity of this Planned Unit Development, the following criteria will apply to any free standing single family houses or attached houses now accessed from behind. 1. Building height will be limited to that of Willoughby Way (with the exception of the Gatehouse). 2. Buildings will have 15-foot sideyard setback requirements, except from the common lot line of the two-lot building site. 3. An obligation to involvement in the Pitkin Reserve Homeowners' Association. 4. A commitment to the landscaping program outlined in the Pitkin Reserve Subdivision Agreement and Improvement Schedule. 5. Natural earth tones will be used on the exterior with brighter colors permitted for accent. The exterior building materials will be limited to wood siding, wood shingles, metal roofing, brick, stone, glass and cedar shakes for pitched roofs. During the review process of the approved Pitkin Reserve P.U.D. density calculations established a developable area of 8.4362 acres. As our development plans now stand,-the allowable F,A,R. for each lot would be based on one-twelfth of the 8.4362 acres. However, any change in the composition of the Pitkin Reserve would result in a -2- Lipkin, Averitt 8 Barclay Design Partnership reallocation of that F.A.R. among the actual number of building sites/lots. Limitations on Replatting. In lieu of the twelve zero lot line, attached single-family houses, we would like to consider as an additional approach that might enable us to be more responsive to market conditions - the alternative of developing the Pitkin Reserve for up to nine free-standing single family houses or a mix of attached and free-standing houses (see attached chart). The attached chart compares all possible alternative mixes of free-standing and attached houses with the approved scheme for 12 attached houses. In all cases, the proposed alternatives provide more open space between houses and never results in an increase in total width of houses. We feel that any of the proposed mixes with result in greater variety and richness within a consistent architectural imgage. This would, of course, require a replatting of the current configura- tion of the twelve approved zero lot line house sites. This would not affect in any way the open space allocation of the current P.U.D. Plan -- replatting would be limited to that portion of the entire tract which has already been approved for development (the "Develop- ment Parcel"). Moreover, replatting would conform to all Engineering Department concerns and criteria. Needless to say, chart any reduction in the twelve approved dwelling units at the Pitkin Reserve will result in the return to Aspen Mountain Park of the unused development rights. These, of course, arose from the conversion of Smuggler Trailer Park to an owner-occupied, controlled employee housing cooperative. The Implications of Relocat This new road location has the Access Road and Utili Following advantages: Easement. 1. More sensitive and sophisticated integration of houses, access road and landscape. 2. Garage doors no longer face the Aspen Institute, bike path or recreation area. They are only visible from the access road. 3. Road is far less visible. 4. Road and driveway lengths are reduced. 5. Disturbed area requiring revegetation is reduced. 6. Vertical change of access road is reduced from 62' to 50' -3- Lipkin, Averi[t & Barclay Design Partnership These proposed changes have been reviewed by our civil engineers, E1 Dorado Engineering, and our structural engineers, ADG (formerly Coe, Van Loo and Jaschke) who agree that there would be no significant negative effects resulting from this change. The utilities would be relocated to the new road right of way with the exception of the sewage line which would remain in roughly the same location on the downhill side of the houses. The proposed utility system and drainage plan would require limited redesign and the use of a Gabion retaining wall would present no structural problems. Conclusion. As we indicated above, it is a refinement of our site plan, and marketing conditions that suggest we make these requests. It nonetheless remains our intention to proceed with the Pitkin Reserve development at the appropriate time in substantially the format and spirit that was approved by the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council of the City of Aspen. We look forward to working with you and your staff on these approaches. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Michael L'pkin, President Pitkin, Ltd. -4- Q .. W Wx,. x~nE - V b L~ C7 ~ H ~ N (") I O f~l O t`") O + O O ' N O O O N N N N N H µ. 3 ~ ti ~ .-a ( 1 .-i M r, [ 1 ~, f`l ~ f`l ~ fn (1 M f") f"1 M f'1 Ei ~- ~ ~ .-~ r+ .~ .-, ~ U z H Q z x -~ awF - (~ U] Q U' I N N O N l0 O l0 N N l0 O ~p ~p ~p I ~ 0 ~ r m rn r r m m r r r rn ~ ~ ~ 3 w x -- w a w Q z a a~nwm W W W E 0.. [q U 3 H ~ m r ~ m r ~ ui m r ~ ~n m r ~o ~n ~ ~ F z 0 oawa w z~nw 0 a ~ z a oww~n - H FC '.~ H N 'V' c!' ri ("1 d' 1f1 m N lfl z P+ H Z N •-I ri O (`l 61 O l0 ~fl (+1 N r O ~O M C F ~ cn W~ D c in ~n ~o ~ v' ~ r r+1 c ~ ~ M r+1 <r in w ax ~ ~ r•C E H - H E (] Ga H N m d' O ~O l0 O O d' O m O N N N N E O H O z E rn c o .~ o .-~ .-~ o ~ in ~ c m m rn rn 2 3 5 r ~o r r r r r r r r r r r r r r a w w E uz Q ~ a w H - E (n '3 H M N l0 O cl' d' O O l0 O N O m m m m Q O E 2i r M r r r lp r m N M M d' m m m m W E z W .7 N d' (`1 ('1 (`l M M M (+1 Cl (`l f~l N N N N ~ ww o a a o 0 a a q wm w xE O CJ H N O N d' N ~ \p m d' lD m O lD m O N z F a '~ '-' '' r. O E m ~ H a ~ ~ a z ~ ~ W H E O W Q H O 61 r lfl m lD C' N r lfl (~1 ri l0 ~ N O v azz w~a E r-7 cn FC E [--~ H N T O~ Ol O O O O r-i ri ri r-I N N N N ,7+ H ~ H r-I r-I rl ri rti ri N ri N H N ri W W O O a a a o a a ~ a :, m ~~ 33 3 i i v 0 v ~ } ~~ 33 3 1 ~ o~ I I ~' I I d ~J o ( ~ i 4 m 4 ~° 0 0 I l o 1 ~ f ~ ~ S l ~ / s 1 ~°_ f~ '~ L a: C 0 v ~~ ~~ v~ ¢~ _~~$~ a ~8~~~ i ~~ ~tg1~ .~:4~ F{[{[{[ T ~~ 3 a ~~1d~ ~ ~e ~~ ~~g~ ~~~ re~~ -~~~a ~~P~~ a~ 0 U ~e ~ C p.. a r Pitkin Ltd. wishes to reserve the right to either develop or sell for development two-lot duplex building sites as single family house sites. To assure compatibility with the proposed Pitkin Reserve duplexes and preserve the integrity of this Planned Unit Development, the following criteria have been established: 1. In accordance with Resolution No. 81-18 of the Aspen Zoning Code, the allowable unit size/F.A.R. is based on the total developable area of 8.4362 acres established at the time of Preliminary Sub- mission. The calculations for the allowable F.A.R. for each lot would be based on 1/12 of 8.4362 acres. Therefore, the F.A.R. for a single- family house on a two-lot building site would be twice that F.A.R. 2. Building height will be limited to either that of the proposed duplex for that location or that estab- lished in the Aspen Code for those building on the R-30 zone. 3. Building will have 15' sideyard setback requirements except from the common lot line of the two-lot building site. 4. An obligation to involvement in the Pitkin Reserve Homeowners Association. 5. A commitment to the landscaping program outlined in the P.R. Subdivision Agreement and Improvement Schedule. 6. Natural earth tones will be used on the exterior with brighter colors permitted for accent. The exterior building materials will be limited to railroad ties, wood siding, wood shingles, brick, stone, glass and stucco. Pitched roofs will be either shingles, shakes or standing seam metal and their pitch will be between 8:12 and that of the shallowest pitch of the roofs of the proposed duplexes. Pitkin Ltd. reserves the right to establish additional criteria and refine the above criteria to insure uniformity in exterior materials and colors and to insure the orderly development and operation of Pitkin Ltd. as a P.U.D. -- ~ `~ ~ \ \` ~\ i ~ I ~\ ~\ ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~~ ~ ~ ~- - 1 1 \\ ~ ~ ~ ~ cs \ \ I 1 c~ s ! ~ V ~I I ~7 1 f ~ `~ ~~ ~ ~1 Z ~) w } °- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i !_ ~ 1 t w 1 5 ,~ ~ 11 ~ i ~- ~ ~ ~ 1 4 ~rt 0 ac 0 .II '~ .v -o ... C v ~~ cn ~~ ~~ ~ ~€ ~gg~~ ~€ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~ III Y~~ ~1~~ #:~~ yR Eff{[~ •~ ~~j~j ~y/ YF s ~~~ yy~~~ d9Fa ~'~~ ~~~~~ i v° •,r'; o ^~f U ~ ~ a~ _. •. ., ~~~ ~ k ~ _, :, • ', .. C~T~ ~~~ A~~~~ 130 south galena''street ~-_-~~,., aspen`, colorado;•'~1611 - ~' -. • ... March 4, 1982 Robert W. Hughes, Esq. GATES, HUGHES & KNEZEVICH, P.C. 600 E. Hopkins, Suite 200 Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Financial Assurances for Improvements at Pitkin Reserve Dear Bob: Pursuant to our discussion yesterday regarding re- quired financial assurances for proposed improvements at Pitkin Reserve, this letter is intended to set a dollar figure for the estimated cost of improvements of particular concern to the City. Following my conversation with you and a brief meeting with Dan McArthur, Paul Taddune and myself, a determination was made as to those items under the proposed schedule of improvements (Exhibit D to the Subdivision Agreement) requiring a financial guaranty. It was determined that the improvements of particular concern to the City were those involving all utility mains, drainage, road work, electric relocations and revegetation along the County roadway. The dollar amount to be inserted on Section XI of the Agreement should be $337,586.00, which is the total construction estimate for all proposed improvements in Exhibit D ($534,504.00) excluding the following: I. Water Improvements 1" Service lines $ 2,250.00 3-1/2" Service Line 300.00 II. Setaer Improvements Service taps 4,550.00 ,, _, Robert W. Hughes, Esq. March 4, 1982 Page Two III. Gas System 3/4" Service Connections IV. Landscaping of Private Units ' Total Construction to be Excluded Total Construction Estimate Service Connections not requiring Guaranty FINANCIAL ASSURANCE AMOUNT ~,,,.r $ 2,100.00 167,718.00 196,918.00 534,504.00 -196,918.00 $337,586.00 Please contact me should you need further assistance or clarification. JWH/caa cc: Paul Taddune Alan Richman t City Engineer Sincerely, ,. .. Aspen/Pitkin i'l~nning Office 130 south gaiena~street aspen, colorau`o.81611 MEMORANDUM T0: Paul Taddune, City Attorney Dan F4cArthur, City Engineer FROM: Alan Richman, Planning Office RE: Pitkin Reserve Final Plat DATE: December 22, 1981 Attached is the Pitkin Reserve Final Plat for your review. This item has been tentatively scheduled for first reading of a zoning ordinance on January 25, 1982 and second reading of the ordinance and consideration of the final plat on February 22, 1982. Your comments on the application by Monday, January 11, 1982 would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your assistance. Pitkin Ltd. wishes to reserve the right to either develop or sell for development two-lot duplex building sites as single family house sites. To assure compatibility with the proposed Pitkin Reserve duplexes and preserve the integrity of this Planned Unit Development, the following criteria have been established: 1. In accordance with Resolution No. 81-18 of the Aspen Zoning Code, the allowable unit size/F:A.R. is based on the total developable area of 8.4362 acres established at the time of Preliminary Sub- mission. The calculations for the allowable F.A.R. for each lot would be based on 1/12 of 8.4362 acres. Therefore, the F.A.R. for a single- family house on a two-lot building site would be twice that F.A.R. 2. Building height will be limited to either that of the proposed duplex for that location or that estab- lished in the Aspen Code for those building on the R-3D zone. 3. Building will have 15' sideyard setback requirements except from the common lot line of the two-lot building site. 4. An obligation to involvement in the Pitkin Reserve Homeowners Association. 5. A commitment to the landscapinq program outlined in the P.R. Subdivision Agreement and Improvement Schedule. 6. Natural earth tones will be used on the exterior with brighter colors permitted for accent. The exterior building materials will be limited to railroad ties, wood siding, wood shingles, brick, stone, glass and stucco. Pitched roofs will be either shingles, shakes or standing seam metal and their pitch will be between 8:12 and that of the shallowest pitch of the roofs of the proposed duplexes. Pitkin Ltd. reserves the right to establish additional criteria and refine the above criteria to insure uniformity in exterior materials and colors and to insure the orderly development and operation of Pitkin Ltd. as a P.U.D. 3-F~V.-e- ~ ~ a4 ~ r ~~ o ~ Q v Q P-s Q'a-~ 'L~(' ~ .. . M E M O R A N D U M T0: City Council Wayne Chapman Paul Taddune Alan Richman FROM: Michael Lipkin DATE: February 1, 1982 RE: Pitkin Reserve - Park Dedication Fee In accordance with Section 7-143 of the Aspen Building Code and Section 20-18 of the Aspen Subdivision Code, the cash equivalent for the park dedication fee and its determination for the Pitkin Reserve Subdivision is as follows: Purchase Price of Total Parcel (20 acres) $1,125,000.00 Price Per Acre - 20 56,250.00 Value of 7-Acre Development Parcel x 7 393,750.00 Value Per Unit (12 units) : 12 32,812.50 18 of Land Value Per Unit x.01 328.13 Fee per 3-Bedroom Unit x 2.5 = 820.31 A park dedication fee of $820.31 per residential unit will be paid prior to issuance of building permits. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Alan Richman, Planning Office ".j `~ ,1 I st 'i~ 1 Jay Hammond, Engineering Department February 5, 1982 Pitkin Reserve Final Plat Having reviewed the above application for final plat and made a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following comments 1. Plat There are a number of minor items requiring inclusion on the plat to be recorded: a. A clear index and sheet numbers. b. The Surveyor's signature and seal as well as the date of the field survey. c. All monuments found and set. d. The area of each lot to the nearest .001 acre. 2. Site Impact While we feel the proposed design results in units that are well integrated into the hillside and succeeds in utilizing a steeply sloping site, it is important to realize that the area disturbed by the construction is significant. As shown in the illustrative landscape plan, the limits of the grading encompass most of the building site. Since the intent of the PUD approach is to cluster the units and encourage a design accomodating the slopes, we feel the goal is ultimately accomplished. However, while the end result will be a low impact treatment, the disturbance to the site in the course of construction will be a very high impact. 3. Water System There has apparently been some new agreement between the applicant and the Water Department regarding looping of_ the water lines. Details of the new arrangement should be included in the subdivision agreement and on the utility plans. 4. Utilities The proposed plans should include at least a schematic layout of remaining utilities such as underground electric, gas, ~ i ^M. `ivy February 5, 1982 Page 2 Pitkin Reserve Final Plat telephone, and TV. The plat should at least designate proposed, corridors for these utilities. Further, the applicant should be required to inform this office of any unforeseen delays in the installation of underground utilities. Delays that could drag such work into the winter season would not be acceptable. JH/co Lpd.1,s.. ,~. ^,"''t- t,.TY OF ASPEN MEMO FROM ALAN RICHMAN C SSM~ ,QI~k ....e sue. ~ ~o ~o ow e.~~:_ .~_~ -~., ~-.:.,..~e, w~~;~ .~M~:u.~ p...~ ~-°~- 4~ 5 _"~X~" G ~~ :, a\\ 9.~a,9- ^+,-,kti~.:~--, ~•-y h...~t P~-a e.,c....Y~t' ~Q.e~-- ~C^~"~ Y~nAnx ~ {~, pr~,c,,,,,\,a~e ~c.¢.S c.R ~ 8 -} Lc ., o F ~ ~-t..u..,,~ wv..~ .,. Qf~ C Q.wi,,,~ ~ ~.o.o ~~ \ F A(~~, r~ e 6~.S~-_...x.1,,(._1 ~ e .2 . ~- ^n Iw l,m~,~,•^'' 1. A~n~~xR~~ov.- _ AC.c.o.....B~~s~ O.. "A~^-~ "t'~ 4x.Ci.w, ~,.-.e..15 "LZS S • P • ~ gC7~-~ ~S Co«~:•.~lo~k• ~ c• `oo\ wat~•K D~-~ct~~aJt.o., c..lt~ -~L~.S S.A• VI [~ ..~ .G S - t A r~/L' 1~~5 p ,+-r~ ,v.T ~.<„), 1.-e, ~ ,.+,t1 gc ~w~X o~..i.-~o ~ ~S ~ ~/^ ~~ ~3 ~...o,».,_o~, ~p ~kw i.Q~~t~a F...pCi.,+S~iAc2-~Cq w-,,,,r,:,.. FAG At~ree,.a,~ ~LS SPr hL~ ~ °~'~~ ~ - Ia~SCQ~~tf\~1~ f ~ v.`~~--{~r.A,M,~~~\ S(n~v~.4/'ti`L- 0:,,-'•~ W...F .,..mow-. F ~...-.• ~ ~.~. ~A~~ o v. Tlr 2e.S - ~ A""` V`k4.x ~ ,.~ \ ~ Ew / ~w•~ -~ cyc..5~ ~' ~~.~. ~.,~.,,~ ~ \A.~ Arc ~.- e.~,~ae2 . ~.5.,.~: S . E~-~~,or~.~ A.~ SAFe._ S~nte~c ~e.3 `1 '^ reel.-~o~..~ ywsE• c„_ ~~~.~ ,J ~,`.~~~:.~ Q C _~ b c~-P.,~ H.., ..ewe., .. ~S Q`~~Fv~YY~yR~m ~~r. i.2,.t,.J- e..+...~~..,.~.ca .. - \h (e~ ~--\.~1. 1~,~ .Z ~ ~ ~.....'ts oyt- spat2 lv. tn4,.~t,~...~y ca n+w.ANY~ ~,(a i..:K. d~2.nXw~A1'~c ..._ F e2S - Co,^S~~ ~. ~ (i ~ \ ( 1 ~x~r- ~55v ~ «,v~ 3~ u,aS~-A ~'Q /~A .. h~S T^ ~ilvQ. ,.F~~4~ g\~.~ a . Zo ~. ~ ~ +~-S Q- ~ 3 0 ~ Q V fl y ~ a, p..,.Y „~. a •~ te, ~G~te,...,~~ 3 ~-. ~~ ~.~.~,~,~ .~~.~s F-.o.~.. bw.P - ~S:~s ~~ 3a . ~ s. C.o~~....,,.w....3aK~~+' ~ Sr S : ~ S --7 ~ $' ~.,~ y-..~•y - wF.x d~sCaC a .,. Y"'- tx~~~...~ ~,ra~ 7 zZ ¢_.,~, .....1rt Q~ A~.e~~l ~.~ows o• ~ '9 e--.~~a,.~c~ ~.-„"E A~ ~~~ • c.c.s ~5 0.~~..~ o~ ~. -, Aspen/Pitk ~~ 130 soy aspen ~4EMORANDUM T0: Paul Taddune, City Attorney Dan P+1cArthur, City Engineer FROM: Alan Richman, Planning Office RE: Pitkin Reserve Final Plat DATE: December 22, 1981 ning Office treet 31611 Attached is the Pitkin Reserve Final Plat for your review. This item has been tentatively scheduled for first reading of a zoning ordinance on January 25, 1982 and second reading of the ordinance and consideration of the final plat on February 22, 1982. Your comments on the application by Monday, January 11, 1982 would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your assistance. MEMORANDUM TO: Land Use Files FROM: Jessica Garrow, Planner/~~~ RE: Pitkin Reserve PUD allowable FAR DATE: December 8, 2006 In the Pitkin Reserve Land Use Files there are discrepancies regarding the allowable FAR in the PUD. This Memorandum is intended to clarify the various documents in the Land Use Files. There were a number of PUD Amendments dealing with allowable FAR that do not appear to have been recorded. The findings in this Memo are intended to govern the allowable FAR in this PUD. On October 10, 1988, the City Council approved an FAR change between lots 3 and 4 on the consent agenda. Part of the motion stated that the total allowable FAR in the PUD is 40,350 square feet. Other items in the Land Use files indicate the total allowable FAR in the PUD is 45,850 square feet. There are no Planning or other City Official signatures , and there are no documents in the Land Use files stating this larger FAR number is correct. There are Planning Staff signatures on other documents, including a 1991 letter signed by Diane Moore, that agree the total allowable FAR in the PUD is 40,350 square feet. Based on these signatures the Community Development Staff has determined that the total allowable FAR in the PUD is 40,350 square-feet. In a June 30, 1987 document, then Planning Director Alan Richman approved of the moving of 196 square feet FAR from Lot 1 to Lot 2. Based on this document, as well as the above referenced 1991 letter, the Community Development staff has determined the following FAR figures to be correct: Lot 1 6,528 sf Lot 2 6,920 sf Lot 3 6,724 sf Lot 4 6,724 sf Lot 5 6,724 sf Lot 6 6,724 sf Lot 7 6,724 sf